Subcontractor Agreements – What Does This Mean to Subcontractors?
Doug Staebler, Custom Concrete Company, Inc., Westfield, IN
Over the past year, there has been a marked increase in the use of subcontractor agreements in residential construction. Although these agreements were used for years in commercial construction, residential contractors often operated on handshake agreements. Like it or not, those days are probably gone for good, and we must learn to operate in an environment that is increasingly legalistic and prone to litigation.
These agreements often create unreasonable obligations on subcontractors, with potentially devastating financial consequences. This article discusses the reasons for the increased use of subcontractor agreements, and what it means to subcontractors. Subsequent articles will focus more closely at indemnification clauses, as well as strategies for negotiating changes to agreements with our customers.
The biggest factor driving the use of subcontractor agreements is the surge in litigation involving homebuilders, especially those involving mold. The frequency and amount of losses create large losses for insurance companies. In an attempt to limit future losses, insurers are determined to push liability for claims on to subcontractors or suppliers. This is accomplished by a combination of tightly worded indemnification provisions combined with strict insurance requirements for subcontractors.
Many insurers stopped writing coverage for homebuilders, and now only a few markets remain for builders to obtain the insurance coverage they need. Builders fear being cancelled or non-renewed and take requests from insurers seriously. In many instances, insurers provide contracts to their homebuilder customers with orders to get them signed by all of their subcontractors. Failure to obtain signed contracts from all subcontractors can jeopardize continued coverage.
The motivation behind the use of subcontractor agreements varies significantly. Large national builders use subcontractor agreements as an important piece of an overall risk management program. In most cases, the agreements are drafted by attorneys from national corporate offices. Conversely, local builders are often given subcontractor agreements by insurance companies, with instructions to get them signed by all subcontractors. They usually had no direct involvement in drafting the agreements, and often have little familiarity with them.
Unfortunately, there are many misconceptions about these agreements and how they operate. Agreements are often long, detailed documents with lots of legal jargon that is difficult to understand. At first glance, they appear to clarify each party’s duties and obligations, and seem fairly balanced between the parties. In reality, the agreements are one-sided, written entirely to benefit the builder. Upon close examination, it is difficult to find anything in the agreement that protects subcontractors. Another misconception is that unfair contract provisions will not be enforced by the builder or by the courts. In reality, courts will generally enforce any provision agreed to in a contract, even those considered unfair or one-sided.
So what options do we have when presented with these agreements by our customers? At first glance, it appears we have little choice but to sign the agreement if we want to work for the customer.
It is difficult to find problem provisions in the agreement, let alone negotiate changes. We feel additional pressure knowing that most subcontractors simply sign the agreements as drafted. However, if carefully executed, most customers, even large national builders are open to discussion about the agreements, and will agree to reasonable changes.
It is helpful to divide contractual provision into three categories. The first are provisions that are operational in nature, such schedules, materials, supervision, change orders, and quality standards. While still important, these provisions will generally work themselves out in daily operations. If problems are encountered, they can generally be resolved in the field as they occur. Ultimately, if reasonable solutions cannot be found, and the issues are significant enough, it may not be profitable to continue working for that customer. In general, it is best to focus on other areas of the contract.
The second category involves provisions dealing with payments to subcontractors. In addition to providing for normal payment terms and procedures, there are two common provisions that pose problems for subcontractors. The first is a “No-Lien” provision. In these instances, subcontractors legally waive their right to file mechanics liens. Builders have valid reasons for seeking these provisions, but we should use extreme caution in agreeing to waive lien rights. An alternative solution is an agreement to reinstate lien rights if certain conditions and delinquencies arise.
Another problem provision is the “pay when paid clause”. These provisions are commonly found in commercial projects, and state that the general contractor (builder) has no obligation to pay subcontractors until the general contractor is paid by the owner. In essence, our payments are dependent on the owner, and we may have little or no contact with them, and no knowledge about their financial status. Additionally, we will suffer from any dispute between the owner and general contractor.
The third category involves indemnification clauses, and other provisions dealing with construction defects, personal injuries, and other liabilities. These provisions are potentially the most severe, and impose substantial and unreasonable obligations on subcontractors. This area will be more fully discussed in the next article.
As our businesses grow, greater amounts and net worth are needed to sustain and operate the business. Unfortunately, the equity in our businesses is at risk to litigation or other claims. These agreements are simply too important to ignore. But if we approach them correctly, there is a surprising ability to make necessary changes to the agreements.
Building Officials Announce Change in Pressure Treated Lumber Materials
Ohio, as well as other states, recently warned residents and the building industry to be aware of the lumber, anchors, and fasteners used on their construction projects. The preservative-treated lumber used for the last 60 years was deemed unusable because it contains arsenic. It was replaced with a new preservative-treated lumber that contains a chemical commonly used with treated lumber.
Until recently, the most common chemical used in the pressure treatment of wood was Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA-C). Effective Dec. 31, 2003, the treated wood products industry voluntarily agreed to cease the production of CCA-C wood for residential and consumer use. This action responded to concerns about the arsenic levels in the wood. As such the primary type of pressure treated wood now available is Alkaline Copper Quat (ACQ). Testing conducted by Simpson Strong-Tie has shown that ACQ is more corrosive to steel than CCA-C.
“This is a public safety issue and the public needs to understand that if they use the old anchors, bolts and screws with the new pretreated wood, a danger exists that the anchors will corrode and could cause the deck or other structural elements to collapse,” said Joe Busch, Ohio Chief Building Official. There are two types of anchors that can be used. Hot dipped galvanized or stainless steel will hold up when used with the new lumber. Dissimilar metals in contact with each other will corrode and possibly lead to failure. Also, all fasteners must match connectors, galvanized with galvanized or stainless with stainless.
Production of the CCA preservative-treated lumber stopped earlier this year and a new ACQ preservative-treated lumber is currently being sold at home improvement stores and lumberyards.
“It is imperative to purchase the proper connecting materials in order to avoid a potentially serious problem,” said Busch.
HOW DOES THIS AFFECT THE INDUSTRY?
Jim Baty, the CFA technical director, says this topic has become a significant issue because the change in connection type increases the unit costs on the project and the result is often a conflict between the foundation contractor and builder. The end result is rising costs of residential construction.
Subcontractors, Beware! Your Assumptions Can Cost You
One of the most dangerous words in the English language for subcontractors is “assume.” For example, do you assume that your company will be reimbursed for costs incurred as a result of project delays caused by another subcontractor on a project or by the general contractor? If the subcontract document doesn’t say it and the general contractor is not specifically obligated to do so by the general conditions, you assumption probably will leave you paying for de-and re-mobilization cost, and other costs, out of pocket! Without sound planning this and many other assumptions are, well, just that – assumptions without basis in fact. And they can cost you.
The American Subcontractors Association’s (ASA) white paper, “What’s NOT ‘In’ the Contract,” gives real-life examples of where courts have issued conflicting opinions on what the general contractor is responsible for when the subcontract document is silent on an issue. In some cases, courts have found that the general contractor is responsible for when the subcontract document is silent on an issue. In some cases, courts have found that the general contractor is responsible for subcontractor’s costs. Other courts have come to the opposite conclusion. The white paper points out several examples of common dangerous assumptions for contractors:
• The general contractor will provide facilities and storage areas onsite: stairways; security for equipment; adequate parking; and access to toilets, electricity and lighting.
• The general contractor must properly schedule and coordinate work so that the subcontractor can complete its work according to the project schedule.
• The general contractor must pay for changes in work that result form schedule changes.
• Someone else (i.e. the owner or general contractor) is responsible for providing property insurance in the work area.
The point of examining such assumptions is to discover how best to ensure that you, as a subcontractor, have properly anticipated your responsibilities and costs for each project.
ASA’s white paper looks at different options, including asking general contractors to clarify, in writing, the meaning of language describing the project requirements; conditioning bids and contracts with language describing the project requirements; conditioning bids step-by-step to identify assumptions reflected in cost estimates. One particularly useful resource for identifying assumptions is the “Guideline on Site Logistics” developed by ASA, the Associated General contractors (AGC) of America, and the Associated Specialty Contractors. The guideline is publicly available online.
In addition, the white paper compares and contrasts the subcontractor’s responsibilities under model subcontract documents published by AGC, the American Institute of Architects, and the Design-Build Institute of America.
For more information, visit ASA’s Web site and click on “Stand Up! ForSubcontractors” or call ASA at (703) 684-3450.
Why all Poured Wall Contractors Should be Members
The CFA is a great group of men and women who are dedicated to the advancement of foundation contractors and the industry in which we work. Some are just starting up companies, while others have been around for years, some member companies are huge while others are very small, some appear tremendously organized and experienced, while others are, well, more like mine. We all share the same goals; we want this Industry to be one that can provide us a decent living, and our products to be in demand from our customers. Whether or not we have inspirations to grow into a “Mega” corporation, we do want our businesses to be the best that they can be. The CFA helps us do that.
We all fight the same dragons: competition, cash flow, profitability, employee retention, restrictive building codes, form theft, business succession, cold weather, hot weather, the list goes on and on. By working together we can solve, or at least minimize, these problems, share ideas, and strengthen the industry as a whole.
The CFA also helps us change our industry. As CFA executive director Ed Sauter discusses on page # , our representation on several code and regulatory bodies ensures that our concerns as foundation contractors are addressed. We could not do this on our own. By being a CFA member, you have joined other contractors to create an industry voice to make changes on a national level. CFA works hard to help its members on a local level as well. If you are having difficulties with codes in your area, don’t hesitate to call CFA. We can make a difference.
Events such as the Summer and Winter Meetings, provide opportunities for us to come together from across the United States and Canada, to enjoy and learn from one another. At the Summer Meeting, and the newly formed regional meetings (starting Spring 2005), we have the chance to network with other contractors and suppliers, but we also have educational opportunities to improve our business skills. I greatly encourage you to attend the Winter Meeting at the World of Concrete in January. The complimentary registration is on page 12. And you can’t miss the Summer Meeting in San Francisco, CA in July. It is CFA’s 30th anniversary – such a milestone should not go unrecognized. It is because of us, the membership, that CFA continues to grow and succeed. This celebration is for us.
There are several of you who have not renewed your membership this year – your time is running out. If you aren’t certain what CFA is doing for you, then call the Talia Nelson, CFA Director of Member Services, and voice your needs. CFA is here for you, but it cannot fill needs that are not voiced. Your involvement is crucial to the successof the CFA. The stronger our voice, the more we can accomplish. You need the CFA, the CFA needs you! n
Terry Lavy, CFA President, Lavy Concrete Construction Inc. terry@lavyconcrete.comBuilding Codes – We can make a difference.
The CFA has been involved in the development of building codes for nearly ten years, beginning with its effort to add input to the ACI Residential Code. The CFA has also been a participant in the ACCS, the Alliance for Concrete Codes and Standards, a group of allied associations that meets biannually to review and propose code modifications to the IRC and IBC.
Code development and modification is a long and often frustrating process. It is never as simple and straightforward as it might seem. While the final decisions for the IRC are made by building officials, there are many competing special interest groups that want to influence the codes in their favor. These interests include masonry, lumber, and manufacturing – all groups with significantly more funding and personnel than the concrete industry – but we can make a difference. These groups are active at the local level in addition to the national level.
A case-in-point is a recent code change in Ohio. Special interests had enacted a code change which prohibited the use of cast-in-place foundations – yes, prohibited their use!! The change went far beyond slanting the code in favor of another building type – in this instance, concrete masonry. The CFA and Ohio Ready-Mixed Concrete Association joined forces to have this provision overturned.
A second initiative, still pending, is the effort of NRMCA and CFA to have separate tables in the IRC for concrete masonry and poured walls. The current (2003) edition of the IRC treats CMU and CIP concrete the same if reinforcement is used when in fact, for the same wall thickness and reinforcement, CIP concrete has more strength. The outcome of this battle is uncertain. A change is submitted to the IRC in writing and after review by the code development committee, it recommends acceptance or rejection. The proponents and opponents have approximately two minutes to state their case at the final action hearings, after which a vote of building officials is taken. We’ll let you know the outcome. This is the first (but not the last) time that the CFA has proposed code modifications.
The final effort is the most comprehensive step in which the CFA participated. The ACI 332 Residential Standard has been nearly ten years in the making. It has just completed the public review period and the 332 Committee hopes to resolve the final differences at the October meeting in San Francisco. Once approved by ACI, the final step will be to ask the IRC to include the 332 Standard either by incorporation or by reference. That process is also lengthy as code modifications are only considered twice within each three-year period.
While the process of providing input to code development is frustrating, lengthy, and often unsuccessful, it is still an effort worth making. Codes are a necessary and positive influence on construction but only by continual vigilance can we ensure that they are fair to all concerns.
Ed Sauter, Executive Director, CFA
esauter@cfawalls.org
Change in Lumber Affects Contractors
New preservative treated lumber requires new fasteners, bolts and anchors for most building applications.
Ohio, as well as other states, recently warned residents and the building industry to be aware of the lumber, anchors, and fasteners used on their construction projects. The preservative-treated lumber used for the last 60 years was deemed unusable because it contains arsenic. It was replaced with a new preservative-treated lumber that contains a chemical commonly used with treated lumber.
“This is a public safety issue and the public needs to understand that if they use the old anchors, bolts and screws with the new pretreated wood, a danger exists that the anchors will corrode and could cause the deck or other structural elements to collapse,” said Joe Busch, Ohio Chief Building Official.
There are two types of anchors that can be used. Hot dipped galvanized or stainless steel will hold up when used with the new lumber. Dissimilar metals in contact with each other will corrode and possibly lead to failure. Also, all fasteners must match connectors, galvanized with galvanized or stainless with stainless.
Production of the CCA preservative- treated lumber stopped earlier this year and a new ACQ preservative-treated lumber is currently being sold at home improvement stores and lumberyards.
“It is imperative to purchase the proper connecting materials in order to avoid a potentially serious problem,” said Busch.
Construction Materials in Short Supply
As the construction season heats up for the summer, the economy improves and slow construction starts begin to turn around, report s are indicating possible cement shortages. In Florida, ready mix companies are on four-day-a-week allocations and California and other U.S. markets are also on or headed toward allocations. The domino effect is that demand is passed outside markets to meet local demand, creating shortages in other local markets.
Several factors converged to create tight supplies of cement, the key ingredient in concrete, and Minnesota will not escape the impact during the 2004 construction season. Strong construction markets exist in the U.S. and overseas. Construction spending reached an all time high in March 2004 according to the U.S. Department of Commerce. An unusually active winter for construction in the U.S. left little opportunity to build a strong inventory for spring when construction activity traditionally increases.
The short-term solution used to meet our local supply needs is to import foreign cement. In the past several years, approximately 25% of the cement consumed in Minnesota came from overseas. We are not alone. According to figures from the U.S. Geological Survey, 2003 U.S. Portland cement consumption was 107.5 million metric tons. Of that total, 23.2 million tons or 22.6 percent was imported cement.
The booming Asian economies have let to an increased local demand for the foreign-produced cement that was filling the gap in our domestic production. In addition, the demand for all consumer good in Asia and other parts of the world has put a strain on the availability of transport ships and caused shipping rates to escalate. These factors have caused imported cement to become more expensive and difficult to acquire.
The length and severity of the shortages of cement in the U.S. depends on the region and on the cement companies serving that region. To me the increased demand, cement companies plan to expand manufacturing capacity totaling more that 15 million tons between 2003 and 2010. Zoning laws, permits activity, and regulatory roadblocks have long been a problem for heavy industries such as cement and will continue to limit the actual realized amount of expansion.
While there is guarantee of market certainty, some analysts are predicting further volatility throughout the year as seasonal cycles for construction continue. The fluctuating price of raw materials has resulted in a commercially impractical situation where suppliers of raw materials cannot reliably anticipate materials costs. However, it should also be noted that the price of concrete products has been and will continue to be among the most stable of all construction products.
The goal of the ready mix industry is to serve the state of Minnesota with an adequate and steady supply of concrete. Local ready mix concrete producers will continue to be the best source of information for current market conditions and its impact on concrete supplies.
For more information, please call Fred Corrigan, Executive director, Aggregate & Ready Mix Association of Minnesota at 952-707-1250.
For additional information, visit http://www.cement.org/pca/shortageQA.asp.
MTSU Unveils Degree in Concrete Construction
Where does one go to learn how to run a concrete construction business? Not the nuts and bolts of building a footing or wall, those are still best taught on-the-job. I’m talking about finance, estimating, managing personnel, marketing… the things that can make or break a business even if you pour the best wall in town. Sadly, the options are few. You can learn the way most contractors do – from their boss (who is often a parent) or from the School of Hard Knocks. There is a new, attractive alternative.
Situated 30 miles southeast of Nashville, Tennessee, in the quiet (relatively quiet) city of Murphreesboro, is Middle Tennessee State University. A rapidly growing university, MTSU is home of the nation’s only four-year bachelors program in Concrete Industry Management (CIM). Launched in 1996, this program provides a well-rounded, yet focused, education for management personnel in the concrete industry. This year, the total enrollment is estimated at 300 full-time students and MTSU’s 100th CIM student will graduate.
CIM is offered by the Engineering Technology and Industrial Studies Department in the College of Basic and Applied Sciences. This program attracts students from over 20 states, Beliz and Guatemala and its graduates are employed in over 17 states.
Until recently, the program was designed to prepare graduates for entry in areas such as the ready-mix industry, supplier industries, admixtures and chemicals, and concrete plant and manufacturing operations. In the fall, the University’s CIM program will be the first to offer a concentration with coursework focused on concrete contracting.
The new Concrete Contracting concentration in the CIM program is flexible in terms of its ability to accommodate students. Candidates can attend directly out of high school or they can obtain their degree while employed. Second year CIM students intern to gain supervised, practical work experience in their particular field of interest within the industry. CIM is working to accommodate nontraditional students who already have jobs but want to broaden their education. The first two years of concrete coursework will be available by correspondence by 2005. Students can attend a nearby community college or university and complete their general studies and business courses, along with the concrete correspondence coursework. This will allow working students to finish their degree with one or two years of fulltime study on campus.
General required courses include English Literature, writing and research courses, history, math courses (i.e. algebra and trigonometry), sciences (i.e. geology and chemistry), economics and psychology. Requirements for the minor in business administration include accounting, management, marketing business law, and finance courses. Concrete coursework includes industry courses, blueprint reading, fundamentals of concrete, materials and methods, concrete problems, and other concreterelated courses.
The concrete contracting concentration adds site planning, layout and preparation, formwork design and computerized drafting, concrete project estimating, advanced concrete project management, design and construction issues, concrete contracting personnel management, field management and supervision.
There are numerous individuals whose vision and tireless effort created this Program but it would not have been a success without the insight and guidance of Austin Cheney, the program Director, Dr. Heather Brown (formerly Heather Sauter – but no relation to Ed), the first tenure-track faculty hired for the program, and Debbie Londre, Marketing & Recruiting Coordinator. Staff was added as the program grew and now includes Joe Fulks, a full-time instructor, and two new tenuretrack faculty to begin in fall, 2004. The staff and steering committee for the CIM program have their sights set even higher. In the next two years, they plan to expand the program, using the MTSU success as a model, to one or two additional universities in the United States. The steering committee also supports the development of a Masters Degree program for Business Management, with an emphasis on concrete. Future plans also include creation of a separate department at MTSU and eventually construction of CIM’s own building (concrete of course).
The CIM program is also unique because it is supported, in great part, by private industry. Yearly tuition at MTSU is less than $4,000 for in-state and for 12 southeastern states in the Academic Common Market, and less than $12,000 for those who must pay out-of-state rates. To help offset the cost of attending college more than 15 scholarships are available each year and supported by companies and associations throughout the country. A support group called the CIM Patrons, which consists of representatives from industry manufacturers, concrete associations, and other interested parties, provides guidance, funding, and most importantly, job opportunities for graduates. The Program has the full support of the University from the college dean through the president and it receives high praise form the industry and graduates alike.
CIM offers an excellent opportunity for contractors to hire quality, well-rounded, and knowledgeable people to help run businesses. Educating those already employed by your company is also feasible with the remote learning option of the program. For more information, contact Austin Cheney at acheney@mtsu.edu. For general information about the program, visit www.mtsu.edu/~concrete.
CFA Announces 2004 Basement of the Year
Wendy Ward, Constructive Communication
Today’s homeowners are constantly pushing the envelope to ensure their home meets their needs, which has caused concrete foundation professionals to respond with inventive techniques and employ new technologies. Such is the case with the Concrete Foundations Association (CFA) 2004 Basement of the Year competition (sometimes referred to as the Basement from Hell competition). The 2004 winner overcame rocky site conditions and a complex design to ensure that the homeowners received the home of their dreams.
According to Ed Sauter, executive director of CFA, the Basement of the Year competition enables foundation contractors to display the wide range of projects completed today. “The technological advancements made in the poured wall industry allow contractors to complete complex projects more efficiently, which ensures homeowners’ dreams are realized,” said Sauter. “Each year the projects submitted to this competition get more complicated and demonstrate the diversity afforded through poured wall foundations.”
The winning structure is a more than 4,000-square-foot basement for a 7,000-square-foot home in Newburgh, N.Y. The foundation boasts a circular front porch, brick ledge around the perimeter and 39 corners that are at a 45-degree angle. Adding even more complexity to the project, there were a variety of wall and ledge elevations.
According to Van Smith, President of Smith Bros. Concrete Contractors, Inc., the foundation contractor for the project, the other foundation contractors in the area did not even quote this project because of its degree of difficulty. “I have been in this business for more than 29 years and this is most challenging project that I have encountered,” said Smith. “The architect even commented that he did not think it was possible to do the job, which made us determined to tackle this tough project successfully.”
The recipient of the Basement of the Year competition is selected by a vote at the World of Concrete each year. More than 120 votes were cast this year between Tuesday and Thursday in the CFA booth. The formal award presentation is made at the Awards Banquet Luncheon during the CFA’s Annual Summer Meeting held at the Beaver Run Resort in Breckenridge, Colo on Friday, July 16, 2004.
Smith Bros. began working with the owner and architect in the fall of 2002 on the complex project. Before construction commenced, the foundation team uncovered a four-inch error in the architect’s plan they were able to correct. Smith Bros. inputted the architect’s print into their Trimble® LM80, which alerted them of the discrepancy. An example of the innovative technologies that foundation contractors employ, the LM80 is a layout manager construction software program that attaches to the Total Station and electronically lays out a project. This ensures precision accuracy on every project, no matter how complex. Exactness was even more critical on this project because the layout for the excavation, footers and wall were conducted as three separate evolutions.
This job would not have been feasible without the Total Station,” said Smith. “With this technology, I am as confident in my 21-year-old son’s ability to layout the project accurately as I am my own, even though I have considerable more experience than him. My crew that has been on the job for more than 25 years waits for him to arrive before beginning layout, because they recognize the tremendous value that these new technologies bring to a project.”
With more than 605 lineal feet of wall, the project required 232 yards of concrete. Smith Bros. supervised the excavation to ensure that it met their requirements. Walls were formed and poured in eight days. The site made it difficult to maneuver panels around the site and the rough terrain created hardships in squaring out the job.
“It was difficult to see all the points for layout from one spot, so we had to create numerous control points to help us layout the job properly,” said Smith.
To add one more challenge to this project, foundation forming occurred during the hottest two weeks of the summer with temperatures in excess of 90-degrees Fahrenheit. “With both the complexity and the temperature, we knew that we truly were constructing the ‘Basement from Hell’ with this project,” said Smith.
Smith Bros. Concrete Contractors, Inc. has served the Lower Hudson Valley area of New York for more than 29 years. Experienced with both residential and commercial construction, Smith Bros. has completed more than 5,000 projects. They have been a member of CFA for four years.
The benefits of poured concrete walls include greater fire resistance because the increased density and joint-free construction offers twice the resistance when compared to a hollow core block wall, resistance to rot and decay, water tightness, design flexibility and ease of maintenance.
For more information on the CFA, attending the Summer Meeting and entries for the 2005 competition visit the Association’s website at www.cfawalls.org, contact the headquarters at 319-895-6940 or send an email to info@cfawalls.org.
From the Executive Director
The Concrete Foundations Association Board of Directors and several members met in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on Friday, April 16th for a strategic planning session to chart a course for future growth of the CFA. The most recent meeting of similar scope occurred in 1998. Membership in the CFA is at a record high of 347 members (261 contractor members) but for the past four or five years the number of members has slightly grown.
The debate during the daylong meeting included discussions as to how we overcome the “good ole boy” stigma (this is hardly an accurate description); whether or not we truly represent the industry; to whether or not we really want to grow. The consensus of the board was that we should be the representative of the poured wall industry. Some estimates put the total number of potential contractor members in the thousands. If this is truly the case, a total contractor membership of 261 members hardly constitutes a good representation.
We are extremely proud of our existing members. When CFA members spoke at ACI code development meetings over the past years telling of how contractor members perform their work, many of the ACI committee members echoed that they wished foundation contractors in their area were members of the CFA. Therein lies the constant challenge. How do we get members to join the CFA if they are not involved in our national activities?
We think we finally have the answer. The national CFA was approached, almost simultaneously, by two groups in different parts of the country who either had, or were planning, local poured wall associations. Both would like the national CFA to add programming, publications, and many of the other benefits.
The Board of Directors approved the development of local Chapters to the CFA. Local chapter members will have all benefits of CFA national members and the CFA will develop programs and support the efforts of the local group. Many details have yet to be worked out but the first two CFA affiliates, Minneapolis and Atlanta, could pave the way to make the CFA a truly national representative association.
