Delay and disruption can be two of the costliest occurrences on a construction project. If a contractor is forced to work out of sequence, in a stop-and-start fashion, or in a congested work area, labor costs can increase greatly. Known as “lost productivity” or “labor inefficiency,” this element of recovery is significant. But, it is also difficult to quantify and prove.

A recent case involved a multiple prime contract project in Tennessee. The public project owner and its construction manager failed to properly schedule and coordinate the work of the various trade contractors. Two contractors sought to recover lost productivity, one using the “measured mile” method and the other using the “modified total cost” method. The project owner argued that these forms of quantification were not sufficiently precise and were impermissible.

Other cases this week address compliance with a specified dewatering method and a “requirements” type contract for construction services. A contractor’s attempted deviation from the dewatering spec was not justified by an alleged differing site condition. And, a government agency could divert required work to other contractors because the amounts of the orders exceeded a limitation clause in the contract.