Dear Mr. Bridget, I don’t understand what you mean by internal & external engineer. but if you mean the contractor’s own engineers and the consultant respectively, then I was talking about the Consultant (The Engineer) in your term the external engineer.
"engineers" in your case are internal or external?
if internal engineers, I assume your programme has been developed based on CEP from engineers, right? then it looks like they have no reason to reject their own methodology....
if external engineers, they need understand all CEP submitted by your engineers and as long as CEP/rates in your programme has been fully reviewed internally, then anyone not accepting your programme is not your problem anymore.
In your recent case the Engineer gave a list of objections which the contractor is wise to follow because if the corrections are not made then any future request for an EoT will fail immediately because the analysis is based on a flawed programme that cannot be changed rstrospectively.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Member for
19 years 10 months
Member for19 years10 months
Submitted by Tanveer Ahmad Niazi on Sat, 2012-06-09 20:47
Thanx for replying the thread. During a decision among friends one of my friends said that the Engineer can reject the program if;
The program does not reflect the contractual dates i.e. start, finish and if there is any other obligation related to the time/date.
The program does not cover whole of the scope.
If the program does not engaged the correct logic.
I just wanted to have the experts’ comments if this is right or not. I knew that about 8 years ago in my first engagement with a contractor as a planner, the Engineer did not reject the program while;
The program did not cover the scope (the authority approvals & inspections, landscaping, and internal decoration scope was not in the program)
The MEP activities were illogical.
MEP procurement was not included.
The last activity of the critical path (concrete structure) ended with the parapet walls (walls at the top floor) had the “Finish” constraint. While the architectural and MEP activities were non critical and finishing five months after the finish of the structure.
The Engineer just put his comments and asked for the incorporation of the comments prior to precede a run. This is now confusing me as to why the Engineer did not reject the program if my friend is right. It is important to mention here that I clearly told the RE that I have just a few month of experience in planning. Do you think that the Engineer just favored me because the Engineer knew that I would have been fired if the program was rejected? All in the course of the project run, the Engineer (specially the RE) did not make any complaint while I remember that I did make many mistakes and the Engineer’s planner directed me and guided me what to do and how to do.
Member for
19 years 10 monthsHi,Dear Mr. Bridget, I don’t
Hi,
Dear Mr. Bridget, I don’t understand what you mean by internal & external engineer. but if you mean the contractor’s own engineers and the consultant respectively, then I was talking about the Consultant (The Engineer) in your term the external engineer.
Cheers
Tanveer
Member for
19 years 10 monthsHi Bridget I do not
Hi Bridget
I do not understand your distinction between "internal" and "external" engineers.
Please can you clarify the point so that we can better understand your position.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Member for
16 years 5 monthsHi Tanveer , "engineers" in
Hi Tanveer ,
"engineers" in your case are internal or external?
if internal engineers, I assume your programme has been developed based on CEP from engineers, right? then it looks like they have no reason to reject their own methodology....
if external engineers, they need understand all CEP submitted by your engineers and as long as CEP/rates in your programme has been fully reviewed internally, then anyone not accepting your programme is not your problem anymore.
cheers,
Bridget
Member for
19 years 10 monthsHi Tanveer You are confusing
Hi Tanveer
You are confusing "non consent" and rejection.
In your recent case the Engineer gave a list of objections which the contractor is wise to follow because if the corrections are not made then any future request for an EoT will fail immediately because the analysis is based on a flawed programme that cannot be changed rstrospectively.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Member for
19 years 10 monthsHi Mr. TestroThanx for
Hi Mr. Testro
Thanx for replying the thread. During a decision among friends one of my friends said that the Engineer can reject the program if;
I just wanted to have the experts’ comments if this is right or not. I knew that about 8 years ago in my first engagement with a contractor as a planner, the Engineer did not reject the program while;
The Engineer just put his comments and asked for the incorporation of the comments prior to precede a run. This is now confusing me as to why the Engineer did not reject the program if my friend is right. It is important to mention here that I clearly told the RE that I have just a few month of experience in planning. Do you think that the Engineer just favored me because the Engineer knew that I would have been fired if the program was rejected? All in the course of the project run, the Engineer (specially the RE) did not make any complaint while I remember that I did make many mistakes and the Engineer’s planner directed me and guided me what to do and how to do.
CHEERS
Tanveer
Member for
19 years 10 monthsHi Tanveer As far as I recall
Hi Tanveer
As far as I recall the Engineer has two choices he can consent to the programme or not.
If the Engineer does not consent then he has to give reasons why.
Best regards
Mike Testro