Kisah Dua Adik Beradik Penipu....

Pada satu masa dahulu yang tidak diketahui bila adalah tinggal satu keluarga yang terdiri daripada tiga orang, bapa dan dua anak lelakinya yang selalu saja rileks kerjanya. Adapun masalah sebenar mereka adalah mereka ini suka sangat bercakap bohong, malah boleh kata macam hobi pula. Sehari kalau tidak menipu memang terasa tak lengkap hidup.

Memang tidak lalu makanlah.

Maka pada satuhari, ditakdirkan bapa mereka terbabit meninggal dunia. Mati tanpa sebab, tetiba saja. Maka beritahulah si Abang kepada adikknya.

"Don pergilah bagi tau kat Imam dan orang-orang kampong berita sedih ini, untung-untung ada orang boleh tolong uruskan jenazah ini... Yeop tak boleh pergi sebab kaki Yeop sakit... "

Si Adik yang memang tahu Abang dia menipu hanya mengangguk. Dia berlalu pergi. Setelah berita itu di sampaikan kepada orang kampong maka tiada seorang pun yang percaya akan berita yang disampaikan itu. Mana tidaknya itu bukan kali pertama berita semacam itu didengar. Maka pulanglah si Adik dengan wajah yang hiba. Berita itu disampaikan kepada si Abang.

Si Abang dengan wajah yang kesal akhirnya bersuara.

"Yeop ingat sudah sampai masanya kita berubah... tak boleh menipu lagilah. Pagi esok Don ikut Yeop, kita pergi kelubuk kat hujung kampong sana, Yeop semalam bermimpi dan diberitahu bahawa sesapa yang nak buang sikap buruk, dia kenalah buktikan dengan terjun dan campakkan sifat buruk dia jauh kedalam lubuk. Camna?"

Si Adik hanya mengangguk sahaja kerana tiadalah ia mampu menandingi “skill” menipu Abangnya yang memang luarbiasa itu.

Pagi keesokan harinya, setelah jenazah diuruskan, mereka bergerak ke lubuk misteri seperti yang dirancang. Setelah sampai berkata si Abang dalam hatinya.

"Ini kalau aku terjun dulu ni mahu lemas dan hilang macam tu saja, ish bahaya ni... " Lalu dia bersuara,"Don (nama adik dia ler)... kau terjun dulu biar Yeop berkawal, kat sini memang keras, orang berpengalaman macam Yeop jer yang boleh mengawal keadaan dan keselamatan dengan baik".

Si Adik tanpa membuang masa terus saja terjun ke dalam lubuk sambil si Abang menunggu. Seminit... Dua minit... tiga minit... Si Abang mengeluh. "Dah mati kebudak ni?. Lama betul... "

Pada masa yang sama sebenarnya si Adik sedang bertarung dengan nyawanya di bawah permukaan air. Sebaik sahaja terjun kakinya telah tersangkut di akar pokok dan dia tidak dapat menimbulkan dirinya kembali. Sudah tentulah setelah berlaku tarik menarik akhirnya dia Berjaya lalu timbul di permukaan air.

"Apa yang kau buat lama sangat kat bawah tu?" tanyasi Abang kehairanan.

"Huh, mau nya tak lama Yoep, kat bawah tu macam-macam ada, pelbagai jenis makanan dan minuman disediakan. Semuanya “free” belaka. Ada nasi goreng, roti canai, “Kenny Rogers” dan macam-macam lagi. Kalau tak teringatkan Yeop sorang-sorang kat sini Don ingat dah tak nak naik lagi dah.."jelas Adiknya dengan penuh penghayatan.

Cerita si Adik tadi telah menyebabkan asid hidroklorikdi dalam perutsi Abang tadi mengeleggak. "Dari semalam tak makan, ini kira best giler dah ni, baik aku terjun.."nekad si Abang. Dush... si Abang tadi terjun ke dalam lubuk kepala dulu dengan kecepatan yang tak boleh dijelaskan. Kepalanya terhantuk dengan batu dan berdarah teruk. Tak sampai seminit dia timbul kembali.

Si Adik bertanya,"Yoep, apa yang telah berlaku?"

Si Abang dengan selamba menjawab"Tu la Don, lain kali kalau nak makan bayar laa..tak pasal-pasal Yeop kena belasah sebab Don makan dan minum pas tu tak bayar... "

Apakah moral cerita di atas?

LUMP SUM CONTRACT BASED ON DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATION (WITHOUT QUANTITIES)

The lump sum contract associated with construction particularly in the one of the Project in Indonesia has created untold misery to contract administrators and quantity surveyors working in project management, supervision, contractor and employer. The problem is caused by a misunderstanding of the concept of lump sum contracts and the application of the principles associated with such forms of procurement. Initially the project were Lump Sum tendered based on Bill of Quantities and upon finalization of contract both the Employer and Contractor have agreed to convert the contract to a lump sum contract based on drawings and specification with modified method of measurement for interim payment process.

In principle, a lump sum contract is an agreement pursuant to which one party consents to pay another party a set amount of money for completing the work or providing the goods described in the agreement. Typically, lump sum contracts do not require contractors to provide a detailed breakdown of costs. Rather, the payment of the total contract price is linked to the contractor completing all of the work specified in the contract. For example, a software installation company may enter into a lump sum contract for installing multiple data processing systems in a building. Instead of receiving an individual fee for each system installed, the company will receive one fixed amount after it finishes installing all of the systems.

Lump sum contracts are regularly used for a variety of transactions, including construction work, consulting projects, and architectural assignments. A lump sum contract is easy to manage since payment is made only once. Generally, the lump sum contractor is paid a flat amount of amount of money after the party receiving the services or goods is given the output. For instance, under a lump sum arrangement, an architect firm is usually paid its total fee once it has supplied all the deliverable acceptable to the Employer.

The construction industry often engages in lump sum contracting. In most cases, the building owner signs a lump sum agreement with a general contractor. The general contractor then enters into separate agreements with subcontractors.

The explanation so far seems simple. Then what seems to be the problem?

The problem arises out of two major factors:

•  The written contract;
•  Understanding and interpretation of the written contract.

A lump sum contract is usually a written agreement, although an oral agreement may be binding in some cases. Once the contract has been signed, all parties are bound to adhere to its terms. 

A lump sum contract ordinarily details the fixed total amount to be paid to the contractor and the timeline for payment. If the contract is for services, a comprehensive description of the scope of the services to be performed by the contractor should be documented. Contracts for goods should thoroughly detail the goods to be provided, including the components, features, and characteristics that must be a part of the final deliverable.

However, all this is dictated by the terms contained in the various documents being made part of the contract. Construction contracts using standard forms like the JCT, NEC, FIDIC etc., detail a hierarchy of documents that would be referred to in the settlement of disagreements or disputes. Such documents may include the specifications and a bill of quantities amongst other things. If the bill of quantity is listed as a contract document, it is possible for the Employer to require the contractor to execute everything it has priced for in the bill.

It must be noted that a bill of quantity can contain one or more of the following items in addition to the lump sum items:

1.         Provisional Sums

2.         Items using Prime Cost Sums

3.         Provisionally described items

4.         Provisionally measured items

5.         Nominated Sub-Contractor items

6.         Nominated Supplier items

7.         Contingencies

Despite described as a lump sum contract all the above items are subject to adjustments and additions to and deletions from the bill of quantities is possible if the contract provides for variations, but no re-measurement of quantities stated in the bill of quantities will be allowed.

As a rule, construction contractors are not entitled to receive more money than the contract specifies. Items required to complete the works must generally be provided even if they have been omitted from the bill of quantities – (Williams v Fitzmaurice (1858) 3 H&N 844). Michael O’Reilly points out that if there is no mechanism in the contract for receiving payment for these extra items, the contractor will have to pay for them. This means that the contractor will have to provide what is indispensably required to fulfil its obligations under the contract.

If it is presumed that quantities do not form a term in lump sum contracts unless the contract states otherwise, the contractor will not be paid any additional payment if the quantities required to be executed are greater than stated in the bill of quantity, (Portman and Fotheringham v Pildritch (1904),Priestly v Stone (1888), Re Ford and Bemrose (1902) CA, Sharpe v San Paulo Railway Co (1873) LR 8 Ch App 597). It could therefore implied that the reverse is also true – being that if the quantities stated in such a bill of quantity are greater than what is required to be executed (as long as the item description is not changed) the contractor will be entitled to receive the full payment against that item.

Can the Employer or Engineer therefore, change the description of an item in the bill of quantities where the quantity has been over measured and attempt to re-measure and obtain the lesser quantity? Unless the contract provides to do so, definitely not! Any attempts to do so would mean introducing an element of re-measuring where the contract does not provide and this would be in breach.

In the same context, what about an item contained in the bill of quantities which is not required to be executed? Contractors always argue that being a lump sum contract they are entitled to be paid for every item in the bill of quantities regardless of requirement in the same manner that the Employer is entitled to insist upon the contractor to provide items required but missed out in the bill of quantities and that each balances with the other. In order to prove this point the contractor will need to establish that the price it has put in for such an item is in actual fact to compensate for some item missed out in the bill of quantity. The burden of such proof will rest with the contractor.

In a lump sum contract, the specifications and drawings are used to describe and identify the scope of works. BQ (or Schedule of Rates) does not use for this purpose and it is used to value variations and often times used for interim payment valuations.

My point is in a lump sum contracts, BQ does not use to describe or identify the scope of Works. The BQ is a tool we use in a lump sum contracts to calculate the Tender / Contract Price. The scope of Works is defined in the Specifications and Drawings. The Contractor’s obligation is to complete the Works in accordance with the Specifications and Drawings. The BQ may contain items which are not required to accomplish the Contractor’s obligations under the Contract.

However, the Contractor should execute any works defined in the Specifications (in most cases Specification takes precedence over the Drawings) even though such works are excluded from the BQ (and/or not shown on the Drawings).

It can be considered that, after the award, the BQ is used only for the purposes of valuation variations and interim payments, unless BQ contains provisional items which are subjected to re-measure. Further, in lump sum (without quantities) contracts, BQ is replaced by Schedule of Rates.

In conclusion, I am in the opinion that, in a lump sum contract, you can’t simply negate payment for any item in the BQ which are not defined in the Specifications and/or shown Drawings, as the BQ does not identify or describe the Scope of Works.

Under the doctrine of restitution no one is entitled to receive any payment for what he is not entitled for under a contract and the converse is also true that the employer cannot escape from paying a contractor his rightful dues under a contract.

Credit to Dr Haris Deen for the above-mentioned article.

ISU-ISU PENGURUSAN DAN PENTADBIRAN – SATU PERKONGISIAN PENGALAMAN

Sekadar ingin berkongsi dengan anda semua, atas pengalaman saya yang sedikit ini yang telah berkhidmat lebih 20 tahun di dalam isu-isu pengurusan organisasi dan pembangunan spiritual yang melibatkan organisasi kerajaan dan swasta. Selalunya masalah-masalah yang dikongsikan kepada saya adalah masalah antara golongan pengurusan tertinggi, pihak pentadbiran, pengurusan dan juga kakitangan sokongan adalah seperti berikut:

Sistem pengurusan yang sering berubah

Sistem pengurusan perlu dikuasai oleh setiap pekerja bagi mendapatkan pengurusan yang efisien dan produktif. Andai sistem pengurusan bagi organisasi tersebut sering mengalami perubahan, kakitangan akan mengalami tekanan kerja kerana tidak memahami konsep dan bidang kuasa kerja dengan tepat dan jelas. Sudah pasti kerja akan dilakukan dalam keadaan bercelaru dan tidak tahu kepada siapa untuk dirujuk.

Ini gagal atau sering berlaku kerana kita gagal merancang dan melaksanakan satu perubahan itu tanpa memikir hanya kerana megikut arahan pihak atasan. Segala moral dan akhlak ditolak ketepi, demi mengipas atau “yes boss” atau “betulah boss”. Pentadbiran urus korporat tidak digunapakai.

Komunikasi ‘break down’

Ini adalah antara ranking tertinggi masalah yang sering berlaku di organisasi. Ada beberapa sebab berlaku masalah ini. Antaranya pihak atasan terlalu ‘bossy’ dengan kakitangan mereka. Mereka tidak mengendahkan masalah yang berlaku di peringkat bawahan, tidak ‘briefing tugasan’ dengan baik, dan banyak memberikan arahan. Peratus tertinggi ialah pihak atasan hanya memberikan arahan kepada pekerja bawahan. Bayangkan apabila komunikasi tidak berkesan bagaimana pengurusan di organisasi tersebut? Anda sendiri tentu dapat bayangkan.

Cuba keluar dari bilik yang selesa dan turun ke bahagian operasi untuk mengetahui rungutan serta luahan rasa kakitangan. Adakalanya rungutan itu adalah satu cadangan yang boleh diterima pakai. Hanya mereka yang terlibat dalam sesuatu bidang itu mengetahui isu yang sebenarnya.

Posisi kerja dan kelayakan jauh berbeza

Antara rungutan yang sering diajukan kepada saya ramai staf yang tidak dapat menguasai bidang kerja mereka dengan baik. Cuba bayangkan anda berpotensi dalam bidang IT tetapi diletakkan dalam pengurusan kewangan. Bagaimana anda ingin menjalankan kerja anda? Saya tidak mengatakan itu adalah mustahil untuk dilakukan. Cuma jika tidak ada penerangan bidang kerja dengan jelas pasti akan memberikan tekanan pada staf tersebut.

Contoh yang lain, kapasiti kakaitangan itu hanya mampu melaksanakan kerja sebagai seorang kerani tetapi dipertanggungjawabkan untuk melaksanakan kerja-kerja seorang eksekutif. Bagi individu tidak yang mengerti tentang tanggungjwab jawatan tersebut diterima sebagai tanda megah tetapi outputnya masih sama seperti yang diberikan oleh seorang kerani. Apabila kakitangfan tersebut gagal melaksanakan tugasnya sebagai seorang eksekutif, kita begitu mudah menyalahkannya.Kita sebenarnya telah menganayaikan individu tersebut.

Kurang mendapat pendedahan dan kursus

Kerja adalah satu cara menuntut output dari anda. Tetapi jika bertahun-tahun output dituntut dari seorang pekerja sedangkan dia kurang mendapat input, bagaimana situasi kerjanya? Pasti anda akan stres, kurang mahir dan juga hilang motivasi untuk melakukan kerja setiap hari. Ramai yang mengadukan hal ini kepada saya. Ada organisasi yang tidak dapat menguruskan latihan untuk staf mereka dengan baik sehinggakan ada yang bekerja 10 tahun belum pernah menghadiri kursus-kursus kemahiran kerja dan motivasi pembangunan diri.

Pengurusan secara “little napolean”

Dalam konsep lain ialah “little napolean” ialah “gila kuasa”, dimana beberapa indivisu mengadakan undang-undang kecil tersendiri didalam melaksanakan tugas dan menindaskan kakitangan bahagian yang lain atau bawahan. Situasi “syok sendiri” ini perlulah dihakiskan dan tentukan hanya arahan-arahan rasmi sahaja dikuatkuasakan.

Ataupun jika ingin mengeluarkan arahan atau teguran buatlah secara “formal” iaitu bertulis agar keputusan atau arahan tersebut boleh dirujuk dengan rasmi kepada pihak yang lebih tinggi atau bertanggungjawab.

Pengurusan secara ugutan atau ketakutan (management by fear)

Kakitangan ditakutkan dengan ugutan atau amaran yang bersifat menindas dan tidak amanah. Ini juga akan menimbulkan rasa tidak puas hati dan seterusnya mempengaruhi produktiviti syarikat.