The latest news in ACC Claims, ACC Levies, Health & Safety, Wellness, and more
Control & Influence
The 3 C’s…
In previous blogs I have spoken about Main Contractors and Subbies not always seeing eye to eye in health & safety.
Things have evolved since then where we now have Project Management firms displaying a lack of knowledge as to what ‘Control and Influence’ means.
Please note, this is after the engineering firm WSP released a guide on 30 July 2020 covering the roles and responsibilities of the engineer in construction as part of an Enforceable Undertaking. We have found this guide very useful and well constructed.
We had an interesting scenario play out in the last week or so regarding this - where multiple PCBU’s have control and influence on quite a substantial and public construction project.
We normally manage this by setting up a Safety Charter that clearly sets out who (PCBU’s) does what - a very handy and proactive tool to manage expectations. In our experience, the process works very well for Principals, Project Managers, Main Contractors, and Subbies alike.
The scenario that played out is that the Project Management firm (PM) acting on behalf of the client did not believe they should be on the Safety Charter as they had no control and influence.
I must point out that due to the nature of their work and their title - Project Managers, they indeed have control and influence.
However, they were adamant that they did not, and the client was fantastic by taking over the role of this project management firm. Perhaps they should discuss their fee structure again…
Anyway, I digress.
A week or so after all the parties (excluding the PM firm) agreed and signed-off on the Safety Charter, the PM firm provided feedback on our SSSP raising a series of questions and requesting further information.
Personally, I find this fascinating and highlights a clear lack of understanding about what control and influence means.
We went back to the client who like us was also puzzled by this request and why they would want to seek this information if they have no influence or control over it... unless of course, they do believe they have influence and control over it…
By them firstly reviewing the Site Specific Safety Plan (SSSP) and secondly asking for additional information they are assuming a position of authority. Whether this is done through naivety or through intent makes no difference – the end result is the same.
A PCBU cannot on one hand say they have no control and influence, and at the same time exercise a level of control and influence on how health & safety should be run. The learnings from this exercise are that it pays to set out expectations. In this case the PM firm either accepts that they have control and influence or they do not get involved. They definitely cannot have a foot in each camp.
