Estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines

Estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the month of Sept. 1854, signed by S.D. Woodruff, Oct. 1854.

Estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines

Estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines during the month ending Oct. 31, 1854.

Estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the month of Oct. 1854

Estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the month of Oct. 1854, signed by S.D. Woodruff, Nov. 1854.

Chart of estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the month ending Dec. 1, 1854

Chart of estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the month ending Dec. 1, 1854, signed by S.D. Woodruff, Jan. 1855.

An estimate of work done by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors on sections 1, 2 and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the months of April and May 1855

Scrap of paper that has been burned almost completely. Only the header of the document is intact. It is an estimate of work done by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors on sections 1, 2 and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the months of April and May 1855.

Chart of estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines

Chart of estimate of work done on the Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway by Messrs. Brown and McDonell, contractors, on sections 1, 2, and 3 ending at St. Catharines for the month of Oct., 1855. This document is water damaged and full of holes. The list of prices is almost completely illegible. The document is signed by S.D. Woodruff, Nov. 1855.

Schedule of prices for Brown and McDonell, contractors, for sections 1, 2 and 3 of the Port Dalhousie Thorold Railway

Schedule of prices for Brown and McDonell, contractors, for sections 1, 2 and 3 of the Port Dalhousie Thorold Railway (1 page, handwritten), Sept. 24, 1856.

Letter to S.D. Woodruff regarding a resolution passed that the engineer be requested to examine the fence built by the contractors alongside of the Henry Vandenburgh Farm

Letter to S.D. Woodruff regarding a resolution passed that the engineer be requested to examine the fence built by the contractors alongside of the Henry Vandenburgh Farm and report to the secretary as to whether this is a lawful fence, completed according to Williams’ contract. This is signed by Duncan McFarland, president. There is a reply written by S.D. Woodruff at the bottom of the letter stating that the fence is not built in accordance with the contract, Dec. 18, 1856.

Estimatesfor clearing done by the contractors including Alexander Cook, Andrew Mains, Frederick Holmes, Louis Clements and Thomas Baird

Estimatesfor clearing done by the contractors including Alexander Cook, Andrew Mains, Frederick Holmes, Louis Clements and Thomas Baird. This document is signed by S.D. Woodruff. This is complete with an envelope made out to S.D. Woodruff, April 28, 1855.

Receipt from E. Riddle and Sons, Contractors of Masonry, St. Catharines

Receipt from E. Riddle and Sons, Contractors of Masonry, St. Catharines for work done, Mar. 13, 1887.

Letter to T. H. Wiley from J.J. Nichols and Sons, Mason Contractors and Plasterers, St. Catharines

Letter to T. H. Wiley from J.J. Nichols and Sons, Mason Contractors and Plasterers, St. Catharines regarding tenders for the proposed lily pond, May 12, 1916.

Employment and Income of Workers on Indonesian Oil Palm Plantations: Food Crisis at the Micro Level

The importance of oil palm sector for Indonesia is inevitable as the country currently serves as the world’s largest producer of crude palm oil. This paper focuses on the situation of workers on Indonesian oil palm plantations. It attempts to investigate whether the remarkable development of the sector is followed by employment opportunities and income generation for workers. This question is posed within the theoretical framework on the link between trade liberalisation and labour rights, particularly in a labour-intensive and low-skilled sector. Based on extensive field research in Riau, this paper confirms that despite the rapid development of the oil palm plantation sector in Indonesia, the situations of workers in the sector remain deplorable, particularly their employment status and income. This also attests that trade liberalisation in the sector adversely affects labour rights. The poor working conditions also have ramifications for food security at the micro level.

Risk and price in the bidding process of contractors

Formal and analytical risk models prescribe how risk should be incorporated in construction bids. However, the actual process of how contractors and their clients negotiate and agree on price is complex, and not clearly articulated in the literature. Using participant observation, the entire tender process was shadowed in two leading UK construction firms. This was compared to propositions in analytical models and significant differences were found. 670 hours of work observed in both firms revealed three stages of the bidding process. Bidding activities were categorized and their extent estimated as deskwork (32%), calculations (19%), meetings (14%), documents (13%), off-days (11%), conversations (7%), correspondence (3%) and travel (1%). Risk allowances of 1-2% were priced in some bids and three tiers of risk apportionment in bids were identified. However, priced risks may sometimes be excluded from the final bidding price to enhance competitiveness. Thus, although risk apportionment affects a contractor’s pricing strategy, other complex, microeconomic factors also affect price. Instead of pricing in contingencies, risk was priced mostly through contractual rather than price mechanisms, to reflect commercial imperatives. The findings explain why some assumptions underpinning analytical models may not be sustainable in practice and why what actually happens in practice is important for those who seek to model the pricing of construction bids.

Subcontract and supply enquiries in the tender process of contractors

In the tender process, contractors often rely on subcontract and supply enquiries to calculate their bid prices. However, this integral part of the bidding process is not empirically articulated in the literature. Over 30 published materials on the tendering process of contractors that talk about enquiries were reviewed and found to be based mainly on experiential knowledge rather than systematic evidence. The empirical research here helps to describe the process of enquiries precisely, improve it in practice, and have some basis to support it in theory. Using a live participant observation case study approach, the whole tender process was shadowed in the offices of two of the top 20 UK civil engineering construction firms. This helped to investigate 15 research questions on how contractors enquire and obtain prices from subcontractors and suppliers. Forty-three subcontract enquiries and 18 supply enquiries were made across two different projects with average value of 7m. An average of 15 subcontract packages and seven supply packages was involved. Thus, two or three subcontractors or suppliers were invited to bid in each package. All enquiries were formulated by the estimator, with occasional involvement of three other personnel. Most subcontract prices were received in an average of 14 working days; and supply prices took five days. The findings show 10 main activities involved in processing enquiries and their durations, as well as wasteful practices associated with enquiries. Contractors should limit their enquiry invitations to a maximum of three per package, and optimize the waiting time for quotations in order to improve cost efficiency.