Carrilion in trouble
Discussion
ALawson said:
Because PMs can be ignorant donkeys making decisions with no idea about the repercussions whilst ignoring advice from technical experts thinking "it will be ok", combine that with junior engineers who are easily led, convinced that what's built is ok (when it isn't) and you get work horsed in to meet deadlines.
Quality Control/Assurance cannot be everywhere all of the time, people need to treat quality like safety. When you rely on someone else to make sure it's right it won't be.
In my main contacting background QC normally make sure the QA process is being followed, they don't necessarily ensure all the checks are being done but the paperwork being produced.
Or rely on subcontractors who then sub sub it out with minimal levels of supervision (either internally or client).
Fair enough Quality Control/Assurance cannot be everywhere all of the time, people need to treat quality like safety. When you rely on someone else to make sure it's right it won't be.
In my main contacting background QC normally make sure the QA process is being followed, they don't necessarily ensure all the checks are being done but the paperwork being produced.
Or rely on subcontractors who then sub sub it out with minimal levels of supervision (either internally or client).
I presume you are referring to a site manager as a PM? The same with Site engineers (again I'm presuming that is who you are referring to)
Either way, tie embedment is cavity wall 101. In fact a 275mm tie would probably have solved it.
Better still the client should have had a good independent CoW
Im not in civil work, frankly in my line we pretty much call what you lot build "targets"!
However...we all work in much the same processes. QA and QC traditionally across all the engineering disciplines generally enforce the paperwork and QMS/BMS side of things.
Do you chaps not have PA (Product Assurance) and DA (Delivery Assurance) though? Which absolutely make sure PMs and Project Engineers/Technical Management are building what they are meant to be building and are responsible for assuring the build to the customer?
However...we all work in much the same processes. QA and QC traditionally across all the engineering disciplines generally enforce the paperwork and QMS/BMS side of things.
Do you chaps not have PA (Product Assurance) and DA (Delivery Assurance) though? Which absolutely make sure PMs and Project Engineers/Technical Management are building what they are meant to be building and are responsible for assuring the build to the customer?
DeejRC said:
Im not in civil work, frankly in my line we pretty much call what you lot build "targets"!
However...we all work in much the same processes. QA and QC traditionally across all the engineering disciplines generally enforce the paperwork and QMS/BMS side of things.
Do you chaps not have PA (Product Assurance) and DA (Delivery Assurance) though? Which absolutely make sure PMs and Project Engineers/Technical Management are building what they are meant to be building and are responsible for assuring the build to the customer?
We did until self-certification came along...However...we all work in much the same processes. QA and QC traditionally across all the engineering disciplines generally enforce the paperwork and QMS/BMS side of things.
Do you chaps not have PA (Product Assurance) and DA (Delivery Assurance) though? Which absolutely make sure PMs and Project Engineers/Technical Management are building what they are meant to be building and are responsible for assuring the build to the customer?
jules_s said:
ALawson said:
Link to schools report.
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/5...
This is the latest CROSS report, if you register you will get an email monthly of stuff that is likely to not surprize you and send chills down the spine.
http://communicatoremail.com/In/169168818/0/gEUz7S...
The organisation doesn't publish names per se, although for certain issues I am sure it will be pretty obvious via google who the culprits are.
Every engineer, project manager should read the Schools report!
Not sure why you are saying PM's and Engineers should read that? it illustrates an on site QC issue from what I read (skimmed pages 37 onwards though)http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/5...
This is the latest CROSS report, if you register you will get an email monthly of stuff that is likely to not surprize you and send chills down the spine.
http://communicatoremail.com/In/169168818/0/gEUz7S...
The organisation doesn't publish names per se, although for certain issues I am sure it will be pretty obvious via google who the culprits are.
Every engineer, project manager should read the Schools report!
Jockman said:
GT03ROB said:
ALawson said:
I started work on site in 1999, spent two summers in 96/97 and 97/98 so have seen a significant change in working conditions for those on site.
When I look at the numbers that used to be killed through sheer ignorance & negligence and compare to where we are now. It really is a huge difference. I worked underground on the channel tunnel & safety practices were virtually non-existent. The mind set today is so different from then. 
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/10/g...
Wont be long before we are bailing them out as a taxpayer. Thank god for that magic money tree i say
Wont be long before we are bailing them out as a taxpayer. Thank god for that magic money tree i say
pavarotti1980 said:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/10/g...
Wont be long before we are bailing them out as a taxpayer. Thank god for that magic money tree i say
Indeed, the share price is so low that a ‘Rights issue’ is out of the question, the Company is so loaded with debt with so little underlying assets banks wouldn’t risk further money, Thier only hope is us, the good old tax payer bailing out yet other private Company! Wont be long before we are bailing them out as a taxpayer. Thank god for that magic money tree i say
I say let them go bust make room for some businesses that can operate like a business. Of course whichever way it’s cut the tax payer will be hit, what with the number of GoVernment contracts this Company has low balled on.
crankedup said:
Indeed, the share price is so low that a ‘Rights issue’ is out of the question, the Company is so loaded with debt with so little underlying assets banks wouldn’t risk further money, Thier only hope is us, the good old tax payer bailing out yet other private Company!
I say let them go bust make room for some businesses that can operate like a business. Of course whichever way it’s cut the tax payer will be hit, what with the number of GoVernment contracts this Company has low balled on.
as the saying goes buy cheap, buy twice.....I say let them go bust make room for some businesses that can operate like a business. Of course whichever way it’s cut the tax payer will be hit, what with the number of GoVernment contracts this Company has low balled on.
.... so the genius's in our government procurement/contracts departments didn't do their due diligence on Carrilion before awarding? They didn't review accounts? They didn't review workload? Knowing they'd already awarded them a chunk of cheap contracts, they didn't question awarding more?
Don't get me wrong Carrilion are not a good example of a company, but where is the civil servants responsibility/accountability in selecting this bunch of knobs? Ah that's right they just saw pound signs...... it's cheap so it must be good....
GT03ROB said:
crankedup said:
Indeed, the share price is so low that a ‘Rights issue’ is out of the question, the Company is so loaded with debt with so little underlying assets banks wouldn’t risk further money, Thier only hope is us, the good old tax payer bailing out yet other private Company!
I say let them go bust make room for some businesses that can operate like a business. Of course whichever way it’s cut the tax payer will be hit, what with the number of GoVernment contracts this Company has low balled on.
as the saying goes buy cheap, buy twice.....I say let them go bust make room for some businesses that can operate like a business. Of course whichever way it’s cut the tax payer will be hit, what with the number of GoVernment contracts this Company has low balled on.
.... so the genius's in our government procurement/contracts departments didn't do their due diligence on Carrilion before awarding? They didn't review accounts? They didn't review workload? Knowing they'd already awarded them a chunk of cheap contracts, they didn't question awarding more?
Don't get me wrong Carrilion are not a good example of a company, but where is the civil servants responsibility/accountability in selecting this bunch of knobs? Ah that's right they just saw pound signs...... it's cheap so it must be good....
who cares if that figure is less than it will cost to deliver ...
Apparently the Company would almost certainly now have been in receivership if it were not such a sensitive Company heavily involved in the Government contracts. I had not realised that they are also in half billion black hole in he pensions book!
Personally I feel the Company should be allowed to go into administration, certainly no Government bailout. Tax payers should not have to bear the brunt of yet more private Company mismanagement.
Personally I feel the Company should be allowed to go into administration, certainly no Government bailout. Tax payers should not have to bear the brunt of yet more private Company mismanagement.
Rovinghawk said:
I know a couple of Carillion directors- the main thing they have in common is a refusal to acknowledge any facts which don't suit them.
I look forward to them getting what they deserve from all of this.
I know one who jumped ship not too long back too. I look forward to them getting what they deserve from all of this.
Carillion aside though, it seems there's a conveyor belt of this sort of thing and that, with exceptions of the top of the tree (who are conspicuous enough for the s
t to stick to them, at least a bit anyway) most of the management blunder off to their next fk-up relatively scot free. An example being a firm a mate used to work for a few years back, Mitie. He was actually made redundant in some sort of "new broom sweeps clean" re-shuffle, but he could see the writing on the wall for the firm. In the end, they didn't actually fail, but it's been a very, very rocky ride for the share price.A firm I've had dealings with, DX freight is yet another example. Utter shower and the share price reflects some extraordinarily poor strategic and commercial decisions.
Digga said:
Rovinghawk said:
I know a couple of Carillion directors- the main thing they have in common is a refusal to acknowledge any facts which don't suit them.
I look forward to them getting what they deserve from all of this.
I know one who jumped ship not too long back too. I look forward to them getting what they deserve from all of this.
Carillion aside though, it seems there's a conveyor belt of this sort of thing and that, with exceptions of the top of the tree (who are conspicuous enough for the s
t to stick to them, at least a bit anyway) most of the management blunder off to their next fk-up relatively scot free. An example being a firm a mate used to work for a few years back, Mitie. He was actually made redundant in some sort of "new broom sweeps clean" re-shuffle, but he could see the writing on the wall for the firm. In the end, they didn't actually fail, but it's been a very, very rocky ride for the share price.A firm I've had dealings with, DX freight is yet another example. Utter shower and the share price reflects some extraordinarily poor strategic and commercial decisions.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff