Expectations of time and money caused the entire project to go left which result

Question

Expectations of time and money caused the entire project to go left which resulted in going to court. Take a close look at the details of what happened and why the subcontractor was denied the constructive acceleration claim. Determine the flaws that were found in this project and discuss the details of this. Be sure to include the following answers to these questions:

How does resource scheduling tie to this project’s priorities?

Present 3 reasons as to why the appropriate scheduling of resources with this project would have possibly lowered the risks?

Explain the risks that were associated with compressing or imposing “catch-up” as the project is being implemented and how that did not work in the subcontractor’s favor with this particular project?

THE LAW Court Denies Subcontractor's Constructive Acceleration Claim against Murdock, the company took its case to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate court began its analysis by noting that there was n any troubled or delayed construction project, work no Indiana case law recognizing or applying a constructive accel acceleration can occur in one of two ways. In the first, eration claim. On the basis of decisions in other jurisdictions, how- the owner or contractor can affirmatively direct that the ever, the court stated that it was a viable dam. The court set forth remaining work be performed in a compressed period and agree the five elements for proving a constructive acceleration claim:(1) to cover the resultant costs. In the second, through what is called the contractor experienced the delay entitling it to an extension; constructive acceleration, the party that directs the acceleration 2) the contractor properly requested the extension; (3) the project must cover the resultant costs even if it does not consider itself owner failed to grant or refused to grant the extension; (4) the proj responsible for those costs. In a case of first impression, the Seventh ect owner demanded that the project be completed by the original Circuit Court of Appeals recently had occasion to consider a sub- completion date despite the excusable delay; and (5) the contractor accelerated the work in order to complete the project by the origi- The facts in this case, Malode&Sovns; Construction Co, Inc.v. Goheen nal completion date and incurred added costs as a result Genexal Constnaction, arose from the construction of a maximum secuAlthough the district court determined that Murdock could not rity prison near Terre Haute, Indiana. Goheen General Construc- show that it provided written notice ofthe delays in a timelyfashion, the appellate court assumed that the formal notice requirement had been tion, Inc, was awarded the prime contract by the state for the prison housing. Construction costs were expected to be approximately $6,970,000. Goheen subcon- waived by the general contractor. The latter masonry work to the lowest bidder, caim was ulimately without merit because the tracted the Murdock &Sons;, as a result of a fixed-price bid of $1,629,825. The other two masonry bids sernoUS delays and cost firm had not astablished that the "sdower than ts came in at $2,747,000 and $2,475,000 and did overmuns, and the state was anbciaedpace of the masons" ws control. In fact, Murdock testified that it had not include a price for rebar. unwilling to grant Murdock no chuc, really" as to the cause ofthe productiv- The subcontract called for the construc tion of 288 cells having very walls. Each wall consisted of individual that there work slowdown by the dense masonry had been an organized cement Hocks arranged in a "Tharge honevally walked off the joaukc byondme perulais to substantiate the chare. The court concluded comb fashion." The blocks were reinforced and filed suit against the state that Murdock's estiate "groly undertated" 8 in. (20.3 cm). The specifications called and the general contractor, the time andeffort requiredto perfomthiskind for continuous grouting with cement rather lodging a construction shouldfall 'squardly" on the subcontractor. The court also rejected Murdodks argument that a force majeure event had occurred, noting that Murdock had knowingly taken the risk of its clause was not a "buffer" with both horizontal and vertical rebar e unique masonry work and that such a risk than mortar. They also required the extensive placement of embedments, necessitating that a significant number of cuts be made in the acceleration cdaim. and that the force majeure blocks. Although Murdock was an experienced masonry tractor, it had no experience with the amount of reinforcement required on this project. against the normal risks of contracting Construction litigators may find it difficult to believe that a party To make matters more difficult, the union masons Murdock would invest such a substantial amount of time and money in a fed- was required to use did not keep pace with the projections set forth eral trial and an appeal without sufficient proof of its constructive in its bid. While a mason can typically lay 200 blocks a day on a acceleration daim. Here, the court even quoted from Murdock's typical project, Murdock had estimated that, given the difficulty opening brief, which stated that "the reason for the [mason work of this particular project, the masons would lay only 150 blocks a slowdown was never determined." At trial, Murdock's witnesses day. Despite its estimate, however, Murdock's masons were laying conceded they could only speculate as to why the productivity was ust 50 blocks a day from the beginning of the project. Even though so low. The court asked how it was to determine the cause if the Murdock dismissed slow workers, increased its crew from 35 to caimant had not been able to do so. For those about to take a posi- 83, provided additional equipment, and modified the construction tion in a lawsuit, this question is worth remembering process, it still fell behind. The and cost overruns, and the state was unwilling to grant Murdock project experienced serious delays Midhael C Loulakis (mloulakeis@cp-stsategies.com), an extension. Murdock eventually walked off the job and filed suit President and Chief Exeutive Officer, Capital Projert Strategies, LLC Reston, VigiaLaun P. Mclaughlin (lmclaughlin@brighalau com), Attomey, BrigliaMcLaughlin, PLLC, Vienna, Visginia against the state and the acceleration claim. After the federal court at the district level ruled

Explanation / Answer

At the outset, the major flaws in this project are lack of appropriate forecasting, planning, scheduling and risk mitigation elements while executing the project. While giving the contract to the sub contractor the prime contractor was supposed to clear out each step involved in the execution of the project.

Resource scheduling would have greatly helped this project to be executed in time. As per the project, the masonry works were to be finished with additional reinforcements which the sub contractor had no experience. In this case resource scheduling if it were done it would have helped Mr. Murdock to keep track of and control the project at every step. Appropriate scheduling if it were done, it would have also helped Mr. Murdock to know at what stages the project is getting delayed and the risk of losing time could have been prevented. Also if at the beginning itself when things got slowed by the masons in laying the blocks, Mr. Murdock increased number of people experienced in this sort of work or added mechanical interventions to increase speed, the risk of over shooting costs could have been prevented at the end. Also scheduling the tasks at the planning phase would have helped create an estimate of time which was appropriate for the project instead of setting very steep deadline for self for finishing the project.

In a project like this where manual labour is involved for execution of masonry work, compressing the project essentially creates a level of stress on the sub conractor which in turn trickles down to the masons who are exerted beyond their capacities to finish the work. This may lead to sub standard work being executed. Even if the sub contractor decides to hire additional manpower to finish the work ahead of schedule, his costs may overrun and the risk of sub standard resources (blocks, masons, raw material for contruction etc.) being employed to finish the task nad also maintain the revenue margin for the sub contractor. But to perform to the best of ability and give an output which is high in quality, all the risks are pointed negatively towards the sub contractor.With no extension given from the client, the risks have further increased for the sub contractor in this project.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse E
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.