Some argue that the days of exploitation in the construction industry died in the eighties. However, recent events do not match this theory. In the last few years, some of the industry's largest and most prominent main contractors have been fined millions of pounds for rigging bids and artificially inflating prices.

For subcontractors, who regularly face unethical commercial practices, this can be even more damaging because of the fact that many are small businesses without means or connections to fight their corner.  The most frequent form of abuse that specialists face, identified by John Huxstable when setting up the CCS, is the addition of unfair clauses in contracts. In 2009 a study by Jim Mason, a senior lecturer at the University of West England, found that such practises are still currently widespread.

One of the most common non-standard terms added to contracts by main contractors are termination clauses for the most minor contract breaches. These can be used by main contractors to coerce specialist firms. Other clauses make specialists responsible for all work and property on-site, even after they have left the premises.  This is stipulated by main contractors to unjustly minimise their risk of offloading responsibility onto subcontracting firms.

A key, and especially troublesome contractual term for subcontractors, is the right of main contractors to hold money for marginal breaches of contract. Whilst there are genuine reasons for withholding money, the system is open to abuse as it grants the chance to limit the cash flow of specialists as a means of leverage.  Though legislation has sought to limit this practise, main contractors use loopholes to get it by.

Such practises are highly unfair and are also exceptionally counter-productive as they poison commercial relationships. It is difficult for specialists to combat them. Unlike civil proceedings, the main contractors and adjudicators costs may have to be paid by specialists who start proceedings, regardless of the outcome of the case. With limited cash flow, this dissuades subcontractors from fighting for their legal rights.

As does the risk of losing out on further work: subcontractors fear that if they speak out, they will be seen as upstarts and not be awarded other contracts. CCS fills this gap by campaigning for them. Comprised of disciplines drawn from across the industry, its members all share one thing in common- they are at potential risk of contractual abuse.

Companies such as CCS, are doing everything they possibly can, to stop unfair contractual terms, and help subcontractors with contractual disputes with both main contractors and other large companies.

CCS runs accredited training schemes to ensure that specialist companies employ members of staff who are well trained in dealing with contracts, both identifying unjust clauses and knowing what to do in the worst case scenarios. The course ranges from intensive, directly targeted short courses all the way up to a BTEC level 4 Construction course.

Perhaps these courses can be utilized throughout the UK, in a bid to rule out contractual abuse once and for all. Knowledge is key- and in this case it is just a means to an end.

About the Author:
Jade Webster is a digital marketer researching BTEC level 4 construction courses.