Detroit Homebuilder Rescinds Telehandler Ban
 |
|
Image 1: Brian O'Toole, president of Schuster Construction Services, knows the productivity benefits of telehandlers. |
April 20, 2005 — When a Detroit-based volume homebuilder decided against employing telehandlers on a project last spring, only a smile came from Brian O'Toole, president of Schuster Construction Services, Oak Park, Mich., the largest telehandler dealer in the state. With the idea that telehandlers could damage the grading around the housing development, the tract builder wanted to avoid the possibility of having to re-work sections of the property.
Enlarge Image
O'Toole's reaction regarding the ban on telehandlers was built on his experience distributing SkyTrak telehandlers with Schuster Construction Services, a company that he and Richard
Schuster started 16 years ago. Demonstrating to contractors — particularly subcontractors — the benefits and cost savings of telehandlers for framers, masons, steel erectors, and many other skilled workers, O'Toole is able to show an increase in the contractor's profits by an improvement in productivity. Telehandlers make laborious tasks like carrying lumber, handling bricks, and moving supplies around a site more efficient.
Image 2: This SkyTrak Model 6036, using a factory authorized truss boom, has been on the job since it was purchased from Schuster Construction Services 15 years ago.
O'Toole suggests that contractors look at the acquisition of a SkyTrak machine as if they were adding another worker to their payroll. He has the documentation showing that the cost of a new “telehandler worker” would cost $14.02 per hour during the first five years of ownership assuming a five-year loan payoff. After the loan is paid off, the cost of ownership drops to $2.31 per hour. Even during the loan payoff period, the hourly cost is much less than the average wage rate in the Detroit area.
After the tract homebuilder said no telehandlers on the site, framing contractors that had bid on the job withdrew their original bids for the development. When the revised bids were submitted, they averaged an extra week of construction time plus the costs of three additional workers. As a result, the developer rescinded the “no telehandler” decree and the development proceeded as originally planned at the lower cost and faster construction time.
