/thread

"/thread" means?

End Thread.

or

/thread 338 up, 50 down
This gets used on messageboards / forums to signify that the previous post (or a post that has been quoted) is either of such high standard / very useful and answers the question of the original post / owns someone that the thread cannot possibly contain any post that's better.

Oh my. I'll take your definition. Thanks, tsunamisurfer.

Not quite...

In spite of the contentions that PUD employees were amazing and selfless (and no doubt many of them certainly were), somehow the actions or inactions of one or more PUD employees allowed a local contractor to take advantage of the situation and get away with it.

What actually happened that led the jury decision and then the appeals court to rule against the PUD and to agree with the contractor? Something is missing. Spradlin clearly was not the sole cause of this horrible situation. It required the culpability on the part of one or more PUD employees who were responsible for seeing that such inflated invoices as submitted by Spradlin should not have been approved for payment. The court simply documented the actions of the employee(s) in approving the submitted invoices, and the result is that rate payers will now have to pay huge amounts for the errors made by the PUD employee(s).

It seems that appropriate action has yet to be taken for those PUD employees who failed to do their jobs properly. As Lumberjack posted regarding the bank robber analogy by Stash:

Originally Posted By: Stash
"If the last person out of the bank forgets to set the alarm, does that let the bank robber off the hook?"

Posted By: Lumberjack
"Perhaps culpability isn't mutually exclusive.
If I were the person who forgot to set the alarm, I would anticipate that I'd be able to watch the trial of the bank robber between job interviews."

So where were those PUD employees who approved the Spradlin invoices watching the trial from? Doesn't seem as though it was done while between job interviews. Every workplace I'm familiar with has consequences based on job performance. Are lack of consequences the culture within the PUD?

First element: a contractor with A LOT of equipment
Second element: work that is being paid for by a time and material basis.

With those two elements the owner (PUD) would be totally foolish to not have a roving supervisor checking that each piece of equipment started up had an actual use or need, that the people's hours being charged were actually on the job, that the work being performed is actually necessary. Anything else would require a trust that I have never seen in contracting in the past.

Usually there are equipment lists with rates that are standard, agreed on prices.

I understand that after the storm everything was nuts with too much going on to have supervisors enough to cover. What do the government agencies do? I know some have lists of ex DOT, ex County inspectors, etc. to call on.

Does the PUD have such a list? If not, why?

Does the PUD watch over contractors like Spradlin normally?

Other than the scope of the emergency, this stuff is standard for most agencies.

If I were a commissioner I would make sure we had a list for the future and I would check out and make sure that the daily work that a contractor does is watched over or at least has spot inspections going on.

I think that if the truth was told we would find the PUD is lax on this.

BTW None of this is hindsight.

There were people out and about to the extent possible. Overseeing this particular contractor was not as necessary as overseeing all the other out-of-town contractors as THEY were the unknown. This contractor was known. Work had been performed in the past. Qualifications were known. Competence was known. Rates were known.



I'll bet you saw it lots of times with vendors, customers, or employees with whom you'd dealt many times.



As there had been many times with this contractor.



I think it's all in hindsight. Not just by you, but by everyone. Had one contractor not taken advantage of this situation and run the ratepayers through the ringer, the PUD employees and management would be exhaulted for their performance. That one contractor took advantage and got away with it, brings up some justifiable scrutiny, but does not diminish what took place during that period. Practically the entire electrical system of Grays Harbor County was made operational in a little over a week... and was virtually re-built in about 6 weeks: unheard of.

It was done faster and less expensively than expected. One contractor tainted a really, really, good thing.

You are commenting about the PUD performance overall in trying circumstances, and I agree with your overall assessment for the most part. I'm sure nearly everyone did a great job during this difficult time.

What I am addressing is the major part that one or more PUD employees/supervisors/managers played which resulted in the PUD losing the case and the appeal to Spradlin. It was a serious lapse and should never have happened.

Here is a summary of the appeal. Begin reading at page 11, paragraph E. and read through page 15. It is clear from this summary that PUD personnel responsible for reviewing and approving invoices never initially questioned Spradlin's rates, prices or the total amounts involved. "The PUD rejected the invoices only because Spradlin Rock's format would not satisfy FEMA."

http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A02/404150%20respondent%27s.pdf

That is too funny. Good guess but don't confuse hobby with jobs. I know what I am talking about including having worked with Spradlin on time and material jobs on occasion.

Trust me on this: Time and material is not a big money earner to big contractors. To a certain extent there are few contractors who can be truly trusted. An inspector writes in his IDR (inspectors daily report) everything that a contractor does including times for a reason. The reason, among others, is to prevent inflating the bill because the profit is so little unless you do get every last dollar.

All that said I never knew any contractor who raped his employer like Spradlin.



No, it is procedure used all the time by public agencies that get caught doing T&M work.