contractor – Cooper Mann Consulting

July 26, 2022

Competitive and Profitable Construction: What’s it take to get there and stay there?

The short answer is… update your operations and transform the business. It’s time to modernize and embrace the cloud.

Construction firms need to be more data-driven, analyzing and responding to conditions revealed by the various systems supporting the business operation. Turning a profit on complex projects means applying automation to manual processes and workflows, introducing more collaborative tools, and delivering real-time data to gain greater insight into the operation’s performance and profitability. The foundation for all of this is the cloud platform, extending connectedness beyond traditional boundaries.

Digital transformation and the adoption of agile and connected cloud platforms can result in productivity gains of 14 to 15 percent and reduce costs from 4 to 6 percent. These improvements are the way to address fading profits even as the pace of business increases. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/decoding-digital-transformation-in-construction

There are several factors that typically weigh down the operation and cause profits to fade. Strained IT resources is a big item for most construction companies, where technical people spend far too much time building and maintaining on-premises servers and networks. Maintaining on-premises servers adds up fast. A single IT manager can easily cost around $150,000 per year, and the “cost of cybersecurity compliance raises the price by an additional $200,000.” (5 Reasons Contractors Need to Modernize Their Operations to Stay Competitive and Profitable by Trimble Viewpoint)

Even when you factor in the costs of hardware, software and IT personnel, those costs don’t include the hidden expenses that come with the use of on-premises servers, like disconnected and siloed data that requires manual processes to use, duplicated data entry requirements (increasing the potential for human error) and more costs for labor. When you figure in all the capital costs and expenditures, on-premises solutions can cost up to four times as much as their original purchase price. On the other hand, NOOBEH cloud servers, deployed on the Microsoft Azure platform, offer reliable, cost-effective solutions to support the variety of important business applications and integrations that high-performance operations require.

NOOBEH cloud services focuses on addressing the pain points businesses have with their IT. We help businesses implement services that promote real collaboration for real use-cases, and we look for ways to connect projects and operational data so it can be analyzed to unlock greater value across the entire enterprise.

Disconnects cause inefficiency, delays, errors, and reduced productivity. Lack of insight on the labor and equipment side leads to uncontrolled resource utilization and a lack of predictability. Jobs get delayed and profits fade. Lost productivity due to duplicate entry of information is leveled at 10%-30% (or more), and these rates are not uncommon. https://www.eckerson.com/articles/hidden-costs-of-duplicate-data.

Clearly, automation, connected workflows, cloud platforms and real-time data are essentials in the transformation and improvement effort. Let in-house IT focus on activities that bring value to the business, finding ways to innovate and improve how things get done. Replace cumbersome, manual processes with software and systems that facilitate greater automation and integration, eliminating redundant data entry and improving the quality of information.

Construction projects are becoming larger and more complex, and project owners want the latest technologies, real-time reporting, and comprehensive approaches to compliance. Today, industry-leading contractors are embracing connected cloud technologies so they can scale and future-proof their businesses.

The modern contractor takes advantage of connected platforms, automation and real-time data that feeds data analysis and business intelligence… innovations only available with the cloud. That’s what NOOBEH delivers.

jm bunny feet Make Sense?

January 8, 2018

Mobile IT for Contractors and Builders (for every business, actually)

The Trend Is Up For Single-Family Housing Market

Even as lot and labor shortages and other supply side constraints continue to impact builders, and while the cost of building materials continues to rise, the demand for housing continues to increase at a fairly consistent rate. “November’s builder confidence reading is close to a post-recession high-..” NAHB Chairman Granger MacDonald said in a recent release.

Supported by rising homeownership rates and a reduced number of available homes for sale, the trend up is expected to continue.

Increased competition for new business opportunities in the building market require that home builders and developers leverage available technologies and IT resources to improve operational performance and increase the profitability of every project. Applications for better estimating, project and cost management and accounting represent the foundations for information management and supporting the flow of work.Extending workflows to embrace mobile workers and remote offices is the next step to developing an efficient anytime/anywhere business. 92 percent of U.S. construction executives believe that technology will fundamentally change their businesses, and help them bridge the performance gap, according to KPMG’s Make it, or break it – Global Construction Survey 2017 report.

Collaborating while on the go and exchanging ideas and concepts quickly helps businesses be more agile and better-able to meet changing customer needs. Remote and mobile access provides businesses with mobile office options that allow users to get their jobs done no matter where they happen to be.

Business moves at a fast pace and working smarter means implementing the right IT to keep moving up with the demand and creating sustainability for leaner times.

Make Sense?

December 2, 2015February 3, 2016

Franchise FUD: Browning-Ferris Industries, the NLRB, and Joint-Employer Status

iconic An August decision by the NLRB is likely to have a broad impact in the coming years, forcing a great deal of change in how many businesses do business. While the issue may be under the radar for some business owners, those in the franchise industry are paying very close attention – which makes sense because the ruling could easily be construed as the beginning of the end for the franchise business model. At stake are the definition of “employer” and the determination of who is really responsible for the workers.

The issue stems from a 3-2 decision by the NLRB on a case involving Browning-Ferris Industries of California. Browning-Ferris Industries is a waste management company that contracted with another company – Leadpoint – to supply employees to perform a variety of work functions. Under the NLRB ruling, it was determined that Browning-Ferris was a joint employer with Leadpoint. What is interesting in this case (and where the FUD – fear, uncertainty and doubt – come in) is that “indirect control” of the employees became the primary factor determining whether a joint employer relationship existed under the National Labor Relations Act. Going against years of precedent, the board ruled that Browning-Ferris and Leadpoint were jointly employing the workers.

In the decision, the Board applies long-established principles to find that two or more entities are joint employers of a single workforce if (1) they are both employers within the meaning of the common law; and (2) they share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment. In evaluating whether an employer possesses sufficient control over employees to qualify as a joint employer, the Board will – among other factors — consider whether an employer has exercised control over terms and conditions of employment indirectly through an intermediary, or whether it has reserved the authority to do so.

https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/board-issues-decision-browning-ferris-industries

There are many who believe Browning-Ferris is a precursor to the pending proceeding against McDonald’s Corp. in which the NLRB general counsel charges McDonald’s Corp as a joint employer of its franchisees’ employees. Possibly in response to outcries of wage inequality and fast-food worker strikes to force an increase in the minimum wage, the NLRB seems to be adjusting its definitions in favor of the movement and may inadvertently destroy the foundations of the franchise business model according to some.

Clearly the franchise business model is in the crosshairs. In an article published on Law360 by David J. Kaufmann, Breton H. Permesly and Dale A. Cohen, the authors cite from the June amicus brief on the Browning-Ferris proceeding, in which NLRB General Counsel Richard F. Griffin Jr “directly addressed and attacked franchising, claiming that it was merely an “outsourcing arrangement” and insisting that franchisors are the joint employers of their franchisees’ employees because franchisors can exert significant control over the day-to-day operations of their franchisees”. No ambiguity there.

There have always been questions when workers are classified as contractors, forcing regulatory agencies to delve into the details of the relationship to determine whether or not independence actually exists. But this decision changes things in a big way. From Unions gaining more strength in forcing contracting organizations to participate in bargaining processes, to franchise businesses electing to run only company-owned locations to minimize exposure and risk, there is likely to be some troubling times for businesses large and small in the coming months and years as the new definitions take hold.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?

here’s a shortlink to this article http://wp.me/p2hGOJ-Om

November 18, 2014December 2, 2014

Courier or Messenger as Contractor or Employee? Compliance with Department of Labor

When it comes to dealing with the Department of Labor, there is only one prudent approach: keep meticulous records and self-audit regularly. It’s not that the DOL is a particularly frightening group, but increasingly public conflicts suggesting wage theft and avoidance of employer responsibilities continue to shine a bright light on the gravely imperative nature of keeping the right records and operating within the proper constraints. It is the DOL’s persistence in the auditing of independent contractor relationships which has put a tremendous amount of pressure on businesses which operate with primarily contracted workers.

The issue is not exclusive to any particular industry, but it seems that there are numerous rich targets in the area of logistics, as recent decisions impacting FedEx and UPS reflect. Described in an MSNBC article quoting David Weil’s book “The Fissured Workplace”, the decisions supporting the DOL in the 9th Circuit “further undermine the “devolution of the proletariat” — corporate America’s ongoing effort to shed front-line, often low-wage employees through independent contracting, subcontracting, and franchising arrangements”. The two federal appellate decisions disputed FedEx’s contention that its drivers in California and Oregon were properly classified as independent contractors. While there are many situations where the argument supports fair treatment for workers who operate more as employees than contracted workers, there is an equally substantial base of business where the performers are contracted and independent and should remain free to operate as such.

One of the industries directly in the crosshairs of the Wage and Hour Division of DOL is the courier and messenger industry. Couriers and messengers pick up and deliver messages, documents, packages, and other items – generally between offices or departments within a business, or directly to other businesses or individuals – and do this while traveling by foot, bicycle, motorcycle, public transportation or private vehicle. The Bureau of Labor statistics in 2012 indicated that almost 25% of those classified as couriers and messengers were local messengers and delivery providers, and that the highest concentration of these providers is in New York.

So what’s the deal with DOL versus courier/messenger services and their clients as it relates to the “contractor independence” issue? Well, the initial approach by the DOL is often to consider the hiring authority (the client) as a Professional Employer Organization or simply as an employer. This approach is often forwarded regardless of the provider’s owner/operator status, and may be due to a lack of supporting evidence that the courier was actively soliciting additional business from other sources (which is generally not the problem of the client, but in this case could be). There is a requirement to substantiate not only the client’s position that he is not the employer, but to satisfy recordkeeping for the courier or messenger, as well, proving independence and having the necessary paperwork and proof to support the claim.

In a business where people are frequently on the move, scheduling jobs between pickups and deliveries, there isn’t a lot of time to spend filling out paperwork and getting written agreements. These folks are working even as they’re scheduling more work, and a lot of this activity is done via text or telephone while riding a bicycle. The circumstances of how this industry works makes compliance a particularly difficult task, and the DOL doesn’t have to schedule audits and compliance visits – they can approach a business at any time and request to review records, observe activities, and more.

Given the frequency of such investigations and audits, every business in the industry should be looking for a simple and foolproof solution to keeping the right paperwork and records that will support the business operator claim of independence and protect them from unnecessary cost or litigation. This is where an accounting professional or consultant may provide assistance, identifying the tools and developing the processes to ensure proper reporting and compliance with regulations on both sides of the transaction. Without the proper documentation and evidence supporting the position of the client as well as the provider (the courier/messenger), both parties may end up finding themselves in an unintentional and costly relationship.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?