Case Study #2- Discrepancy in Concrete Mixture- Mai Esmail

After reading and evaluating this situation thoroughly, some of my immediate thoughts were 

1. Cheating on the cement portion of the concrete is wrong, considering that I designed this multi-family housing based on specific calculations.
2. How did the superintendent convince my client to follow along with their idea?
3. Why wouldn’t my client consult with me before approving this idea?
4. Does the client know what is at risk?
5. The concrete work that has been installed will have to be removed and replaced with the correct concrete. This will cause a delay in project completion.
6. This was not in the contract that I and my client have agreed to. Therefore, this would be considered a violation.
7. Do not certify anything without it being corrected.

My approach to this situation would be to first speak with my client. From what I know, my client seems to already have knowledge about the situation and does not seem to have an issue with it. I would further explain to my client that the result of changing something that may seem small to them, could cause something bigger to happen. At that point, I would explain that using a cement portion that is less than the required that is needed for a certain strength, will cause the concrete to be weak. Therefore, resulting in a weak building. With this knowledge, I would hope that my client will come to their senses and realize that it would be unethical to go with a weaker concrete. I would also remind my client that we signed a contract with each other. According to the AIA-201: General Conditions of the Contract, “The document describes what each party is to do and spells out the remedies should any party fail in its obligations.” With this in mind, I would consider it a clear violation of the agreement between us. But I would try to reconcile and get everything back on track. To do that, we would have to remove the existing concrete and replace it with the correct concrete. This would cause a delay when it comes to project completion. 

My next step would be to speak to the General Contractor. I would ask the Contractor if they knew about the situation and if it was approved considering that the superintendent is employed by them. According to the A201 article 3.4.3,” The Contractor shall enforce strict discipline and good order among the Contractor’s employees and other persons carrying out the Contract. The Contractor shall not permit the employment of unfit persons or persons not skilled in tasks assigned to them.” Knowing this information, I would have hoped that the Contractor would have hired a superintendent that knows his job a bit more. If the Contractor did know of this, then I would consider them liable for this mistake. If not, then I would expect that the Contractor would take the superintendent off the job due to a lack of knowledge and misleading the client. Hoping that the contractor agrees with me, we get back on track to finish the project.

My final step would be to have a time extension if it is needed. According to A201 article 8.3,” An extension of time can be granted if the C is delayed by 

· act of negligence by O, A, or other contractor 

· changes in the W 

· labor disputes 

· fire 

· unusual delays in deliveries 

· other events beyond the C’s control 

· also, if delay is authorized by O 

· if arbitration is pending 

1. A determines a delay is OK.”

Based on this information, I have the right to extend the time if it is necessary to do so. Once everything is corrected, I would then be able to certify the Contractor’s request for payment.