Hi everybody, I am very new to the field and was wondering if anyone knew what the industry norms are regarding head Engineers on large construction / B.O.T. projects:
I was recently hired to join the Contractor for a major project, where the Govt. is the Client. The concession contract has provisions for the role of "Engineer" who has lots of authority. I believe he is supposed to be impartial, since the contract says he is to make decisions (which are binding) in accordance with the "Project Documentation", or if unspecified, in accordance with "the accepted professional principles and standards in the field of engineering."
Probelm is, the Engineer on the project openly views himself as the employee of the Govt. and always hands down binding decisions that are in the Govt.’s favor. The vast majority of employees of both sides take this for granted. Some of these decisions are having a massive effect on the Contractor’s (now enlarged) scope of work. I believe my superiors are preparing for a long battle in arbitration, but I was hoping first that somebody might know if there is a genreic standard in these kinds of cases. Is the lead Engineer generally supopsed to be impartial with a primary duty to the project, or does it vary by the project and the particular contract? Doesn’t seem right that the lead Engineer can simply act as an extension of one party.
Very much appreciate you reading this and thanks very much to anybody who could enlighten me on the matter...
-Stom
I was recently hired to join the Contractor for a major project, where the Govt. is the Client. The concession contract has provisions for the role of "Engineer" who has lots of authority. I believe he is supposed to be impartial, since the contract says he is to make decisions (which are binding) in accordance with the "Project Documentation", or if unspecified, in accordance with "the accepted professional principles and standards in the field of engineering."
Probelm is, the Engineer on the project openly views himself as the employee of the Govt. and always hands down binding decisions that are in the Govt.’s favor. The vast majority of employees of both sides take this for granted. Some of these decisions are having a massive effect on the Contractor’s (now enlarged) scope of work. I believe my superiors are preparing for a long battle in arbitration, but I was hoping first that somebody might know if there is a genreic standard in these kinds of cases. Is the lead Engineer generally supopsed to be impartial with a primary duty to the project, or does it vary by the project and the particular contract? Doesn’t seem right that the lead Engineer can simply act as an extension of one party.
Very much appreciate you reading this and thanks very much to anybody who could enlighten me on the matter...
-Stom