Claims

Loss of Productivity

Ahmed Ibrahim PE
Planning Expert
Claims
Claims Management azain.pbc@gmail.com

1- Introduction.

In the construction realm, the claims relevant to cost and loss productivity quite often
fail as a reason for a deficiency of contemporaneous records. Most of the times claims
are accompanied by hard bargaining. And contemporaneous project documents must
be submitted with a claim to substantiate the said claim. The most challenging aspect
of a construction project is to deploy and manage the labor at the jobsite in an effective
way to avert the loss of productivity.

One common issue that we see in relation to records is when there is little or no record
to support a particular claim that is being made. The most common issues that we
encounter in records, including those related to progress and that have actually been
produced partly or fully, are as follows:

1. Actual activity starts and finish dates and stated progress %’s not supported
by records.
2. Changes (e.g., to logic and durations) were made to programme when
updating.
3. Inaccurate and overstated progress reporting.
4. Progress not recorded against an approved programme;
5. No contemporary records of labor productivity.
6. Missing information in progress reports (e.g., activity location)
7. A reluctance to produce actual cost records.
8. Over-reliance on letters rather than primary records.
9. Multi-topic correspondence.
10. Inconsistent and conflicting records.
11. Illegible documents.
12. Undated photographs, without location information (e.g., floor level).
13. Inadequate document management and control systems.
14. Incomplete or inaccurate document registers; and
15. Disputed record attributes e.g., not approved, not an “original”, not signed.

SCL, 2017. Society of construction law Protocol. s.l.:s.n.

SCL, n.d. s.l.:s.n.

Thomas, R., 2008. Delay Analysis in Construction Contracts. s.l.:Blackwell Publishing.

Claims Management azain.pbc@gmail.com

2- Mechanisms are used to evaluate labor Productivity.

There are numerous methods to evaluate labor productivity, measured mile is one of the
preferred techniques perceiving labor productivity. This article discusses an actual claim
scenario by applied measured mile technique.

Construction Labor Hour Productivity.

Productivity case studies of a project (A)

The analysis has been established to compare the level of productivity achieved in areas or
periods of the works impacted by identified disruption events with productivity achieved on
identical or like activities in areas or periods of the works not impacted by those identified
disruption events.

1st Scenario, the contractor has executed 10000 EA brick walls on 19 working days with
1350 Man-hours.

Activity ID Activity Description Actual Start Actual Finish Working (D)

VC-152-100 Installing brick walls 1-April-24 22-April-24 19 W-D

The task /Activity has been executed on 19 working days. And the team worked without any
disruption and the predecessor’s activities finished on time and successors activities have
started on time without any delays.

Actual Handcount
12

10

0
Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day- Day-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Handcount 5 7 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 9 8 8 7 5 4 4 4 3 3

SCL, 2017. Society of construction law Protocol. s.l.:s.n.

SCL, n.d. s.l.:s.n.

Thomas, R., 2008. Delay Analysis in Construction Contracts. s.l.:Blackwell Publishing.

Claims Management azain.pbc@gmail.com

2nd Scenario, the contractor has executed 10000 EA brick walls on 24 working days with
1600 Man-hours.

Activity ID Activity Description Actual Start Actual Finish Working (D)

VC-153-100 Installing brick walls 12-April-24 10-May-24 24 W-D

The task /Activity has been executed on 24 working days. And due to the piece meal of
design and drawings suspension the crew efficiency has been disturbed.

Frequent design changes during the constructions had disrupted the workflow, lead to
rework, and extended the activity timeline.

Actual Handcount
12

10

0
Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da
Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da Da
y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y- y-
y-1 y-2 y-3 y-4 y-5 y-6 y-7 y-8 y-9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Disruption Period 5 7 8 9 9 10 9 6 6 9 3 8 8 7 4 4 5 8 3 3 3 3 3 3

Disruption VS NON Disruption

12
10
8
6
4
2
0

Disruption Period NON-Disruptive Period

SCL, 2017. Society of construction law Protocol. s.l.:s.n.

SCL, n.d. s.l.:s.n.

Thomas, R., 2008. Delay Analysis in Construction Contracts. s.l.:Blackwell Publishing.

Claims Management azain.pbc@gmail.com

3-Analysis of man-hours and productivity in affected or disrupted period.

The performance index or productivity factor (PF) of labor is then calculated.

in the same way as in the Earned Value Costing method.

Achieved man-hours during the period.

PF =
Achieved man-hours during the Impacted Period

Actual man-hours expended during the period = 1600 MHR

Planned (or achieved) man-hours during the period = 1350 MHR

Achieved man-hours during the period, 1350MHR.

PF = 0.84
Achieved man-hours during the Impacted Period, 1600MHR.

that is, for every 1.0 man-hour worked, 0.84 man-hour's value of work.
was produced, in the disruption period.

Here Causes of disruption and loss of efficiency. (Thomas, 2008)

• Inaccurate detailed drawings

• Rework/corrective work
• Ripple effect of multiple changes
• Delayed or hindered access
• Adverse weather (usually severe)
• Environmental conditions
• Crew overloading/crowding
• Out of sequence working
• Learning and ‘un-learning’ curves (learning curves repeated)
• Fatigue (overtime/shift working)
• Dilution of supervision
• Stacking of trades in confined space
• Repeated learning cycles or curves
• Out of sequence access to work faces
• Congestion at work faces (confined space, confusion, safety hazards)
• Stacking of trades (activities, accomplished concurrently)
• Increase in labor gangs or labor force (above optimum levels)
• Increase in shifts
• Out of sequence working or changes in sequence of works (based

SCL, 2017. Society of construction law Protocol. s.l.:s.n.

SCL, n.d. s.l.:s.n.

Thomas, R., 2008. Delay Analysis in Construction Contracts. s.l.:Blackwell Publishing.

Claims Management azain.pbc@gmail.com

4-Conclusion

To conclude, this article discussed the cornerstones of the analysis of disruption claims, especially loss of
productivity. And disruption claims allow contractors to seek financial compensation for the additional
costs incurred due to unforeseen disruptions. This can include costs associated with extended project
durations, increased labor, additional materials, and equipment usage.

And the article proved that comprehensive record-keeping is vital for substantiating claims and can be
beneficial for post-project evaluations, audits, and in the event of legal proceedings.

Ahmed Ibrahim, PE, PMP, PMISP

Dynamic and results-oriented Planning Manager with over 12 years

of experience in the field of project planning and management.
Proven track record of successfully overseeing complex projects
from inception to completion, optimizing resources, and ensuring
timely delivery within budget constraints. Adept at utilizing advanced
planning tools and techniques to streamline processes and enhance
project efficiency. Excellent leadership, communication, and critical
thinking skills, with a strong focus on achieving organizational goals.

SCL, 2017. Society of construction law Protocol. s.l.:s.n.

SCL, n.d. s.l.:s.n.

Thomas, R., 2008. Delay Analysis in Construction Contracts. s.l.:Blackwell Publishing.