CSI's endorsement of ConsensusDocs

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Ruth (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 11:32 am:    I was just curious about spec writers thoughts on CSI's endorsement of ConsensusDocs for use as contract documents. From my limited knowledge of these documents, they do quite a bit to eliminate the architect from the construction administration phase of the project. Does anyone have any information on why CSI would endorse these? J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 778 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 12:33 pm:    It is my understanding that CSI has endorsed certain documents in the ConsensusDocs family. I also understand that ConsensusDocs is "overselling" this endorsement indicating that their product has been fully endorsed by CSI. I have been unable to review a full set of the most recent ConsensusDocs (especially the General Conditions), but from my initial review, it is my opinion that those who wrote them don't really understand some fundamentals of contract law. I would not use them unless they were rammed down my throat, and if that happened, I might withdraw from the project. Richard Gonser AIA CSI CCCA SCIP Senior Member Username: rich_gonser Post Number: 85 Registered: 11-2008 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 12:49 pm:    Based on my overview of all the comments I've seen here and marketing materials received, I would STRONGLY SUGGEST that CSI send a CEASE and DESIST LETTER from the legal counsel to the people the publish Consensus Docs. These marketing publications I've received are making it sound as though CSI supports and is responsible for the content. This needs to happen immediately and the Consensus Doc people need to publish a retraction equal to the effort misrepresenting CSI. It will otherwise cause further long-term damage to CSI and our profession. This might be an overstatement, but sometimes you have blitz the quarterback. Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 603 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 12:57 pm:    I got an email FROM CSI that proclaimed their endorsement of the ConsensusDocs. Not sure a cease and desist would work against their own communications dept :-) Richard Gonser AIA CSI CCCA SCIP Senior Member Username: rich_gonser Post Number: 86 Registered: 11-2008 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 01:02 pm:    Fair enough. That just reinforces the attitude that some have, calling it the Construction "SELLING" Institute. Professional organizations should be defending their constituency not dismantling it. No wonder the membership is half what it used to be. Ruth (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 01:12 pm:    In the letter I received it says that CSI "is an active participant and endorser" of ConsensusDocs, and further on provides a discount code to be used if you are a CSI member. It does seem to clearly indicate their support - and is that isn't the case, I would agree that they should do something about it. The brochure that came with the letter also uses CSI in the list of "ConsensusDocs Coalition" members Robin E. Snyder Senior Member Username: robin Post Number: 574 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 01:40 pm:    Remember, CSI does not solely represent Architects. The AIA handles that. I am curious why there is the attitude that endorsement/support of Consensus docs will cause long-term damage to CSI and our profession? Or, how is this dismantling the constituency? Ruth Albertelli Junior Member Username: ruth Post Number: 2 Registered: 10-2014 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 01:53 pm:    Robin, that was sort of my point in asking about this. CSI does purport to represent a distinct position for both contractors and design professionals. That would give a great deal of weight to their endorsement of these documents. But I also go back to the fact that there have been many writings about how these documents diminish the role of the architect in the construction process, and/or allocate more risk to the design professionals. If those criticisms are true, it would be nice to know how CSI feels it can endorse them. And if those criticisms are not true, shouldn't CSI at least address that misunderstanding? Ronald L. Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1266 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 02:17 pm:    Nathan, if you are referring to a recent email, then you're mistaken. The latest CSI Weekly was mentioning CSI's endorsement of EJCDC documents, and even then it was only the C Series documents. CSI is a participant on ConsensusDocs, and we should be. However, our endorsements to date have been limited to a certain number of documents. I don't agree with everything in all of the ConsensusDocs documents, but I also don't agree with everything in all the AIA documents. As a consultant to architects, I really don't care that much about what is in the owner/architect agreement, but the architect might. The ConsensusDocs General Conditions may have a modest impact on Division 01 regarding submittals, pay applications, and contract modifications. Ron Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 604 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 - 02:25 pm:    You are correct Ron. I lumped ConsensousDocs into the same mental category as EDJC docs. Oh the shame! Crawling back into my corner now :-) Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C, MAI Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 280 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Thursday, October 23, 2014 - 12:42 pm:    The letter many of us received earlier this year came from ConsensusDOCS, not from CSI. It is PARTIALLY true: A few years ago when there were only 6 documents CSI agreed to endorse to the extent that they follow basic organizing principles. But they disclaimed endorsing for technical content. You will not hear that from ConsensusDOCS though. Their new push to CSI members is misleading, as though the current 100+ documents were endorsed and leaving people to assume that includes content. If CSI's core members are still the ones mentioned in our middle name, then serving architects and other design professionals is our core business. My opinion then is that we should be quite unhappy with anyone who is sticking our clients with much more risk while claiming in their letter that CSI says there is less risk. The only way you could connect CSI with saying that is perhaps they're following some inkling of standard organizing formats, if so then yes there could be a bit less risk than Owner-drafted custom agreement forms. Even that is a stretch here though. The much more relevant type of risk here is submittals becoming contract documents and elevating the architect's duties in their approval. I hope architects and owners do not fall for it. Instead what is needed is a REAL consensus, which the AIA and the AGC has had for decades until the AGC opted out, and got an army of subs and a few building owners to agree with this as a new "Consensus" while in truth not having an industry-wide consensus anymore. louis.medcalf@gmail.com (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, October 22, 2015 - 03:44 pm:    If ConsensusDOCS really represented a consensus as to contractual relations between owner, design team, and construction team, wouldn't they outsell both AIA and EJCDC documents combined? George A. Everding, FCSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 811 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Friday, October 23, 2015 - 03:57 pm:    I have been trying without success to get data on the use of ConsensusDOCS on constructed projects, and whether any of those projects have yet resulted in dispute resolution. The presentation on ConsensusDOCS at CONSTRUCT this year was wholly unsatisfying - neither presenter was very effective in telling the story, and there were a number of pointed questions from the audience that weren't addressed. AGC could get traction producing and introducing these documents because architects - in perception or in fact - have not performed their services to the expectation of owners because they have been systematically avoiding their traditional responsibilities in a misguided attempt to limit liability. That's why contractors seized the initiative. Then AIA refused a seat at the table when AGC was formulating the documents, so there was no voice of the architect in the consensus. CSI's role, as stated above, was to represent the broader spectrum of the construction industry - our constituency goes well beyond architects. Still, I'd love to hear stats on use of ConsensusDOCS, and success or failure stories. Perhaps it is still too soon to tell. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 328 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Friday, October 23, 2015 - 11:41 pm:    Didn't the AGC have a seat at the AIA contract documents update table for like, forever? I thought it was they who decided to step away from the table and do their own thing. I wasn't there, so I'm just gathering from what I've heard, but I'd sure like to know more so I get it straight. Deborah Corr (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Monday, October 26, 2015 - 12:30 pm:    In my work I see ConsensusDOCS being pushed hard by Design Builders and DBIA. Owners who have no technical staff or previous design and construction experience are most likely to jump on board. Architects and experienced Owners are sticking with AIA Documents. The Design Builders are working hard at gaining market share, particularly in the healthcare field, and for reasons like those George points out they are making headway. By using ConsensusDOCS for many of these projects with unsophisticated Owners, ConsensusDOCS are becoming more mainstream. This comment is not to disparage Design Build - DB can be very advantageous. Luckily, there is an AIA Contract for it that works just fine and it better protects those inexperienced Owners.