# Contracts



## buildr7 (Oct 10, 2014)

If I'm the guy that feeds the sub........ should I sign his proposal/contract? As it may be written to his terms/advantage.Whats the sense if I impose mine as I'm the one talking the risk of his perhaps lack of viability.I know some subs actually quite a few will want to tie up the job as they go to others to "pick the other cherries",protect them selves from their new apprentice lack of quality ect.In a red hot economy the subs may have the advantage against a smaller player as they may say I don't sign mine see ya later alligator.Does a gc contract hold more water in court as that's the last thing 1 wants to do!!


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

buildr7 said:


> If I'm the guy that feeds the sub........ should I sign his proposal/contract? As it may be written to his terms/advantage.Whats the sense if I impose mine as I'm the one talking the risk of his perhaps lack of viability.I know some subs actually quite a few will want to tie up the job as they go to others to "pick the other cherries",protect them selves from their new apprentice lack of quality ect.In a red hot economy the subs may have the advantage against a smaller player as they may say I don't sign mine see ya later alligator.Does a gc contract hold more water in court as that's the last thing 1 wants to do!!


The guy with the gold always rules. It's been that way for thousands of years


----------



## EthanB (Sep 28, 2011)

I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're asking but, it doesn't matter who provides the contract. What matters is what's IN the contract. Now, you're a GC so I'd think you should have a subcontractors agreement and standard practice all worked out.


----------



## mstrat (Jul 10, 2013)

Yeah, you need to be more clear if you want help around here...your statement makes zero sense, but I'll take a stab at it.

What you're saying is if you're hiring the sub (I assume that's what you mean by feeding them), should you sign his proposal/contract? Yes. He is a business owner afterall, and he's got a contract/proposal to let you know what he's working for and with.

"He may be picking the cherries off other trees"...make your job the cherry then. Problem solved. (stop trying to think you're the boss...you wanna be the boss, hire some guys on your payroll to do the job) 

"the GC is the one taking the risk" ... talk to any number of guys who trusted the GC on a job that never got paid out...happens all the time, it's how GC's start having trouble finishing jobs, they didn't pay the subs as agreed...

Again, I've got no clue what the real intention of your post is though...if you're gonna be a GC you'd better make your contracts far more comprehendible than your posts here


----------



## TxElectrician (May 21, 2008)

With the attitude the OP has expressed on this forum I think he will have a hard time attracting quality subs.


----------



## mstrat (Jul 10, 2013)

TxElectrician said:


> With the attitude the OP has expressed on this forum I think he will have a hard time attracting quality subs.


Agree.


----------



## huggytree (Nov 3, 2013)

i dont work for a GC who wont sign my contract....ive had one that picked it apart and crossed out 1/2 of it before signing....he was very difficult to work for and only lasted for 1 house.....i have a few new home builders who make me sign their contract also...so we end up with 2 contracts....i dont have a problem signing theirs....

my contract defines in detail what im going to do.....it also puts limits on what im doing...its my attempt to clear up as many grey area's as possible..


----------



## dielectricunion (Feb 27, 2013)

From the sound of the post, the OP may be the special occasion when these subs say "i better have a contract for this guy to sign too, if hes going to so graciously feed me and my family"


----------



## Warren (Feb 19, 2005)

As a sub, I have had several GC's sign my contract over the years. I don't think I have ever signed a contract from a GC though. My intention was always to make sure I got paid according to MY terms. I don't think I have had anyone sign one in many years though, as I seldom work for new people anymore.


----------



## HardWorks (Aug 6, 2014)

Most times I am a sub and I sign the GC contract. I provide a bid, for this and that, they send me a contract and scope of work. I sign it or negotiate it then we move on to the work. This is on commercial and industrial work. Residential is different. When I have done work for GC or developers, I send them my contract.


----------



## ESSaustin (Mar 27, 2010)

A key concept in contracts is "mutuality".

Anyway....
HardWorks- I have the opposite experience: On most commercial jobs (demo or haul off) we sign the GCs contract. On every residential job we do (demo/Haul off/ land clearing/ect) they sign ours.

I have, on many occasion, told the other party I will only sign theirs if so and so is amended. Once I explain my side, and why I think a clause is unfair, they agree to change it.


----------



## dielectricunion (Feb 27, 2013)

ESSaustin said:


> A key concept in contracts is "mutuality". Anyway.... HardWorks- I have the opposite experience: On most commercial jobs (demo or haul off) we sign the GCs contract. On every residential job we do (demo/Haul off/ land clearing/ect) they sign ours. I have, on many occasion, told the other party I will only sign theirs if so and so is amended. Once I explain my side, and why I think a clause is unfair, they agree to change it.


 thats not the opposite, thats the same thing he said


----------



## ESSaustin (Mar 27, 2010)

Ok, sorry. I though his last sentence said on commercial jobs he has the GC sign his contract.


----------



## dielectricunion (Feb 27, 2013)

ESSaustin said:


> Ok, sorry. I though his last sentence said on commercial jobs he has the GC sign his contract.


Mine was a trivial response, just wanted to feel like i was contributing... Haha


----------



## rselectric1 (Sep 20, 2009)

Warren said:


> As a sub, I have had several GC's sign my contract over the years. I don't think I have ever signed a contract from a GC though. My intention was always to make sure I got paid according to MY terms. I don't think I have had anyone sign one in many years though, as I seldom work for new people anymore.


:thumbsup:

I wear both hats. GC and sub.

As a GC, I expect a full quote from subs with their full scope, payment requirements, and their legalese which I check over, etc. 

As a sub, it's my responsibility to write the scope, payment requirements, etc.

Once a few jobs are under our belt at either role, we rarely actually sign a contract. Just a scope and the price. OK via email and we go.

Its all about trust. Since the OP is a newbie GC, it would probably be best to read through the subs proposals, and address anything in the language or scope individually. If a GC I had never worked for handed me a contract that he had prepared, it likely would NOT contain the full scope for one. Never had this happen, but if the scope and terms were all correct, I'd probably sign it.........maybe. It would depend on other things as well.


----------



## ESSaustin (Mar 27, 2010)

Well you really hurt my feelings. I wish I had a cat to cuddle.


----------



## HardWorks (Aug 6, 2014)

ESSaustin said:


> Ok, sorry. I though his last sentence said on commercial jobs he has the GC sign his contract.


I wish they would sign mine. 

Today most gc's buy the jobs then shop them out, making it even harder on the subs and contracts.


----------



## mrcharles (Sep 27, 2011)

In commercial it is rule number one that you never sign the proposal from the sub.


----------



## Kowboy (May 7, 2009)

I recently got a call from a GC to do repairs on a store facade. His original sub was being non-responsive and the mall was getting pissed. Plus he had a super on site and the store was open.

I emailed him a proposal with my terms and when my phone rang several hours later it was him. Instead of the "Why are you raping me?" I was expecting, I got "How soon can you start?"

Nobody signed anything. I did what I said I would do for the rates I said I'd do it for. I sent him a bill and he paid it.

My rates must not have been as bad as I thought. He asked me if I'd travel out of state.


----------



## concrete2013 (Nov 6, 2014)

mrcharles said:


> In commercial it is rule number one that you never sign the proposal from the sub.


Why is this? To keep the ball in there court


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

concrete2013 said:


> Why is this? To keep the ball in there court


Why should I let someone I'm paying dictate to me how it's going to be?


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Californiadecks said:


> Why should I let someone I'm paying dictate to me how it's going to be?


So how does that play out at yer favorite upscale restaurant? :whistling


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Tinstaafl said:


> So how does that play out at yer favorite upscale restaurant? :whistling


If they screw up my food they don't get paid. Golden rule still applys.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Tinstaafl said:


> So how does that play out at yer favorite upscale restaurant? :whistling


I tell them how my food is to be prepared, because I am the keeper of the gold. I don't ask them how are you going to cook my steak.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

I think it all boils down to who owns the prime contact and is responsible to the HO gets to make all subs sign.


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Californiadecks said:


> I tell them how my food is to be prepared, because I am the keeper of the gold. I don't ask them how are you going to cook my steak.


I'll buy that to an extent, though if you demand inedible charcoal I'll tell you to go fly a kite.

Nevertheless, you won't dictate my price. That is what it is, and if you don't like it, I don't give a crap if you're the king of Siam.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Tinstaafl said:


> I'll buy that to an extent, though if you demand inedible charcoal I'll tell you to go fly a kite.
> 
> Nevertheless, you won't dictate my price. That is what it is, and if you don't like it, I don't give a crap if you're the king of Siam.


I'm not saying dictate anyone's price. Where'd that come from? I'm saying dictate conditions of the job which is a GC's main duties to the HO. The price is something both must agree to. There is a point where your price may be unreasonable and you won't be hired. That is the golden rule. 

There are rules that I get to make that must be adhered to. For example there's no working on Sunday, no work starting before 7am. All workers will be safe according to OSHA standards. Everyone will be covered on WC. There's lots of things a GC needs to have in writing to protect the HO, property, and his own company. 

I can't think of any rule you get to make me do besides pay you.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Just for the record, my subs and I sign nothing. We usually come to an agreement over a golfball. Only thing I get is a proposal so we don't forget what we agree to.


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Californiadecks said:


> I can't think of any rule you get to make me do besides pay you.


Okay, I may have been on a bit of a tangent with the price bit. But you are paying me for [in essence] a finished product, and you have no business coming behind the counter to dictate my grilling procedures as long as the end result is what you're paying for.

It's just common sense that things like hours of operation and so forth get laid out and/or dickered over, but when all is said and done, you will pay me to employ the procedures I choose or you're free to move on to someone who enjoys being micromanaged.

Just like you, I'm selling a product. You don't get to dictate the manufacturing process.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Tinstaafl said:


> Okay, I may have been on a bit of a tangent with the price bit. But you are paying me for [in essence] a finished product, and you have no business coming behind the counter to dictate my grilling procedures as long as the end result is what you're paying for.
> 
> It's just common sense that things like hours of operation and so forth get laid out and/or dickered over, but when all is said and done, you will pay me to employ the procedures I choose or you're free to move on to someone who enjoys being micromanaged.
> 
> Just like you, I'm selling a product. You don't get to dictate the manufacturing process.


I would never dictate the manufacturing process, just the general rules that applies to everyone. I would do this as a commercial GC but on a residential job I've known my subs for many years. I trust them and also never question the price. I'm an easy guy to work "WITH".


----------



## Kowboy (May 7, 2009)

Californiadecks said:


> I can't think of any rule you get to make me do besides pay you.


Mike:

On the job I mentioned previously, I dictated everything. I didn't have a pair of Wood's Power Grips and knew I would need them. I bought them, billed for them, and kept them. I had to work in the mall after hours and my rates rose 20%, the fee for me not sleeping with my wife. 

I could have made this GC mow my lawn. He had an unresponsive original sub, the mall management screaming at him, and a super living in a motel doing nothing but missing doctor's appointments and bitching about it. It ain't who has the gold. It's whoever's ass is in the biggest trouble. I had four potentials call as I was typing his proposal; I didn't need the work, but I stopped his bleeding.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Kowboy said:


> Mike:
> 
> On the job I mentioned previously, I dictated everything. I didn't have a pair of Wood's Power Grips and knew I would need them. I bought them, billed for them, and kept them. I had to work in the mall after hours and my rates rose 20%, the fee for me not sleeping with my wife.
> 
> I could have made this GC mow my lawn. He had an unresponsive original sub, the mall management screaming at him, and a super living in a motel doing nothing but missing doctor's appointments and bitching about it. It ain't who has the gold. It's whoever's ass is in the biggest trouble. I had four potentials call as I was typing his proposal; I didn't need the work, but I stopped his bleeding.


Most of the time it is.
Because the general is in charge of the sub and responsible for all the subs. Never once have I heard of a sub responsible for the GC. The guy who rights the checks is the boss.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Kowboy said:


> Mike:
> 
> On the job I mentioned previously, I dictated everything. I didn't have a pair of Wood's Power Grips and knew I would need them. I bought them, billed for them, and kept them. I had to work in the mall after hours and my rates rose 20%, the fee for me not sleeping with my wife.
> 
> I could have made this GC mow my lawn. He had an unresponsive original sub, the mall management screaming at him, and a super living in a motel doing nothing but missing doctor's appointments and bitching about it. It ain't who has the gold. It's whoever's ass is in the biggest trouble. I had four potentials call as I was typing his proposal; I didn't need the work, but I stopped his bleeding.


Because you had the GC by the balls still didn't make you his boss. Just allowed you to take advantage of him. But just to make it clear as a GC I can fire the sub the sub can't fire me they can quit but I don't lose the job.


----------



## Kowboy (May 7, 2009)

Mike:

Not ten minutes ago I got a call from the super on that job thanking me for all my work. The GC asked if I'd travel out of state for him, so if I had him by the balls, it must have felt pretty good.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Kowboy said:


> Mike:
> 
> Not ten minutes ago I got a call from the super on that job thanking me for all my work. The GC asked if I'd travel out of state for him, so if I had him by the balls, it must have felt pretty good.


Doen't matter you don't call the shots when he has power of the purse and firing power as well. Has nothing to do with "if he likes you or not".


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Californiadecks said:


> Doen't matter you don't call the shots when he has power of the purse and firing power as well. Has nothing to do with "if he likes you or not".


Sorry, this is like a sore tooth. Your position seems to be that as the GC you're the Big Boss and lord of all you survey. That's nice, but you still have a boss to answer to (besides the wife): the HO who hires you. Ultimately *he* is the one with the power.

Now before you come back with descriptions of your ironclad contract that nullifies that power, think about it a moment. As a sub, I have a right to my own ironclad contract that makes me the same ultimate authority on my little piece of the project.

You seem to think that all subs are supplicants begging for a piece of your project. On the contrary, there are many situations where you can be in need of a specialist to accomplish a part of the job that you have neither the staff nor the skills to do by yourself. At that point, you are in the same position as a HO looking for a contractor, and will need to sign my contract if you want my services.

If it's an equitable arrangement, why wouldn't you?


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Tinstaafl said:


> Sorry, this is like a sore tooth. Your position seems to be that as the GC you're the Big Boss and lord of all you survey. That's nice, but you still have a boss to answer to (besides the wife): the HO who hires you. Ultimately *he* is the one with the power.
> 
> Now before you come back with descriptions of your ironclad contract that nullifies that power, think about it a moment. As a sub, I have a right to my own ironclad contract that makes me the same ultimate authority on my little piece of the project.
> 
> ...


Yes the HO is the boss of me and I'm the boss of everyone I'm responsible for and paying. I will dictate what the final project will be and all the rules of the property I'm responsible for as well. I can fire you makes me the one with the power. The only power you have is to not do the job. Then you don't get the money. Please tell me where I'm wrong.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Tinstaafl said:


> Sorry, this is like a sore tooth. Your position seems to be that as the GC you're the Big Boss and lord of all you survey. That's nice, but you still have a boss to answer to (besides the wife): the HO who hires you. Ultimately *he* is the one with the power.
> 
> Now before you come back with descriptions of your ironclad contract that nullifies that power, think about it a moment. As a sub, I have a right to my own ironclad contract that makes me the same ultimate authority on my little piece of the project.
> 
> ...


Your argument that I need the sub makes me less in charge is no different then a valuable employee that thinks the same way. But at the end of the day if you think you can hold my feet to the fire you have to go. There's a reason I have to be in charge of certain things. It's about liabilities. If you screw something up I as the GC am responsible. If I screw something up nothing happens to you.


----------



## Kowboy (May 7, 2009)

Californiadecks said:


> Please tell me where I'm wrong.


I would never work for you no matter how much you begged or promised to pay me or how bad you really needed me?

I work with people, I work for no one. Okay, but I sleep with her.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Kowboy said:


> I would never work for you no matter how much you begged or promised to pay me or how bad you really needed me?
> 
> I work with people, I work for no one. Okay, but I sleep with her.


Don't need you. My subs are very happy.


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Californiadecks said:


> You could say that and the HO that hires me has the same options because there's so many.


correct, and you write the contract right? or does the gold holder write it?


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

The state dictates a lot of the language in my contacts and by law I must write one.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> correct, and you write the contract right? or does the gold holder write it?


Again I have no choice is the law


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

What I'm saying is that it doesn;t matter who writes the contract if both parties are on an equal footing. The GC needs the sub as much as the sub needs the GC and the GC needs the HO wh needs the banker who needs the mortgage holder who needs a home in good order to be able to carry a mortgae. it;s cylical. Nobodys' on top...anyoe who thinks they are i deluded. Plenty of subs make more in year than the GC's or bankers or HO's they deal with and same for each member of the equation. 

Everyone has responsibilities to the other


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> correct, and you write the contract right? or does the gold holder write it?


Again if you don't want to sign my contract don't work for me. But as the keeper of the gold I get v to make the rules. And because the law requires me to make the contract with the HO any other argument is irrelevant.


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Californiadecks said:


> Again if you don't want to sign my contract don't work for me. But as the keeper of the gold I get v to make the rules. And because the law requires me to make the contract with the HO any other argument is irrelevant.


The HO is the holder of the gold. it just passes through you and if you;ve done things correctly you get to grab on to a little bit as it passes by you

If you don't want me to work for you don't call me


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> What I'm saying is that it doesn;t matter who writes the contract if both parties are on an equal footing. The GC needs the sub as much as the sub needs the GC and the GC needs the HO wh needs the banker who needs the mortgage holder who needs a home in good order to be able to carry a mortgae. it;s cylical. Nobodys' on top...anyoe who thinks they are i deluded. Plenty of subs make more in year than the GC's or bankers or HO's they deal with and same for each member of the equation.
> 
> Everyone has responsibilities to the other


But as the GC I get to make the rules. Even if it doesn't matter to you. I'm responsible legally and financially for everything you do on my site. I'm hired by the HO to control the job. If you don't like it don't work for my company as a sub.


----------



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

dom-mas said:


> The HO is the holder of the gold. it just passes through you and if you;ve done things correctly you get to grab on to a little bit as it passes by you
> 
> If you don't want me to work for you don't call me


I agree with most of what your saying, but:

As far as the subs go, I am the client. If I dont get paid doesnt mean you wont get paid. Thats my problem. 

While it is cyclical, the GC is the boss. Its his job. Like I said, ill sign an agreement I have already agreed to, why not? I hold my end, they hold theirs.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> The HO is the holder of the gold. it just passes through you and if you;ve done things correctly you get to grab on to a little bit as it passes by you
> 
> If you don't want me to work for you don't call me


I'm responsible for your company. I'm liable for everything you do. It's my job to make sure you abide by all saftey rules have all the insurances and is my job to act as the agent for the HO to make sure all work is done on time and right. Why can't your argument be said about employees as well. An employee can say is not your money it's the HO'S so therefore your not in charge.


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Californiadecks said:


> But as the GC I get to make the rules. Even if it doesn't matter to you. I'm responsible legally and financially for everything you do on my site. I'm hired by the HO to control the job. If you don't like it don't work for my company as a sub.



You say that the one who holds the gold makes the rules? Who ultimately holds the gold? The HO correct?

If you hire me as a sub i am legally responsible for everything I do on _your job as well correct? You can look at it like a sub signing your contract but you are both signing each others contract. There are resonsibilities on each side...just like the HO has responsibilities to the GC they hire. It's not a question of who controls the gold....it's a question of each person doing the job they are contracted to do...in a contract there are always 2 sides...I agree to do this and you agree to do that...very plain and regular...no person is in control since they both have responsibilities to the other

Any GC that doesn't understand that has a shortlived or tempemental career in my opinion. PLENTY of GC's in the world. also plenty of HO's to work with who are happy to sign my contracts_


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Jaws said:


> I agree with most of what your saying, but:
> 
> As far as the subs go, I am the client. If I dont get paid doesnt mean you wont get paid. Thats my problem.
> 
> While it is cyclical, the GC is the boss. Its his job. Like I said, ill sign an agreement I have already agreed to, why not? I hold my end, they hold theirs.


The GC isn't the boss...the HO is. If a sub performs a scope the way the gc wants it but the HO doesn't like it and is willing to pay to have it changed who gets their way? Gc's are contractors the same as any sub....They just get paid for a different scope


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> You say that the one who holds the gold makes the rules? Who ultimately holds the gold? The HO correct?
> 
> If you hire me as a sub i am legally responsible for everything I do on _your job as well correct? You can look at it like a sub signing your contract but you are both signing each others contract. There are resonsibilities on each side...just like the HO has responsibilities to the GC they hire. It's not a question of who controls the gold....it's a question of each person doing the job they are contracted to do...in a contract there are always 2 sides...I agree to do this and you agree to do that...very plain and regular...no person is in control since they both have responsibilities to the other
> 
> Any GC that doesn't understand that has a shortlived or tempemental career in my opinion. PLENTY of GC's in the world. also plenty of HO's to work with who are happy to sign my contracts_


_

Yes and the HO holds the golds and ultimately rules. I've been in this business 30 years haven't had any problems yet. And yes if you work for me I am in control. Period. 

I had a drywall guy agree in writing that all corner bead was to be included. I came in he was spraying texture I asked him why there's no l metal on the crawl space opening. He said that wasn't included. I broke out my contact to show him where he was wrong. He never worked for me again when he asked me why does it have to be your way. I said "because I hired you remember". "We didn't hire each other". :laughing:_


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> The GC isn't the boss...the HO is. If a sub performs a scope the way the gc wants it but the HO doesn't like it and is willing to pay to have it changed who gets their way? Gc's are contractors the same as any sub....They just get paid for a different scope


But the HO hired me to be their agent in control of everyone.


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Jaws said:


> As far as the subs go, I am the client.


right and if I don;t like your rules i don't work for you right? same as if the HO has some stipulations that you don't agree with you walk? You agree to their terms, you agree to theirs. I've signed plenty of GC agreements on commercial jobs, but not unless i agree with what is written and I have changed what was written frequently. At the end of the day it doesn't matter who is writting the contract, it matters what the contract says and who agrees to it


----------



## griz (Nov 26, 2009)

Now for reality...

On competitive bid commercial/PW work sub signs my contract and
I pretty much own his azz.....If you don't like it don't bid it.

Competitive commercial is it's own cut throat world. You can & will be taken advantage of by unscrupulous low life subs that exist to bid low and TRY and make money on change orders. GFL...:thumbsup:

On bid to me work...my subs were the pros from Dover. I listened to every word they said. They took care of me because they knew I watched out for them....

Many jobs I never even got bids from them....

If they bid & thought they were high we talked...

Same if I thought they were low. 

Did me no good to have a sub that didn't make money off me....


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> The GC isn't the boss...the HO is. If a sub performs a scope the way the gc wants it but the HO doesn't like it and is willing to pay to have it changed who gets their way? Gc's are contractors the same as any sub....They just get paid for a different scope


What if the HO says he wants me the GC to be the boss? This is exactly the agreement that a HO hires the GC to do.


----------



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

dom-mas said:


> The GC isn't the boss...the HO is. If a sub performs a scope the way the gc wants it but the HO doesn't like it and is willing to pay to have it changed who gets their way? Gc's are contractors the same as any sub....They just get paid for a different scope


Not to sound like a power tripper, I am not. But:

My scope is to build the project. Who does what, in what order and what rules will be followed by everyone on the site, is my scope. I hire and fire, all directives to sub trades, vendors and my crew are from me. 

The HO is not directing my subs, if they did, my trade contractors would disregard and go to me. Im the one paying them. 

Are they employees? No. Do they answer to me when the crap hits the fan? Yes. The HO has nothing to do with the trades. I would never allow a client to hire or fire a sub, nor would I work with a sub they hired.


----------



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

Do you think the manufacturer of the tie rods ford uses thinks im the boss because I bought a Super Duty? No. Ford is their client.


----------



## Jaws (Dec 20, 2010)

dom-mas said:


> right and if I don;t like your rules i don't work for you right? same as if the HO has some stipulations that you don't agree with you walk? You agree to their terms, you agree to theirs. I've signed plenty of GC agreements on commercial jobs, but not unless i agree with what is written and I have changed what was written frequently. At the end of the day it doesn't matter who is writting the contract, it matters what the contract says and who agrees to it


Like I said, I dont have a problem signing something I have agreed to.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

Jaws said:


> Like I said, I dont have a problem signing something I have agreed to.


I don't either, but I still control the job and everyone I hire. I have to, someone has to do the job. Has nothing to do with ego.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> So we are agreeing 100%. You were saying that the person with the money is in control (writes the contract in the context of the OPs question) but it looks like you agree that it doesn't matter who writes the contract as long as both parties are happy with it. Who writes the contract was the original question in all of this
> 
> I never said that the GC doesn't have any authority on a job, what i was saying is that everyone is responsible to someone else, everyone gets their gold from someone else.
> 
> You're no different than any other GC, or sub for that matter, we need what need and we won't work for someone or have someone work for us that can't meet those needs


Well let me rephrase it then. I am the keeper of my employees and subs gold. The a HO is the keeper of my gold. I never said who was the gold keeper. I did say the keeper the gold rules and that still stands. Rather it be my boss (the HO) or the general.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

If you really want to get specific and pissy and make this about the author, then my lawyer is my author. So as long as you write what my lawyer writes you can be the secretary (author)


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Californiadecks said:


> If you really want to get specific and pissy and make this about the author, then my lawyer is my author. So as long as you write what my lawyer writes you can be the secretary (author)


I wasn't getting pissy or specific...I was answering the original post, I was also trying to show that just because someone holds the money doesn't mean that they write the contract


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> I wasn't getting pissy or specific...I was answering the original post, I was also trying to show that just because someone holds the money doesn't mean that they write the contract


I will dictate most of the contract if I'm the GC. I've giving you a scenario for which limited terms I will allow the sub to dictate. 

If I dictate most of the contract and you write it, who's contract is it really?


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

All you get to dictate is SOW and payment terms. That's it

And payment terms are questionable


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

What of interest is there to me besides SOW and payment? On the rare times that I do have a "contract" with a resi GC it's them accepting my quote. That's all there is and all either one of us is interested in

Payment terms are definitley not questionable


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> What of interest is there to me besides SOW and payment? On the rare times that I do have a "contract" with a resi GC it's them accepting my quote. That's all there is and all either one of us is interested in
> 
> Payment terms are definitley not questionable


If you ask for money at an inappropriate time that is ABSOLUTELY questionable. Which goes for either party. Because your GC has no other concerns about the job besides the money means nothing to me.


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

No, what I'm saying is that payment terms are not a question, it's always understood before hand. Not saying I've never asked for a progress pay when one wasn't due but payment structure and amounts are understood, even if they aren't always followed (99% of the time they are though)

When did I say that anyone was only concerned abut the money...SCOPE and money are what interests me...it's the meat and potatoes the rest is fluff


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> No, what I'm saying is that payment terms are not a question, it's always understood before hand. Not saying I've never asked for a progress pay when one wasn't due but payment structure and amounts are understood, even if they aren't always followed (99% of the time they are though)
> 
> When did I say that anyone was only concerned abut the money...SCOPE and money are what interests me...it's the meat and potatoes the rest is fluff


It should be your only interests. The GC on the other hand, has a lot more that interests him as it pertains to the subs. Insurance, scheduling, inspections, I could go on and on but I've covered this extensively.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> What of interest is there to me besides SOW and payment? On the rare times that I do have a "contract" with a resi GC it's them accepting my quote. That's all there is and all either one of us is interested in
> 
> Payment terms are definitley not questionable


Did you not say that is all either side is concerned with in a contract? Sow, payment


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> No, what I'm saying is that payment terms are not a question, it's always understood before hand. Not saying I've never asked for a progress pay when one wasn't due but payment structure and amounts are understood, even if they aren't always followed (99% of the time they are though)
> 
> When did I say that anyone was only concerned abut the money...SCOPE and money are what interests me...it's the meat and potatoes the rest is fluff


The rest is child fluff to you. But if your ass is on the line that changes. Insurances isn't fluff


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Right...I have zero responsibility and don't carry insurance

This is just silly.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> Right...I have zero responsibility and don't carry insurance
> 
> This is just silly.


Didn't say that. I said it's not your responsibility to make sure it's mine. What's fluff to you isn't to me. That's not silly.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> Right...I have zero responsibility and don't carry insurance
> 
> This is just silly.


I agree that is silly if I would of said that.


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

You live in california I don't know but I'd be willing to bet that most of the fluff is stuff that is required by law, so it's not specific to your contract...the scope and payment are the things that everyone is interested in, most of the rest is the same job to job.

So if all a sub can dictate is the scope and the payment then so be it. The rest is legislated anyway


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> You live in california I don't know but I'd be willing to bet that most of the fluff is stuff that is required by law, so it's not specific to your contract...the scope and payment are the things that everyone is interested in, most of the rest is the same job to job.
> 
> So if all a sub can dictate is the scope and the payment then so be it. The rest is legislated anyway


Nope, not with subs. State doesn't care about contractor agreements. It's not even a law to have Liability Insurance here, for any contractor.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

The state, however is up a contractors azz when it comes to home owners.


----------



## dom-mas (Nov 26, 2011)

Ok well maybe fluff is the wrong word, but i still hold that scope and payment are of primary concern to everyone.


----------



## Calidecks (Nov 19, 2011)

dom-mas said:


> Ok well maybe fluff is the wrong word, but i still hold that scope and payment are of primary concern to everyone.


Damn! I agree. :laughing:


----------

