In many cases, I'd agree with you. But in context of what happened here, the fact that the company was Chinese (or simply just foreign, for that matter) is absolutely relevant. A few outstanding points:
1. The company was "unaccustomed to the rigor of American construction rules" and "lacked basic quality control", leading Caltran to "relax U.S. standards when the firm couldn’t finish fast enough."
2. "ZPMC violated the job contract by delivering key documents in Chinese instead of English. ABF lacked sufficient quality-assurance staff to speak directly to its own subcontractor – also a contract violation."
3. "Counting the money spent on travel and living costs for Caltrans and its contractors, the suspension span consumed much more than the $250 million in ZPMC’s assumed efficiencies that made the Chinese steel so cost-effective." On living costs alone, Caltran "paid about $50,000 annually per person to rent more than a dozen well-appointed rooms."
Asked for justification, "Caltrans described the accommodations as "reasonable and appropriate" in a written statement. 'The hotel provided a government rate that was comparable to rates at other western hotels,' and followed bargaining agreements, based in part on providing adequate 'safety and support for employees far from home.'"
Parts of the story will feel terribly familiar to anyone who has had much manufacturing done in China. Sometimes, things go smoothly, but in the worst cases, like this one, there's a huge mismatch between 'Western' quality demands and the output of their Chinese partners.
The typical pattern will be for the manufacturer to start sending back work which is totally unacceptable. When their partner protests, the manufacturer will grudgingly raise the standard to 'barely tolerable'. Time runs out, exhaustion sets in, decision makers don't want to draw attention to the fact that they chose the wrong manufacturer - so the client has to lower their standards.
Caltrans officials were amazingly naive and blinkered if they weren't aware of the long history of stories just like this one. Perhaps they did know the history, and they thought they would be protected by quality checks embedded in the contract, but that's just more naivety. Contracts don't have much power in that environment, particularly when your project is already falling way behind schedule.
Blaming 'The Chinese' though, is stupid. Caltrans was in charge of this deal. If they chose the wrong partner and didn't stay in control of things, they are responsible.
Not at all. You apparently didn't read the article.
"Caltrans employees and U.S. contractors who supervised the job lived fulltime in Shanghai, and top officials flew there often. Tony Anziano, toll bridge program manager, alone spent more than $300,000 on travel.
"Part of that cost was for Anziano’s room at the five-star JW Marriott Shanghai Tomorrow Square for up to $470 per night, according to his expense reports."
The travel costs are an obscene waste of American tax dollars. Moreover, the fact that so many tax dollars were paid to a foreign company is offensive. Even if that company was at all competent, it shows a disregard for the American economy. For a project that puts American lives at risk, a demonstrated concern for the wellbeing of Americans is rather important.
>Moreover, the fact that so many tax dollars were paid to a foreign company is offensive. Even if that company was at all competent, it shows a disregard for the American economy.
The reason that the US doesn't restrict foreign engineering companies from getting government contracts is that it wants US companies to be able to bid on government projects in other countries.
I don't actually find the hotel price to be necessarily offensive in the absence of any other information... in foreign countries, you often have to pay a premium to get American-standard lodging (if it's even available).
I don't think people outsource to developing countries because they think they'll get cheaper hotels there... it's more about the cost of the services / goods being delivered.
Shanghai is more or less a first-world city these days. American-style hotels will not be hard to find. Your "if it's even available" parenthetical may be true in general but is rather absurd in this particular context.
Do you think the citizens of countries such as Japan, Canada, and Turkey should be offended that their governments are paying hundreds of millions of dollars to 'foreign' companies in the U.S. for (e.g.) the F-35 fighter?
Responding to this from the parent comment (highlight is mine):
> Moreover, the fact that so many tax dollars were paid to a foreign company is offensive. Even if that company was at all competent, it shows a disregard for the American economy.
> Caltrans diaries also indicated that ZPMC violated the job contract by delivering key documents in Chinese instead of English. ABF lacked sufficient quality-assurance staff to speak directly to its own subcontractor – also a contract violation. “Although I can jump in when misunderstanding between ABF and ZPMC developed,” Caltrans engineer Stanley Ku wrote in a report, “I do think ABF should have a (quality expert) who can speak Mandarin to reduce the ‘misunderstanding’ situation.”
I'm not concerned because the firm was Chinese. I'm concerned because they tried to override the engineers and hired a company with zero experience who massively underbid the project. That screams "bad management" to me, personally.
China is the new bogeyman.