Gary,

Thank you a lot, I will be reading the paper by Humphery Lloyd, definitively NEC is a different view worth exploring.

Rafael

Thanks Gary

It is very uncommon here to have a PM of record of the job that is not in charge of the means and methods and this includes being responsible of the schedule, the one who makes it, not an observer who must negotiate the schedule on every update.

Here many would see the arrangement as if a general contractor not responsible for the schedule and the subs telling him what is the schedule. Our traditional contract types, including the Project Manager type of contract are very different.

Too radical for me, I don't believe such contract type will ever be adopted here as is, even when I like some of the ideas I heard before.

Anyway I will always encourage new views and believe the NEC can contribute a lot to the way construction contracting is done in a future. Unfortunately is is difficult to get a hold on a copy of their forms. Here it is easy get hard copies of the AGC and AIA standard form of agreements, even PDF copies stamped as SAMPLE/DRAFT are available on the internet but I not being able to find such protected copy of the NEC to see what it is.

Rafael

Gary,

You said - "The PM is the client" - Good to know.

Client:

I understand it means the PM is the owner. That under NEC3 the contractor never assumes PM responsibilities, the PM [the owner] prepares the schedule he must follow.

Rafael

As a matter of caution please be reminded that;

Approved Contractual Baselines might represent an implicit change to the contract conditions but not an Update Schedule that is ahead or late and might show changes in plans by the contractor.

The two are very different things.

Usually [unless the Owner is the PM] the Contractor is on control of the means and methods and he can make any changes in plans without it changing the agreement. The Contractor has the right to the means and methods, the Owner has a right to be informed.

At home the hands down approach is to avoid requiring revised Baselines and let the original plus the current change orders determine where we are. We compare updates against revised milestones only, for us [or the few ever heard about re-baseline schedules] it is easier and avoid changes or conflicts generated by revised baselines. Yes our CPM culture is poor but with regard to re-baseline schedules it helps.