In considering the issue of employing contractors 2 recent court cases have proved a point.
Both cases involved a worker being engaged and then being asked to do something which was outside of their skill set which not resulted in a safety failure leading to serious injuries being sustained but a significant financial cost to the 2 companies in fines, fee for intervention and court costs.
Both cases highlighted the consequences in failing to control a contractor and at SAMS Ltd it got us thinking about other examples we are aware of which 3 examples immediately came to mind.
The first involved the replacement of an asbestos roof on a vehicle work shop in which the tenant agreed to share the cost of the replacement and agree the contractor with their landlord. Being a shrewd operator the landlord decided to save some money by employing his friend to complete the work. The first time that the client became aware that the work had started was some 30 minutes after it had started when the worker landed next to their vehicle lift having fallen some 5 meters and sustained serious injuries.
The second example was at a large music festival when the promoter, to reduce costs, decided to employ the services of some volunteers to act as marshals on minor gates to show audience and workers where to go. Their reward was a 3-day pass to the festival but lacking faith in their ability each volunteer had to pay a £100 deposit returnable at the end of the festival provided they had met their end of the bargain. A good idea you may think but when the heavens opened and it rained for 2 days the initial enthusiasm of the volunteers dissipated rapidly with all but 1 abandoning their post and going to watch the festival anyway. The cost to the promoter was significant in that he had to get, at very short notice, SIA badged security staff to attend and make up the short fall. A true cost saving.
The final example relates to the appointment of a contractor to act as a site manager who, on evidence available, looked ideal. All went well initially until his complete inability to manage staff and challenge poor practice was ruthlessly exposed by other contractors. At first the issue was not that apparent and started with some fairly minor issues picked up onsite safety inspections which were addressed and ended with a significant failure, directly caused, footballing terms, by the site manager having “lost the dressing room” and any respect of other contractors who started doing things off their own back to get the job done.
In each of these cases significant weakness was present around competence and poor decisions around selection and control of contractors. In each case the contractors were not up to the task which became painfully clear after the work had started. In selecting or appointing a contractor the golden rule is having an understanding that what may seem an attractive, and cost effective solution, which if wrong, will quickly unravel and create a far greater problem over time.
The old proverb which states that the path to hell is paved with good intentions is, when it comes to the selection and deployment of a contractor, is very true.