Laserfiche WebLink
Here are FCF's thoughts on the Trident development agreement and lack of clear <br />enforcement: <br />1) In Sec. 3.8 generally, the terms "Subcontractor Addendum" and "Subcontract Addendum" <br />are seemingly used interchangeably. Exhibit C is the document that appears to be referred <br />to and also seems to use both. We'd recommend that a single term be used throughout. <br />2) Sec. 3.8(8): This section should be more expansive to include investigations by any labor <br />law agency and filed by whomever. An example edit could be: <br />"The Developer shall cooperate fully with any investigation initiated by labor enforcement <br />agencies (e.g. MNDLI, MNDOT, MN AGO, USDOL, USDOT, etc.) regarding any contractor or <br />subcontractor performing work on the Development Property, including taking any action <br />required by the pertinent enforcement agency or that teh Developer otherwise elects to <br />take." <br />3) The last sentence of Sec. 3.8(8) seems to be repetitive of the first sentence of Sec. 3.8(9), <br />though the first sentence of Sec. 3.8(9) appears to soften the requirement with regard to the <br />Developer so that could be removed, or strengthened to remove the "best efforts" and <br />"reasonable steps" language to just say "The Developer shall require the General Contractor <br />to use and enforce the Subcontractor Addendum with all subcontractors, and shall require <br />the General Contractor and all subcontractors to cooperate with any labor enforcement <br />agencies regarding any claim filed with the pertinent labor enforcement agency, including <br />taking any action required by that agency or that the Developer otherwise elects to take." <br />4) In Exhibit C (the Subcontractor Addendum), the last sentence of paragraph H seems to be <br />an attempt for General Contractors to absolve themselves of down -chain liability. This <br />appears to directly conflict with the Construction Worker Wage Protection Act (Minn. Stat. § <br />181.165, subd. 2), which specifically states that contractors cannot have agreements that <br />indemnify themselves from liability from a sub under the Act. <br />