Construction Rant

Being a member of the National Access and Scaffolding Confederation (NASC) will not necessarily cut accident rates, despite what some major contractors think.

I set up my own company three years ago and - as I have always believed to be the case - found that it is the responsibility of the company itself to encourage good working practice.

For the NASC to imply that if you do not use its members you may compromise standards is unfair and misleading.

At a time when clients call the shots, every project that we are involved in has been re-bid and the lowest bid wins.

To suggest that being an NASC member excludes you from the price war is unfounded.

The reality of the criteria of becoming an NASC member is that 75% of your workforce have to be directly employed. At present, my own workforce is 40% direct, reduced in the past year from 90% due to fluctuating workloads and uncertain times.

I'm in favour of tighter regulations and a governing body for scaffolding to increase standards and better education of our industry, but in terms of safety non-members are no more dangerous than members.

I would become an NASC member to raise industry awareness and increase our tender opportunities - but not for greater safety regulation or to encourage higher pricing and increased staff salaries.

Mark Gainham,
Managing director
SBBS Building & Scaffolding

Drug dealers, feral teens, sex offenders and a host of other low-lives frequently receive pathetically inadequate penalties for their anti-social, unlawful activities.

So the decisions to fine a pair of grandparents £45,000, a Yorkshire couple £29,000, and an Essex man £103,000 may suggest the authorities are finally cracking down on the criminal element.

But far from having committed some heinous crime, they all have one thing in common; they are in the construction industry. Their only offence was to offer regular work to CIS4 card-holding subbies.

To my mind, it is a scandal that such massive fines are being levied against a hard working community. Rather than being encouraged, their very existence is increasingly threatened by a taxation directive that has been designed to raise revenue - in much the same way that speed cameras operate.

To make sure you don't unwittingly place yourself in line for a nasty surprise, be aware of one of HMRC's more cynical ploys.

When the Revenue is considering a status investigation, subbies are frequently invited to attend an 'informal' meeting to discuss their working arrangements.

The operatives are reassured they are not under investigation, but make no mistake, HMRC is looking for anything that helps them build a case against contractors, who could then find themselves involved in a lengthy investigation, which often ends in a huge fine.

I suggest you alert your subbies to the fact these 'informal' meetings are nothing of the sort.

Richard Crisp
Sales director
Hudson Contract Services

In the current economic downturn, it is increasingly common for big companies to delay payments to smaller suppliers and use bullying tactics to legitimise such practice.

While we can lobby these big companies to restrain from late payment, it is the smaller suppliers that actually hold the power to stop it happening.

The question is: what type of business do you want to be? One that holds on to its values and sticks to the principle of fair payment in order to weather the current storm? Or one that goes bust as a result of trying to manage an impossible cashflow situation?

The Fair Payment Campaign launched by NSCC last year gives SMEs within the supply chain the ability to achieve certainty of payment, 30-day payment terms, and the end of cash retentions.

And we can't let the progress made so far slip away at a time when fair payment is more important than ever. We need to test the resolve of the government's commitment to fair payment throughout the supply chain. If all businesses that want to realise fair payment practices stand firm, they will be much better placed when the market recovers.

The SMEs that make up the supply chain are the construction industry. Without their skills, knowledge and workforce, there is no industry and we should not forget that when it comes to payment.

For guidance, practical tools and tips for getting paid on time, visit the NSCC's dedicated website.

Suzannah Nichol MBE
Chief executive
NSCC

Last week, Construction Confederation chief executive Stephen Ratcliffe welcomed news that CONIAC, the HSE advisory committee on construction, faces the axe. He argued that he was happy to see the Strategic Forum's safety body take over CONIAC's responsibilities.

But the 'specialist' construction industry must come together and resist such aspirations.

It is a generally held view that our industry is driven by the majority-contracting side of the construction industry, and that major contractors fail to understand the needs of the specialist sector.

The Construction Confederation would have us believe therefore that it is there to set the agenda and the rest of the industry, which does somewhere in the region of 80% of the work, should recognise its position in the supply chain and dutifully follow its lead.

The Strategic Forum's safety group must not be allowed to move in on CONIAC. Otherwise it risks becoming another closed shop for mainstream contractors, hell-bent on telling the specialists how to do their job.

The National Association of Shopfitters is by no means the sole arbiter of standards within the overall sphere of construction. But what is certain is that CONIAC must be saved. It successfully joins up the dots of the whole industry and demonstrates that intelligent thinking exists outside the square mile of Westminster.

Robert Hudson
Director
National Association of Shopfitters
Shopfitting Independent Training Forum

When HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) legislation forced composite companies out of business last year, it was seen as a good thing for the construction industry. But that same legislation allowed PAYE umbrella schemes to take up where composites left off. The taxman had these companies in the net and let them off the hook.

A PAYE umbrella scheme pays much of a worker's payment as travel expenses or for meals and tools, but workers become employees of the umbrella company and so normal benefits and expenses rules apply.

When a place of work is not a temporary workplace, a worker's travel and other costs become normal costs payable out of taxed income.

What is not understood is that when payments are treated as expense payments, these do not count towards gross pay for calculating the national minimum wage. Neither is holiday pay.

Clients and principle contractors are responsible for checking compliance in the supply chain, but it is still unclear to what extent they could become liable if workers are found to be improperly employed.

HMRC is actively seeking law breakers and is able to impose fines of up to £5,000 for each offence. When the net closes, the taxman will recoup millions, without having to issue demands and challenging appeals on what constitutes a temporary workplace. But at what cost to an already beleaguered construction industry?

Carolyn Walsh,
Director
CW Construction

The pressure on principal contractors to vet those they engage with, and on sub-contractors to prove their credentials to buyers, has boosted the popularity of independent accreditation schemes.

But with so many schemes available, the challenge lies in accreditation bodies reaching an understanding to persuade more firms to adopt this approach. Some pre-qualification service providers are currently working with the Health & Safety Executive to this end.

If it isn't achieved, frustration over unnecessary duplication could lead to a loss of credibility for pre-qualification providers, which would be bad news for the industry.

In addition to mutual recognition, it is important that an independent awarding body is established to certify the quality of accreditation service providers. This would enable the HSE to endorse those schemes which meet the required level of competence, quality management and service delivery.

While large numbers of contractors and users of their services benefit from third party accreditation, many in industry still doubt the value of such schemes.

Leading accreditation providers must do more to demonstrate the real benefits of these schemes to the client and contractor market. Apart from the role accreditation plays in preventing accidents, it can save clients and contractors a lot of time that would otherwise be spent in multiple vetting processes. Mutually recognised standards would save both time and money for industry.

Darran Hughes
Operations director
SAFEContractor

Big companies are delaying payments to smaller suppliers in the biggest cash flow squeeze since the early 1990s. The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) says the situation is so bad some of its members are now facing a wait of over three months to be paid.

Why are they doing it? It's simple - it's because, in this climate, they can. By taking advantage of the current fears, born of the credit crunch, larger companies can withhold payment for the maximum amount of time, safe in the knowledge that their suppliers will 'put up and shut up'.

While the FSB are busy naming and shaming the worst culprits, how can those lower down the food chain ensure they don't fall victim and become their clients' latest credit solution?

The answer rests with the issue of value. Those whose services are valued by their clients are less likely to fall prey to extended payment periods. The supplier, therefore, needs to better communicate his or her value and shout louder in their demands for payment. If still necessary, they should then exercise their legal rights and charge interest on any late payments.

The larger firms are playing an arrogant and potentially damaging game. Withholding payment is a sure way to build resentment which could colour the suppliers' performance and service delivery.

Chances are that if they do value the suppliers then so do the suppliers' other customers. If payment is delayed, these same suppliers may feel that they're better off taking their goods and services elsewhere next time around.

Andrew Russell
Joint managing director
Russells Construction

Last year's MSC legislation drove many workers into self-employment or 'umbrella' companies.

Yet last week, CJ reported that the government will act "to ensure nobody is falsely classified as self-employed", and in parallel, HMRC is consulting on tax relief for travel expenses for temporary workers, which could eradicate Umbrella companies.

Continue reading "HMRC is wrong to victimise umbrella companies" »

It's encouraging to see more sustainable buildings being delivered, but as Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) come into force, they threaten to hit the property industry just when it needs help the most.

As of today, every building in the UK built, sold or leased needs an EPC and recommendations report, with penalties for non-compliance - yet the industry is unprepared.

The problem is that there is a shortage of people accredited to complete EPC reports for commercial buildings. There is already a backlog that needs signing off and this will only get worse.

Is this a new skills shortage? No. There are thousands of fully qualified engineers perfectly capable of producing the certificates. The problem is that to become accredited through a relevant scheme in England or Wales, each of these engineers, no matter how well qualified, needs to undergo two days' training - at a cost of £500-plus each. Yet in Scotland, professionally qualified engineers will be able to sign-off EPCs without any additional training.

South of the Border, it seems, we don't have the same faith in our engineers' abilities and instead must face unnecessary costs and complexity.

Backlogs for certificates will grow, putting yet more pressure on the property market. The government should step in to support those who already have the skills and experience to produce EPCs. Surely in the 21st century, it still means something to be a chartered engineer?

Jim Costello, Director, Hulley & Kirkwood

You can set your watch by it. The floods arrive and there are the inevitable cries that our green land has been paved over by too much impermeable concrete and asphalt.

This blame culture misses the point. The fact remains that increased rainfall patterns are set to continue and our antiquated drainage systems cannot cope. What really matters is that central government and the construction industry learn quickly from mistakes and fully grasp the need to embrace Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) on new developments.

Both government and the construction industry have been talking about this for too long now with no action.

Government has failed to set out legislation that would change the way we manage and alleviate the pressures that unpredictable rainfall patterns place on our traditional drainage systems. Equally, our industry has been too conservative in its approach to using SuDS, often not understanding what systems can offer or how to install them.

The irony is that proven technologies like porous asphalt are widely available. Used as part of a wider SuDS programme they can manage excess surface water and reduce flood risk.

Defra's Draft Floods and Water Bill could hold local authorities responsible for surface water in their areas. This Bill could also eventually pave the way for more specific SuDs legislation.

Yet consultation on this Draft Bill is set for 2009. Our industry should not wait for this legislative 'kick-start' before it embraces current and effective technology.

James Freeman
National special products manager
Tarmac