Carrilion in trouble

[GT03ROB]

SystemParanoia said:

Bully for you.
But you can't make claims about something you have absolutely no experience in.
The people living with those conditions daily will certainly disagree with Mr powerfully built

..... what makes you think I have no experience??

[SystemParanoia]

GT03ROB said:

SystemParanoia said:

Bully for you.
But you can't make claims about something you have absolutely no experience in.
The people living with those conditions daily will certainly disagree with Mr powerfully built

..... what makes you think I have no experience??

Fine, do a month doing grunt work, with the grunts.
See how it really is, instead of how the spreadsheet says it is.

[GT03ROB]

SystemParanoia said:

GT03ROB said:

SystemParanoia said:

Bully for you.
But you can't make claims about something you have absolutely no experience in.
The people living with those conditions daily will certainly disagree with Mr powerfully built

..... what makes you think I have no experience??

Fine, do a month doing grunt work, with the grunts.
See how it really is, instead of how the spreadsheet says it is.

....& the reason you say I haven't is????

[SystemParanoia]

GT03ROB said:

SystemParanoia said:

GT03ROB said:

SystemParanoia said:

Bully for you.
But you can't make claims about something you have absolutely no experience in.
The people living with those conditions daily will certainly disagree with Mr powerfully built

..... what makes you think I have no experience??

Fine, do a month doing grunt work, with the grunts.
See how it really is, instead of how the spreadsheet says it is.

....& the reason you say I haven't is????

That you disagree that working conditions for grunts are getting worse.
means you haven't been a grunt for a LONG time.

[ALawson]

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.

I started working for a small subcontractor, circa £20m per annun, before joining Laing O'Rourke in 2002 during the giddy heights of T5.

From there via some bid work and constructability on Terminal T2a I ended up at Farringdon Station (£200m) and via Farringdon Crossrail onto London Bridge £1bn.

Over that period whilst working for main contractors operatives safety and health only got better, you only need to review industry AFR and fatality rates to see its a much better industry. Whereas safety used to take priority there is now significant health screening and a massive focus on not creating long term health issues, HAVs etc.

The training and equipment being provided is second to none generally so those grunts although doing the same job are doing it in different ways (for the better), manual work is still manual but on the jobs I have worked on it completely different.

I don't doubt that if you working for certain residential or commercial operators it could be completely different.

[Trophy Husband]

SystemParanoia said:

GT03ROB said:

SystemParanoia said:

GT03ROB said:

SystemParanoia said:

Bully for you.
But you can't make claims about something you have absolutely no experience in.
The people living with those conditions daily will certainly disagree with Mr powerfully built

..... what makes you think I have no experience??

Fine, do a month doing grunt work, with the grunts.
See how it really is, instead of how the spreadsheet says it is.

....& the reason you say I haven't is????

That you disagree that working conditions for grunts are getting worse.
means you haven't been a grunt for a LONG time.

Not wishing to jump into a disagreement!!

However, having worked in construction contracting for 30 years and now running my own I am certain that on the whole conditions have improved massively for the grunts (not a term I particularly like) or the person at the dirty end of the job.
The improvements I have seen are all largely based around safety/safe systems, working hours, working conditions etc. Maybe my view is skewed by the people I have worked for (freelance Agent/PM) who have generally been the medium to large nationals/multi-nationals

Things that weren't around in my early days:-

Good welfare
Health Surveillance
HAVS assessment and monitoring
Active Dust Suppression (cement dust is a killer) leading to face fitting of FFP3 face masks
Eye Protection policies
Warm and waterproof PPE
Sensible working hours (my record for a working week was 98 hours back in 94, averaged 80 plus that summer). Working Time Directive sorted that to a degree although the opt out kind of hinders to a degree.
Mechanical lifters for kerbs/concrete products
Check valves/Quick hitches on excavators
Seat belts on dumpers/rollers
Behavioural Safety Training (the best thing in the world in my eyes)
The list could go on.

When I think back to the sites I was on in the 90's most of them were ripe for an accident/fatality and I had a few near misses myself.

I therefore don't recognise a deterioration in working conditions for the real working man, I only see a vast improvement. If you look at the AFR's for contracting as a whole industry things are improving all of the time. Risk Assessments, Method Statements and Permitry can only go so far. The next big leap in construction safety will only be achieved through behavioural safety training of which I am a huge advocate and train my guys as a matter of course. Regularly.

[ALawson]

Trophy Husband said:

The next big leap in construction safety will only be achieved through behavioural safety training of which I am a huge advocate and train my guys as a matter of course. Regularly.

All the main contractors have been doing this for at least 10 -15 years with it casscading down through their supply chains.

Do you do IFF/IFE type BS or approach it from the Behavioural Science angle, ABC etc.

I delivered IFF for LOR for a few years and completely agree, at a certain point its up to the "grunts" to choose not to work unsafely, easier said than done with pressures to deliver that were you need sensible senior management.

[GT03ROB]

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.

[Jockman]

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.

All Insurance driven Rob

[Trophy Husband]

ALawson said:

Trophy Husband said:

The next big leap in construction safety will only be achieved through behavioural safety training of which I am a huge advocate and train my guys as a matter of course. Regularly.

All the main contractors have been doing this for at least 10 -15 years with it casscading down through their supply chains.

Do you do IFF/IFE type BS or approach it from the Behavioural Science angle, ABC etc.

I delivered IFF for LOR for a few years and completely agree, at a certain point its up to the "grunts" to choose not to work unsafely, easier said than done with pressures to deliver that were you need sensible senior management.

LOR trained me as an IFF deliverer. I loved it, the whole idea of it. The old boys were the hardest to deal with, their behaviours were so ingrained.

Nevertheless, I did witness huge improvements in behaviours because of it.

The problem for large contractors is that safety is such a great thing to value and aspire to,but how on God's good earth to you attribute a real cashmoney cost to maintaining it at high levels, day in day out, on a 50,000 man hour site? Clients expect the highest levels of safety but they're not up to speed as to how much that really costs and how it affects aspirational programme targets.

We need to be given the right amount of time to deliver projects and the funds to do so. A fair price for a fair job is, well, fair.

In my mind, something has got to give in construction. It's such a noble thing, building the future for our kids and their kids. Schools, hospitals, motorways, airports, bridges, all manner of amazing structures. These things should be paid for properly.

[Rovinghawk]

Trophy Husband said:

The problem for large contractors is that safety is such a great thing to value and aspire to,but how on God's good earth to you attribute a real cashmoney cost to maintaining it at high levels, day in day out, on a 50,000 man hour site? Clients expect the highest levels of safety but they're not up to speed as to how much that really costs and how it affects aspirational programme targets.

Speaking for Carillion on one of their major sites:

They preached safety above all else. Rules, regulations, inspections, audits, etc. Everyone banged the safety drum, at least in public.

They then screamed for unrealistic deadlines that meant subbies working in excessively close proximity. Anyone pointing this out was vilified.

Programmes were such that work was done in sub-optimal ways because it brought the finish date closer, regardless of increases in risk.

Carillion violated its own safety rules on many occasions- when I objected to a couple of them I was dragged into the PM's office and told to back off or be barred from site. When I pointed out hypocrisy on safety matters it was routinely ignored; others were treated the same way. It was made clear that if we protested too loudly there would be repercussions/reprisals, either personally or against our companies.

My favourite episode is where at a safety 'briefing' my foreman pointed out a dangerous practice by Carillion - the response was "fk off".

I look forward to Carillion getting what it deserves- I think it's well overdue.

[dxg]

ALawson said:

If you look at the http://www.structural-safety.org/ website you will see there is massive concern in general competency especially those undertaking cladding works. Grenfell tower is a cast in point, Edinburgh schools etc. There must be significant numbers of legacy issues out there across the board.

Clients and their designers are somewhat responsible, scheme costs don't reflect reality and then we have "value engineering", sometimes it works, other times as you state there is a failure in the design process and then its too late. Insufficient engineering due diligence leading to significant quality/safety issues.

Hello,

Could you help me with where to look on that website, please.

I've tried searching their database by 'Carillion' (correct spelling!!) but am not finding information. Is there some kind of forum available or one of that organisation's reports?

I guess the point you're referring to isn't specific to Carillion, however I completely agree with you re value engineering and I'm looking for evidence of poor thinking in both design (Grenfell) and in construction process (Edinburgh schools)

Thanks!

[ALawson]

dxg said:

Hello,

Could you help me with where to look on that website, please.

I've tried searching their database by 'Carillion' (correct spelling!!) but am not finding information. Is there some kind of forum available or one of that organisation's reports?

I guess the point you're referring to isn't specific to Carillion, however I completely agree with you re value engineering and I'm looking for evidence of poor thinking in both design (Grenfell) and in construction process (Edinburgh schools)

Thanks!

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!

[crankedup]

ClaphamGT3 said:

GT03ROB said:

crankedup said:

Inevitablity of an increasingly unsavoury workplace for ordinary people, judging from the behaviour of already existing Corporations? Marx was correct when he stated that the commercial world will be just a few huge conglomerates, as you mention with many strings to thier bows. Wether this is good,bad or indifferent I am not at all sure, but the steam roller steams on.

I would not agree. I've been in the industry for a long time & size does not inevitably lead to unsavoury workplaces.

I would agree. Terrible practices are more often than not seen in the smaller contractors, not the larger ones

Perhaps large medium or small, dependant upon the management style. Happiness in the workplace seems to be a rare thing, I cannot remember the last time ‘I’m happy’ or even content was pronounced by anybody. Most workers appear to be down in mouth and very pissed off,

[wc98]

vonuber said:

On the design side it's a skills shortage. We've plugged the gap a lot with EU nationals.

you just think you have . the skills shortage was the industries own doing. like most industries in the uk today where wet behind the ears grads think they have come up with something new in relation to cost cutting they end up cutting their own throats. when large companies abrogate themselves of their responsibilities those doing the actual work tend to do the same. may not be right, but just the way it is.

you can buy any level of cis card you like today (official and on the register) , instant accreditation without the training to back it up, then people wonder why work is shoddy,contracts over run and people get hurt or killed . lack of investment in training over the years is biting back hard now.

knowing some of what went on and the terms and conditions of those on the new forth bridge crossing for instance, i am just a liuttle surprised only one person was killed during the project and won't be surprised in the least should major problems arise in the next decade or so.

[wc98]

Trophy Husband said:

Not wishing to jump into a disagreement!!

However, having worked in construction contracting for 30 years and now running my own I am certain that on the whole conditions have improved massively for the grunts (not a term I particularly like) or the person at the dirty end of the job.
The improvements I have seen are all largely based around safety/safe systems, working hours, working conditions etc. Maybe my view is skewed by the people I have worked for (freelance Agent/PM) who have generally been the medium to large nationals/multi-nationals

Things that weren't around in my early days:-

Good welfare
Health Surveillance
HAVS assessment and monitoring
Active Dust Suppression (cement dust is a killer) leading to face fitting of FFP3 face masks
Eye Protection policies
Warm and waterproof PPE
Sensible working hours (my record for a working week was 98 hours back in 94, averaged 80 plus that summer). Working Time Directive sorted that to a degree although the opt out kind of hinders to a degree.
Mechanical lifters for kerbs/concrete products
Check valves/Quick hitches on excavators
Seat belts on dumpers/rollers
Behavioural Safety Training (the best thing in the world in my eyes)
The list could go on.

When I think back to the sites I was on in the 90's most of them were ripe for an accident/fatality and I had a few near misses myself.

I therefore don't recognise a deterioration in working conditions for the real working man, I only see a vast improvement. If you look at the AFR's for contracting as a whole industry things are improving all of the time. Risk Assessments, Method Statements and Permitry can only go so far. The next big leap in construction safety will only be achieved through behavioural safety training of which I am a huge advocate and train my guys as a matter of course. Regularly.

without a doubt there were major improvements . how well they are being continued as prices get squeezed is open to question , imo. my own short lived experience was lots of signage , lots of form filling and box ticking then lots of ignoring actually on site.

[dxg]

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!

Thanks - I'm going to get digging and reading!

[vonuber]

wc98 said:

vonuber said:

On the design side it's a skills shortage. We've plugged the gap a lot with EU nationals.

you just think you have . the skills shortage was the industries own doing. like most industries in the uk today where wet behind the ears grads think they have come up with something new in relation to cost cutting they end up cutting their own throats. when large companies abrogate themselves of their responsibilities those doing the actual work tend to do the same. may not be right, but just the way it is.

I'm not sure your answer relates to my statement, unless I am missing something.

[jules_s]

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)

[ALawson]

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).