> > Probably also included the cost of relocating the culvert(s) tied to the inlet.
>
> Maybe, but not likely, even if though, that would be a good point. The friend either has the strength of business to absorb his error or he doesnt, which I am speculating is probably the case, due to the backcharge being in dispute. You do not get very many of those errors of that proportion ( laying out an entire system in the wrong place) before you are labeled "that guy" and have "that reputation" and have to go back to land surveying.
>
> Risk? There is some, and it is not for the weak stomached, but very manageable if you are well trained and prepared. It is no where near the risk that the people have that are willing to give us $.02 on every one of their dollars just to do something that we claim to be experts in.
:good: :good:
:good:
> before you are labeled "that guy" and have "that reputation" and have to go back to land surveying.
Maybe I read it wrong but that comment seems a bit condescending the way you stated it. I am not implying this was the intent of what you were saying but I fear too many LS's see themselves as little more than 'expert measurers'. In truth, measuring properly is nothing more than a tool of our profession. As proof, take a look back on your PLS and State exams--few, if any questions required you to do math but they require you understand how to apply it. As well, construction staking is not often required to be done by an LS, even on many public works jobs and its experience cannot be used to qualify for licensure in many states.
> Risk? There is some, and it is not for the weak stomached, but very manageable if you are well trained and prepared. It is no where near the risk that the people have that are willing to give us $.02 on every one of their dollars just to do something that we claim to be experts in.
Risk is expanded beyond managing errors and into to a world of he-said-she-said whereby a contractor indiscriminately withholds $$$ from your dispersement with too few facts. Given a sub-contract that provides the surveyor little, if any, recourse or protection risk is no longer manageable but perhaps it is tolerable. Try to explain your raw data to a GC who is far too busy managing far too much minutia for one person already. You may as well be using hieroglyphs. Lets see how far you get with sending billings for extra time needed to prove yourself correct and for the time lost on other work and risk being labeled 'that guy' regardless.
If you have the desire to self insure, more power to you. My point is that there now exists a higher than reasonable risk that a surveyor will be blamed for problems beyond their control, for problems related to but not directly caused by something they did (or didn't), and for issues for which they had not fault. I have paid or refunded $ for more than my share of problems on site and when it was my fault I have done so graciously. What I take issue with, is when the GC and the concrete guy have already held a meeting and placed blame, torn up and replaced 50' of sidewalk, removed all my stakes, and sent me a bill for everyone's T/M and small tools. It is not about being worth $.02 to them (and that is what most see us being worth), it is about being worth 150%-500% of any given portion of a job to us (stake a water line for $1,200 and pay $3k to R/R a hydrant). All I am saying is that along this thread line, bid according to the risk at hand. The lower your price, the higher your risk. Soon enough you will be up against someone who is cheaper and willing to take more risk. Is that where we really want to end up or are we already there?
I wouldn't get too hung up by someone in the construction industry refering to surveying as a trade if you want the work. Construction surveying is more of a trade than a profession here by definition of our state law.
"Practice of land surveying" means assuming responsible charge of the surveying of land for the establishment of corners, lines, boundaries, and monuments, the laying out and subdivision of land, the defining and locating of corners, lines, boundaries, and monuments of land after they have been established, the survey of land areas for the purpose of determining the topography thereof, the making of topographical delineations and the preparing of maps and accurate records thereof, when the proper performance of such services requires technical knowledge and skill.
Most contractors don't give a hoot in hell if the "surveyor" who doing his work is licensed or not. All you need is plenty of insurance. If your work is per plan no worries mate.;-)
Jim
I most certainly did not mean that in a condescending way, and I whole heartedley agree that we as surveyors should not undercut the value of our services. In my opinion it is "that guy" that does that and ends up facing the reprocussions. Contractors are really pretty smart people, but like most, they have to be educated, and most of the time they learn the hard way. Eventually they do learn that the headaches "that guy" creates is not worth the savings.
