Forth Road Bridge

Originally Posted by Bibio

so why do company's falsify the costs in the initial pricing?

to get the job then shaft the public for more money as once the project is undergoing then we have no alternative but to pay the robbing currents. if there were contracts put in place that dictated that all costs above the initial were responsibility of the contractors then i think you would find things got done a bit better.

Spot on Bibio. I have never understood how you can quote for a job and then charge 2 or 3 times the amount to get it finished a year or two late. New Wembley Stadium anyone? Mind you, with public sector jobs, the "client" i.e. government or other public body keep changing the brief with no concern as to the effects on costs. You need a system where the client, whether public or private sector, says "I want A, B and C.", the contractor asks, once only, "Are you completely sure that's exactly what you want?" and then builds it, to the agreed spec for the agreed price. No f^&%ing about on either side.

I trained originally as a a civil engineer and worked for private clients and public sector such as the MOD and, as I'm sure Ralph would agree from the sound of it, the biggest problem with the public sector is they never properly research what it is they want or how it's supposed to be achieved. And then they change their minds half way through. Utter madness.

Originally Posted by DJFridge

Spot on Bibio. I have never understood how you can quote for a job and then charge 2 or 3 times the amount to get it finished a year or two late. New Wembley Stadium anyone? Mind you, with public sector jobs, the "client" i.e. government or other public body keep changing the brief with no concern as to the effects on costs. You need a system where the client, whether public or private sector, says "I want A, B and C.", the contractor asks, once only, "Are you completely sure that's exactly what you want?" and then builds it, to the agreed spec for the agreed price. No f^&%ing about on either side.

I trained originally as a a civil engineer and worked for private clients and public sector such as the MOD and, as I'm sure Ralph would agree from the sound of it, the biggest problem with the public sector is they never properly research what it is they want or how it's supposed to be achieved. And then they change their minds half way through. Utter madness.

This hits the overspend in a nutshell, poor prep, vague brief and no clear clue as to what they want. This added the planning and public consultation costs in UK sees prices spiralling. We have had a recent scheme where we have tried to advise the client not to change materials and layouts due to cost and time for very little gain but they dont listen and its cost them. We have to charge for the extra time or we woudl go out of business !!

[andrewsmith]

DJFridge has hit it on the head with the govt

As another person in the construction and property sector.
Govt. contracts are seen as pay days by companies. BSF is the biggest of them flattening buildings selling the land to X (I'm not mentioning companies in this) who build, manage and operate the school and charge the council an offensive amount of money more than it does cost, and at 25years new building time as they're built to a worse standard than some office developments.

The term 'consultants' is a load of s****, I'm a Surveyor I do the initial work on projects like the Forth bridge and paid a joke of a wage for the pleasure.

As a side note to all this (and this has been mentioned) the construction and property sector is paid sod all. You can earn more as a bar manager at Whetherspoons than you can as a served surveyor. The going rate ATM for a senior Chartered Building Surveyor is around £20k p.a.

Architects are on even worse wages and conditions depend who you speak to, £12.5k and 15 days holiday for a senior Architectural Technician is being paid by a couple of practices

Nice thread.

Changing spec is a big problem we see in IT projects too, don't know how often I end up uttering under my breath "another public sector customer that doesn't know it's rrrssss from it's elbow"

The biggest issue is not the scope change itself, that happens in every project, it's mentality towards money. It's always treated as somebody elses money. There no shareholder that's going to kick your rrssss, so it's no problem to spend it.

The "If you change your mind you'll still be invoiced for X that has been completed, but what you want now is going to cost you Y". The private sector decision maker says "I can't do Y, because I only budgeted for X, and I'm going to get my rrrsss kicked for not planning it properly". The public sector guy goes, "Oh well, good job it's not my money".

The other issue is nobody is expected to put their neck on the line and take responsibility, go three times over budget on a private project, and you'd be sacked quicker that you can say P45. In the public sector the consequences are far less severe, and the culture is one of covering your own rrrss. So somebody in a meeting says, "is that being done right?", and everyone nods and goes, I don't want to answer that question, lets get a consultant in to tell us if it's being done right or not, and if it's wrong later down the line, we can blame him. If the consultant finds it's not being done right now, we can blame the other consultant who we hired to tell us what to do the first time round. In the private sector, if you can't answer the questions, then questions are asked about what value you bring.

PFI was an absolute joke, Engineers and Architects screwed down to no fees, Joint Ventures based off shore screwing the government body. It would have been great to walk away from them, but when they are the only horse in town.

Im not going to deny that as an Engineer with 20yrs experience that I make a decent living but compared to similar trained proffessions it is not that well paid.

(recent contract)

Senior Engineer (chartered 20yrs experience) £65hr
Solicitor similar experience to above £245hr

you do the math

[andrewsmith]

Originally Posted by Rog

PFI was an absolute joke, Engineers and Architects screwed down to no fees, Joint Ventures based off shore screwing the government body. It would have been great to walk away from them, but when they are the only horse in town.

Im not going to deny that as an Engineer with 20yrs experience that I make a decent living but compared to similar trained proffessions it is not that well paid.

(recent contract)

Senior Engineer (chartered 20yrs experience) £65hr
Solicitor similar experience to above £245hr

you do the math

And thats particularly cheap for a solicitor, Land lawyers its closer to £1,000 hr.

The best one I was involved with this year was a service desk for a regulated industry: Desk charge (person manning) £60hr, calls +£10; add the needs for service plans asbestos reports etc.. +£5 charge for administration, fees for auditing the 10-15% of the works 1% (of works cost), quantity surveyor fees 1% of invoice total per month (they made over 10k in a week in March because of year end).

And this was cheaper than doing it the SAP procurement processs

[MisterTommyH]

Originally Posted by andrewsmith

The going rate ATM for a senior Chartered Building Surveyor is around £20k p.a.

Architects are on even worse wages and conditions depend who you speak to, £12.5k and 15 days holiday for a senior Architectural Technician is being paid by a couple of practices

That seems a little mis-leading to me. May be the case up there, but doesn't seem familiar down here.

This doesn't apply to people who have had to change companies and take a massive cut just to work, but I would have said most engineers (with time served but no financial interest in the company) are somewhere in the 30's.


Architects I would say are just slightly more say 30/40's. I can't comment On surveys because I havent had that conversation with any.

It's worth remembering that architects go to university for about 7 years to get RIBA accredited - that's nearly as long as doctors and look at the pay differential. Engineers go to uni and then have to do PG study and pass a chartership in a similar manner to solicitors - look at the pay differential there.

These are not cowboy builders as most people see them, but professionals. And they do seem to get paid less than the same professionals abroad, and even similar professionals out side construction in the UK

Originally Posted by Rog

but compared to similar trained proffessions it is not that well paid.

(recent contract)

Senior Engineer (chartered 20yrs experience) £65hr
Solicitor similar experience to above £245hr

you do the math

think it's worth pointing out those are not what the employee gets, but the rates that they are charged out at. Put of that has to come all overheads and insurances. Plus many jobs are not on a time rate basis (only where works are an 'extra'. Fees at the moment are on heavily discounted percentages of the project cost.

[andrewsmith]

Tommy that the sad thing, up here everyone took >10% paycuts in 2008/9 some another 10% last year and some firms aren't even breaking even on their fees

[Bibio]

it makes fecking sick to the stomach what some of theses robbing barstwards manage to steel out the public purse.

i work 168hrs a week yes you read it right and get all in £20k a year which is going to drop to 17K in september. i don't get paid holidays or anything remotely like that because of robbing currents steeling from the pockets of the people. its wrong all feckin wrong.

[MisterTommyH]

Bibeo, the point that I think we're all trying to make is that the majority of people in the project would rather do it right first time and get paid the once. It's not robbing if the client is indecisive and asks you to do it twice - you should get paid for doing the work you have done - especially when the work is instructed by the council/government.

If a council worker was paid to paint a wall, they do it, then it's decided that they'd rather have it painted blue than White, why should the painter have to do it the second time for free? It's not his fault they want a different colour.