More problems at IGF?

[Mr Dee]

Several points:

- Of course the list of flaws is going to be long, they'll list anything short of lack toothpaste facilities because the more they list, the more serious their claim must be.

- You cannot state generally, that Union shops will produce poor workmanship. Would the work be any more accomplished because some schtick is being paid less? Hire the right company, and it won't matter if it is Union or not.

- This is a re-hash of the flaws we were told about 6 months ago…bumped up, and will be reminded of, 6 months down the road.

 

Can't wait until this BS is put behind us.

[sweep the leg]

 

 

 

They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be.

 

Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman.

Ooops. Sorry. More logic.

 

 

Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product.

 

I can't believe they're legally able to uphold that requirement. The NDP doesn't even pretend it's not beholden to unions.

[Booch]

I work in the Engineering and Infrastructure Industry and from my take its not so much a design flaw moreso a lot of oversights on some things (due to inexperienced stadium design team)

 

As well it seem's that the on-site Contract Admin/Project Management team and obviously the Site Inspectors and people involved with Quality Assurance and Quality Control really dropped the ball and didn't ensure specs were met and the job was not done for a lack of better words....right.

 

Structurally and for the most part functionally it is fine, but the tight schedule for completion, the fiasco of unrealistic timelines (probably due to inexperience) caused a lot of the cosmetic blemishes and issues with drainage and proper HVAC and sewer/water and other odds and ends to not be properly inspected and deficiencies in meeting specs, grade...etc..etc were either not done, or the prime contractor and Project Management team hushed it to get it done and had fingers crossed that it would never become an issue (at least not within first couple years) 

 

For most projects as well there is a warranty period where the contractor is on the hoook to fix resolve problems and issues prior to the client taking over the costs associated with the project (ie..repairs/maintenace/issues) so thats an area as well where Stuart Olsen will be liable for. 

 

Regardless of it all it should not be considered a slight to the Blue Bomber organization as they were not to blame for construction issues, but the Board or the group or whoever it was who hired the Designer and Prime Contractors for this project. 

 

Was it a case of hiring a cheaper Designer...hiring a friend...whatever the case it's just too bad it happened and puts a bit of a black eye on what is still a great stadium (best in Canada most would say) but get it corrected and be done with it

 

This is common in projects all the time, it's just this one is more of a public issue and a nice media story to cause discussions and finger point

[IC Khari]

 Through an exhaustive search I found some pictures of Stuart Olson and architect Ray Wan's previous projects ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[voodoochylde]

 Through an exhaustive search I found some pictures of Stuart Olson and architect Ray Wan's previous projects ...

 

 

 

Didn't realize they were one of the contractors for the Sochi Olympics..

[Tracker]

 

 

 

 

Bottom line, the NDP made them hire local, you hire people without relevant experience issues like this pop up. Thanks dippers!

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies.

 

They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be.

 

Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman.

Ooops. Sorry. More logic.

 

 

Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product.

 

Your logic is flawed. You are positing that the lowest labour cost determines the best quality and the lowest overall cost- that is not a given under any circumstances. In most cases, the wages will be the same for a similarly qualified tradesman because a journeyman will take his/her talents elsewhere if inderpaid. You are also assuming (probably falsely) that the issues with the stadium are due to poor workmanship, and nowhere is that categorically stated- the issues appear to be poor design, and that comes out of the non-union offices of the architect and engineering firms. Moreover, the supervision on the site would have been the purview of the construction mangers, and I would bet they are also non-union. Being unionized is no guarantee of good results, but neither is is being non-unuon.

[Mr Dee]

I don't know about that, BUT, I do know Barbera Streisand thinks

"People…who need peepholes are the luckiest people in the world."

So, how can you argue with that?

[max power]

I have no idea how much of a fiasco this is, or even if it is one at all.  But I will say that some of the items on that list sound suspiciously like nit-picking for the benefit of a lawsuit...

(vii) lack of weather stripping of all doors;
isn't this something any shmoe could do in 5 minutes?

(x) exterior finishes subject to vandalism damage;

?? They put a "please vandalize me" sign on the stadium?

(cc) inadequate entrance gate design;

doesn't look nice enough?

(ff) no power provided for broadcast trucks;

Every game has been broadcasted so far, so apparently this was resolved for day 1.

(ii) no internal barrier free route between upper level football offices and lower level football operations;

Too many doors between Wade Miller's office and the cafeteria?

(kk) inadequate storage in building and around site;

Seems kind of subjective

(oo) poor layout of dock scissor lift controls; and

What does this even mean?

(pp) no barrier free route from parking to Administrative Building entrance;
Or this? Does the staff have a difficult time making it from the parking lot to the offices?  I've been there. It's not a long walk.

[max power]

And someone was wondering if this could have been part of the reason for the postponement of the Heritage Classic.  It looks to me like a LOT of the items on that list are about things that would make it difficult to hold events in winter.  Plus they are ripping up the concourse next winter?  Was it the Bombers that wanted the outdoor game shortly after the Grey Cup, or was that the NHL?

[Rich]

And someone was wondering if this could have been part of the reason for the postponement of the Heritage Classic.  It looks to me like a LOT of the items on that list are about things that would make it difficult to hold events in winter.  Plus they are ripping up the concourse next winter?  Was it the Bombers that wanted the outdoor game shortly after the Grey Cup, or was that the NHL?

 

NHL wanted it after Grey Cup, Bombers wanted it later.

 

According to the Bombers, this wasn't the reason the game was delayed, this is apparently s a result of a consultant's report they got last week, so they didn't know the extent of the defects or the suggested course of action when the outdoor classic was being negotiated.

 

This was in the free press article 

 

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/football/bombers/295009101.html?cx_navSource=d-top-image

 

 

The work will not impact Winnipeg Blue Bomber games this season or other events scheduled for Investors Group Field, such as FIFA Women’s World Cup games. Spokesman Darren Cameron said the issues were not what forced the Bombers, the Winnipeg Jets and the National Hockey League to delay an outdoor winter classic game at Investors Group field one year.

 

 

Konowalchuk said a consultant’s report, submitted last week, concluded that during the design and construction of the stadium, "there was insufficient attention to the mechanics of water drainage and heating, there was poor execution of critical details, and poor construction quality control."

 

As to your other post about the nit picking.  That is an outline, and I'm guessing the details would be available when they go to court where the onus is on them to prove each of those points,  so that is why some of it won't make sense to you.

 

And if those things were the only thing wrong with the stadium, they probably wouldn't be suing.  But since they have extensive costs because of the drainage issues, it only makes sense to throw it all in there as it strengthens their argument about negligence somewhere.

[Jpan85]

New slogan fort he 2015 season, IGF has 99 problems but Winning Ain't One

[Tracker]

We could use a variation of Apu's slogan: "Now almost 90% life-threatening problem free". Anyways, we should all be grateful for this hitting the fan now- what would we have to kvetch about otherwise?

[Goalie]

That elephant slide looks fun

[Bomber Diehard]

Building inspectors should have been in there twice a day either passing or not passing their work.

[Fatty Liver]

 Through an exhaustive search I found some pictures of Stuart Olson and architect Ray Wan's previous projects ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eeet is Russia???

[iso_55]

**** happens... Here's one on a smaller scale in Calgary...

 

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/shaganappi-bridge-delay

[GCn20]

 

 

 

 

 

Bottom line, the NDP made them hire local, you hire people without relevant experience issues like this pop up. Thanks dippers!

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies.

 

They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be.

 

Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman.

Ooops. Sorry. More logic.

 

 

Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product.

 

Your logic is flawed. You are positing that the lowest labour cost determines the best quality and the lowest overall cost- that is not a given under any circumstances. In most cases, the wages will be the same for a similarly qualified tradesman because a journeyman will take his/her talents elsewhere if inderpaid. You are also assuming (probably falsely) that the issues with the stadium are due to poor workmanship, and nowhere is that categorically stated- the issues appear to be poor design, and that comes out of the non-union offices of the architect and engineering firms. Moreover, the supervision on the site would have been the purview of the construction mangers, and I would bet they are also non-union. Being unionized is no guarantee of good results, but neither is is being non-unuon.

 

 

 

Nope, not at all what I was saying. Not in any way shape or form. My point is simply that requiring the exclusive use of union shops limits the amount of companies that can tender and therefore waters down the pool of skilled labor. On a project with the scope and size of a stadium that will inevitably lead to cost overrun due to limited tendering, and will exclude in some cases some very good and possibly better qualified companies.

Can you seriously defend the need to use only union labor? What possible argument could one have that it would improve a project.

[GCn20]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bottom line, the NDP made them hire local, you hire people without relevant experience issues like this pop up. Thanks dippers!

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies.

 

They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be.

 

Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman.

Ooops. Sorry. More logic.

 

 

Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product.

 

Your logic is flawed. You are positing that the lowest labour cost determines the best quality and the lowest overall cost- that is not a given under any circumstances. In most cases, the wages will be the same for a similarly qualified tradesman because a journeyman will take his/her talents elsewhere if inderpaid. You are also assuming (probably falsely) that the issues with the stadium are due to poor workmanship, and nowhere is that categorically stated- the issues appear to be poor design, and that comes out of the non-union offices of the architect and engineering firms. Moreover, the supervision on the site would have been the purview of the construction mangers, and I would bet they are also non-union. Being unionized is no guarantee of good results, but neither is is being non-unuon.

 

 

 

Nope, not at all what I was saying. Not in any way shape or form. My point is simply that requiring the exclusive use of union shops limits the amount of companies that can tender and therefore waters down the pool of skilled labor. On a project with the scope and size of a stadium that will inevitably lead to cost overrun due to limited tendering, and will exclude in some cases some very good and possibly better qualified companies.

Can you seriously defend the need to use only union labor? What possible argument could one have that it would improve a project. It was simply a requirement put in place by a government that is beholden to the unions. It made so sense, other than political gain, then and the proof is coming out in the pudding.

 

[gbill2004]

@bkives: In wake of disclosure of concrete probs, Manitoba's PC opposition has called for audit into the construction of Investors Group Field. #bn

[The Unknown Poster]

@bkives: In wake of disclosure of concrete probs, Manitoba's PC opposition has called for audit into the construction of Investors Group Field. #bn

Im not sure if this is neccesary.  It plays well in the media but its a cost.  To me this sounds like its best handled the way it is: owner vs builders, let a judge decide.

 

And yes, many items might seem like nitpicking but thats what you do in a lawsuit like this.  If I had a new house built which included weather stripping and the weather stripping wasnt done, I might shrug and go do it myself.  If the roof leaked and the foundation cracked and I was forced to sue, I'd definitely mention every little thing.  Because if a professional builder cant do the little things I can see, how do I know he did the big things I cant?

[FrostyWinnipeg]

@bkives: In wake of disclosure of concrete probs, Manitoba's PC opposition has called for audit into the construction of Investors Group Field. #bn

 

BBB just ran an audit of what was wrong.

[gbill2004]

@bkives: In wake of disclosure of concrete probs, Manitoba's PC opposition has called for audit into the construction of Investors Group Field. #bn

BBB just ran an audit of what was wrong.

PCs want audit to show who's to blame for what happened.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

@bkives: In wake of disclosure of concrete probs, Manitoba's PC opposition has called for audit into the construction of Investors Group Field. #bn

BBB just ran an audit of what was wrong.

PCs want audit to show who's to blame for what happened.

 

I dislike witch hunts for witch hunts sake.

[Tracker]

 

 

 

@bkives: In wake of disclosure of concrete probs, Manitoba's PC opposition has called for audit into the construction of Investors Group Field. #bn

BBB just ran an audit of what was wrong.

PCs want audit to show who's to blame for what happened.

 

I dislike witch hunts for witch hunts sake.

 

We are in an election year federally and soon after, provincially, so the mud will start flying. Fear and smear.

[DR. CFL]

Perhaps an inquiry to determine if there is fraud or criminal negligence involved in this entire process is in order.