Has anyone ever come had a similar situation?
I am a GC that usually does whole houses but am currently developing a basement for an interior decorator. We have signed a cost plus contract and have made it all of the way to drywall. My finish carpenter is on another one of my homes right now, so we would be delayed about 14 days if we waited for his schedule to open up. The HO suggested using a guy that she has been working with for about two years. I have met him and he seems like a reasonable guy to work with. He has offered to not only match my guy’s price, but beat it by $500.00 as a favour to her. That’s o.k. by me, but now the HO has said that she wants to pay him directly, outside of our contract, in order to save my project management fee (15%). Since he is supplying and installing all doors, base and case, etc. That would mean a reduction of about $6000.00 from my total bill, or $900.00 out of my pocket.
I think that this could turn into a deal breaker for both of us.
btw, my contract adresses this by saying that I would approve of any external trades in writing first (which I have not).
Any suggestions?
Replies
Can you take your portion to completion, then walk away and let him finish? In theory it takes $900 out of your pocket, but only if you have to stick around and burn time. If you get off the job sooner, your overhead is cut. Seems like if you refuse to do it her way, you're going to cause hard feelings and resentment. She has already seen a way to save some significant bucks, and that's going to be hard to let go of. There's the $500 he's willing to underbid your guy, plus the $900 in your fees, so all she can see is $1400 on the table.
Do it right, or do it twice.
Thanks for the post ELCID72.
That's one way out, but I bet she'll feel like she is being abandoned, since after the doors are hung she'll still have to contend with painting, tile, flooring, and electric and plumbing finishes.
Additionally, my plumber and electrician did the rough-ins, but if I am off the job, I can't guarantee that they will be too jazzed about finishing for the HO who I couldn't get along with.
Which kinda brings up a good question, has anyone ever stepped in to finish another GC's work? I did once, and I'll never do it again.
On the surface it sounds like your contract puts you in the driver's seat but what does it say about timely completion?
If you have to delay her use of the finished product by at least two weeks, she has some negotiating power beyond a simple spirit of co-operation. That delay on your part is what brought this up in the first place.
Try to split the cost difference with her and you still supervise this guy with money going through you to maintain control. That way you finish the whole job and she gets some satisfaction..
Excellence is its own reward!
Piffin, thanks for the post.
Actually I am more than willing to use her guy. The first time she mentioned that she might want to use her carpenter was early in the project, before our actual need for him. So we were cruising along with framing, rough-ins and drywall all the while knowing that it would either be her guy or my guy doing the carpentry. The decision was going to be made on whose schedule cleared up first. This much was discussed from day one. And, as it turned out, her guy has an opening. (our city is extremely busy right now)
The root of the problem we are running into is whether her guy is paid through me or directly by her. She assumed one way, I knew the other. Now that it has come to the front burner, it has to be dealt with. I actually have the contract on my side here, but I don't know how to diplomatically remind her of that without the resentment comin up.
Fez
Business is business.
I hate it when a customer finds ways to save money in the middle of a job that makes me loose sleep.
As Piff said, try and split the cost difference with them and if you see that theyre unwilling than you should stick to your guns cause you don't need customers like that.
How many times have I had customers add into a contract a penilty clause as to finishing the job on a specified date. Ususally it was $200 a day. After a cpl a moons I figured out years ago to agree as long as I'd get $200 a day more than my price for each day I finished early.
They figured it out eventually. Know what I mean?
Be creative
Namaste
andy
In his first interview since the stroke, Ram Dass, 66, spoke with great difficulty about how his brush with death has changed his ideas about aging, and how the recent loss of two old friends, Timothy Leary and Allen Ginsberg, has convinced him that now, more than ever, is the time to ``Be Here Now.''
http://CLIFFORDRENOVATIONS.COM
"The root of the problem we are running into is whether her guy is paid through me or directly by her."
That's sure a polite way of saying she's is cheap!
As stated, you may have to comprimise but I'd at least hang tough on this. Piffin's point about delays is well taken but normal delays are part of the deal so I would not let her use that.
The point I'd make to her is that your role really doesn't change here. You still have to supervise the new guy, get the next bit of materials there and have the next wave of subs show up. What's the dif?
Your clients true cheapness is coming out. Hold her to the agreement. If her F.C. screws up, you will hold the bag. Why on earth would you take less pay for accepting additional risk?
I wasn't really trying to make a point for her about delays. I was just asking what his contract had to say about it.
Not too many things piss a customer off more than for a guy to disappear for two or three weks and they see no progress happening..
Excellence is its own reward!
Piffin,
Just for the record, my contract states that "time is of the essence" in the execution of the work. It is not specific about start or finish dates (not even estimated ones).
It also says that any trades that the HO wants to bring in have to be approved in writing by me, and that in no way am I resposible for any delays caused by anyone brought in by the homeowner.
Ouch!
Never, ever, ever sign a contract with a time is of the essence clause. It means you are screwed. It is staing that time is the single most important part of this contract and any delay that prevents her use of the facility will cost you whatever named amt is mentioned in thecontract. Nothing named? Then it's whatever she thinks it is worth.
Bow low when you approach her.
Did you have a lawyer read this contract for you?
Did he mention this phrase to you?
In red letters?
BOLD ONES?
If not, would you like to have a conversation with him and use the word negligence?.
Excellence is its own reward!
Piffin,
Actually it is my own internal contract. The one I have used for about 5 years in its present form. Yes, my lawyer has reviewed it and has never mentioned anything about the "time is of the essence" clause.
I have never heard of anyone raising red flags over that phrase before. Out of curiousity, do you have a background in law? or has your lawyer spelled this out for you?
There are lots of other points in that particular part of the contract which seem to cover my butt from almost anything that could possibly delay a project such as lack of available trades or bad weather.
Once again, there is no delay here. Her guy is moving right in on schedule. Its just whether she gets to pay him direct and avoid my fee or not.
Cheers
Fez >>> "Its just whether she gets to pay him direct and avoid my fee or not."
Exactly, the answer is not. I don't mean to oversimplify this, but how has your responsibility changed?
The only thing that has changed is you seem willing to use a different sub than the one you originally intended to use.
Edit> One more thing. The client saves $575 and you are losing sleep over this?
Edited 5/4/2003 2:47:35 PM ET by Qtrmeg
Fez,
Have you explained to her that you will need to know the exact moment his tools and equipment are on the job so you can notify your GL Insurance company that your coverage will have a lapse in coverage while he is on the job? You will also need to tell her that your subs can't be covered while the trim sub is on the job, so you will have to pull all your guys off the project till he finishes. Also explain to her she will need to secure her own General Liability and WC policy to cover this man and his helpers.
She will still need to pay you any time you spend coordinating with this guy with your other subs.
From my cost plus contract;
19. OWNER'S SEPARATE CONTRACTORS: Any labor or materials provided by the Owner's separate Subcontractor's while Contractor is still working on this project must be supervised by Contractor. This contract percentage fee for Contractor's profit and overhead will be charged on all labor and materials provided by Owner's separate Subcontractors while Contractor is still working on the project. Contractor has the right to to qualify and approve Owner's Subcontractor's and require evidence of work experience, proper licensing, and insurance. If Owner wants to avoid paying Contractor's profit and overhead per this section, Owner must then bring in his separate Subcontractor's only before or after Contractor has performed all of his work.Derrell Day
Dayco Construction, Inc.
Qtrmeg,
Actually no, My guy would have charged me $6500.00 to supply and install everything required. My take would have been $975.00 Here guy is coming in at $6000.00 even. If his bill went through me I would lose only $75.00 - no big deal. She wants to pay him directly and save the whole $975 of my fee!
Actually no, "her" sub works for you, or he doesnt.
Is this that complicated?
Whoa!
Piffin and Mike are right on with "Essence" clause.
Time becomes the most important aspect of the contract when you insert that clause.
Quality, workmanship, service, materials all become moot when you use that clause because "essence" means the primary reason for the contract. If time is of the essence, then legally, in the court of law, you could win a award for design and production, but if you completed the job a day late, or were proved to delay the job for any reason, including the weather, a jury could find for the Owner and award damages.
I know........it's a stretch, That's why I'm not a lawyer. But drop the Essence clause ASAP.
" Its just whether she gets to pay him direct and avoid my fee or not. "
Seems pretty cut & dried. sounds like communication is the key.
She can pay him direct if she wants, but explain what that entails.
Credit her the $500.
Explain to her why overhead & supervision costs are still being incurred, the $900 is still mine.
Talk to her
View Image
Barry E
" Yes, my lawyer has reviewed it and has never mentioned anything about the "time is of the essence" clause.
I have never heard of anyone raising red flags over that phrase before. Out of curiousity, do you have a background in law? or has your lawyer spelled this out for you?"
Should I be careful about practicing law without a license?
LOL
After my first wife and I divorced, I was a nervous type for awhile. If you knew her, you'd know why. So to read myself to sleep at night, I had this book on contract law...
After awhile I could get to sleep with James Herriot's "All Things Wise and Wonderfull"
I knew I was over her when I could fall asleep with a Steven King Movie on the TV.
Anyway, I enjoyed studying it - the contract law, that is. My first impression of that phrase is that it could be a self protection thing and good, but I read an article not long ago about contractors that pointed out that a builder could easily be putting his own head in a noose by signing such a contract.
You may have other language that negates it to some effect.
Usually, it is for example, when you are building a snack shack meant to sell goodies to the tourist crowd on Independence Day. It is clear that it must be built and functional by July 4 so a contract might mention that date or an earlier one with the stipulation that "time is of the essence". in other words, The timing of this completion is a essential portion of this contract and the value of the goods and/or sevices to be delivered are reduced by X dollars if that time scedule is not met.
Ther may be reasons for such clauses in residentail contracts but I have a hard time imagining them.
perhaps if a client had to move out of their house while remo work is going on and they have another house available for free for six months. The value of exceeding the time clause in that case would be additional rent and moving costs. The dollar amt should always be named in the contract because value is being given to the time. Not specifying the exact value is like writing a blank check.
.
Excellence is its own reward!
i never sign contracts with " time is of the essence" clauses.. and they are really too arbitrary if there is no time constraint.. so you have a conflict that opens the door to litigation..
take that clause out of yor future contracts.. it is not in your favor.. contracts are interpreted AGAINST the party that wrote them when there is a dispute... so .. that clause can be used against you.. and i see no way it can be used against her..
i would execute a Change Order for this pahse.. her benefit.. the job proceeds and she is billed a total of $500 less.. your original $900 reamains as yours , because the contract is still yours to complete.. this is just one subcontract or phase " by owner",
nothing else has changed... be there with a Written Change Order for her to sign with the new terms and payments...
now .. about that clause.. what were you trying to do by including a "time is of the essence " clause ?
that clause is used for liquidated damage contracts... you don't have any liquidated damage clause do you ?.. if you do.. how does it kick in ?Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
Regarding someone's advice to give up now because of referrals in the future, my opinion is that is complete bul$!!!t. Follow that route and what you will have is referrals to more customers that start out thinking they can push you around. Let your work stand for itself.
Mike Smith: My experience is currently limited to Colorado real estate contracts, but in our attorney written and State mandated contracts there is no connection between "liquidated damages" and "time is of the essence". "Time is of the essence" is just as applicable in a "specific performance" contract. Again, my experience is very limited.
My attorney has advised me that "time is of the essence" also covers timely payment.
Maybe Bob Walker will show up and help.
Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one.
Edited 5/5/2003 8:45:33 AM ET by Hasbeen
has... at the risk of gettin disbarred from the on-line legal begal dear abbey show..
all of the time is of the essence i've ever seen were in AIA doc's.. and they all had liquidated damages..
also.. if the contractor can include "ime of essence " in regards payment.. then a court could certainly find for the homeowner in regards to timely performance.. i think the phrase is fraught with danger..Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
AIA contracts: where the architect builds for the architects pleasure...Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one.
I don't remember anyone mentioning giving up but I recommended finding a negotiated middle ground that could make both parties happy. Of course if both want the whole bannanna, they'll both be enjoying bannannna mush.
Anyways, a battle is seldom worth it. .
Excellence is its own reward!
Everyone,
Thanks for all of your advice. I'll try to resolve this thing tomorrow with the client. I'll definetly post the results for those interested. You've all given me some good ammo if we get down to a debate regarding why I should still be paid even though she introduced me to this carpenter.
Thanks also for the tangential advice regarding the "time is of the essence" clause. I don't have a copy of the contract here at home, but I'm gonna check my contracts when I get in to the office tomorrow and see exactly how it is worded.
For those who are curious, as with most documents in my office, I didn't start from scratch when making them up. I usually visited hotpaper.com (when it was still free) or 'borrowed' heavily from other builder's contracts that I had come across. The 'time is of the essence' clause is simply a remnant from something that I picked up. I think that there have been enough posts today that are warning against it to make me seriously consider removing it from my contracts.
For now, I'll get some shut-eye and prepare for an uncomfortabe client meeting tomorrow.
Goodnight.
I'm confused (usual state for me)
you started the thread saying this was a cost plus effort, no?
therefore any and all time you spend is chargeable
that 1.5-2 hours talking to him
the additional time you spend supervising him, etc
make sure if she contracts direct she understands you are not responsible for his work and it may cost more since you can't supervise him, she must, and work correction is at her expense, not yours (as in correcting oops-es)bobl Volo Non Voleo Joe's BT Forum cheat sheet
Use her guy, in place of yours, and that is as simple as it gets. Your markup isn't a get rich scheme, it is your income. Your income is estimated on the entire cost of the project, not something that is open to cherry picking.
From what you have stated, my understanding is that you have a contract that calls for 15% over the costs of construction regardless of who does the actual finish carpentry.
If she wants to pay directly rather than reimburse you, that is her decision. However, it should not affect the contract or what is due you. Your only loss should be 15% of $500.00 ($75.00). Additionally, you may have met a competent carpenter you can use in yhe future.
"besides, i can always knock it out with a sledge.
good for the heart..."
I don't realy see it.
Now I am not a contractor. And in this case I would be in the customers shoes. And I might try to pull a "trick" like this myself.
But (baring some other leverage like a time claus) I don't see any options in here. Either the job terminates now and the HO hires here guy to the trim and then the HO has to take care of all of the following on terms.
Or Fez says on the job and still has to take of all of the remaining scheduling and monitoring. Since this new guy is an unknow he might even feel that he needs to put in a little more time checking up on him. And specially if there is anything "special" like outlets in the baseboard where might have to do some work in the middle of the finish work.
As to who writes the check to the sub there might be some fine legal points about that I don't really see any practical different, but he needs to explain to the customer that account and paying the sub is really a very minor of the fee. Otherwise the HO says that they will pay all of the subs directly.
As far as spliting this cost "for customer satisfaction" I can see that either. I see no reason for it. Spliting the cost are does for reason where either both parties are "wrong" or where one side made such a bad error that either they can't be expected to pay the full amount or the circumstances turn out to drastically different that was orginally expected.
I believe that this was a T&M job. But say before it was started the detials of the job was discussed and comments made about until we actually get into the job we won't know the details of what is actually behind the walls, but I don't expect to see more than $5,000 extra work.
But when they opened up the walls he found that there was serious structural problems that no one expected. And that puts a lot of pressure on both parties. While it was T&M it is still much, much more than what he would expect to pay. And he might have hard feelings that the contractor should have expect to at least suggest such a difficulties.
In a case like that I could see a contractor comprimsion by saying that he would take a profit on the extra part of the project, but will still need his overhead charges, etc.
But in this case nothing of significance has changed, just the name of the sub. The HO could have pulled this "trick" at any point in the job.
As I said, as a CHEAP A$$ HO, I might have tried to do this under the circumstances, but it the contractor said no I see need to manage the project I can see any justification to saying otherwise.
Use her guy- but since she want's to save your fee on the work, she can manage him herself. Tell her to call you when he's done, and you'll come back to finish your work. It's pretty simple- she doesn't want to pay for your time to oversee him, so don't give it to her.
Bob
Mark,
If anything, my workload increases by using her guy. Since he and I have never worked together before, my involvement will probably increase. There will probably be more time spent on this job than if I used my guy, because my guy has worked for me for about 3 1/2 years. He knows what I need.
I have to add that her guy does seem like a reasonable person. Probably someone that I could call on whenever my guy is too busy for all of my projects. I'm looking forward to seeing the quality of his work, because so far, the personality match seems like a good fit.
Bob,
If I let her manage him and call me when she's ready for me to take back over, I probably wouldn't have taken the job in the first place. The total job is probably going to run about $30,000.00 after fees and taxes. My take was supposed to be about $4000.00 but the $900.00 that she is trying to take away cuts my gross profit by almost 25%!!!
Plus, the break wouldn't be that clean. I have already invested about 1.5 to 2 hours of time going over details with this guy on site along with a couple of phone calls during scheduling. In fact, she specifically asked me to go over everything that he needs to do so that we make sure that nothing was left behind that my guy would have taken care of.
p.s. he is moving his tools in tomorrow morning (monday) so I have to get this worked out.
Well, if you're stuck reviewing the job with him, being responsible for his work, and it's actually causing you increased hours, you'd be out of your mind to agree to do away with your fee- in fact, I'd look to get a change order for the additional time.
Clients don't realize the position they put contractors in when they do something like this- sometimes you need to explain it in terms they'll understand. Since she's a designer, ask her if it would be OK for one of her clients to come to her half-way through a design project, and tell her that someone else will be designing the kitchen (which was part of her contract originally), and that she'll have to coordinate all her work with the kitchen designer's- colors, materials, etc. Ohh...and the client expects to get a decrease in the designer's contract amount since she's not having to do the kitchen design. Yeah, right.....
Bob
Fez,
I'm going to agree with Bob, here. Why did she choose you in the first place ? Could she have managed this job herself ? You need to resell yourself and your value for a second time on this job. Explain to her the value of what she is getting for $900.
In fact, she specifically asked me to go over everything that he needs to do so that we make sure that nothing was left behind that my guy would have taken care of.
Ask her why she wants you to do this for free. This is a good learning experience for everyone when a HO says, I have a sub I would like you to use. We all know the pitfalls of this, but it is important that part of our response be, "If I agree to this, the person will be managed by me and markup will be charged for their services."
carpenter in transition
Fez ---
You have yourself in a bad position.
If you agree to use the man and he causes you extra work perhaps by causing some damage, you are in a tough position. And if he hurts someone and you have approved him, you are in a tougher position.
I suspect your contract was intended to allow you could choose/change the subs not for you to approve the subs that were chosen.
But then I don't know what your contract calls for ...
Id eat it. Its only $900......but it still sucks for sure. You might loose a referral or two that could make up for the $900 ten times over. And this work relies heavily on referrals. Crumby situation for sure.
why allow this client to screw him? referrals will expect to screw him too!
So, she wants to run it though you? What about your lost time, the additional amount you will have to pay in liability insurance, does he have a license, is he insured with liability or worker's comp? What is going to happen when one of your other subs gets in his way, or he is in their way? Who pays for that. When I work on a job with other subs regularly, if something goes wrong or what ever, we usually cover each other, either by working it out for free, or just paying someone's wages. I don't do that for just anyone. How much more time is it going to cost you? What are you going to do when you go over "everything" with her sub and he makes a mistake? Are you going to eat that, along with all the additional time you are now going to spend with him and the homeowner? You know, if there is a problem, she will probably call you at night- never fails. How much time does that take away from your family. Is your carpenter meticulous? Does he limit the # of nails/screws and leave open gaps in his joinery. How does this other guy compare in quality? Who is going to clean up after this guy and will it look as if he was never on YOUR job?
Oh yeah, what would you (or your wife) spent that "PROFIT" on? Sounds like a nice 3-5 day fishing trip to me or a new canoe (trout season is open out here). You might need a vacation after the most known Murph'y Law "#### happens".
One more thing, how does it effect your relationship with your carpenter? Does he have so much work in the next few months that he won't take it into consideration next time he does a bid for you?
Another thing, does you carpenter add $500 extra into every one of your jobs just for the heck of it? Probably, not. So, what is this other guy REALLY leaving out- quality or quantity?
Its your contract. Because you have to guarantee the whole product, you get a piece of everything that walks onto the job. You supply materials, you pay the Finisher and you add your percentage. I don't think there should be any argument here. This is your livelyhood. This is a buseness. Maybe she can GC the next house she builds on her own.
Turtleneck
Its not a smile- its a cramp
This is alittle late but FWIW this is what I would do.
If the HO is paying him directly charge an hourly fee of $75.00/ hour for consultation with her sub. billable in 1/4 hour incramants. Jobsite vists include driving time. Also include any time already spent bringing him up to speed. She's saving the money and job direction aint free, so either she does it or pays you to do it.
Like I tell my customers "if I'm going to work for free it'll be on my own house I got lots to do."
__________________________________________
I agree...it's too late in the game to really re-work this.
I'd let her deal with the new guy completely, and simply bill her an hourly rate for the time you have and will spend with him overseeing his portion fo the work.
Do review the "time is of the essence" clause. It can hurt you.
Fez, I'm not sure how things are in your state but what you describe is him/her acting as a GC and paying/hiring a sub independently. In California I believe he/she would have to pull a separate permit and act as a GC with a sub. In CA he/she needs at least two to pull that off so thats a big hit to start off.
I am not a legalite but I think your attourney would agree that if you orginally bid the complete job and the requestor alters, at some later point, the circumstances that caused you to create the bid, then you would still be entitled to payment of the entire bid. I think that essentially, its a change order, unless for some reason you were not able to meet you end of the deal.
Think of it this way.... I bid a job and get it. Then I sign a contract and take out a loan. I buy the materials and sub out the work. I now have a bunch of materials and my project plan is on schedule. Suddenly the Requestor says I have a guy that can do it for 500.00 less. Now I have a bunch of materials I may or may not be able to use and a sub who is going to sue me for breach of contract.
My two cents would be to tell him/her no... Or simply say we will do everything that we stated in the original contract except that which you have altered by saying later that you will do yourself. You will still pay us the original contract price because it is by no fault of our own that you have caused this excess in cost.
Bottom Line --- get it in writing, its a change order...
NOONE,
Fist, I live in Canada.
Second, my contract with HO is cost plus.
Additionally I took a 10% deposit upon signing the contract (which I am still holding) and I have bought no materials before I needed them. So I'm o.k. so far.
Finally, my carpenter knows that I am trying her new carpenter on this job and is o.k. with it. - I guess he's tired of putting in long days and full weekends. As I said in an earlier post, my city's construction community is super-busy right now.
I guess that I really submitted my original post to the group to get some good arguments on why I should still be paid my full fee for using her carpenter. Everyone's been most helpful.
I guess I didn't understand. I'm used to looking for solutions, not arguments. Re-assign my goals and i can do the argument thing too.
LOL
Good luck..
Excellence is its own reward!
As a good friend of mine, says often, about this business, "You gotta be flexible", I also find it works pretty good in Life itself, beings flexible that is. Naw piffin , you get to keep looking for solutions, as far as I'am concerned. Be Safe out there Jim J
Piffin,
Don't get me wrong, I don't like to argue (especially with clients) but her husband had already begun the process on Friday afternoon with a curtly phrased phone call to me stating that they were "led to believe" that they didn't have to pay my fee on their guy. The disagreement in fees was already in the out in the open, it was unresolved, and I was stewing about it.
I thought of bringing it up with you guys on Sunday morning, and am I ever glad I did. Not only did you all offer some excellents points on why I should still be paid in full, you also acted as a cheerleading squad. I felt more energized Monday morning dialing her number to discuss the whole thing.
The result? She saw it from my point of view and agreed to my full fee (as the contract states). Only after she had resigned herself to paying my full fee did I offer her the "lets split the fee on your guy's labour portion only" bit (see post to Boss Hog). Now she's happy and excited about the project again, I barely dropped my fee at all (and only did as a matter of customer PR), and everything is groovy.
In fact, she is asking me to look into how much it would be to insulate and drywall her garage while I'm "on the job".
I sure slept better last night.
That's great!
You negotiated from a position of strength, and then compromised. Good lesson for all of us..
Excellence is its own reward!
Just a thought to throw out.
What if you went with her guy, but told her you would bill her as an add-on any time you spent "managing" the guy, or over-seeing his work?
That's basically why you add 15% onto your fee, isn't it? Seems like that would keep the HO happy, but cover extra the time you're spending with this guy.
Could you also disclaim any responsibility for the quality of his work, since you didn't hire him?
Painting and f#cking a lot are not compatible; it weakens the brain. [Vincent Van Gogh]
Boss Hog,
Someone's earlier post mentioned insurance and I'll be bringing that up with the HO today. Basically, if her guy is not paid directly by me, then my insurance is no longer valid. If that's the case, I'm off the job. We wind it up today at drywall and she can continue on her own - no hard feelings.
If she wants me to continue after this guy, then I gotta do it all. Depending on how the conversation goes, I think that I'll be prepared to offer to split my fee with her on the labour portion only of her carpenter's work.
In her mind, she will be the one directing him, as she is right upstairs while he is working downstairs - any questions go straight to her. Meanwhile I have 5 jobsites to look after today.
However, my insurance, overhead, and responsibilities don't change. Ultimately it is up to me to co-ordinat teh job and hand over a finished basement.
So I am going to try to maintain full fees. My fallback is splitting my fee on his labour 50/50 with her. (maybe $200) If that's a nogo, then I'll let her finish up the basement on her own. Again, no hard feelings.