TRADE JURISDITIONS FOR BIDDING

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

Author Message Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 451 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2011 - 10:41 am:    When I worked in Alberta, public bid (tender in Canada) projects used the Alberta Construction Tendering System (ACTS) that describe organizational roles and construction disciplines and set trade jurisdictions for subcontractor works and Tender closing times for major M & E subs. Use with private tendered projects was optional. Are there are any similar documents in the US? Please name names. Thanks Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 132 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2011 - 05:59 pm:    In Massachusetts public bid work, we have filed sub bids and trade bids for some trades, but not others. It seems to be based on which unions were powerful in the 1950s. I can't imagine you want to know this if you don't have to. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1149 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, April 29, 2011 - 05:48 pm:    I don't know of any systems like what you mentioned now, but back in the early days of my career (1980's) some public projects had systems like what you mentioned, and some governmental agencies had similar systems. (work for the State of Washington, for example). Washington State University also had a fairly detailed bidding system that they no longer use anymore. I think in the US, the trend has been to become less restrictive both in procedure and content. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 487 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Friday, April 29, 2011 - 11:52 pm:    Bidding requirements vary from state to state, and, within a state, from one agency to another. In Minnesota, the state posts mechanical and electrical subcontract bids a few days before prime contract bids are received. Some surrounding states, and other agencies within Minnesota, do not have the same requirement. Whenever you're dealing with a public agency, you must contact that agency and ask what their bidding requirements are. Remember the old saw about "assume"... Christopher Borcsok Senior Member Username: ckb Post Number: 33 Registered: 06-2013 Posted on Sunday, March 09, 2014 - 09:56 pm:    I have a school project that just went out for Tender, and the school board (Owner) has a prequalified contractors list. From the list I've seen, at least three generals, three mechanical, three electrical, and maybe a handful of others (I see one email address with masonry in the name). I think this goes back to the difficult question of responsibility trade jurisdiction, since both the General Conditions of the Contract, and MasterFormat say that it doesn't assign jurisdiction, and yet the client dictates who the generals can use as the subs... isn't that somewhat contradictory? Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 733 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 01:52 am:    I'm not sure where MasterFormat comes in; it says nothing about assignment of work. The A201 does say the owner cannot force a contractor to work with a subcontractor if the contractor has reasonable objection. However, because it is a condition of bidding - if you don't like the subs, don't bid - I don't think that clause applies. There is no contract until the agreement is signed; the bidding documents explain what conditions will exist after award of contract. It's then that the owner can't force the contractor to hire an objectionable sub. In Minnesota, most state projects have a two-step bidding process. Mechanical and electrical subcontractors submit bids on one day, and their bids are publicly posted. A few days later, prime contract bidders submit their bids, using only posted mechanical and electrical subcontract bids. The prime contractors are free to choose anyone on the list of posted subs, but prime contract bidders nearly always choose the low posted bids. Apparently, their objections, if any, are not as important as taking the low posted bids and getting the job. All that aside, if there are three mechanical and three electrical subs designated, it's likely the contractor will have no objection to at least one of them. spiper (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 09:33 am:    We often use a prequalified list on school projects for GCs as well as major subs. However that does not preclude a GC from using a different sub it simply lets the GC know which subs are prequalified. We will also require qualifications not only from the GC but from some of the major subs as well. If we do this we identify which subs are required to be prequalified for that particular project. I am not sure how the project that Chris is referencing is set up but if it is anything like how we set up our projects then the client is not dictating to the GCs who they can use as subs. They are merely letting them know who is already acceptable and possibly who will be getting a set of documents. George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 722 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 11:12 am:    The gate swings both ways - unless I am misremembering A201, the Owner also has the right to reject a sub if there is reasonable cause. An experienced owner does a pre-qualified (and implicitly "preferred") sub-contractor list to tell the GC-bidders who is acceptable, as Scott says. It doesn't limit who can bid, but those NOT on the list probably will need to go through some sort of qualification process before signing a contract. Besides, you better believe that everyone on the lists knows everyone else and has probably worked with them before on one of the Owner's projects. And the GC probably knows which subs not on the list would be rejected by the Owner anyway. There are no secrets on the street. George A. Everding AIA CSI CCS CCCA Allegion PLC (formerly Ingersoll Rand) St. Louis, MO John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: john_regener Post Number: 689 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 02:11 pm:    What does the Architect's license state about responsibility for assigning work to various suppliers and contractors? As compared to the (General) Contractor's license? John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1564 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 02:28 pm:    It doesn't matter what the licensing says about assignment of work when state law says it must be done for public projects - it's got to be done. The law in Massachusetts is quite explicit about the way the documents must be put together in order to accomplish that objective; it discusses drawings, specifications, bidding documents, advertising, plan rooms, and on and on. Only sub-contractors in 14 (or is it 17?) specific trades, as Lisa notes, are required to be separately bid. Essentially what we do here is (though practice varies slightly) is to have a "lead section" for each filed-sub-bid; generally the principal one for the trade. That section has an article with the legal requirements in it (dictated by law), and statements describing what other sections are part of the bid; those sections reference back to the first. Also lists of drawings are included. Drawings are supposed to be as separate as possible, but of course for many things you can't do that, so drawing notes may be annotated with the trade responsible. Separate bid forms (dictated by law) are included for those trades. The trickiest part is where there may be cross-over or more than one place where something may be specified. There has to be a clear and explicit scope indicated on either drawings or specs, whichever works best. Things that could be structural steel or misc. iron, for example, must be indicated (the structural steel industry's definitions don't matter). One can find oneself in a strange world when this isn't done right. Even if something traditionally part of a certain trade is clearly indicated, but no sub-trade is given, it can be interpreted that no one "owns" that work (not even the general contractor) and a change order must be issued. I did a couple public projects in Pennsylvania, which also has the MEP trades as separate bids as others have noted for several states. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 734 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 02:42 pm:    I don't know what other states have to say, but I believe the requirements are similar: to be a licensed design professional, one must have a specified amount of education, a specified amount of experience, and pass a specified exam. There is nothing in the statutes about assigning work or other specific aspects of practice. George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 723 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 03:11 pm:    The reason we architects don't assign work to trades is because it steps into the Contractor's "means and methods" role - it has nothing to do with licensure and everything to do with best practices and standard of care. But when the state mandates that we do so on behalf of the owner, best practices and standard of care demands that we do it. One of the quirky differences between a typical project and a government project. Add State of Illinois projects to the list of who requires separation. George A. Everding AIA CSI CCS CCCA Allegion PLC (formerly Ingersoll Rand) St. Louis, MO Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 736 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Monday, March 10, 2014 - 03:24 pm:    I agree, George, but architects either don't understand that or are willing to accept the risk that goes with specifying means and methods. A hundred years ago, it was a different game, and architects were heavily engaged in means and methods, but the general conditions have changed.