In any field of profession one must do its best and carefully examine every little detail of their job to make sure it’s flawless for the client and themselves for any and all job they have, this is especially true to the architects. Every architects have to protect the health, safety, and welfare of every individual that will go into their designed buildings and those around its vicinity. In case study 1, the architect notice a different in the poured in place concrete, the amount is different than the original proposal which can and will lead to the building falling down. When the architect talk to the owner he said, he will talk to the superintendent of construction, which is hire independently by the owner. The situation create a distrust between the groups, architect suspect the owner and the superintendent cheating on material to save money which will be really bad on the architect since it’s his job to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. In this kind of sticky situation I would suggest the architect try to get an emergency meeting with the owner and the superintendent as fast as possible because it’s the entire team that build the building not just architect, so the reasonable thing to do is to prove how the shortage in concrete will negative impact the overall building. The architect have to test the concrete and show the result as prove to the owner and superintendent. At the same time the architect should also get ready for the worse, which is when after the fact they will keep on not listen or outright refuse it, then the architect should prepare and find his original proposal for the pour in place concrete amount in all his document, as prove to the government like the DOB that the owner and superintendent is cheating on the concrete, that is the last straw to do which I don’t think it should come to that.
