The key to these agreements is to ensure that care costs are properly set at the beginning of the agreement. If that is not true, there will be problems. If the pay is too low, the janitor will often look for ways to reduce the obligations to make the deal profitable. If the pay is too high, the organization will be unhappy and the janitor will be under constant pressure to do more work or increase the frequency of service delivery to justify the fee. Sometimes the organization will even look for ways to get out of the agreement if the owners think the right deal is fundamentally unfair. These agreements require the concierge to monitor the performance of contractors directly mandated by the organization of all members of the company. The janitor`s remuneration is also fixed and is generally subject to annual CPI increases and market controls. Logically, the janitor`s remuneration is much lower than under a “do” agreement. “Do” agreements are inflexible because obligations and remuneration cannot be changed over the life of the term unless there is an agreement between the janitor and the organization on a change in the terms of the contract.
Increases in IPV do not correct this situation and market valuations often cause resentment and bitterness between the parties. In addition, many (most) market review clauses contain a ratchet provision, so that the revision of the “market” can only lead to an increase in pay and not a decrease! These agreements often remove the warmth of the relationship between the body company and the concierge. The commission continues to monitor the amount the body spends each year on cleaning and maintaining the commons. They simply tell the janitor to solicit offers, have the contractors check the contractor`s work by the janitor, then approve the payment and report back to the committee. The concierge is not under pressure to put the cost of labor below a certain price or take shortcuts. What`s the best part? Personally, I think the monitoring agreements are the best for the industry. They take the heat from long-term maintenance contracts because they effectively leave the agency responsible for the amount of expenses for general cleaning and maintenance of real estate. The organization can budget for the amount of expenses that owners want and are willing to pay for.
I see that very few disputes develop between janitors and entities under supervisory agreements. In addition, almost all states in Australia have laws on teams that resurrect developers to enter into only contracts that are in the best interest of a company. There is a much more logical argument for the organization that enters into a 25-year “surveillance contract” over a 25-year “do” contract. The supervisory agreements let the commission control expenses and let the manager make money from the lease – where he should make his income. “Do” Agreements A “do” agreement is a care agreement in which the concierge is responsible for carrying out the tasks (either personally or by the employees) at the janitor`s expense.