Jerry Lee Anderson began his career as a purchasing agent and then transitioned to field work as a construction engineer in a centralized major projects department for a large Midwest electric utility company. His later roles included supervisory positions in construction cost and scheduling, budget development, and contractor claim resolution. His final role focused on energy delivery as Director of Transmission Construction. After retiring from his primary career, he worked as a consultant for a national electrical contracting company with a primary role of claims avoidance/resolution.
As a result, he has gained a wide variety of hands-on construction experience in energy generation, transmission and distribution, and building facilities projects. We asked him how his expertise informs his approach on the American Arbitration Association® Construction Panel.
Q. What types of construction disputes do you typically handle as an arbitrator or mediator?
I typically serve on panels for large complex construction cases as a non-attorney construction professional often to give perspective on core technical dispute issues. I also serve as a sole arbitrator on cases in the commercial, standard, and energy panels.
Q. What drew you to ADR work in the construction space? What do you value most about serving as a neutral on the AAA’s Construction Panel?
It has been my experience that most claims are not completely one-sided…both parties are typically at fault to some degree or another. It has also been my experience that often parties will not acknowledge their own contractual responsibilities as they relate to the dispute. I rely on my experience as both an owner as well as a contractor representative to assist parties in resolving issues based on the facts of the case, rather than emotions that evolve from “living the claim.” The value I most enjoy is resolving issues in a way that allows both parties to move ahead with their respective missions, regardless of the outcome of the dispute.
Q. How has your judicial experience shaped the way you approach construction arbitration or mediation?
The focus throughout my career in industry has been the successful completion of “the project.” It became apparent that many projects that result in disputes follow similar paths, usually with the same initial warning signs that are not addressed. Ignoring these issues inevitably results in larger, more complex issues. I approach my resolution of claims with this in mind…giving weight to both parties based on their respective actions as the project progressed.
Q. Are you noticing any emerging issues or trends in construction cases coming to arbitration?
A. Although I am undoubtedly biased as a non-attorney, it appears that there is a trend for many arbitration construction panels to be routinely composed entirely of attorneys instead of panels that include at least one construction professional. Large complex cases often benefit from the blended experience of both attorneys and construction professionals to fully identify the core causes of disputes.
Q. What advice do you have for parties preparing for arbitration or mediation in complex construction disputes?
A. I find that both parties sharing common undisputed information prior to the preliminary hearing is extremely useful. This includes items such as the contract, schedules, approved change orders, etc. It is also helpful to have both parties discuss proposed mutually agreeable schedules that can be shared at the preliminary hearing, again with streamlining the entire process as the goal.