Masonry Magazine June 1984 Page. 8
STONE
PANELS:
Profits or
Purgatory?
By EUGENE GEORGE
As a mason contractor, I am much concerned that the pitfalls of installing stone veneer panels are not discussed more frequently, more thoroughly, and more openly in real-world terms, and specifically from the contractor's viewpoint. As a self-appointed recorder of such problems, I am reminded of the energetic tomcat who, after a biological experience in a veterinarian's office, returned home somewhat subdued. He now goes out only two or three times a week as a consultant. And having produced eight sons and an even greater number of masonry buildings over the past 35 years, you might call me a consultant in one field or another.
Let's pretend for a moment a typical mason contractor has been properly cranked up about what, where, when, why and how stone veneer can be used and is about to apply all that wonderful knowledge to his first bid on a stone job. Here is what he might find:
1) The Bid Documents
These will likely detail an extended guarantee. Reduced to simple language, this little time bomb leaves the mason contractor liable for real, not to mention imagined, deficiencies in material, labor, and total engineering of the anchorage system employed. Whether or not actual control or precise knowledge of these elements is enjoyed by that contractor is of no consequence he is no. 1 on the liability hit list. Therefore, our typical mason contractor, presumably a prudent type, will ask, but not always get, an arrangement for liability to be properly spread among the suppliers and professional advisors involved. And in writing, please! Always in writing.
2) Specified Materials
Some of the natural materials being specified are supplied by off-shore quarries or fabricators who frequently demand full contractor payment prior to shipment of product regardless of whether verifiable bonding is in place. Incidentally, to those who supply these materials only on those terms, I say we in the masonry industry pray fervently for the day when our contractors get paid for their goods and services before they deliver.
I might also suggest this new kind of Chargex imposes severe pressure on the contractor's cash flow, bonding and interest account-thereby adding yet another bid-escalation factor that contributes to the uncompetitive reputation of natural stone as a building material. It also vaporizes his hope of fiscal leverage in legitimate material deficiency disputes that may surface during or after the contract.
That, in turn, must obviously influence his bonding costs and hence his whole bid. With no irreverence or disrespect intended, it seems to me that God, as the stone manufacturer, is responsible for product quality, and stone
About the Author
Eugene George is a past president of MCAA and the Canadian Masonry Contractors Association, and currently is MCAA regional vice president from Canada. In professional life he is president of George & Asmussen Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario. This article has been adapted from his presentation at MCAA's Pre-Conference Seminar on Masonry Panel Anchoring Systems in New Orleans, La., January 26, 1984.