Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Left contract after 2 1/2 weeks. Do you put in on CV"
You're overestimating the plumbers role on the project. There are many other people working, and the objective of the project may be to stop the building going down, but the plumbers objective is to fix leaky pipes.
The other contractor, an Electrician has already been asked to cut electricity supply (how he cuts that supply, is down to him) to the area of the building with the 3 leaky pipes to reduce the risk of death if they blow. The project has decided they are willing to risk the unoccupied side of the building (yes unnocupied, as a contractor brought in to fix leaking pipes, you don't know the whole story) to make sure that the smaller, area with many smaller but easier to fix leaky pipes (conveniently where the CEOs office is) is secured.
How you fix the leaky pipes (tape, new pipes, glue, chewing gum) is down to you.
Billybiro is correct in his analogy. @l35kee, Yes there are other people working on the project but they take guidance from the plumber. If the plumber says fix 6 pipes, they will only fix the 6 pipes. The problem was there was no one else to take responsibility for the other 4.
You're overestimating the plumbers role on the project. There are many other people working, and the objective of the project may be to stop the building going down, but the plumbers objective is to fix leaky pipes.
The other contractor, an Electrician has already been asked to cut electricity supply (how he cuts that supply, is down to him) to the area of the building with the 3 leaky pipes to reduce the risk of death if they blow. The project has decided they are willing to risk the unoccupied side of the building (yes unnocupied, as a contractor brought in to fix leaking pipes, you don't know the whole story) to make sure that the smaller, area with many smaller but easier to fix leaky pipes (conveniently where the CEOs office is) is secured.
How you fix the leaky pipes (tape, new pipes, glue, chewing gum) is down to you.
PMSL at your username - are you in fact a plumber?
There's 10 leaking pipes, any one of which remaining leaking will bring the building down. Client has engaged my services to prevent the building going down, but client gives me enough material to fix only 6 pipes.
At this point, I'm telling the client I need more material, right now, in order to fix all 10 leaking pipes, or the building will go down. If client refuses to provide that further material, I walk before even attempting any work.
I'm walking on the basis that no matter which 6 of the 10 leaking pipes I fix, I cannot prevent the building going down and therefore cannot complete the client's brief successfully, through no fault of my own due to arbitrary client constraints that can only result in failure of the original brief, by anyone foolish enough to attempt it.
You're overestimating the plumbers role on the project. There are many other people working, and the objective of the project may be to stop the building going down, but the plumbers objective is to fix leaky pipes.
The other contractor, an Electrician has already been asked to cut electricity supply (how he cuts that supply, is down to him) to the area of the building with the 3 leaky pipes to reduce the risk of death if they blow. The project has decided they are willing to risk the unoccupied side of the building (yes unnocupied, as a contractor brought in to fix leaking pipes, you don't know the whole story) to make sure that the smaller, area with many smaller but easier to fix leaky pipes (conveniently where the CEOs office is) is secured.
How you fix the leaky pipes (tape, new pipes, glue, chewing gum) is down to you.
You fix the 6 pipes however you want to, but you fix the 6 pipes, otherwise chaos.
No.
There's 10 leaking pipes, any one of which remaining leaking will bring the building down. Client has engaged my services to prevent the building going down, but client gives me enough material to fix only 6 pipes.
At this point, I'm telling the client I need more material, right now, in order to fix all 10 leaking pipes, or the building will go down. If client refuses to provide that further material, I walk before even attempting any work.
I'm walking on the basis that no matter which 6 of the 10 leaking pipes I fix, I cannot prevent the building going down and therefore cannot complete the client's brief successfully, through no fault of my own due to arbitrary client constraints that can only result in failure of the original brief, by anyone foolish enough to attempt it.
Trying to think of a plumbing analogy... What about..
Client has 20 leaking pipes. You want to fix the 3 which if burst could bring the whole building down, but client says no, fix the 10 smaller ones and we can deal with the other 3 as and when they happen.
Then you realise you can't swim so bail.
Plumbing analogy is more like...
There are 100 leaking pipes and you only have enough material to fix 60.
My thought is let's go buy more material to fix all 100.
Programme directors thought is fix the 60 and I choose not to believe the other 40 are leaky until the place floods.
I as the plumber being responsible for the house not flooding have raised that yes 40 are leaky and will flood the house.
Problem is if I fix the 60 and the house still floods....it's still my responsibility.
Trying to think of a plumbing analogy... What about..
Client has 20 leaking pipes. You want to fix the 3 which if burst could bring the whole building down, but client says no, fix the 10 smaller ones and we can deal with the other 3 as and when they happen.
Then you realise you can't swim so bail.
"Client has 20 leaking pipes. You want to fix the 3 which if burst could bring the whole building down, but client says no, fix the 10 smaller ones"
If your brief is to help the client prevent a water-based building disaster, then no.
If your brief is the wholly D&C-trapped, "Do what you're told to do, exactly how you're told to do it", then yes.
If you were a plumber brought in by the client to fix a leaking pipe, would you follow the client's orders when they tell you to use a screwdriver rather than a wrench to turn off the stopcock valve?
Totally not the same thing!
The programme manager was in the school of 'let's just roll it out ASAP and deal with the sh*t when it hits the fan' whereas I am of the school 'This is the Sh*t that is going to hit the fan. Let's figure out a way to minimise/stop it before we go ahead.'
Trying to think of a plumbing analogy... What about..
Client has 20 leaking pipes. You want to fix the 3 which if burst could bring the whole building down, but client says no, fix the 10 smaller ones and we can deal with the other 3 as and when they happen.
Leave a comment: