<y> 撰寫於郵件新聞:470ea77b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> <y> 撰寫於郵件新聞:470a78c2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>> Many renovation works for the existing buildings are badly managed by
>> architects, because they do not have sufficient knowledge in structural
>> engineering to properly decide whether they should seek advice from
>> structural engineers. In fact, in some renovation projects, while some
of
>> the defects are rectified (sadly, many of them are badly rectified),
new
>> damages to the buildings are done. One reason for this is that some
>> architects want to alter the structures of the buildings without
>> notifying the structural engineers, as they consider such alterations
are
>> only ‘minor’ alterations, while, in fact, such alterations are not
>> ‘minor’. The most worrying thing is that many architects consider
that
>> they always make the correct decisions, merely because they have the
>> ‘professional status’ under law, but not because they have sufficient
>> understanding of the relevant cir***stances, in which they make such
>> decisions, and the true reasons. How can one satisfactorily resolve a
>> problem, if he does not have sufficient understanding of such problem
or
>> does not even know that such problem does exist?! Roughly speaking, the
>> architects do not have sufficient understanding of what they are doing.
>> Don't trust the architects when they assure you that they can ensure
that
>> the works would be satisfactory, because they will ****rk their
>> responsibilities and blame other consultants or contractors when things
>> go wrong. The architects can damage your buildings without realizing
the
>> significance of the damages. I know an architect who naively requests
his
>> staff to carry out structural design and checking, while his office
does
>> not even have the relevant copies of the British Standards and other
>> relevant do***ents!
>>
>> Structural engineers are involved in many renovation projects, but
there
>> are cases, in which they are only responsible for part of the works. In
>> other words, there are parts (including structural works) of the
projects
>> for which the engineers are not responsible. Some architects are making
>> use such loopholes to carry out structural alteration of the buildings
>> without notifying the structural engineers. Of course, the engineers
may
>> still turn a blind eye to such cases, even if they know them, because
>> they are not responsible for those parts of the works and they do not
>> want to offend the architects. With luck, such structural alterations
may
>> not have significant effect to the buildings. However, without luck,
the
>> long-term durability of the buildings would be adversely affected. Of
>> course, we hope that the future users would not cause further damages
to
>> the buildings, and God would prevent them from doing so. One damage may
>> not cause the immediate collapse, but two may.
>>
>> Many architects even misunderstand the role of project managers.
Roughly
>> speaking, a construction project manager is to strike a reasonable
>> balance among time, cost, quality and safety of the project and
>> environmental protection with the contribution of architects,
surveyors,
>> structural engineers, building services engineers and quantity
surveyors
>> etc.. Such architects insist that a project manager should deal with
the
>> architectural aspects of the projects. Roughly speaking, this is an
>> incorrect viewpoint, because there is no good reason for the project
>> manager to do the same job of the architect as the architectural
designer
>> in the construction team. However, the project manager is to help the
>> architect to achieve a reasonable design efficiently and to check or
>> spot-check whether the architect's decision violates the reasonable
>> constraints of time, cost, quality, safety and environmental protection
>> of the project with the contribution of other consultants. Dealing with
>> the architectural issues is a time consuming job of architects, and the
>> project manager should not use his time to do the same thing! Some
>> architects say that making decisions in architectural aspects is one of
>> the most im****tant skills of the project managers. They say so simply
>> because they want to seize project management jobs from the genuinely
>> competent people. Some architects do not make sufficient effort to
>> control the management of the main contractors. (However, they are
>> willing to spend a lot of time and resources to trick or frame their
>> employees, who have the potential to surpass themselves, to eliminate
>> them or to destroy anyone who would be against their interests.) Here
is
>> an example. Generally speaking, there is a formal organization chart
for
>> each construction project. However, architects usually fail to check
>> whether the personnel in the organization chart do really have the
>> expected authority. Indeed, in many cases, the construction companies
are
>> being controlled by people not shown in the organization charts! Of
>> course, no employee dare blow the whistle, because they do not want to
>> lose their jobs! There are ways to minimize such cases, but the
>> architects just don’t do it! While the main contractors are
undoubtedly
>> responsible for the time, cost, quality and safety of the projects and
>> environmental protection, the consultants including the project
managers
>> and architects etc. should also be responsible for the same to some
>> extend. They should at least spot-check the management practices of the
>> main contractors. Otherwise, it is more likely that it is too late to
>> find out something goes wrong and the project team and the client may
>> need to pay extra effort and/or resources to rectify the situation.
Such
>> spot-checking or ‘surprise’ checking may help to identify the
problems
>> as soon as possible so that they may be dealt with at earlier stages to
>> minimize losses. However, the architects do not even have the project
>> management skills to properly monitor and control the management
>> practices of the main contractors. It is possible to vest the
consultant
>> project managers with more power to monitor and control the management
of
>> the main contractors by incor****ating appropriate contract terms in the
>> construction contracts, but the architects and the quantity surveyors
>> etc. do not know how to do it or how to do it properly, as their
>> knowledge is insufficient. While some consultant project managers do
have
>> ways to properly monitor and control the management of the main
>> contractors, they are unable to do what they want due to limited power
>> under the construction contracts. Moreover, a project manager is to
>> remind the project team of certain issues, which the project team may
>> overlook. Architects clearly do not have the technical knowledge to
>> perform this role.
>>
>> Then, should structural engineers be team leaders of the building
>> construction projects? It may not be appropriate to say that we cannot
>> let structural engineers to lead the team. Provided the structural
>> engineers have further obtained sufficient relevant academic training
and
>> have sufficient knowledge in different areas of building construction
>> mentioned above, he may be able to become the leader. However, as most
of
>> their academic training is about structural design and calculations,
much
>> of their training and the relevant training resources are wasted, if
they
>> assume positions in construction project management. Some structural
>> engineers acting as project managers do perform some of the structural
>> design works in some projects, but usually they are working themselves
to
>> death. However, in many projects, the project managers would not have
the
>> time to carry out the structural design or checking on their own. There
>> are many cases, in which building construction projects are badly
managed
>> by civil engineers, because they do not have sufficient knowledge in
>> different areas of building construction mentioned above.
>>
>> Holders of higher certificates or higher diplomas with several years of
>> work experiences are definitely not the appropriate candidates for the
>> position of project managers, simply because their experiences are not
>> built on solid technical knowledge. Their experiences and knowledge are
>> built on sand and therefore not dependable. Some people may think that
>> several years of work experiences can replace a university degree, but
>> this is not correct. It is very unlikely that a man can become a
medical
>> practitioner without an appropriate university degree and some years of
>> relevant work experiences after he has obtained the degree. Would
anyone
>> find a surgeon without a proper university degree to perform brain
>> surgery? Many people in the construction industry without sufficient
>> academic qualifications like to use their several years of work
>> experiences to authenticate that they can assume senior positions in
the
>> industry. Their first priority is not to improve the practice of the
>> construction industry, but is to protect their own interests. The low
>> quality of the buildings in Hong Kong clearly proves that their several
>> years of work experiences are simply rubbish. For example, some Clerk
of
>> Works (COW, who are architects’ representatives) even give ‘verbal
>> instructions’ to the contractors' staff with respect to structural
>> works, of which they do not have sufficient technical knowledge.
>> Sometimes some contractors do naively follow their instructions. When
>> things go wrong or accidents occur, they simply deny that they have
given
>> such instructions! These dangerous monsters exist in many consultant
>> firms. The biggest problem is the attitude of these high cert.
monsters.
>> They tend to think that they can use their “solid experiences” to
>> replace structural calculations or verifications. Suppose a COW or a
>> project manager without sufficient academic qualifications has worked
in
>> a completed project called Project A and he works in a new project
called
>> Project B. Certain aspects of Project A may look similar to some of
those
>> of Project B. But, usually, it is unlikely that two construction
projects
>> can be exactly the same, because the buildings are built or to be built
>> at different sites, the conditions of which are also different. With
>> luck, some of his experiences in Project A may be applicable to Project
B
>> without verifications and without problems. However, sometimes the
>> differences between the site conditions of Project A and those of
Project
>> B may render some of his experiences in Project A not applicable to
>> Project B. It may be dangerous if he wrongly apply his previous
>> experiences in Project A to some areas in Project B. In many cases,
they
>> do wrongly apply their experiences and ****rk their responsibility and
>> blame others, when things goes wrong as per their ‘verbal
instructions’.
>> Many of these high cert. monsters have been working in the construction
>> industry for several years, but still they are unable to realize the
>> im****tance of acquiring knowledge in basic structural engineering and
>> learn it. As such, their quality is inherently low. Maybe they do not
>> need to learn, because they have been being able to dupe the public
with
>> their limited and unprofessional skills. There are many guys, who are
>> earning more than HK$ 30,000.00 per month in the construction industry,
>> are doing more harm than good in the construction projects. Then, are
>> their rubbish experiences completely useless? No, their rubbish
>> experiences are still useful, because their ‘solid experiences’ tell
>> them when and where they should kiss the X of their bosses, when and
>> where they have to silence themselves, when and where they can use bad
>> practice, exploiting all loop holes, and when and where they should
trick
>> or frame those genuinely competent guys, and these are what their
bosses
>> exactly wants. Corruption is a problem in the construction industry,
but
>> some incompetent people use corruption as an excuse to hide their
>> incompetence. In many many cases, technical and managerial incompetence
>> is the real cause of the problems.
>>
>> A few years ago, I saw some of the main steel reinforcement bars of a
>> reinforced concrete beam of a building was damaged because there was
not
>> sufficient space to accommodate some electrical and mechanical (E & M)
>> services. No collapse occurred for some structural reasons. Anyway,
>> obviously, this should not happen. This is the reason why the E & M
guys
>> are some of the most dangerous project managers in the construction
>> industry, because they care more about the E & M works than structural
>> safety, as they are not responsible for structural safety on the
pretext
>> that such is not their expertise! The construction industry allows the
E
>> & M guys to become project managers for reasons of giving face and
>> incentive but this is at the expense of public safety!
>>
>> Some consultants firms are competing with one another so fiercely that
>> they charge unreasonably low fees from their clients. They dare not
>> explain clearly to their clients why certain fees cannot be reduced. To
>> lower their operation costs under the pressure of low fees, they invent
>> construction contracts or ‘hidden verbal agreements’ to make the
>> contractors to carry out works, which should be carried out by the
>> consultants themselves. However, many contractors cannot carry out such
>> works properly due to their limited qualifications. Even if the
>> contractors do have the competent personnel, they do not have the
>> required resources to do the jobs. For example, many contractors do not
>> have the relevant copies of the British Standards in their offices,
>> because they are expensive. I do own some relevant copies of the
British
>> Standards, but my eyes were draining tears when I made the payment for
>> obtaining them. Only those with money can have reasonable access to the
>> relevant standards and codes. This is the hypocrisy of the British.
Some
>> consultant firms cannot maintain proper project filing system due to
>> limited income. Some irresponsible consultants, including some
>> architects, even request the project team to minimize paper works to
save
>> their time and office spaces! This is one of the reasons for the delay
in
>> the completion, cost overrun, quality problems and safety problems of
the
>> construction projects, as the communication among the project team
>> personnel are hampered by insufficient paper do***ents or badly
prepared
>> do***ents. One possible way to resolve the problem is sell their
>> Mercedes-Benz to provide more resources for improving such
communication.
>> Japanese cars are cheaper and not too bad. Admittedly, Japanese cars
are
>> more fragile than the European cars in case of crashes. However, there
>> are tons of insurance products to protect you. Don’t worry.
>>
>> Formal technical language is the ABC that any learnt man must know. One
>> of the most basic requirements for becoming a genuine professional
>> engineer or project manager is the ability to communicate in formal
>> technical language. Many accidents, claims, disputes and litigation
etc.
>> in the construction industry arise unnecessarily merely because the
>> relevant parties are unable to communicate with one another in precise
>> language! The ability to communicate precisely is particularly
im****tant
>> in cases where no one knows everything (This is true in the
construction
>> industry.), because, with such ability, the relevant parties can
properly
>> and efficiently learn and understand new things or things, with which
>> they are unfamiliar. Unfortunately, many degree holders, including
those
>> with master degree qualifications, and chartered and fellow members of
>> the professional bodies cannot even write grammatically correct
English!
>> This is one of the greatest shames of mankind at this age. Some do not
>> even understand why it is a shame. Well, universities are happy to sell
>> degrees to idiots and idiots are happy to buy degrees from the
>> universities. A perfect match! People with rubbish degrees or
>> professional qualifications, which they obtained by cheating, are now
>> packing the construction industry! The employers just want to use their
>> qualifications to authenticate their old practice. If their old
practice
>> goes wrong, those employees are to take the blame. These contractors
just
>> make use of the organization charts with flashy badges, ISO labels, new
>> big banners with safety slogans and superficial management system etc.
to
>> cover up their old bad practice.
>>
>> Universities are the first places, in which the students learn
collusion
>> by practising collusion. For example, the students’
>> dissertations/re****ts are corrected by the lecturers before they are
>> formally marked by the lecturers and the lecturers verbally instruct
the
>> students not to disclose any bad practices of the companies, in which
>> they work, or which they visited, in their dissertations/re****ts! All
>> university graduates working in the construction industry know that I
am
>> telling the truth, but, of course, none of them would be willing to
admit
>> cheating before the public! Candidates applying for becoming chartered
>> members of the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) can request
members
>> of the CIOB to correct their professional interview re****t, before they
>> are submitted to the professional interview panel. This is clearly
>> cheating. The most horrible thing is that they think this is normal and
>> are never ashamed about this. I have seen with my own eyes some senior
>> members of the CIOB corrected the draft professional interview re****ts
>> for some candidates. The corrections marked on the re****ts makes them
>> look like music books. The corrections include corrections of the
>> mistakes in their use of English. These candidates smiled shamelessly
>> when they received the corrected re****ts from the senior members and
then
>> they amended their re****ts ‘accordingly’ and submitted them to the
>> professional interview panel. Unless they can explain with good reason
>> why this is not cheating, this is clearly mass psychosis of the members
>> of the CIOB. If you think I am lying, please ask the President, the
Vice
>> Presidents and the Regional Manager of the CIOB (Hong Kong) whether I
do
>> lie. Maybe I am wrong. For any public examination, students should be
>> allowed to bring their private tutors to the examination hall!
>> `Engineers` who obtained their degrees in Mainland China are just a
joke.
>> I know many of such engineers cannot even read project do***ents
written
>> in English and they often ask their colleague to translate them into
>> Chinese. I think it may not be appropriate to call these so-called
>> engineers beggars, because they are worse. They can seize jobs from
local
>> engineers/professionals simply because of their family or clan ties
with
>> those who have the authority (which generally means big money) in the
>> industry or powerful people in Mainland China. As such, they are
actually
>> parasites, thieves and robbers. If they cannot read and write proper
>> English, they should be sent back to Mainland China and jailed.
>>
>> It is a sin to carry out professional works without the ability to
>> communicate precisely, simply because precision is required for such
>> works for public safety. No one can properly learn any professional
>> subjects without using formal technical language. As such, it should be
a
>> criminal offence to be the director or project manager of a building
>> construction company without a proper degree qualification and the
>> ability to communicate in formal technical language. However, the
>> government and legislators are lenient to many consultants and building
>> contractors, partly because they want to protect these people, who may
be
>> relatives and/or friends of the people working in the government. In
>> respect of this, we can see how man-made law fails in an ugly manner.
The
>> evil consultants, bad contractors, lawyers and legislators etc. have
been
>> colluding with one another to make bad laws to create and protect their
>> own interests and to allow their brothers, sisters, wives, sons,
>> daughters and so on, who are without sufficient academic
qualifications,
>> to work in and have power to control the operations of their
>> firms/companies. Those who are now controlling the construction
industry
>> with their financial power deliberately allow these incompetent people
to
>> survive in the industry, because they want to use these rubbish to
>> replace the genuinely competent people, who can or who have the
potential
>> to surpass themselves.
>>
>> All these bad people, like those who practise as medical practitioners
>> without proper licenses, should be jailed. The government should
quickly
>> make laws to have them jailed. If the government is not to do so, then
we
>> should allow medical practitioners to hire their girl friends,
fiancees,
>> wives, mistresses, daughters or their beloved hookers etc. as nurses,
>> even if they do not have any proper nursing training! We should be
>> reminded that the professionals such as engineers and medical
>> practitioners are able to gain their reputation, trust and authority
from
>> the public because many of them can really make use of their knowledge
in
>> science and technology to better our lives. However, some people who
have
>> obtained their professional qualifications have been making use of such
>> trust and authority to dupe the public. They do not think they are
doing
>> evil things, simply because they think they are allowed to do so under
>> man-made laws!!
>>
>> Admittedly, formal technical language may look ***bersome. Roughly
>> speaking, formal technical language must look ***bersome, because it is
>> used to describe the complexity of nature and things, which are really
>> complicated. Sometime even the most learnt men tend to be lazy or
sloppy
>> and they use less precise language to save time. However, that does not
>> mean that they do not understand how to use formal technical language!
I
>> myself sometimes avoid using formal technical language, because I am
>> lazy, but there are many cir***stances, in which use of formal
technical
>> language is unavoidable and I cannot be lazy, for professional works.
>>
>> Can Chinese be used as formal technical language? Chinese should not be
>> used as formal technical language for the time being. Roughly speaking,
>> the Chinese language structure has been being damaged (partly by naive
>> ‘scholars’ and teachers). It would take a lot of effort and pain to
>> rectify the Chinese language such that it can be used as formal
technical
>> language. Even if it can be rectified satisfactorily, it is unlikely
that
>> it is as effective as English. Of course, generally speaking, English
>> language is not perfect with respect to it being used as formal
technical
>> language. But such imperfection can be more easily rectified. However,
>> never count on the naive expatriate English teachers to do it.
>>
>> In Hong Kong, employers use their financial power to compel the
>> professionals to practise in unprofessional way. The professional
bodies
>> may argue that those professionals should blow the whistle. But this
>> cannot solve the problem. What if they silence themselves under
financial
>> pressure? Can we assume that there is no problem merely because no one
>> blows the whistle?
>>
>> There is collusion among the members of the professional bodies,
>> consultants, employers and the contractors etc.. As such, even if
someone
>> is willing to blow the whistle, they will work together to destroy the
>> relevant evidence as soon as possible. There are a number of other
>> reasons for the relevant professionals to silence themselves. First,
due
>> to the crazy high land price policy of the government, many
professionals
>> in the construction industry are losing their jobs and therefore those
>> now working in the industry do not want to offend their employers.
>> Secondly, since the universities have been producing a lot of rubbish
>> degree holders, more and more risk takers are available in the market
of
>> construction industry. Indeed, if anyone blow the whistle, they will
>> retaliate, of course, without any trace.
>>
>> The ultimate proof of the bad practice of the professionals,
supervisory
>> personnel and building contractors etc. is the low quality of the
>> completed works. In some cases, low quality works can be easily
>> identified. However, in many cases, the problems arising from low
quality
>> works would become noticeable only after, say, 10 to 20 years. Indeed,
>> some contractors can 'skillfully' cover up their low quality works or
>> damages they have done to the buildings with beautiful or luxurious
>> finishes. It would be foolish to wait for 10 or 20 years to see whether
>> we need to improve the current situation. We need to do it now by
urging
>> the government to make new laws to replace the incompetent people in
the
>> construction industry with the competent ones. Anyway, the low quality
of
>> the buildings put up in Hong Kong in the past clearly prove that the
>> construction industry has been being dominated by incompetent people.
We
>> must immediately eliminate those thieves, robbers and parasites who
make
>> use of their family or clan ties to secure their positions in the
>> construction industry. We must ensure that the competent people have
all
>> the necessary authority to rectify and control the situation and must
not
>> allow incompetent people with financial power only to control the
>> construction industry. This is the only way to properly ensure public
>> safety and protect the hard-earned income of the public!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
|
