by Iain McIlwee | 22 Jul, 2020 | Main News Feed
The Professional Practice Task Group for the Construction Leadership Council (CLC) Covid-19 Task Force has today published a methodology for assessing and reporting the cost implications of disruption due to the pandemic. Construction clients and contractors rely on accurate cost prediction as the basis of business plans, financial contracts, and commercial control.
The unprecedented nature of the pandemic is affecting the progress and productivity of existing and future contracts, meaning that the information
upon which estimates are usually prepared no longer applies.
The Toolkit acts as a guide to enable better cost forecasting to assist the industry in making informed investment decisions on viability, improving robustness of pipeline and driving long term economic growth.
Commenting on today’s launch, Simon Rawlinson, Chair of the Professional Practice Task Group said:
“The Cost Assessment Toolkit will help the construction industry manage the impact of Covid-19 on existing and future contracts. It establishes a standard methodology to incorporate the cost impacts of the virus into estimates, provides clarity on exclusions and through the collection of industry wide data allows clients and supply chains to compare their project costs against an aggregated data set. By providing the tools to measure and therefore improve productivity, the toolkit acts as a guide to ascertain and assess project risks and establish viability for the long term.”
FIS CEO Iain McIlwee responded:
“This Toolkit could be one of the most valuable resources the CLC has produced through the COVID crisis. Our sector has been particularly hit by productivity concerns with work often being high, heavy or inside and sometimes all three! It is vital that we work together to understand this so that we can sensibly price and manage work and that we work together as a supply chain to find practical solutions to some of the potential contractual landmines out there. We are looking carefully at this Toolkit and what we can do as a sector to add further context and detail to ensure that it supports the cultural improvement much talked about, but desperately needed in construction”.
Download all the Toolkit documents:
COVID-19 Cost ssessment Toolkit
Covid Cost Assessment Tool – Appendix A
CLC Press Release
by Clair Mooney | 22 Jul, 2020 | Main News Feed
The Construction Industry Joint Council (CIJC) Working Rule Agreement, its pay and conditions, would normally have been reviewed at the end of June 2020. In April 2020, all parties to the Agreement agreed to postpone the start of any review discussions, given the Covid-19 emergency and the unprecedented effects this was having on employers, operatives, the industry and across the UK.
Whilst work on many construction sites is restarting, the overall impact on the construction industry remains variable in different parts of the country. As a result, the member trade associations of the CIJC representing employees covered by the CIJC have decided, this week, to extend the postponement of pay negotiations until September, when a further assessment will be undertaken. This decision has not been supported by the trade unions and we await their formal response.
Parties to the CIJC Working Rule Agreement remain in regular contact to monitor progress as the industry moves forwards from the emergency to better understand any ongoing impact on employers, operatives and the industry. In the meantime, all rates and allowances as detailed in the CIJC Agreement dated 1 August 2018 will continue to apply.
Visit our Employment Hub for more information
by Iain McIlwee | 22 Jul, 2020 | Main News Feed
As part of the easing of lock down restrictions, people may now use public transport in England for any journey, although they are still being encouraged to consider alternative means of transport where possible. Face coverings are mandatory on public transport in England and travellers should maintain social distancing where possible.
Transport for London (TfL) continues to encourage people to avoid using the network during peak times (05:45 ‐ 08:15 and 16:00 ‐ 17:30) and has published a construction toolkit with guidance for businesses in our sector.
Advice supports employers and is designed to “support your workers to help get them and the rest of London moving and working again, as safely and sustainably as possible”.
You can download the Transport for London briefing for the construction sector here
by Iain McIlwee | 21 Jul, 2020 | Main News Feed
The guidance Approved Document M (access to and use of buildings), volume two, 2015 has been amended following a consultation the provision of Changing Places toilets on the 12 May 2019 which ran for a period of 10 weeks, ending on 22 July 2019, but was then reopened for targeted consultation of sectors most likely to be affected in February 2020 using the same questions.
The guidance in paragraphs 5.6 and 5.7 has been amended to mandate for the provision of changing places toilets within appropriately sized, publicly accessible buildings. The provision states that changing places toilets should be provided in the following buildings types:
- Assembly, recreation and entertainment buildings (see note) with a capacity for 350 or more people. Or a collection of smaller buildings associated with a site used for assembly, recreation or entertainment such as: zoos, theme parks and venues for sport and exhibitions with a capacity of 2000 people or more
- Shopping centres/malls or retail parks with a gross floor area of 30,000 m2 or more
- Retail premises with a gross floor area of 2500m2 or more
- Sport and leisure buildings with a gross floor area over 5000m2
- Hospitals and primary care centres
- Crematoria and cemetery buildings.
Note: Places of assembly, recreation and entertainment can be defined as buildings such as amusement arcades; art galleries; cinemas; concert halls; conference centres; further education colleges; hotels that provide function, sport or leisure facilities; libraries open to the public; motorway service areas; museums; places of worship; theatres; university buildings open to the public.
Clarification is also provided on how the capacities should be derived in these buildings. The amendments also state that further guidance on layout and equipment is available from the changing places consortium campaign website and by reference to guidance in section 18.6, diagram 48 as well as Annexes F and G of BS 8300-2:2018.
Transitional arrangement
The changes in the amendment booklet take effect on 1st January 2021. The amendments do not apply in any case where a building notice or an initial notice has been given to, or full plans deposited with, a local authority and either the building work to which it relates has
(a) Started before that day; or
(b) by 1 March 2021
Full copy of the amendments document is available here.
This needs to be read in context with the current Approved Document M.
by Iain McIlwee | 21 Jul, 2020 | Main News Feed
The HSE has published new guide guidance on Disinfecting premises using fog, mist, vapour or ultraviolet (UV) systems during the coronavirus outbreak.
If you choose to use fog, mist, vapour or UV treatments as a way of cleaning and disinfecting surfaces, discuss your requirements with your manufacturers/suppliers (this may include fumigators), to help you decide if a product/system meets your needs. The treatment you use will depend on:
- the size of the area to be treated, its shape and how easily it can be sealed off if delivering an airborne product
- whether there are hard or soft surfaces – soft furnishings may act as a ‘sink’ for the airborne chemicals and emit them for some time after treatment (it may be possible to remove items such as sofas before treatment)
- the type of business you have – some areas may be better suited to UV surface treatments than airborne chemicals or vice-versa
Any use of these treatments for these purposes should form part of your COVID-19 risk assessment. Users must be competent and properly trained.
Full details of the guidance and advantages and limitations of the various methods are available here.
by Iain McIlwee | 21 Jul, 2020 | Main News Feed
The subject of design liability, drawing control and normal working practices in construction was under the spotlight in the Grenfell Inquiry this week. Simon Lawrence, Rydon’s contract manager on the project between 2014 and 2015, was questioned. A key line of questioning was around how Rydon (Main Contractor) worked with Harley Facades Ltd (the specialist cladding contractor), Studio E (Architect) and Building Control who signed off details as approved for construction and how Rydon could have fulfilled their responsibilities as a Design and Build Contractor.
Around 45 minutes into the recording it was clarified that the role of Rydon was to “manage and co-ordinate the work of third parties” and “to co-ordinate and manage the process of design”. The specific question asked of Mr Lawrence was “At what stage did you believe the design had reached when Studio E started working directly for Rydon?”.
The answer paints from Mr Lawrence is one that many sub contractors will be familiar with:
“Yes I would to get to the completion of technical design, but you often find, particularly with the RIBA stages that there seems to be a bit of float, it is not quite a hard and fast rule. So I think there was enough detail to say it was Stage E when it come across. Whether there was absolutely everything that ticked every single box to say it was the right sections etc etc. I would say possibly not”.
“With the cladding specifically they would obviously be relying on the specialists to add further detail to that information”.
It was suggested in the discussion that Harley Facades Ltd had contractually committed to the design and installation of the cladding system.
“You would look at the design overall and designs particularly around areas where we had third parties specialist looking at, if there was any detail they didn’t have I would expect them to flag it up. Design and Build typically, some form of construction starts before the full design of the full building is finished and complete. So I would take that as a work in progress that would be taken by Studio E and Harley through the early stages project”.
“Would you not require 1 in 5 scale drawings available to you at Stage E?”
“It would be very rare that we would pick up a tender and it would be fully 100% everything ticked off at a RIBA stage. There would normally be a merge between possibly D & E… The further the client progresses the design the better and less risk they have financially obviously when they go out to tender. But we would often pick up you know we may have 1 in 5 drawings on every other part of the building, but not on the cladding because we knew there was a specialist sub contractor coming in to complete that final part of the technical fabrication design work.”
Interesting points were made about how drawings may have proceeded to construction phase without approval through the design chain with Mr Rawlings conceding that “It would have been good to have a design responsibility matrix” an that he was not aware of any process in place to ensure that there were no gaps in scope or deliverables and that each contractor or sub contractor clearly understood their design responsibility and liabilities.
The full video of the hearing session can be picked up here
The inquiry schedule is available here
An example of a Design Liability Matrix is available in the RIBA Plan of Work Toolbox
