NEC3 ECC: Employer wants Contractor to show realistic duration after accepting the programme for subsequent cl-32.2 programmes

The Contractor have a last accepted programme and now client insists that the realistic duration’s to be shown in order for him to accept it and the argument the client is using as contractor is delivering the key dates working out of sequence to hit the milestones. This out of sequence work is not reflected in the Cl-32 programme and Contractor maintain the logic and duration of the activities, the client is using the out of sequence option and insists the contractor implement it in their cl-32 programme.
if the Contractor does what is asked this will result in bringing the planned Completion date forward which the Contractor is willing to do, however, insisting the float created by this exercise should be termed as terminal float and the client is not happy to use this terminology and does not want the contractor to call it terminal float.

My question IS creating terminal float due to sort of realistic/accelerated work is correct and Contractor to retain it and publish as terminal float in the subsequent programmes.

1 Like

I f I was you I would not worry about what you or the Employer want to call it. The fact is that if planned Completion is ahead of the Completion Date, this float is “owned” by the Contractor. Clause 63.3 is very clear that if a subsequent compensation event moves planned Completion, Completion Date moves by the same amount.

Slightly strangely the contract does not call this terminal float but the guidance notes do. What ever you call it, it is retained in the assessment of subsequent compensation events whoever and however the gap was caused by.