okay good afternoon Welcome to our latest uh webinar the Bells Are Ringing so must be uh must be 1:00 maybe a marriage something like that possibly possibly a marriage so welcome this is the uh the project manager in the nec4 ECC webinar and we're trying to look at what is new and uh and what is uh what is different so if I can introduce um to my right to your left as you see it but anyway to my right Richard Pon is an NC drafter of Mark McDonald and a good friend of mine good afternoon and I'm Rob Geral the NC usage group secretary also nc4 drafter for whatever that means so the focus is on the NC for engineering and Construction contract in particular the project manager the role of the project manager and we're trying to tease out really uh what is new and what is different in that role so so welcome Richard great and over to you okay so for those of you that didn't join the the first webinar this just to be very very brief nc3 has been around for next part best part 12 years now so we've got 12 years of learning gone into nc4 I think you'll see there's significant Evolution but it's not a revolution it's nothing radical it's just better and it has improved um it there will be no logic to me in starting off off on a new contract with nc3 there's been lots of effort going into nc4 so you think it would quite quickly be um not quite not quite defun throughout a date that people will switch automatically or I see no reason not to apart from the fact that as you know a lot of clients are already on Frameworks they've got stuff ready um there's probably a lot of lawyers around the country trying to sort out a quick addenda to switch from 3 to four that'll be fairly radical but it's possible um okay so one thing I've my duty didn't I to say um uh on your screen you should have um some the ability to ask questions so if at any time there's a question in you at the moment we have 79 oh 800 so going up all the time 802 people attending this webinar if you have a question in you then please do ask it we'll do our best to answer them as we go through the webinar those who can't will answer um separately if all of you ask a question we'll probably spend the rest of our working lives answering try to answer but we'll we'll do best we'll try Okay so the thread for today there a couple of quick slides on some of the new and changed secondary options in the ECC 4 there's a a one slide and a few bits on specifically on the language changes and then radically I thought I'd use the structure of one to n brilliant idea um to tease out some of the key things so I've got a copy of my still draft nec4 highlighted with the things that I thought were worth talking about on this session so that's where we're going um and right so new and change options firstly in response to requests and to be honest to make the I think largely to make the contract more um usable and the dispute avoidance board concept has generally been used a lot more internationally I do a lot of work with World Bank and AG Development Bank contracts where the dispute of or has been standard for 10 years so NC is really catching up by making that as an option this is where we have one or three uh Specialists hopefully experts in the type of work we're doing difference being they're not deciding the dispute they're there for reference and to have a chat really to avoid the dispute and there a routine meeting for them to come in at a stated period within the in the contract data so the cluding the word of voidance isn't it not it's not a drb it's not a resolution board it's an avoidance board that there as constructively and helpfully as they can guiding the parties away from formal dispute absolutely and the effect on the project manager really is just that that dispute feeling perhaps will be a little bit closer so there'll be a routine requirement to present to a distribute of audence Bo On where things are going okay again got to be careful we haven't got time for too much detail on these so we'll we'll try and Skip through it's about how it affects the project manager like like any so something project manager does or doesn't do if you're not careful could quickly come in front of the da to to suggest a way for so a good point because it's a regular D when when adjudication first came out of course the idea was that there was going to be adjudications you know short and sharp quick but that's that's changed sorry moving on W1 and W2 they stay as they were except there's the addition of a first stage where the the parties can go off to named senior Representatives prior to going off to the adjudicator now as most of you will know with W2 we have to allow a dispute to adjudication at any time under the housing grants act and in this case in W2 the reference to senior Representatives has to be by agreement between the parties and how's that affect the project manager do you think does it affect them massively not really except that they I guess the project manager would find themselves having to be able to coherently present the situation to those senior reps perhaps in an environment which isn't quite as adversarial at this stage intimidating intimidating as it would be in the adjudication okay but again the project manager Compton project manager will seek to avoid if at all possible of course anything going anywhere near Representatives Robert Rob and I have been have been training for 20 years on this stuff and the whole of NEC is a dispute avoidance process in its own right yeah okay the next two are cunningly colored in Orange to hint those of you in the know that they probably come across from the Professional Services contract which hasn't has an orang you missed that come on which has an orange cover so we have what's now called undertakings to the client and others which is collateral warranties which has always been loing in the PSC but many clients have wanted it in a Construction contract and therefore we've it's been included now as an option same was the case with PSC NEC is not in the business of trying to draft the warranty themselves we're just giving the process and requirement to provide warranties as required by the contract lastly X9 is a transfer of Rights Clause to do with intellectual property which again is been transferred pretty much across I believe from PSC okay A little interaction from the project manager here perhaps may maybe assist the employer maybe assist the process ofen but there's no direct OB again swiftly because there's quite a lot here to cover Rob as we talked about before um apparent company guarantee becomes an ultimate holding company guarantee and there's a little bit difference in the drafting but no real day-to-day effect jumping ahead termination by client very little day-to-day Effect one hopes and contractor's design is a significant one where X15 X15 used to just covered you skill and care now it's been wrapped together with things that really are going to be needed if there is any contractor design certainly any significant contractor design there's a a prompt for Professional emment Insurance which wasn't in EC3 there's Clarity on intellectual property and Licensing to use which fills one of the criticisms of NEC that it wasn't good perhaps some people have said intellectual property it also reverses the burden of proof doesn't that's one good point it does and that's that's a a detail but again it's not going to affect the day-to-day roles but no again in in an our's webinar you people out there we can't get into the details this is just the the headlines really um x21 is whole life cost which is a simple Clause under which the contractor can say hey if we just tweak that that might reduce the Opex operational expenditure which might be a good idea Mr client overall and then there's just a mechanism within the contract to do a deal in the same way there is an acceleration we'll do a deal on scope coming later price is and completion date yeah there is no Mis declines of course there is no oh sorry yes oh yes we are Rob and I been joking about this this afternoon um the NEC we have made significant effort in undoing what should have been done 10 years ago some would say that it will make Robin I job in training a lot easier because we don't have a masculine project manager anymore I think that's actually a very positive move horor um two big ones firstly x22 is the ECI sorry for the acronym early contractor involvement which has been out there on the nec's books and on the website for at least a year maybe more now it's formally brought there's even a formal training course that NC will offer on that Clause um that will affect the project manager in a big way because that basically is a complete change in the whole procurement regime because then the project manager in that stage one is part of the team building a contract for stage two so it's a very different role for a project manager um and the only one on there I haven't mentioned is information modeling now it's intentionally not been called Bim building information modeling because there's lots of chat in the industry that have a stupid name for it anyway because it's not just buildings that we're modeling so we've called it information modeling and there are detailed processes all I put on the slide there are the defined terms there is a requirement to contribute to an information model model as well as the works sorry what's now the scope coming later there's a requirement to for the employment to give the information model requirements what's the constraints on how this model is built up or otherwise and then there's a requirement for the the supplier the contractor in this case to develop and maintain What's called the information execution plan so again not enough time to do that in detail and to be honest neither Rob or I have really got detail head around that that's going to take some time as we go forward in nc4 okay but the project manager will play a role in that in accepting a project manager the project manager will be accepting the routinely updated information execution plan and the project manager when he comes to accepting designs will also be needing to be cons be comfortable that those submissions comply with not only the the normal what we used to call The Works information but also the information model requirements okay so heads up on those only language few I think very good things on the language 10.1 there's always been a question on 10.1 there's no change to the real meaning of 10.1 it's just it's been split into two sentences shall act has stated and then 10.2 says Spirit Mutual trust and cooperation so no real difference to be quite honest um interesting it's still cooperation I don't know why we didn't change it to collaboration but that's another story um X12 in training courses I've always been telling people that partnering was a stupid title it was a stupid title it's really multi-party partnering it's been rebranded as multiparty collaboration but the Clause itself is unchanged wonderful I can hear your cheering the risk register is dead long live the early warning register okay again in training we spend hours trying to make people understand the difference between a risk register and a project risk register because it confuses the out of people that's much more straightforward now we have an early warning register Richard doesn't sleep by the way and he is seeking therapy for a number of issues thank you rob indeed yes I'm not quite sure which option that comes under okay scope um what we haven't mentioned yet is a general attempt in the updating from three to four to try to make things the same if there's no good reason for them to be different across the different contracts particularly the e CC the engineering Construction contract Professional Services contract and the term Services contract and one change that you'll be surprised by perhaps is that workers information is dead it's now going to be called scope okay so but in terms of everything else it's not a change it was really affect the just just new terminology get change forms you know change language those sorts of things nothing more than that yeah um in a similar vein across the patch now we don't talk about an employer we talk about the client and more of a detailed one um there's been lots of criticism over the last 10 years about the whole of Section 8 there's been some tiying up there but the main thing or and language thing is that what we used to call employer risk is now more usefully called the client's liability to emphasize the difference because of the EMES that it involves if the employer chooses to have those clients liability okay so to to two um two changes interesting the word risk has disappeared in two two places as such this quite difficult training isn't it where you using risk in different sentences different processes different things where really intention of the drafters was not really the word risk in that case so I think that's a good thing but again I said there have been some some tweaks to the wording of Section 8 but the fundamental Essence is unchanged by anything on this slide it's just a language issue you agree yeah I would agree I would agree pause to um pick one question has the role of the supervisor changed in nc4 um effectively very very little if at all if all so I think the supervisor's role is pretty much unchanged except that as we'll see in a moment there is an additional requirement in terms of a quality management system which we'll pick up on the slides coming up very shortly but simple answer supervisor will still be the supervisor yeah no is is the answer yeah okay thanks so core Clauses like I said I thought I'd be radical and set them out in 1 to n except that 7 to n are two doll so we'll make do with one to six okay um you say that again that's fine everybody got that was quite cool we already got that move on sorry um so General um firstly we have an explicit prompt in the conditions for the scope if you want to to specify the required communication system this is just reflecting good practice really all it does is the only change is that we'll when somebody's confronted with a job of preparing a scope there'll be a clear prompt to decide whether or not to specify the communication system that communication system could be pen and paper more likely these days as we move into more contracts using the in the cloud Management Systems okay so so there's many in quite excellent examples of that so again it's for the project manager to make sure that they follow whatever the communication system is specified in yeah again like I say it's not actually changing anything it's just making a clear prompt when it comes to writing the scope good people writing the scope that works information have been doing this anyway it's not it's not difficult it's just catching up likewise on any job I've ever been involved in it's pretty obvious that the project managers are going to set up the risk register for the first risk reduction meeting but it never said that in the contract okay it does now likewise the early warning reg except it's the early ear warning meeting and it's an early warning meeting um likewise good practice has been established for years most well-run NEC contracts will have a routine risk reduction meeting and not rely on waiting for one party to instruct the other to come along or all we've done in the contract this time is to have that as a period stated in the contract data so as a so there an obligation to hold that meeting no longer than to be honest there's no remedy in the contract if it doesn't get held but it's just again setting out good practice yeah um yeah yeah I still see problems in the areas of early warnings I still see uncertainty reluctance a Fear Factor he knows why but you know that's again that that that hasn't changed and I know Rob for the last five years has been telling us we shouldn't use the word warning because we should have positive things in early warning meetings anyway again an opportunities but any let's not try and change everything let's just rob you were the one that told me I had to stick to the script okay sorry come on um there's now a very clear chain a clause for the contractor to submit proposals to change what he's been asked to provide in the CL sorry for the contractor to submit proposals in the client scope to change what's been in the client scope yeah remember Cent scope is what we used to call Works information um in the case of the Target contract that's it there's no great change because in 63 something I can't remember I'm not that sad there's a clause which we've always called the value engineering clause which says that if we agree a change to that document the prices are not reduced and therefore the contractor gets a benefit in accordance with the share mechanism yeah what was missing in nc3 and we had to patch back in if you wanted it was the same principle in options A and B Because Under A and B in nec3 if the contractor says hey we can save a million there the employer says oh great idea changes The Works information and brings the price down by million so there's no incentive for the contractor to to suggest that now when you prepare the document you'll have to think about it and you'll have to plug into the contract data of so-called value engineering percentage which is going to be the percentage that the contractor takes for his good ideas so it's but um so for the project manager to administer the the project manag is fixed in dat part two indeed and the price is the valuation proposals is done in the same way as a compensation it's done on a defined cost cost fee I'm pretty sure I should have said that right I supposed to know this on anyway yes moving on so that's that's the me all those changes are very positive they're all relatively simple um but they're all going in the right direction section two rob suggested we just deleted the slide but I just wanted it to go to two there is no real significant difference in the whole subcontractor process there's some changes to the language and details but it's nothing I think nothing worth shattering the one thing that has been done and will be interesting actually is some changes to the definition of subcontractor itself um but again I think that's possibly a bit too much detail for today there is something in in subcontracting about um the actual terms and conditions used in the subcontract have to basically uh match if that's right there is a process that the project manager needs to be aware of not accepting the subcontracts and there are subtle things like like in nec3 there was an obligation under the target contracts to submit the contract data for the subcontracts yeah which of course was completely meaningless if if the subcontracts were were not using any c so it's price so now it asks for the pricing information for example like I say detail if you're a project manager and you're com to an ec4 then guess what you're going to have to read the contract so there are going to be changes look out for Robbie's coming book on the changes to like those changes it's going to Beil it's going to be it's going to be a storm I've heard it's brilliant um but in reality these These are details not there's nothing to no great shakes in contrast time number three you recognize as time or you any you see uh people out there and so firstly again a prompt for the person writing the scope to say in what form they want to see the program so the form is are what like typically well I think the G the requirement for a Gart is inherent in 312 itself as it always is the form here you can't show order and timing with that a g in my really okay let's not start arguing Rob it's not a good idea I think what this is trying to say line of balance you seen one of those I have okay all right God what is he like most projects the entry in the scope here will be say Give me the give me all elements of the program in their native software and and in a PDF so that the numes can read it and on a bit of paper so I can stick it on the wall it's that sort of form I think we're talking about here it could be more again with all NC things it's an open statement whatever you write in the scope becomes an obligation on the contractor to do um this is a big one if we have no submitted program within the two sorry if there's no response under 313 to the program submitted by from the project manager no response to that program then similar to the way there are some prompts regarding the two stages of compensation assessment which was new in nc3 now the same principle has been applied to the program so no response within the designated two weeks contractor May doesn't have to contractor may prompt if the PM is still saying nothing for another week you know what's coming next the program is treated as accepted so that I think is a significant change and in terms of what it does to the project manager well it's Mak making them realize that they might get that prod a little bit more often if they are tardy in doing what they're supposed to be doing that's that to me that's not the best outcome that's not what driv to achieve what we want is the meeting of Mind here between project manager and contractor to create that program which is able to be accepted in the timy fashion well within the time scales absolutely agree Rob and thoroughly constantly uh frequently to and again on the previous slide we just said we've now got a contractual requirement for a routine risk reduction meeting everybody doing NEC out there knows that there needs to be a routine meeting or sub meeting to look at compensation events to look at payment and to look at program a well-run job will have a monthly meeting program at was so the pro at wor so the program can be talked about discussed submitted by the contractor M can respond almost by return say yes fine move on NC is a very concise contract and we haven't started trying to add in that level of detail we're still leaving room for some common sense on how to do NC properly yeah so that's a significant this is like a a fallback provision almost the show The Show Must Go On we need an accepted program in place because Cog to the wheel of the contract need need that need program because we need that to assess s of things okay okay relatively minor tweak on acceleration again if we've got to acceleration it's bad news still very badly is for an employer because the contractor very definitely in control subtle difference now either party can propose acceleration um if that's proposed then there's a time scale now because it in the past any the quotation had no time scale which is very odd in anyc so there's now three maximum three weeks to put together a quotation maximum three weeks for pm to respond six weeks so I find that a bit bizarre so you want to accelerate something but we'll spend you but we spend six weeks kicking this thing around before we press the button okay as you as you well know Rob that period is a maximum period yeah and again I I haven't checked everything but I'm pretty sure there's no Express remedy in the contract if we don't respond within three weeks but I take your point Rob yeah if we want it doing we're going to do when it in the hurry aren't we yeah okay section four I've already um highlighted firstly the whole sentence the whole sorry the whole part of section four has been rebranded as quality management rather than just testing and defects a little bit more of a positive language that's good um and essentially this is one of these things where it was already done in PSC why on Earth is he not in the Construction contract it's just crazy so we now have a requirement for the contractor to operate a quality management system re complying with the requirements as stated in the scope and then within a certain period after um the contract date they got to submit a quality policy statement for acceptance of the project manager so obviously Rob didn't get the italics on that project manager apologize for exceptions to project manager um and something's going on wrong what are you doing Robbie it's not going Robie just I know what you're doing that's better Rob was just trying to confuse me by doing some other fancy stuff on the so there's also a quality policy statement again similar to PSC and and then and lastly a quality plan so all of this is standard in the PSC it's nothing radically new to the industry and clearly if a contractor is doing design work You' expect him to have the same systems but also we need those systems for the the um uh for the contractor yeah what is interesting here obviously interesting only if you're a bit of an NC person is that the qu these quality management issues here are dealt with by the project manager rather than the supervisor okay okay all right so just pause if I might so I was wondering there are no questions but I really have to press a button to get the latest questions press but a load of questions just have a just a quick reflection will the contractor have to accelerate uh no no you can't mandate their acceleration it's Meeting of Minds and again for the for purpose of brevity here I've only on these slides as a general rule shown the changes so just as in nc3 and four there the same basic principle okay all the slides been made available after the presentation yes along with answers to any questions that we haven't managed to get through uh does the introduction of a deeming provision in respect of the submitted program not place the project manager and employer at risk of the rationale in introducing good question does it place them at risk what would the risk be the most as I again as I say in training whilst 14 point one says that accepting anything doesn't change the contractor's obligations accepting a program if that program includes employer obligations does put the owners on the employer to do what it's on the program yeah so there is a significant reason for the project manager to look properly at the program that's not changed yeah no no no apologies there no apologies and because we all know that anyc doesn't work without a proper updated working program so that's that's really the drive behind this claw and this change and I can only say that I've had this discussion I don't know how many times over the last 10 years and it's not it's not scientific but I would say a significant proportion of people uh would be thinking this is a good change would you agree or uh I I I don't want deemed accepted programs I want it's not it's not a good sign it's it's not a good sign but uh an accepted program is is is you are in a better place than not having one if you don't have one then potentially you you are left with the position that the project manager assesses all conversation and then I mean this is again this is a good point and it's another one again danger of going broadly off the subject here but a lot of people miss the link between no program in place and 64.1 as soon as a program hasn't been submitted or revised as required under the contract the project manager in nec3 and nec4 is required to get in and start accessing the quotation so I look at CL 50.3 and 64.1 so they're two pretty nasty Provisions in the contract we need to avoid them how do we avoid them we work together accepted program in place we use it couple more not a question as such but I can see I have a lot of teaching material to change for next September yeah Welcome to our world any period for acceptance of a quality plan uh yes yes that was good enough simple answer that's good enough the question was yes no yes or no we're given a yes or no answer yeah it'll be a sensible period it's probably a couple of weeks just a couple more and then we'll carry on is it that was a big question too B for me is treated accepted program considered the same as accepted program in cases of delay Zoot evaluation yes be rejected by the PM is not officially accepted no it will be the contract says treated it's just the same way as a compensation event suddenly becomes accepted or uh implemented right so yes okay back to it that's a good idea Rob to give it a bit of a break so now we're on probably you need to take that picture out slides so payment again tidying up really the project manager still got an obligation to assess how much the contractor is due the amount due the 50.2 but now as in PSC there's an obligation on the contractor to actually apply for the payment and tell you how much he thinks he sorry how much it thinks is due in the next assessment if if the contractor does not do that he don't get paid okay fairly fairly harsh but in reality again when we talk about this in training not many contractors don't do this anyway so it's not going to change the world another yippe here um the nec3 they in I've always said in reaction to contractors wanting to have a separate fee percentage for subcontractor workers compared with their own work NC introduced two introduced two fee percentages the direct fee percentage subcontracted fee percentages that causes complications in tender assessment and long and short of it training we've now just bined the subcontracted fee percentage so there is now just the one fee percentage which will apply to all defined cost howsoever incurred okay howsoever that's not an NC s not an S sorry Rob I don't know how I know where that came from um okay some really good things I think on defined cost firstly the the really annoying little last sentence little last part of the definition of Define cost nc3 which says oh by the way we're not going to include the cost of preparing the event that's options A and B in options A and B that's now gone so the the preparation of the conversation event is now a defined cost but as Rob's about to remind me we're only going to include it as something extra if it's actually changed the defined cost of doing the job yeah and we will still I'm afraid we will still have the debate as to whether that compensation event changed the number of qss required on the site to be doing their day job doesn't this this change doesn't change that the effect is whether or not the defined cost is affected by the compensation and there's more just just one more do does the introduction one more question which is quite funny does the introduction of nc4 mean that Richard Pon will at last after 12 years get rid of his dog ear scruffy copy of the UC oh I love that Ian Ian my hero so the answer it's come all the way from it's come all the way from in vaness is do you know it's still there by my side eBay no no no I can't it's it's a it's a very personal thing but Ian yes I will have to start with NC for all now okay thank you for that one what are you guys like honestly be a serious webinar wear come on don't tell recit it's going on really whatever you do so final assessment um this is another response to criticism by some writers contractual writers and the market um in the nec3 as we know now there is just an obligation for the PM to make another assessment after the defect to figure it's just the last one that's explicit in the contract now we have a whole claw quite a lot of words actually um within four weeks of the defect certificate the PM is required to make the final assessment if the PM never gets round to it the contractor has the opportunity to do so once again I don't think it says so but it might be a good idea if they talk to each other at this point that be good wouldn't it Rob talking to each other brilliant and then we have a very unnec phrase conclusive evidence sticks out like a sore thumb to be honest um of the fin amount due in other words it's not going to go anywhere that's it finished you can all go home but unless dot dot dot wait for it um if we're under W1 or W2 um the two existing dispute resolution mechanisms then that final assessment so-called final assessment may be referred by either parties up to the senior Representatives they're got four weeks to try and sort it out if they can't sort it within four then it automatically I think goes up off to the adjudicator okay there's going to have to be a notice but that's what the contract says well we've got four weeks we need clear time scales we can't have this thing festering for years that's the whole point and if the adjudicator doesn't come up with an answer that both sides are happy with then on to the tribunal the only thing that is wrong in what I've said again is that that senior representative step I'm pretty sure no I'm very sure is by agreement between the parties if you're because of the housing grants act the Hue Grant act as I love to call it which says we can go to disputes and adjudication at any time the only difference really with W3 is that we don't have or it's been deemed not to need that senior Representatives decision we'll just go straight to the dispute avoidance board that we were talking about a moment ago there is uh there's something isn't about closing down Define cost as well haven't mentioned here but there is a process whereby you're you're totally right and that's that's in a similar fashion to sort of I'm I don't know where that went Rob that really should be in this presentation went into option C through to F but that's that's where he's in the contract okay no sry in the contract presentation your presentation very okay so Rob is appropriately telling me I've missed one out yeah and I don't know how that got missed out because that is actually very significant similar vein similar vein but one of the problems with nec3 at the moment is that the PM can correct a previous assessment in the next one at any time there's no constraints on how far they can go back what the nc3 does now is say that four hold on good s what nc4 does now is say that the contractor may come to the to the project manager with a chunk of defined cost of course including if there is any disallowed cost and say look that's it this is the record that's it CL and then the clock's ticking and the pm has quite a long Peri 13we period to say yes okay move on and then we're not going to go back yeah so it's only relevant on a significantly long contract period really but it makes an awful lot of sense probably more appropriate for things like term service contract if you're using that for a 10e contract theoretically in year 10 you oh just but we we we have there's been stuff in the Press hasn't there about uh problems where uh project managers have gone by gone back fairly in asally looking for this cost way be that was that root cause of the first ever bit of case on the want to be asking that people do the job that they should be doing at the time that Define cost is correctly recorded and captured yeah project manager audits the accounts records in all of that practice all of that is good practice and that process is not changed the only additional change and apologies for not putting on the slides we'll put it in before we send it out actually is the fact that there's a a a small addition um of that provision that we've talked about yeah okay okay well spotted Rob thank you you could you could have done that in the drive on though Rob to be honest by the way chunk is not an anyc word listen I use lots of words that might not come into anyc words so options A and B now this is a bit to make the Qs is really happy any Qs is out there no don't answer that one um firstly the shorter schedule of cost components has just lost the ER because it's only the important thing is now we've only got one schedule in and you'll see in a minute we've only got one schedule in CDF CDE sorry so we have a short schedule remember this is only this is nothing changed it's still only used for assessing compensation events and whereas today you have to go and work out how much the contractor has actually paid his steel fixer it's in nc4 it's this is quite interesting Rob keeps doing this but as an industry going to be difficult it's going to be difficult which is wrong but but we're starting that process okay you promise right so whereas as I was saying whereas today under option A even though it's only for compensation events you've still got to come up the contractors show you exactly how much wages he paid his steel fixer for that half hour of Steel fixing in nec4 there's the opportunity to Tender rates in part one of the shedule of the shed of what's now the short schedule so we have tendered rates for different types of people different types of skills so contractor and project manager obliged to use they're obliged to use those like tended rates there's also a mechanism to agree rates that aren't already there which makes sense it's a bit snappier it's a bit snappier it's quickier I mean some of you out there I'm sure with gray hair like myself will say oh look it's like day works from 20 years ago and it is but that's I think is a good idea Val for option B yeah okay um a real big change again if you're a bit of an N specialist is the the training course on defined cost is now reduced from three4 of a day to half a day because we don't have to talk about the percentage for people overheads because it's not there anymore we're saying that all those supplies equipment and so on for sanitation and Recreation and all the other bits and Bobs various components all those bits are now just going to be paid most as equipment and we'll just get paid on invoice so that's just what's been done um also a massive Improvement under the current nec3 option A you don't actually pay the invoice or the or the forecast invoice to a subcontractor you've got to drill down into the subcontractor's real costs yeah and that never really works to it doesn't happen people do deals so why don't make it more more simple so now we will include subcontractor amounts which is the more alignment with the schedular cost components in option CD and E and also small detail but in six and seven design and manufacturer there's no overhead percentage on top of the rates there never should have been in the first place because it there's no need didn't add anything just added complication For No Good Reason okay so new rules for the project managers to get the head down but not nothing nothing nothing Earth shattering but it it it does change the cost off yeah so it's mostly going to affect the commercial people who may be the PM or maybe the backup team to the PM and of course contractor on the other side options C and D very similar and also good news firstly the slightly crazy idea of having the option of using a shorter schedule to assess conversation events no bin we'll just have the one shed of cost components nice and clear clear simple tender evaluation 10 times easier and in a similar vein we've lost the people overhead percentage in A and B and we've lost the working area overo percentage in C D and E with those things distributed back again those things are now just back into cost so you mostly will be equipment or invoice or sorry or 95% is going to be equipment isn't it because it's very little like there ever planted materials so we'll just pay for it now I can see some of you jumping thought hold that thought right thank Rob fair enough um we still pay subcontractors the only difference is that for consistency across the patch that statement is now made in the sh of cost components rather than the definition defined cost deta tid tid it's neater and it makes sense hunting so much and similarly the overhead percentage of gone in design and manufacturer exactly the same as with options A and B okay so that picture I'm going to hold that thought so now these are supplied by the contractors got nice shiny orange hat calculator so glasses pencil and the measuring T you pay for those then as a project manager well that is going to be the issue because according to the contract nec4 will pay what it cost these things are all equipment now they're all equipment so they're all stuff bought to help provide the works so they all get paid so so one problem gets solved but another one small ra now we have things like residual value argum what we haven't talked about but those in the know out there will know why this has been changed because we had so many so much hle taking out the cost of those things from the routine stream of cost because they were covered by the percentage so that's helped in the case of the defined cost for the routine payment slightly but it has two issues we will have some problems inevitably on sorting out how to pay for those things yeah um you know the other example is you know the site Agents come into the office with his old lead pop yeah yeah I'll leave it there and it also means when we're pricing up compensation events if there is a a an extension to the complete if there is more time on site there is going to be more toilet paper used therefore the parties sorry the project manager contractor are going to have to include that in an assessment and they haven't got a a nice percentage to apply there in the scheme of things in the of things say the working area overhead percentage was 10% of the people cost and the people cost is a percentage of the whole it's it's it's relatively small peanuts but it's small numbers small num focus on focus on the big numbers and again as we say forever in training particularly option C focus on how much money you're paying out to subes because that's where most of the money is going not on the flipping toilets and toilet paper yeah you didn't say flipping carry on sorry compensation events number six the last one we're nearly there guys and ladies before helps me on that one firstly a correction in my humble opinion you can now add in add compensation events as a on line as a bullet point in the contract data in the same way that you could always add in additional employers risks so now there will be two bullet points one underneath the other so at least the person writing the contract data will be prompted to think what's the difference between these two yeah and we don't have to go to a zed Clause to add in a compensation event for a certain flood event for example um a nice tidying up I think it's very good tidying up is that we have a separate Clause now in section six for the whole concept of a in of a sorry a quotation for a proposed instruction it's nice and tidy all tidy um and also um there has been a problem whereby contractors were asked to provide quotations for these possible combonation events and in some cases that's always going to take time in some cases Rob particular if some designing if if you're going to do it professionally very expensive you're going to have to spend design yeah and then the client oh yeah too much not going to bother and you've just wasted put a whole load of money into the ground option a contract in particular option b left a indeed it's it's not it's never been a clause that that fitted with the collaborative working that we're talking about so that is a a a good I think a very positive thing and then probably lastly um and this is just a tidy thing in 631 we have a clause which tells us when's the difference between actual defying cost and when we start forecasting it's well it's the date that the PM notifi instruction or that the contractor notified the conversation event roughly don't quote me on that read the contract all we've done now is give that give it a name it's a lowercase name but it's the dividing date so there's Clarity that that's the dividing date we use when it comes to that cost overall cost submission likewise we take our we use our program that was current at the dividing date yeah to work out the so the accepted program current the dividing date as it says switch dat is semm but they've called divid yeah I've heard I've seen people use switch date in Publications but we've called it dividing date okay so again in that whole page there there's nothing radical project manag the only thing that well okay the only thing is that the PM is going to have to sort out quotations and conversation events for proposed conversation events which you can go ahead yeah but again grown up people on site will just make sure they've got a a clear um firstly a cost recording system for the people booking time to Preparing that quotation although as we said Rob it doesn't change the fact You' still got there still will be a debate as to whether it's actually increase the overall Define cost okay um so in terms of those on six and the detail apart from me missing out on the defined cost finalization for which I humbly apologize that's pretty much where we are I don't know where we are in terms of time I'm going to ask you some questions no that that's it isn't it are youing that's it that's it that's where we've come to so in the next seven minutes or so let's see what the questions we've uh we've got uh how to use B with nc4 question mark okay that that's that as you put will guess is oh there won't be a how to use w't there won't be a how to use guy that will go into guidance won't it so yeah B is now him do you like him like not sure that but B is now in and there won't be a h to guide there be guidance respective contracts as to how to implement the information model um right so how does X12 fit with alliancing should it be used for alliancing um that's quite interesting there will be an alliancing contract that didn't mention but there are for consultation it in in June um the big difference is that the alliancing will be a everybody signing up to the same contract document yeah whereas X12 with its new name of multiparty collaboration is still going to be the same principle which is a set of bip party contracts yeah with a X12 stitching them together yeah and I'm I I've not been involved in the drafting of the alliancing contract but I'm pretty sure there won't be any um additional need for X2 to go with it alliancing is interesting isn't it you can you can have so many opinions or discussions about what he mean so to me X12 will help you um realize some of the principles and values of alliancing without formalizing the allian in contract itself so the alliance in contracts will allow for multiple parties to sign up to the same terms of I would certainly think that X12 will be simpler having said that X12 is can be as complicated as you want to make it basically quickly a couple more then Richard question why would the contractor not get 100% of the saving reduction in cost and no target change if it was their idea uh good question um because we are trying to encourage some collaboration we're probably wanting the employer to work with the contractor with his idea I'm guessing um again if you want to give the contractor 100% of the saving that's your choice just put it in the contract data to be honest you're dictating that because you will put in the value engine percentage that you wish the contractor the benefit and I haven't actually got my head around to think there's probably an article in in deciding what's a good number I don't know very interesting yeah uh couple more then so uh oh okay accreditation will ECC project manager accreditation courses change too yes um will the nc3 ECC project man accreditation course lose some value no next question no it won't lose value come on a little B more of course the two will have to run in parallel won't they there'll be accreditation of project manager supervisor to um service manager that will running parallel for three and four I would imagine they're working on a a transition between one to two I don't think it's abandon all your knowledge and start from scratch there'll be a it's being worked on here at neq there will be a an appropriate pop up from any those that you out there that are have done the accredited project manager and got three your 70% pass Mark firstly well done secondly there will be a top up to get you to the4 States that's one so I'm the quiz Master General free issue items supplied by the client how is that managed put it in the scope it's not changed at all on mention put it on the program put scope tell them when you're going to provide it or make it available talk to each other about it and if you don't if an employee you don't do what you said you're going to do there's going to be a compensation it's fairly straightforward yeah okay so apologies we didn't um answer all the questions but we will do so a few more things in wrap up got four minutes have on so the NC annual the NC users group annual seminar 2017 is the 22nd of June it's at County Hall London to accommodate more people than would us be the case why because uh the lawy 4 uh will be made that creating a little bit of Interest as you be yeah a lot of interest contact us anything else that you would like information on the NC users group uh information on contracts on accreditation on training on all sorts of NY things there's the contact details um we hope that you've enjoyed this this webinar and you'll tell people to watch this because it was really quite fun wasn't it well I've enjoyed it and it'll be available very shortly on YouTube and other such channels we still have 699 of the original it's still hanging on in there 83 so so bless you all thank you for attending enjoy the rest of your afternoons and goodbye thank you very much cheers