What do the Oakland Athletics, Michael Burry and Freakonomics have in common?
Besides being subjects of bestselling books, they are also examples of situations where a generally accepted assumption about otherwise innocuous things was challenged and the challenger achieved success. There is no shortage of generally accepted assumptions in our industry that could use some challenging, but one seasonally appropriate topic that comes to mind is workforce hydration.
Workforce hydration
Developing a workforce hydration plan for a construction site doesn’t seem complicated at face value — put out lots of cold water and tell the workers to drink it. Maybe throw some iced kegs or cases of water with some bagged ice out there and call it a day — minimal expense, minimal fuss, mission accomplished.
Congratulations, you have just provided hydration in the most inefficient, ineffective and cost-prohibitive way possible. Sounds preposterous? Perfect, now the challenge.
The challenge
Any hydration plan must accomplish two things: never run out of water and be as cheap as possible. Running out of water is an unacceptable critical failure, and water is commoditized as anything in existence, so cost is key, right? Wrong.
Water is commoditized, but the distribution and allocation of water to a workforce are not. So, is there a better way to distribute and allocate water? And if there is, does it matter? Let’s break this down into two parts.
Does it matter?
An average project in an urban environment can purchase water and ice for about $1.25 to $1.50 per person per day. This is easily tracked by purchase orders, and everyone has similar numbers in cost forecasts. However, the distribution and allocation expenses are often two to four times the cost of the water due to the high cost of onsite labor relative to the price of ice and water. For example, a jobsite of 2,000 workers will require around 250 10-gallon kegs of iced water a day. Distributing those kegs, returning the previously used kegs and cleaning up the keg stations requires about one full-time equivalent (FTE) per 10-20 kegs. That is 12.5 to 25 FTEs, or equivalent to $3 to $4 per day per person, meaning that hydration distribution is costing your project $2 million a year.
Is there a better way?
Hydration bins
A fully managed program that features insulated hydration bins is a more efficient distribution method. The bins keep water or sports drinks at OSHA standards for over five days in direct sunlight in extreme heat. They come prefilled with up to 500 standard bottles submerged in ice, are forklift compatible and mobile for easy placement in any location. Bins can even be lifted to supply craft workers on elevated structures. Manpower and potential for lost-time incidents are reduced significantly by eliminating manual lifting and positioning of heavy water jugs and coolers.
The key is that an outside party handles the daily delivery, sitewide distribution, pickup and restocking of bins, minimizing the cost of onsite FTEs.
Hydration kiosks
Hydration kiosks are another solution for large jobsites and more concentrated work fronts. Kiosks are coupled with self-contained, mobile water processing units or potable water sources to deliver virtually unlimited, chilled drinking water directly to work fronts across the jobsite, eliminating the need for hauling water and ice. A bonus is that the water processing units also include safety showers and eyewash stations. Kiosks dispensing water into reusable drinking containers instead of disposable cups or bottles dramatically reduces plastic trash and boost site ESG and sustainability efforts.
Both methods dramatically reduce the volume of onsite labor that is required to distribute and allocate water. The direct impact varies depending on jobsite specifics, but in most cases, a superior solution is provided while saving more than 20% of total spending.
Is that worth challenging your standard assumptions? I think so.
For more information, visit ameco.com.
