Large Wire Pull Problems

Status
Not open for further replies.
What area of country is this work being performed? That will also take into consideration with regards to industry standards. What we in Detroit think is right may be wrong in Phoenix.
 
Before we start calling them unskilled laborers ( probably true ) how is California with regards to journeymen licensing? They may just be overly abundant with apprentices still unskilled yet learning. Nevada has limited rules regarding the same thing ( a diferent topic ).
What really troubles me is pulling existing out then reinstalling same cables in different conduits. Why bother? Why not just go new? How can you expect it warranteed if it is spose to be?
 
This is a large solar array construction project. The contractor has a handful of electricians in his employ, but the majority of the work crew are construction laborers hired from a temp agency; their main job in this project is to construct the array framework. While they may be skilled in construction, they have no experience in electrical work. That is what I meant by "unskilled laborers."

The wire pulls discussed in my original post were performed on four different days: three weekend days and one weekday (after 4PM). This was to minimize the impact of the power interruption on our facility. On hand for the pulls were:

  1. Myself
  2. One or two (depending on the day) construction laborers, employed by my company and reporting to me. My company had no obligation to provide these extra workers, but I requested them to help out with wire handling, etc.
  3. One or two electricians (depending on the day), employed by the contractor.
  4. Zero, one, or two foremen (depending on the day), employed by the contractor. Of these two, one is a carpenter; the other is an equipment operator.
  5. Four to six construction laborers, hired by the contractor through the temp agency.
The contractor himself was present all day for first pull, absent for the second pull, present only in the afternoon on the third pull, and only present for about an hour for the fourth pull. He really wasn't involved at all on the last pull because he was busy with his friend who was visiting from out-of-town.
 
Jon456 said:
This is a large solar array construction project. The contractor has a handful of electricians in his employ, but the majority of the work crew are construction laborers hired from a temp agency; their main job in this project is to construct the array framework. While they may be skilled in construction, they have no experience in electrical work. That is what I meant by "unskilled laborers."

The wire pulls discussed in my original post were performed on four different days: three weekend days and one weekday (after 4PM). This was to minimize the impact of the power interruption on our facility. On hand for the pulls were:

  1. Myself
  2. One or two (depending on the day) construction laborers, employed by my company and reporting to me. My company had no obligation to provide these extra workers, but I requested them to help out with wire handling, etc.
  3. One or two electricians (depending on the day), employed by the contractor.
  4. Zero, one, or two foremen (depending on the day), employed by the contractor. Of these two, one is a carpenter; the other is an equipment operator.
  5. Four to six construction laborers, hired by the contractor through the temp agency.
The contractor himself was present all day for first pull, absent for the second pull, present only in the afternoon on the third pull, and only present for about an hour for the fourth pull. He really wasn't involved at all on the last pull because he was busy with his friend who was visiting from out-of-town.
Click to expand...

I hate to say this but it has to be said, this is typical of non union contractors that hire unqualified workers in an effort to save money, so the owner of this non union electrical contractor can pocket more money for himself. I am not saying all non union EC operate this way, but the one your dealing with does !! And by the way, you have no right to supply him with additional unqualified workers, as you have stated, to help him handle the wire, JMO!! Electricians handle and install wire, its the job they where trained to perform.
 
Last edited:
jusme123 said:
I hate to say this but it has to be said, this is typical of non union contractors that hire unqualified workers in an effort to save money, so the owner of this non union electrical contractor can pocket more money for himself. I am not saying all non union EC operate this way, but the one your dealing with does !! And by the way, you have no right to supply him with additional unqualified workers, as you have stated, to help him handle the wire, JMO!! Electricians handle and install wire, its the job they where trained to perform.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I have to respond to this one. The shop being union or non union has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of work or install. I have seen just as many substandard installs by union shops as nonunion. Union affiliation does nothing whatsoever to ensure quality workmanship. This is a character issue, plain and simple. Some of us have pride in ourselves and strive for quality in ever install, every job, no matter how minor and some simply do not. When it comes to pride and personal accountability tb e scales are atleast balanced between union and nonunion shops. Let's not make this a political argument one way or another but leave it at the fact that some persons, union or not, choose not to make quality workmanship their number one priority.
 
Workmanship is more of a fuction of the contractor's culture and supervision than of the electricians working on the project. Quality or the lack there of starts at the top.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Workmanship is more of a function of the contractor's culture and supervision than of the electricians working on the project. Quality or the lack there of starts at the top.
Click to expand...
Exactly! Not just quality, but also professionalism. I'll illustrate with an example:

At the start of the job, a number of the crew -- mostly the temp construction laborers, but also one of the contractor's foremen -- were smoking on site throughout our property: on rooftops, between & behind buildings, etc. Besides the reduction in productivity, it posed a fire hazard to our facility. One of the worker's discarded cigarettes actually set fire to the dry mulch ground covering in a landscaped area of our property. Fortunately, a child playing nearby smelled the smoke and alerted us, so the fire was put out before any serious damage occurred. I established a designated smoking area on our property, and the contractor instructed his crew that anyone caught smoking outside that area would be off the job. But smoking continued on our property, and even though I notified the contractor of continued smoking throughout our property, he never fired anyone. As a result, the workers learned that the contractor's directives and authority were meaningless.

Worse than that, this established a work "culture" where the workers knew they would not be held responsible or accountable for anything they did on our property. It is the reason they carelessly dented the sheet metal roof panels on our steel buildings, even after repeated warnings to walk carefully on the roofs. And it's the reason they continued to walk and stand on our feeder conductors, even after numerous warnings not to do so.

Now before someone points out the obvious, allow me to state that I was not given the authority to throw any of the contractor's crew off our property, nor did I have any power over the contractor. So all I could do was report the problems back to the owner of our facility.
 
Jon456 said:
...
Now before someone points out the obvious, allow me to state that I was not given the authority to throw any of the contractor's crew off our property, nor did I have any power over the contractor. So all I could do was report the problems back to the owner of our facility.
Click to expand...
If the rules are not enforced there is no real reason to expect them to be complied with.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
If the rules are not enforced there is no real reason to expect them to be complied with.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The owner (my boss) expected the contractor to enforce the rules on his own employees. The contractor did not do that.

In defense of my boss, he was out-of-town for a month just after the project started, so he was unavailable to deal with some of the early problems. After he returned, he did address the various problems with the contractor on a number of occasions. The contractor would either deny the problem, blame someone else, state that the problem could not be avoided (e.g., he stated it was impossible for the laborers to work on the rooftops without denting them), or say he'd take care of it (but not really do so). Realize also that we are operating under a tight schedule, and my boss can not afford any big delays in the project. As a result, he has had to swallow some of these "smaller" issues in order to see the job get completed. But there will be financial repercussions for the contractor at the conclusion of the job.

In any case, I think you can understand why I may be more than a bit frustrated by all this.
 
Don?t know why but I just read this entire thread. This thread sounds to me like someone who is hunting for a reason to not pay their bill by saying he done this or he done that. :rant:

Has anyone counted how many times someone has made the statement that these practices are done all the time in this thread? I know that I read it more than once. How many times and by how many different people does this need to be said? :happysad:
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Workmanship is more of a fuction of the contractor's culture and supervision than of the electricians working on the project. Quality or the lack there of starts at the top.
Click to expand...

johnmccoll said:
I'm sorry, but I have to respond to this one. The shop being union or non union has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of work or install. I have seen just as many substandard installs by union shops as nonunion. Union affiliation does nothing whatsoever to ensure quality workmanship. This is a character issue, plain and simple. Some of us have pride in ourselves and strive for quality in ever install, every job, no matter how minor and some simply do not. When it comes to pride and personal accountability tb e scales are atleast balanced between union and nonunion shops. Let's not make this a political argument one way or another but leave it at the fact that some persons, union or not, choose not to make quality workmanship their number one priority.
Click to expand...

...fact remains, there is no way union electricians would let this scenario happen. It is obviously a non union contractor is working the posters job. I have stated that not all non union electrical contractors operate that way, but you can not deny that this one is not non union.
 
jusme123 said:
...fact remains, there is no way union electricians would let this scenario happen. It is obviously a non union contractor is working the posters job. I have stated that not all non union electrical contractors operate that way, but you can not deny that this one is not non union.
Click to expand...

That is absolute utter nonsense.

I have no idea who did the job but it could be either.
 
Jon456 said:
Agreed. The owner (my boss) expected the contractor to enforce the rules on his own employees. The contractor did not do that.

In defense of my boss, he was out-of-town for a month just after the project started, so he was unavailable to deal with some of the early problems. After he returned, he did address the various problems with the contractor on a number of occasions. The contractor would either deny the problem, blame someone else, state that the problem could not be avoided (e.g., he stated it was impossible for the laborers to work on the rooftops without denting them), or say he'd take care of it (but not really do so). Realize also that we are operating under a tight schedule, and my boss can not afford any big delays in the project. As a result, he has had to swallow some of these "smaller" issues in order to see the job get completed. But there will be financial repercussions for the contractor at the conclusion of the job.

In any case, I think you can understand why I may be more than a bit frustrated by all this.
Click to expand...


...just found the the cause of all your post. Money! Your simple trying to build a case to withhold money from this contractor, which is fine, if you are correct. Have you sent him letters, stating an impending withholding of monies is eminent because of his lack of contractual obligations, and state which obligations he has failed to meet?

You are so hell bent on his wire pull, did you require him to test/remove the wire in which you say maybe damaged, and if the wire is not damaged, are you ready to compensate him for pulling it out and than having to re-install it?
 
iwire said:
That is absolute utter nonsense.

I have no idea who did the job but it could be either.
Click to expand...

...no its not, and you know it. There is no way union electricians are going to supervise laborers and allow them to pull in major feeders for a building, especially when union work is hard to come by these days. Again, as I have stated in my other posts, not all non union contractors operate this way, but this one does!
 
Union, non union is really a non issue.. how about not hijacking the thread with that type of conversation. It really has no bearing on the subject. I have witnessed both union and non union alike do some of the same things which would be considered "hack" but was ok because the union guy did it.
 
You guys are trying to read too much between the lines, rather than read what I have plainly stated. Hopefully, this will clear up some of the concerns expressed above:

  1. I am not the "customer" per se. However I do represent the customer's interests with respect to this project.
  2. I am in the trade and have been a member of this forum for almost four years. I have posted 263 times in numerous threads, 42 of which I have started. Only 3 threads are related to this particular project.
  3. I can -- and do -- read the NEC. But I've found this forum to be an excellent resource for UNDERSTANDING the code and LEARNING how it is applied. Furthermore, this forum is perhaps the richest source for knowledgeable and experienced electricians and electrical inspectors. That is why I also come here to learn about industry standards and practices.
  4. I have absolutely NO control over the finances in this project. My role is strictly technical.
  5. At NO time did the facility owner (the "customer") ever ask me to find justification for withholding payment from the contractor.
  6. Both the owner and myself have concerns about the quality of the wire pull. My concerns are greater because: (A) I was present for the pull and witnessed all the work first-hand; and (B) because I understand electricity and electrical work much more than the owner (i.e., I take the NEC and industry standards much more seriously than he does).
  7. As I stated earlier in this thread, the owner and I both want some assurance that the insulation on the feeders were not damaged during the pulls. The only method I can think of to test that is to fill the underground conduits with water (they already contain a considerable amount of water), and then megger the wires. If there are alternative ways to test the integrity of the insulation, I would love to hear your suggestions!
  8. As I stated earlier, the owner did ask me to provide him with a list of industry standards and best practices in order for us to justify a charge back to the contractor for the cost of independent testing of the feeders.
  9. While I did state that there will be "financial repercussions for the contractor at the conclusion of the job", I was not specifically referring to this aspect of the job (the wire pull). For example, I have already mentioned that the contractor's crew damaged the roofs on a number of our buildings. He is responsible for that damage and will be held accountable for it.
Having said all that, I am somewhat concerned about the feeling I'm getting from some posts here. It's like the wagons are being circled around this contractor because he is "one of us". If the guy really is doing substandard and unprofessional work, shouldn't the industry be ostracizing him, rather than protecting him?

Let's assume for a moment that I am the customer and I do believe that some payment should be withheld due to problems with the quality of work. Let's further assume that I am seeking advice from members here to justify that. Why is that wrong? If you went to a doctor for surgery and you believe he did a "hack" job on you, wouldn't you want to know from other medical professionals whether that surgeon followed accepted industry standards and practices? How many of you would complain about those "damn doctors" if they closed-ranks to protect "one of their own"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top