Memoirs of a building supervisor
Today, I filed a building violation report for the building of one of the big builders in the city.
The installation pipes were passed through the elevator. The most dangerous place for fire! Both the diameter and the number of fire extinguishing pipes were half standard. For some toilets, air outlet pipes were not considered. These works are done at the discretion of the plumber and contrary to the approved plans. Because it is difficult for the buyer to explain that the building has a separate suction pipe for each service. And it has no economic value, but they work for a twelve-story building with a full stone Roman facade.
The plumber has no incentive to increase the diameter of the pipe and the number of fire extinguishing pipes. Because it gives a price per square meter of the building. The more he reduces the amount of work, the more he will benefit. His name is not recorded anywhere. This is the common pain of the construction of this country.
Honestly, this is not the main concern of the engineer. The manufacturer violates, the supervisor records the violation. But when the builder is thick-necked and has capital, the builder’s complaints reach the municipality and the building engineering system organization sooner than your report. The first complaint is that the supervisor asked for money and we did not give it, later he filed a report.
It is surprising that until three years ago, supervising engineers in this city received their fees from the builder, and their job was to report the violation of the same builder to the municipality! They received a part of their fee at the time of signing the plan and another part in the form of a check. Sometimes the manufacturer did not pay the checks of the supervisors who registered the violation report for them! It was interesting that no one’s voice could be heard. All were digested in a faulty process. Those who could ignore it remained in the labor market and those who adhered to technical documentation were eliminated.
I think the previous generation of engineers were used to this method. They knew that if they did not confirm, no one would cooperate with them. The more loosely you monitor, the more busy you will be. The supervisors of big projects were fixed names. Those who approved the previous big project without looking. Their name was at the top of the list of cooperation with big producers.
But now the work cycle has changed. The supervisor’s money is received by the organization in one lump sum. There are resistances to this process. Because some believe that receiving a single monitoring fee reduces the builder’s financial ability to purchase reinforcement and concrete. [At the time of writing this text, the supervision fee is about one-fifth of the cost of the reinforcement used for one square meter of the building]
The supervisor is determined by a rating system. There are many criticisms for this method. Some of them get supervision work every two to three years.
As much as this system has problems, it has a virtue. The moderator is no longer an automatic verification device. It is a quality control agent. An obstacle to the excesses of the manufacturer in favor of the user and the buyer.
PS:
This text was sent by a colleague of Nazer Mechanic. We published it on the channel with a little capture and editing.
Share your experiences with us.
Engineer Hamid Pourbakhri
↙ A channel for members of the construction engineering system organization
instagram.com/pourbagheri_eng
@avadan_eng
This post is written by Pourbagherii_eng