How to Stop Cheating On
Industrial-Floor Joint Filling
Identify and discourage cheaters—because
when the installer cheats, everyone else loses
BY STEVEN N. METZGER
heating on floor joint filling
has reached epidemic proportions. Some call cheating petty larceny, but it’s really grand theft, with an impact far
beyond the cost of the original jointfilling contract amount. Improperly
filled joints result in chipped,
spalled concrete floors—and that
hurts facility owners, architects, engineers, general contractors, and
concrete contractors. Although it’s
almost impossible to shut down an
experienced, determined cheater,
C
knowing a little about their motivation and methods can go a long way
toward reducing cheating. Let’s examine why installers cheat, how
much money they can make, and
how to best deter them.
Why Installers Cheat
To understand the temptation to
cheat, all you have to do is look at the
profit potential on a typical project.
Let’s take, for example, a job that
calls for the filling of 15,000 lineal
feet (lf) of 3⁄16 x11⁄4-inch joints, using a
$45-per-gallon epoxy filler. An ethical and unethical installer both bid
the project using the same figures:
Labor:
15,000 lf @ 600 lf/day
= 25 days @ $400/day
= $10,000
Material:
1 5 , 0 0 0l f @ 70lf/gallon
= 215 gallons epoxy @ $45/gallon
= $9,675
A legitimate bid is $19,675.
The dishonest installer, however,
sees an opportunity to make a
killing, so he bids $18,000. He gets
the contract—underpriced at
$18,000—and decides he can cut
corners and perhaps even get by
with substituting a cheaper material without authorization. His actual
estimate uses the following figures:
Labor:
15,000 lf @ 900 lf/day
= 17 days @ $400/day
= $6,800
Material:
15,000 lf @ 140 lf/gallon
= 107 gallons @ $30/gallon
= $3,210
The joint edges have severely spalled, yet the filler in the upper part of the photo
appears to be adequate. The installer placed the filler only 58⁄ inch deep, over both
debris and backer rod. The filler was then driven down into the void below by
hard-wheeled traffic, exposing the joint edges to damage.
The dishonest installer’s expenses
are $10,010; his profit, $7,990, is almost half of the $18,000 contract.
But is the outrageously high profit margin worth the risks for the dishonest installer? The answer is yes.
He reasons that even if he gets
caught on a few defective joints, he
can afford to correct them because
of the huge potential profit. He figures that most of the defects won’t
show up until after the owner has
moved in. By that time, the owner’s
focus will be on his business operations, not the floor.
The general contractor should be
concerned. Since his primary function is to oversee all work performed, he’ll share the blame if the
cheating is discovered. And if the
installer’s retainage doesn’t provide
adequate incentive to get him to return to the job, the general contractor could end up performing the
corrections or paying someone else
to do the repairs. In many cases, the
general contractor’s entire retainage may be held until all corrections and repairs are adequately
performed. But is the general contractor concerned? Maybe not. He
may be delighted because he’s getting a $19,675 job for $18,000—allowing him to pocket the extra
$1,675. But the games will begin
once the cheater swings into action
on the jobsite.
How Installers Cheat
Like dishonest installers everywhere, the cheater has decided to
employ some of the most common
tricks of the trade (for more, see the
sidebar on page 473). All reflect the
cheater’s primary goals: to reduce
labor and material costs.
Since the job is fast-track, our
dishonest installer requests—and
re c e i ve s — p e rmission to work
nights. The general contractor
agrees because it will help keep the
schedule on-track. But by working
off-hours the cheater knows he
probably won’t be watched—providing him ample opportunity to
pull his dirty tricks.
By raking just the top 1⁄2 inch of
the cut and leaving up to 3⁄4 inch of
residue such as saw laitance and
debris in the joint, the dishonest installer reduces his pre p a ra t i o n
costs by 50%. As expected, he now
needs only 107 gallons of epoxy
filler, not the 215 in the contract. If
there isn’t enough debris in the
joint, he can sweep in additional
d e b ri s, add sand, or even insert a
compressible backer rod at shallow
depth. He may also add silica sand
or stone dust to the epoxy to bulk it
up and prevent it from filling the
entire joint depth. Besides cutting
material costs, these methods lower his labor costs, since the crew
has to mix and dispense only 107
gallons of epoxy filler, not 215.
Another easy way for him to cut
material costs is to substitute a
cheaper epoxy, a trick that’s especially easy if the dishonest installer
works at night. On this job, the
cheater buys epoxy for $30 per gallon rather than $45, but submits
data for the specified product. In
case anyone questions him, he has
WHAT JOINT FILLERS DO
Most floor slabs have joints. Joints control anticipated shrinkage
cracking and terminate placement sequences. But the creation of
joints also interrupts what should be a smooth, continuous sur face.
The joints thus become impact points for the hard wheels of materialhandling vehicles.
The primary function of a joint filler in an industrial floor is to eliminate interruptions and restore the floor’s surface continuity. The goal is
to refill the joint rather than just seal it. Refilling is best accomplished
by installing a semi-rigid epoxy that will support wheeled traffic while
protecting the joint edges.
To provide maximum support and protection, the filler should be installed full-depth in sawcut joints, so it gains additional deflection resistance from the bottom of the cut. Where there is no bottom shelf, as in
the case of a through-slab construction joint, the filler should be installed to a minimum depth of 2 inches to give it additional support
from sidewall adhesion.
a few more tricks up his sleeve. He
may leave a few cans of the specified material on-site. If he’s kept
empty cans of the specified filler
from another job, he may fill these
containers with the cheap substitute. Or he can save empty cans
from the first day of work, then take
them to the shop and fill them with
cheap filler. He can also bring filler
to the job in unmarked cans or 5gallon pails, saying decanning at
the shop saves time.
After a mere 17 working days, the
installer’s job is finished. The floor
looks fine, with its flush filler profile and uninterrupted floor surface. In fact, improper floor joint
filling is rarely noticeable from a visual inspection. But while the installation appears perfect on the
s u rf a c e, the presence of foam
backer rod, laitance, or other debris represents a ticking time
bomb for both the general contractor and the facility owner.
Everyone Loses
Except the Cheater
In less than a year, the joint filling
has failed and the unprotected
edges are spalling badly due to lack
of protection from hard-wheeled
t ra f f i c. The owner paid for something he didn’t get, and what he did
get is functionally useless and aesthetically unpleasing. Until the repairs are performed, the owner will
suffer from problems such as excessive vehicle-wheel wear, reduced productivity, and further
floor deterioration. The facility is
less valuable because the floor
looks damaged and patched. And if
the cheating is not addressed within the typical one-year warranty
period, the facility owner will absorb the eventual cost of joint repairs or refilling.
In this case, the owner notifies
the general contractor of the problems while the floor is still under
w a r ra n t y. After hearing about it
from the owner, the general contractor calls up the installer. He tells
our crooked friend to go back and
correct all the bad filler and the resulting joint-edge damage. But
since the joint filler’s retainage is
only 10% of the $18,000 contract, he
tells the general contractor, “No
way.” By walking away from his retainage, his profit drops from $7,990
to $6,190. But a profit of $6,190 still
provides him with a hefty margin.
Not bad for a few weeks’ work.
Cleaning up this mess is now the
responsibility of the general cont ra c t o r. If he’s looking for a scapegoat, the concrete contractor may
end up losing as well. The jointedge spalling may be attributed to
the concrete contractor’s workmanship. And if the dishonest installer
subcontracted the work from the
concrete contractor, the concrete
contractor’s retainage can be held,
despite his innocence. Even if he
can prove his workmanship was
good, his reputation has already
been brought into question.
No matter who pays whom or
when, the reputation of the entire
construction team has been damaged. The owner may blame the architects and engineers for poor design, inadequate plans or specs, or
lack of oversight. The general contractor or construction manager
may never see another project from
the owner, architect, or engineer.
And to get future projects, the concrete contractor may need to guarantee his services by, for example,
extending his standard one-year
warranty to at least two years.
How to Deter Cheaters
Although it’s important to accept
the fact that you can’t eliminate
cheating—especially if the installer
is determined and experienced—a
little common sense can go a long
way toward reducing the problem.
All too often commonsense precautions are pushed aside in the
midst of a tight schedule. To dep ri ve cheaters of the opportunities
they need, take the following practical precautions.
Evaluate the project specifications carefully, making sure everyone understands what joint fillers
are meant to accomplish. Take the
time to find out why certain products are better than others. (There
are at least 50 semi-rigid epoxy
fillers on the market, and they are
not all equal.) The specifications
should be as tight as possible to
leave cheaters little latitude. If designers prefer a nonpro p ri e t a ry
spec, they should list a few, truly
equal products to choose from.
Before awarding a joint-filling subcontract, ask filler manufacturers for
recommended installers in the project area. Since it’s in the manufacturers’ best interests to make sure the installer does nothing that will reflect
badly on their products, they’ll never
knowingly recommend a cheater. Examine the bids closely. If five contractors bid $1.50 per lineal foot, and a
sixth one comes in at $1.10 per lineal
foot, something is probably wrong.
Investigate the reason or discard the
bid.
Once you have a reputable installer lined up, make him part of
the construction team. He may be
able to offer suggestions that will
make the work go more smoothly
and result in better quality. It’s vital
that every member of the team, including the filler manufacturer, be
in close communication. The more
people involved, the less chance
the installer will have to cheat.
It’s still important to set some
ground rules, though. Make it clear
that floor joint filling is a critical element in obtaining a durable floor
and that only a professional, proper
installation will be accepted. To ensure this, let the installer know in advance that he will be held accountable for his work. Advise him that
filled joints will be test-drilled, before payment, to verify full-depth
filling. If any cheating is detected, he
may have to remove all or part of his
work and replace it at his own cost.
The general contractor should be
reminded that it’s his job to ensure
that all work, including the joint
filling, is performed according to
plans, specs, and manufacturers’
instructions. There is no substitute
for proper field inspection—especially at night. Off-hour work is often necessary and even desirable.
But if off-hour work is scheduled,
an inspector should be provided, or
MORE TRICKS OF THE TRADE
Beware of joint-filler installers
who:
• Request off-hour work and actually demand premium pay
(for the opportunity to cheat)
• Delay starting until the schedule is tight, then come to the
job undermanned and ask the
general contractor to donate
people to clean ahead of the
filling
• Leave cleaning tools in conspicuous places but don’t use them
• Make a noticeable effort to
clean a few joints while the
balance of the crew is dispensing filler in the rest of the
joints, which are still filled
with debris
• Carry the same buckets of debris around the jobsite, so no
one will know just how little
debris has been removed
• Delay installations until just after the floor has been powerswept or scrubbed, depositing
even more debris into joints
• Demand extra for problems already factored into the bid
amount, such as joint widening. Most installers bid jobs
knowing a 1⁄8-inch joint may
widen to 3⁄16 or 1⁄4 inch due to
concrete shrinkage
• Moan and groan about how
hard the specified filler is to
work with, while pushing the
merits of a cheaper filler
• Submit a cheaper product as
the specified filler’s equal
without offering a reduction in
contract price
• When caught filling less than
full-depth, tell the general contractor it’s better that way because the filler will expand
the installer should be allowed only
to clean joints during those times.
He can then fill the joints when the
regular staff is available to monitor
the filling. If the general contractor
fails to assume his responsibility,
he may end up sharing the consequences of any cheating.
Don’t Create Opportunities
For Cheaters
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of cheating is the loss of opportunity for ethical installers. If an ethical installer finds he can’t get a
joint-filling contract at a fair price,
he may stop bidding floor joint
work, creating even more opportunities for cheaters. And even if he
can get a joint-filling contract, he’ll
probably be viewed as just another
cheater. Already under suspicion, he
may find his payment and retainage
held unfairly—all because the general contractor got taken by a cheating installer on his last job.
Steven N. Metzger is president of
Metzger/McGuire Co., Concord, N.H.,
a manufacturer of joint-filling materials
and concrete floor repair products.
Metzger is also a consultant on floors
and floor repairs and an associate
member of ACI Committee 302, Construction of Concrete Floors.
PUBLICATION #C960469
Copyright © 1996, The Aberdeen Group
All rights reserved