A pile of carbon copies on the QS's desk
At the end of the month a subcontractor's application arrives with twenty daywork sheets attached. Some are signed by your site manager, some by a foreman who has since left, one by the client's clerk of works. Two describe work your site manager says was in the subcontractor's package anyway. One claims six operatives for a day when the sign-in sheet shows four.
Your QS now has to decide what to accept, weeks after the work, with no photos and no clear link to who asked for it. Whatever they decide, somebody will be unhappy.
Why dayworks turn into disputes
A daywork sheet only works if it is agreed while the work is fresh. Paper sheets get filled in at the end of the week, signed in a hurry and handed in with the application. By then the facts are a matter of memory. The root cause is not bad faith. It is that the record is made too late and without the evidence that would settle it.
- Sheets are written at the end of the week, not on the day.
- Nothing links the sheet to the instruction that authorised the work.
- Signatures show someone saw the paper, not that they checked the hours.
- Labour on the sheet is not compared with who was on site.
- Sheets arrive with the application, long after the work is covered up.
What late dayworks cost you
You either pay for hours you cannot check or fight over them, and both damage the relationship with a subcontractor you may need next month. Where the work was instructed by your client, the same weak record makes it harder to recover the cost upstream. And your QS spends days each month on sheets that should have taken minutes to agree.
Daywork capture on the day
- The subcontractor's foreman raises a daywork record on a phone, on the day, against the project and the area of work.
- It must reference an instruction: a site instruction, an email or a verbal instruction logged in the site diary. No reference, no record.
- Operatives are picked from those signed in that day, so the labour is checked against attendance automatically.
- Plant and materials are added with delivery notes or hire references where they exist.
- Photos of the work, before it is covered, attach to the record with time and location.
- Your site manager approves, queries or rejects on their phone, with a reason. Unapproved records chase them after a set time.
- Approved dayworks flow to the QS, grouped by subcontractor and by instruction, ready to value against the subcontract rates.
| Question at valuation | Paper sheet | Daywork record |
|---|---|---|
| Who authorised it? | Often unclear | Linked instruction |
| Were those people on site? | Unknown | Checked against sign-in |
| What did it look like? | No evidence | Timed, located photos |
| When was it agreed? | Weeks later | On the day, by the site manager |
| Is it client-recoverable? | Worked out later | Tagged to the client instruction |
What the QS and site manager notice
Dayworks are agreed while the work is visible. The QS receives records that are already checked for attendance and authorised by instruction, so valuation is quick and the arguments are about the few that deserve it. Dayworks caused by client instructions are grouped for recovery. Subcontractors know where they stand each week rather than at the end of the month.
The subcontract itself does not change. Your rates, your daywork terms and your approval limits stay as they are. What changes is when the facts are fixed. A record agreed on Tuesday afternoon, with a photo of the opened-up ceiling and the name of the person who asked for it, leaves very little to argue about at the end of the month, and the arguments that remain are about genuine differences rather than memory.
Do your dayworks look like this?
- Daywork sheets arrive in bundles with the monthly application.
- You cannot tell who authorised the work.
- Hours on the sheet do not match who was on site.
- There are no photos of the work before it was covered.
- Recovering client-instructed dayworks is a separate hunt.