At another forum (Fine Homebuilding), a general contractor posted the following thread. What is your take on the issues raised?
"Because after I finished a job I used him on, he went back and did more work for the h.o. without asking me. I was mad at the h.o. for hiring my sub behind my back, but madder at the sub for doing it. I let him know, and he apologized and said he wasn't thinking. But that was after he said I finished my contract, and so what did it matter what happened after I left?
I told him as the GC it was my job and my client. If she had hired him to work on another house thats one thing, but this was my project. If he had called me, chances are I would have told him to take it and don't worry about it - but he didn't call me, and that's what ticked me off.
I asked him if it was cool with him if, after he finished a job and got paid, I hired his helper to come out and do a few extras on the same job. Not the same as doing a side job for the neighbor, he admitted."
Just my way of looking at it, the GC's account, the sub had no respect for the relationship with the GC, just more of the me me me generation. If i was GC i would simply remove the sub from my list and avoid and future work or referals. In short find a sub i can work with, and form a good working relationship.
"he apologized and said he wasn't thinking."
not thinking, a big problem with a lot of the just do it generation.
In the middle of the job? No question; the sub shouldn't.
Long time after the job? No question; the GC has no role anymore.
In the middle period (move in to 2 years?)...
this is the potential time frame for a phone call.
The GC may be getting squeezed by a new contractor for that bonus room finish or an add on but if this were so then why didn't you get a call from that GC to do the wiring related?
This street has to run both ways.
Once the contract (the job the HO originally hired the GC for) has been completed, the GC is out of the picture. I'm doing electrical work, why should I ask the GC if it's okay if I do additional electrical work? I'm hired by the GC to wire an addition. We finish the job and the HO likes my work and wants me to wire some high hats in another area. I now have to ask the GC if it's okay? That's ludicrous. If I get a job for a GC, I don't expect a percentage from him. I could see if we were in the same trade, but most of the GCs I've worked for are builders.
"I now have to ask the GC if it's okay? That's ludicrous. If I get a job for a GC, I don't expect a percentage from him."
If your in the electrical contracting business, then you would understand that good Builders and GC's not handymen type GC's but ones with a ligitment business, need to cover large overhead costs, and securing new accounts cost money, we would never think of stealing the GC or Builders account, and cutting his mark-up, something a side jobber or handyman might do.
Yes, the GC found the account, it was his time and money, that secured the account, just because your invited in to do sub work, does not give you the right contract on your own, some GC's and builders have sub contracts that spell out penalty for stealing work, and some even end up in law suits.
If the house was "closed" it is really none of the GC's business who works on it. This is the customer's house. If this was still under an open permit the GC had, I can see his problem.
Greg, I had not thought about using the permit as defining the scope of the job. It would provide an important benchmark.
BTW, I suggest that all visit / join the FH site, and read this entire thread. "Got angry with my electrician" has gone to well over 100 posts .... many of which are enlightening.
Not as much the permit as the actual "closing" where ownership changes. Usually that happens about the same time tho. Back in the "happy days" they even closed houses without the CO in place if they were coming up on a quarter end or year end and needed the points. That usually ended up being more expensive because the customer wanted something extra most of the time.
I would say it depends on how the job was done when it was subbed out. I'm assuming that the sub billed the GC, and the GC took a markup on the sub's bill. That's normal, but if I'm working for a GC and billing him and he's taking a markup on my invoice, I shouldn't have to deal with the HO at all.
That doesn't normally happen as most GC's are out to lunch when it comes to electrical, so it's easier for me to discuss wiring with the HO directly. If he's getting a cut on my invoice but not doing any of the legwork, I'd say it's fine to go back later and work directly for the HO.
I see BIB, Petey_C and Sixer as all having strong points.
I'm going to lean towards the "It's not the GC's business after closing/final" position with a couple of notable exceptions.
1)If you have a good relationship going with the GC and your getting a lot of work it would be foolish to do anything that could be construed as disrespectful to said GC whether you see it that way or not.
Of course if it turns out that the GC wants to mark up your work at that point the owner might just find another electrician. Now you have somebody else hacking into your work that you're expected to warranty.
That brings me to:
2)Warranty issues. Lets say the drywallers didn't do a very good job of getting the lid hung. You go crawling up there and shake something loose. Cracks start to form soon thereafter. Homeowner contacts GC about warranty. GC claims you caused cracking by scuttling about in the attic and won't even consider the possibility that the lid was improperly installed.
It could take a long messy conflict to get that situation resolved.
It doesn't seem worth the trouble either way if the GC is going to be that way about it.
Fortunately, my "hanyman" GC's (a few to a few dozen homes a year) wouldn't take that position in the first place. They would put the owner in touch with me and be done with it.
Quote from original post
"Because after I finished a job I used him on, he went back and did more work for the h.o. without asking me."
He finished the Job, why should have the Electrical Contractor asked him for permission ?
As far as I'm concerned the Original Job was completed, the GC marked up the Electrical Contractors bill ( after beating him down in price I'm sure). The case is closed, deal is done.
Why some people think the Electrical contractor is somehow Indebted to the GC I don't know.
This is the problem with this trade, This so called Me..Me generation inherited a trade where everything that actually makes money I.E. Fire Alarms, Burglar Alarms, Motor repair etc.. is now done by others. You have older contracting companies still charging what they did in 1975 because they have paid off shops, tools etc.. (since they actually made a profit back then )and can because of low overhead.
Believe me, That GC or Builder covers his "large Overhead" in his pricing for the work, he doesn't need to reach into the pocket of the Electrical Contractor after the Job is done.
I have to go through my Job list and make sure I send a check to all GC's I have done work for in the past and still have "They're Customer" as a client. Since the function of an Electrical Contractor is now to make sure the GC covers his overhead
One thing has always bothered me about the original thread ... I just couldn't identify what that 'thing' was. I think I have ...
One of the keystones to the GC's attitude seems to be "if the sub won't behave, he'll never see any more work from me?"
The logic / merits of that argument aside .... I have NEVER received any future business from anyone who has dangled the "future business" carrot. That promise seems to be empty cant, used solely for some immediate advantage. Usually it's in the form of 'give me a good price today, and I'll bring you a lot more work.' There have been plenty of times, though, that there have been similar variations.
This has even been the case where the job is going smoothly, there are no issues, and the promise comes 'out of thin air.' The work never materializes.
This has even been the case where the job is going smoothly, there are no issues, and the promise comes 'out of thin air.' The work never materializes.
This is because the day before, the GC realized his profits were still at 50% not the usual 40% and was wondering if you forgot to hit him with a change order or something. He was doing a "Just in case" carrot dangle.
This technique is spelled out clearly on page 857 of the GC/cheapskate handbook (Mcgraw Hill 1978)
Hey Guys,
I'm a General Contractor and this happens all the time in Commercial construction, Everyone on the jobs should know NOT to step on toes! Subs should never take work directly from the client that was introduced by a general, period. even months after a project is finished I expect my subs to Atleast call me and tell me the client wants more work, 99% of the time I'll say it's cool, but I'm kept in the loop That's all that matters.
'Sides the relationship between General and specialty contractors should be like the relationship between company owner and Worker, Side jobs with the owners clients are off limits, always.
Know who you hire,I've been working with the same bunch for over 15 years, I know who I can trust and who I Need anyway.
Common sense, General rules.
Go Easy on me fellas, I'm new Here.
That's all fine and good ... but I suspect that you'll find a fair amount of disagreement on the point.
Simply put, as independent contractors, you have absolutely no business telling them how to run their businesses. Not even indirectly, with the implied threat of refusing to deal with them again. Subs are not your serfs, nor your employees, and you have absolutely no claim to any profit from work that does not involve your trade - which is general contracting.
It's no different than if a plumber wanted a say, just because I helped him put in a water heater last year.
In a similar manner, you have no business objecting if I work with another general on a job - even if he's your main competitor.
You want me to become other than an independent contractor, feel free to get your own EC license, and then buy me out.
"Because after I finished a job I used him on, he went back and did more work for the h.o. without asking me. I was mad at the h.o. for hiring my sub behind my back, but madder at the sub for doing it. I let him know, and he apologized and said he wasn't thinking.
So, now with this GC, it's a situation of yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir?
Being a subbie doesn't mean you must work in absolute servitude to a GC.
I read a story over here, where the GC went bust during a contract and was found to be using his subbies credit to get things like materials, to get the job finished, when the recievers came in, the subbies were not even allowed to collect their own tools and materials from the site, it was guarded by security guards.
One guy I knew, lost NZ$40k in tools and materials, he tried to sue the company, but, as usually happens, he never did get his money back, it nearly sent his company to the wall.
One of the biggest developers in the area (country?) just went belly up, WCI Properties. Mailings went out to thousands of people around here. I bet there are a lot of people who will be left with unpaid bills. My wife got one but she doesn't think they owe her people anything. I told her to wait and see who will claim she isn't getting paid because they didn't get paid. The court got her name from somewhere.
I really feel bad for the little guys who think they were working for someone who would pay them. Now they are a couple hundred down on the pecking order in bankruptcy court.
The cruelest blow will be when the #1 guy sues everyone else to get them to quit their claim. That happened to a guy I know who had worked himself up to #146 or so in the Evinrude bankruptcy. Bank of America had him served with a show cause order.
How would you feel if your employees gave out their business cards to your customers for future work? completely urelated to the job your involved in.
Employees arent property they are free to do whatever they want with their free time, right? wrong, and it's not a matter of using your materials or tools that you would have objections to this issuse, it's a matter of princple.
I hear alot about dangling carrots, and thats unfortunate alot of subs have been hurt by GC's but a well oiled machine demands there be rules, even unspoken ones.
Watt work, I admire your devotion ... it's pretty late!
The comparison of employees to independent contractors strikes to the heart of the matter. Independent contractors are NOT employees. They carry their own licenses, bond, and insurance. That's why they're called 'independent' contractors.
So, the issue of an employee performing contracting raises all manner of legal issues, all by itself.
If the legal requirements are met, the employee IS absolutely free to do as he wishes when he's 'off the clock.' The employer has absolutely no say in said employees private time. This has been reflected in numerous legal rulings, where employers attempted to exercise control over such time ... even to the extent of directing religious, political, and family activities.
That sort of thing went out with the 13th amendment.
Now ... I suggest you take your "I get to limit the activities of another contractor to your local contractors' board, and see what they think. While you're at it, you might ask your attorney about 'restraint of trade' laws.
The 'understood conditions' you assert border on the illegal; they're certainly immoral.
How would you feel if your employees gave out their business cards to your customers for future work? completely urelated to the job your involved in.
That is an entirely different thing, your sub-contractors are not as you put it above, your employees, they are only contracted to you for a short period of time, otherwise you would be providing them with safety gear and the like.
This is what some General Contractors, no matter how young, don't seem to be able to fathom, if you annoy "your" subbies enough, you WILL run out of guys to do "Your work",
use this rule at your own peril.
GC's didn't get a bad name with subbies over-night.
We all have a bad name,(flaky,slow,always late,forgetful) sometimes unfounded, Like I said I've been working with the same bunch of guys for 15 years, I personally have only had this conversation about twice and the one time I can point out it was breaking a new sub in.
Most property managers we work with ask me if my electrician can take a look at something on a different floor, I always pay upfront and on time, whereas the building takes 30-45 days from recieving the bill, somewhere in the middle of the job if not after. My guys don't mind the 20% I make and the building knows that there is more accountability. (3 million in general liability insurance).
Now imagine if the building's project manager talked to everyone directly; the drywallers, electrician's, plumber's, painters where would I be? General's depend on their contractors just as much as the subs depend on the generals. I'm getting calls now from my subs because WE are out of work, thing's are dryed up and one developer told us two months ago; to take .60 cents on the dollar or I should get in line. All my subs are paid and it looks like I'm out $45,000 or Lawyers fees.
John, I don't suppose you have read many employee contracts. Most employees of any large corporation sign an agreement than can be several pages long telling them what they can't do on or off the clock.
This has even gone as far as banning smoking on your own time and other things that are far from personal freedom. Virtually any tech company makes you sign a "no compete" and intellectual property agreement. We gad a guy at IBM who got fired because he was selling boat propellers on the side ... on his own time. The contract was so air tight, he couldn't find a lawyer who would take his case for a taste.
Greg, as you noted, such restrictions are so unusual that they need to be specifically called out in advance. Likewise, such agreements are subject to a great deal of litigation ... and frequently not enforced by the courts.
Not that it has matters .... the outlawing of slavery did not prevent Texan employers from foisting 99 year 'contracts' on illiterate former slaves, and attempting to have them enforced.
None of that applies here, for two reasons: there is no such specific agreement, and none of the parties are employees.
In the example you cite, I suspect that IBM relied upon the idea of 'at will' employment. That is, essentially, what the GC is threatening to exercise: do things my way, or I won't let you play with my ball.
Otherwise, all cant aside, let's look at the practical barriers to enforcing the 'understanding' that the GC is asserting exists:
Assume the customer has an additional project. Is the first GC asserting that the customer must hire him again?
Assume a job has been bid by several GC's. Is our GC asserting that the sub cannot furnish bids for his part of the job to several GC's?
Assume a job arises that does not require a GC. Is the GC asserting that the sub is required to hire him anyway?
Assume the customer - or anyone, for that matter- has obtained the sub's number from the truck, the phone book, another referral, etc. Is the GC asserting that the sub is barred from accepting such work?
Suppose the GC needs another sub for some task. Is the heating guy supposed to stop taking service calls because he did a job with the GC? Or the plumber? Would the GC be upset if the roofer returns after a storm to make repairs five years from now?
I'll be that, should there be an accident on site, that the GC suddenly becomes an expert on the topic of 'independent contractors.' He's not about to let that loss affect HIS insurance premiums! Or pay the sub's unemployment insurance. Etc.
The GC can't have it both ways. Either he has employees, or he hires a contractor. What happens apart from that specific job is of no concern to the GC. He surely would object if the sub insisted that the GC only use him .... or only bid on jobs with the sub's approval.
Ironically, for the GC, the electrical contractor is in a much stronger position; in some ways, it is the EC who's in charge - not the GC. Unlike nearly every other contractor, the EC pulls his own permit, and signs off on the plans. He goes, the permit is void.
Contract law is based upon the 'legal fiction' of the parties being equal. Maybe it's best to make that fiction a reality, and leave all the other baggage aside. Call it the 'four corners' doctrine: if it's not in the 'four corners' of the contract paper, it's simply not part of the agreement.
How would you feel if your employees gave out their business cards to your customers for future work? completely urelated to the job your involved in.
Employees arent property they are free to do whatever they want with their free time, right? wrong, and it's not a matter of using your materials or tools that you would have objections to this issuse, it's a matter of princple.
This is the exact reason why I don't do work for GC's . This guy actually believes the Sub contractors are his employees. He believes this because there are way too many Electrical contractors out there that let GC's pull this nonsense.
Let me tell you something Watt man or whatever your name is, The Subcontractors that bid and win the jobs where you are the GC are Contractors. They Contract a job and then fufill the contract, they have no other obligation to anybody especially the GC who is nothing more than a middle man.
When you start paying your own workmans comp for electricians, Liability insurance, license fees etc. and get licensed in your state then you can hire all the Electrical "Employees" you want.
Until then go hammer some 2x4's together and try to take a bath every couple of days, which for some strange reason most GC's and they're retarded employees are unable to do.
Rich, I appreciate your passion. My own posts on this topic have had a fair amount of 'feeling' behind them as well.
Watt Work didn't start this thread - I did. He just brought it back to life.
As far as attitudes go, he just affirmed what another poster, in another forum, asserted. It was from this other forum that I copied, and pasted, the paragraphs that started the thread.
Oddly enough, the attitude isn't limited to GC's alone. For years I have worked together with a plumbing contractor, and it has been a relationship that has benefited us both.
Yet, his guys bungled a job - it happens to us all - and the customer called in another plumber .... who, in turn, called me. Now Plumber #1 is all upset that I was there helping Plumber #2.
This revealed two separate issues:
First of all, you have to be able to trust your fellows. Plumber #1 was afraid that, somehow, I was undermining our relationship. There were the usual suspicions of going behind his back, dealing direct with the customer, making the other guy look good at his expense, etc.
The second issue, of course, was: WHO is the customer?
You over-think this stuff, you'll drive yourself crazy. As for my passing out cards to the final customers ... it's their property, and they have every right to know who I am, who sent me, and why I am there. To expect otherwise is simply improper.
Now ... to carry this a bit further .... what if this customer wants his lights worked on? Going through his desk, he sees my card, and gives me a call. I think we can all agree that the lighting has nothing to do with the water heater that first brought me there. Why on earth would I call either of these plumbers, to 'clear' my going to work on the lights?
Yet, that is what the GC's are asserting.
One more point ....
EC's are often in a position to act in the place of a GC. I've often had to bring in other trades, and see that they get scheduled, paid, etc. Sometimes I've even brought in a GC.
Oddly enough, GC's can serve a useful purpose.
Likewise, it has always been my assumption that every journeyman, of any trade, is a skilled professional ... and I try to treat them as such.
Therefore, let's not get into personal attacks or name calling, please.
The situation can get really goofy when a GC has his cast of 'pet' subs, and - for whatever reason - you get the job, rather than 'his' guy. I've even had (a very few) of these other subs try to disrupt my work, just to try to make 'their' guy shine.
Such behavior is both unprofessional and futile.
Whoa! slavery?! obligations?!, Pets?!? you guys need to relax... I'm talking about a team effort not manditory rules. my subs are free to do whatever with whoever whenever! I don't need to tell them not to go around me, they RATHER work with me than for the H.O/P.M.
I represent a good 30-60% of their business, and if i'm cut out of the loop with a owner, fine, so now I'M OBLIGATED to give that person more work?! No, if he or she feels that I'm holing them back, there's the door! no hard feelings.
You guys have obviously been screwed over before, but it's not the way I do business. and I'm not talking about onesy twosies jobs I'm talking about the same crews on every job!
Take food of my table and I'm not OBLIGATED to put food on yours!!
I think we have two separate issues here.
Food off your table? If there's no need for a GC, it's not only NOT your table, you're not even invited to dinner.
Otherwise, I've heard this "I take good care of my subs" line before. Apart from being something I've never seen ... such a practice is absolutely not in my interest.
Some claim it's a textbook ploy out of Detroit; whatever the origin is, here's how it works: a large firm swamps a smaller one with work, effectively monopolizing the smaller firms' capacity. The smaller firm becomes dependent upon the larger firm. Once hooked, the larger firm then pressures the smaller firm to lower prices, adjust production schedules, etc., all with the threat of removing their business - thereby bankrupting the smaller business.
It's not in my interest to let such a situation develop. Rather, a healthy business spreads it's risk by having a broad customer base. That way, the failure of one customer to supply business - for whatever reason - has a lesser effect on the business. It's the old "don't put your eggs in one basket" business model.
Every GC, it seems, is convinced that they are somehow different from the others. There may be some truth to that idea; I do know that some GC's get better pricing from me than others.
What's the secret to getting good pricing from me? Simple: you do your job and I'll do mine. That means you need to concern yourself with only a handful of things. These include:
1) Pay me - on time;
2) Schedule the trades on a job;
3) Take out the trash; and,
4) Make sure there's a working toilet on site.
In short ... you stick to your business, and I'll stick to mine. You do a good job this time, and the next time I'll cut your price.
Why is it that subs get to list requirements and a GC can't?
those four concerns are valid, I have one concern...keep me in the loop. If your in the building I brought you to and the project manager asks you directly to do something else, fine just mention it to me. Not because I want a cut, some mafia style tribute. (just to whet my beak) I just want to know whats going on, I must mention also that this applies only to buildings I work in all the time, not new or one time hired situations.
there is some degree of protectionism involved, I want to keep great clients Happy, and I would (and have) look into problems occuring from other peoples work for them. after working in a building (several of them) for years, there is an attachment, to the people (tenants,staff,management) even if their are other contractors there competing for bids, which there often is.
I think what people are missing from my posts, is that I think of it as a TEAM effort and not a threat or "dangling a carrot" most of my subs are no bid contractors, I bid the (small) jobs without getting a quote because I know their average cost per unit. sometimes I put out from my pocket because I over looked something or under estimated something and some times I get lucky an things go easier than I thought.
I have 3 electrical contractors for example: one larger one and two spin-off's of that larger one, both with owners that worked for the larger company. whenever it gets slow or there's a huge job, the smaller companies come to work for the larger company as employees. we all go way back to even before I got my license, we all comunicate on the walkies, and we all know whats going on with each other.
damn straight, i'd be suprised and even hurt if I'm not told about a job in one of "my" buildings, from one of "my" subs, I expect at least that much.
fortunate for me and my subs, this whole notion isn't as hard to grasp as it seems it is with YOU guys. I can only say that i'm lucky to have the extended crews I have.
right now I have my guys pulling weeds and cleaning up the hills in my back yard (home/office), because we are slow. tomorrow two of my guys are going to help one of my subs out on their job for a couple of days.
we look after our own.
One more thing, this whole notion of getting "hooked" "monopolizing" and becoming "dependent" is silly. I pity the fool who puts all his/her eggs in one basket! this isn't WALMAT where i get to beat down prices, I'm not the only contractor in town! we are talking about contractors running their businesses differently, I know of a GC that one of "my" subs works for that buries his subs in paper work! (daily reports,time keeping records, material recipts) thats the way they do business, and if you don't like it , don't work for them! it's that simple, I have a handshake and a promise from you that the job will be done on time, thats most of my contracts with "my" subs.
no one HAS to work with me no one is "stuck" we ARE all "independent" right?!...RichR.
AHMEN Watt !!
The guy I'm with now, wanted a "non-compete" the way it was writen I wouldn't be able to work. In any aspect of electrical.
I had no problem signing the agreement not to disclose bidding and rate info. After all thats in my best interest aswell.
As far as work on the side.. (some hate that term and idea)..I have all my papers in order and I do only Electrical, No conflicts there.
The CO. I work for does all special hazard fire suppression,sprinklers and mic. Bldg fire.
For what it's worth, I have several customers who have a "No General Contractor" policy. One customer is a hospital and the others are manufacturing businesses. They have an in house construction superintendent and they sub out all trades. They have found that dealing with GCs creates more liabilities than benefits.
Actually when you look at the General Contracting industry, I'm surprised it's legal. They insinuate themselves between the customer and the people who actually do the work and siphon off funds like a leach. After the subs to a great job, the GC steps up and takes credit for it!
I've worked for hundreds of GCs and 95% of them are now out of business. A GC is just a handyman who got so busy he had to hire subs. GC's ARE FRAMERS. Need I say more?
As far as the OP, if the GC is still on the job, proper etiquette says that he should be notified of the customer's request and he should get a piece of the action if he requests it, but if he's down the road, no such courtesy is required.
"I've worked for hundreds of GCs and 95% of them are now out of business"---skyline electric
Yeah, pimpin' aint easy.
My "usual" GC - I now refuse to work with him - got his experience pouring concrete sidewalks. Many of his electrical 'innovations' have been the subject of picture threads. On our last job, he somehow found an unlicensed, illegal alien (Eastern European) hack to do the refrigeration work.
Cement work to HVAC ... that's quite a jump.
By contrast, on another job was the 'other kind' of GC. Toilet maintained, lifts provided, trades coordinated (for the most part), communication with the customer and the numerous inspecting groups kept flowing.
Whenever these threads get going, every GC claims attributes near sainthood. Such has most definitely NOT been my experience. A typical example: on a major job, I was awaiting final payment. The GC wanted the subs to release him before paying them - so he could, in turn, get paid by the customer.
Alas, this is exactly the opposite of standard practice, as well as Nevada contracting law. That is, both the law, and AIA contracts, specify that the subs get paid FIRST, before the GC gets paid. In this case, the customer made inquiries.
The GC was telling the subs that he was waiting to get paid.
The GC told the customer that the subs still had paperwork outstanding (his release).
The customer made it clear - pay the subs FIRST, if you want your final payment, as called for in the contracts. The whole purpose of that 'hold back' was to ensure that the subs got paid, to prevent the GC from taking the money and running.
(Now, this may seem backwards - until you realize that every sub can lien the property if he's not paid. The customer simply doesn't want to get stuck paying twice!)
Amazingly enough, the only constant in dealing with GC's has been this: if the GC makes promises of future work, or expounds on how large he is .... you know you're in for a tough time.
I too am an electrical contractor as well as a general contractor. When I build a house, I am not a framer, I am more of a broker. I agree with watts on the courtesy subject. I have no obligation to him legally, but if he asks "just let me know what is going on" I have no issues. If he wants money for it. I don't think so.
Honestly though, I work for good contractors. They have all been good to me. They all meet reno's 4 qualifications and allow me to do my job the way I think best. They pay on time, no arguements. Maybe questions but no arguements. I have never used a contract. I send a quote for the job and a bill after rough in with any changes listed and priced. I may get taken one day and it may all change, but I like to do business with a handshake and gc's that can do the same. I don't deal directly with large cooporations and I understand that is a different ball game.
I have one small commercial contractor that paid me 10K for a small job. A year later he still has not gotten paid anything. I realize that this is his responsibility and I appreciate his making sure his subs got paid.
Dear bamboozled,
Good generals maybe like baby Pigeons, YOU may have never seen one but their out there, and lots of them. or you may ask: what are they good for? Well the good LORD put them there to serve a purpose as part of the food chain. and you just may not be smart enough to question the big guy!
But if you really don't want to deal with them...set up spikes or poison.
and they won't bother you no more.
A general notice to all our readers ....
Judge ideas on their merit alone. It matters not who says something ... on the internet, anyone can be anything.
Opinions are but the thoughts of the posters, and ought not be considered as proven, accepted, or common practice ...at least, not automatically. While ECN is, in my opinion, the best electrical web site out there ... we do get folks who speak of things they've dream up, have read about in books, or have simply misunderstood.
Even I've 'stepped in it' a few times.
Remember: Just because someone claims that he financed Ford, and Edison stole his ideas, does not make his claims fact. Not even on the internet.
Generals,BAD. Sparky's,GOOD. I get it.
Watt_Work
One more thing, this whole notion of getting "hooked" "monopolizing" and becoming "dependent" is silly.
actually the insurance industry made WC a standard here for sole proprietors (or in my case a type S corp) on the premis that
'nature of service' to any consistent GC equates to employment
all fine and well, but the
kicker is, the executives of any given corporation can sign off on
themselvesso i basically now have a WC policy that i can't take advantage of myself (as many here also) , but it allows me to walk onto a GC'd job
crazy eh?
~S~