Do you feel that you have been treated badly by your contractor? If so, you are not alone. In fact, thousands of people - perhaps millions - loathe contractors. Many negative characteristics are attributed to General Contractors:
They are widely believed to be imbeciles who drop out of elementary school to smoke cigarettes and hang-out at pool halls - louts and ruffians who annoy with loud talk, poor dental hygiene and tobacco products. Others hold that contractors are grifters - outright criminals - who work tirelessly to manipulate the wallets of unwary homeowners, dashing their hopes, and leaving them without funds to complete their projects. Still others see contractors not so much as criminals, but rather as lazy, incompetent clods who are skilled only in meeting only the lowest acceptable levels of personal industry and workmanship.
Are these attributes of character unfair stereotypes or is there a kernel fo truth in them?
First, it is obvious that there are plenty of bad contractors. Some of the bad ones mean well, but they simply have no talent. When you find an excellent contractor, you will very likely find that he or she was first a superb tradesman first. Highly talented carpenters, plumbers, electricians and the like, generally make the best contractors. Their feet are firmly rooted in the trades. Those with little or no aptitude for the trades tend to make poor contractors.
Other poor contractors may be fine tradesmen, but have no business skills:
For example, a contractor may insist that his employees and subs turn out work of the highest quality, diligently attend to errors and work very hard to please his clients. But, if he is a poor estimator, projects that he believes will result in a reasonable profits may quickly slip into the red, ultimately resulting in catastrophic losses.
Still other contractors have no employees. That's right, zero employees! People are often shocked to learn that it is commonplace for general contractors to have no employees. Some press their wives or husbands into service as bookeepers, gophers and the like. But, many go it alone. The uninitiated often ask, "How is this possible? Who could possibly perform all the work associated with remodeling and building a number of homes simultaneously?" The answer is simply this: Such contractors engage subcontractors to perform every function associated with the project. This leaves the contractor to focus on obtaining permits, working with architects, processing endless reams of paperwork, managing his subs, making sales calls, marketing, estimating, preparing scopes of work and more! By going this route, he eliminates the overhead associated with hiring a solid team to perform the functions that he alone undertakes. This, in turn, makes it possible for him to tender very low bids to prospective clients. But, this tactic also places contractors who maintain strong, talented teams on their payrolls at a terrible disadvantage, even as it makes the contractor's life a very dodgy one vis a vis risk.
At Mills Builders we have come to believe that consumers are best served and recieve the highest and best value from contractors who take a team approach to their projects. We, for example, assign a Project Manager to every job and often a Superintendent as well. We have our own crew to perform many important tasks and others are performed by excellent subcontractors with whom we have longstanding relatonshps. When you work with us - and others like us - workmen will be at your home every day until the work is finished. Owners frequently complain that their contractor "disappears" for days at a time and no work at all is done for significant periods of time. That's because the contractor is using subs on multiple sites, moving them about from one job to another in an impossible effort to keep all his clients happy. The succesful operation of a full-service general contracting company is a tough, complex job. Period! We believe that it is a job that requires more than one man driving around in a pickup truck. Any other arrangement introduces unnecessary risk into an undertaking which is - by its nature - already difficult and fraught with opportunties to make costly mistakes.
At this point, readers may protest, "Hey...come off it! You know good and well that there are crooks galore who claim to be legitimate contractors. Everyone know it - why bother to deny it?
My reply is that I do not deny it. To the contrary, it is a fact. I would simply add that that there are roughly similar numbers of crooks in the remodeling and homebuilding business as there are in most other occupations. That's how I see it. There will always be crooks among us. Incompetents will always be around to foul things up for the unsuspecting consumer. That's life. No business is immune to it. There are crooked doctors who perform unnecessary operations just so they can charge a big, fat fee. Right? Lawyers? Most lawyers are hardworking, honest people - like it or not, its the truth. Most of them are NOT crooks. But, some are. They are the ones the media wants to talk about. Honest people are dull. Crooks and swindlers are interesting, newsworthy.
Finally, I would like to mention two additional reasons that go to answer the question - Why are contractors so maligned?
First, I recently heard saw a segement on CNN wherein the parties to a discussion about unemployment and labor issues discussed those sectors of the economy that will be most in demand over the next twenty years or so. I was not suprised to learn that in this country, there is a wide disparity in income between persons who work predominantly outdoors as opposed to those who work indoors. Because contractors and tradesmen often work outdoors, they are relegated to a the status of second-rate citizens by some folks. Unfortunate and unfair, but true.
That contractors are somehow cast by many as second-class citizens caused me to ask - "why?" I have a theory that the problem may be rooted (in part) in the relationship between architects and their clients. Yes, architects!
Most people are suprised to learn that architecture really did not exist as a profession separate from building until the first university studies in architecture were offered in France around latter part of last centry - that is, 1880 or 1890. (I am not certain about the precise date, but the late 1800's is pretty close). Persons attracted to the study of architecture sought to distinguish themselves from builders whose clients they hoped to obtain. They had no desire to associate with builders as colleagues or peers as it was not in their financial interest to do so. Put simply, they presented themselves as gentlemen posessed of refined artistic sensibilities, well educated, sophiticates, swells! At the same time, some (certainly not all) sought to promote the notion that builders were poorly educated rogues and certainly NOT gentlemen. The builders, they claimed, were disrespectful, de'classe', oafish, swindlers, who were out only for themselves. The architects wangled the favor of owners and, the results of this are evident today. Architects are generally held in higher regard by the public than builders.
I have no desire to insult architects. There is much about the profession I admire and I am a fan of great architecture. But, I think it is clear that the early friction between architects and builders is evident in public perception even today.
I wrote this post to point-up what I beleive to be an important issue. I certainly don't have all the answers and you might not agree with my ideas. Either way, let me know. I will be most interested to have your point of view.
See 'ya next time!
Comments