Rethinking Engineer Shifts in Indian Real Estate Construction Projects: A Two-Shift Model for Better Supervision, Safety, and Planning

Sat Oct 4, 2025

1. Executive Summary

In most Indian real estate construction projects, site engineers and supervisors are many a times expected to stretch their working hours from early morning to late night (often 8 am to 10 pm). This practice not only leads to fatigue and burnout but also compromises the quality of planning, supervision, and safety. While labourers often demand overtime for financial reasons, engineers derive little benefit from long hours beyond their contractual salaries. The result: overworked engineers, poor planning, reduced oversight, and higher chances of errors and accidents.

This white paper proposes a structured two-shift engineer deployment model with a one-hour overlap (7 am–3 pm and 2 pm–10 pm). The model ensures continuous supervision of site works, improved planning and coordination with consultants, enhanced reporting, and realistic scheduling, all at a minimal additional cost. While such shift systems are common in large infrastructure projects globally, their adoption in Indian private real estate remains negligible. This paper makes the case for why it must change.

2. Current Reality on Indian Real Estate Construction Sites

• Single stretched shift (9am to 8pm+): Engineers are expected to handle everything from planning and drawings to execution supervision, safety, and reporting.

• Labor overtime preference: Migrant workers often prefer overtime for higher daily wages. This leads to sites running till late night, but without structured engineer coverage.
• Impact on engineers: Unlike labourers, engineers’ productivity is mental. Long hours directly reduce effectiveness in technical checks, planning, and decision-making.
• Drawing Errors: Site teams often lack sufficient time to study drawings thoroughly, leading to errors that consultants or separate office teams do not always catch in time.
• Missed Schedules: With limited time, site engineers often do not participate meaningfully in scheduling and target setting. This leads to unrealistic schedules prepared only by office teams and inevitable missed targets.
• Manipulation Risk: With only one engineer in charge, contractors or labour supervisors can manipulate or bypass checks more easily. A two-shift system introduces cross-checking and accountability.

3. Why Two Shifts for Engineers?

1. Continuous Supervision: Work on most real estate sites happens from early morning to late night. A single engineer cannot realistically supervise effectively across this span.
2. Planning + Execution Balance: Engineers need quiet hours for planning, DPR preparation, RFIs, and drawing review. Splitting shifts allows one group to focus on planning during consultant hours and another on execution during late hours.
3. Schedule Ownership: Two engineers actively involved in scheduling and realistic planning ensures the schedule reflects actual site conditions, not just office expectations.
4. Minimal Additional Cost: Hiring an extra junior engineer costs around ₹25,000–30,000/month- a negligible figure compared to the costs of delays, rework, or safety lapses.
5. Cross-Verification Advantage: Two engineers checking drawings, bar bending schedules, or QA activities reduces errors and prevents manipulation.
6. Better Retention: Young engineers see the construction industry as harsh due to 14-hour shifts. Structured shifts improve work-life balance and reduce attrition.
7. Benchmarking with Global Practices: In infrastructure projects worldwide, multiple shifts for engineers and supervisors are standard. Indian real estate can no longer afford to lag.

4. Global References

• Singapore Construction Industry: Engineer shifts are structured, with strict caps on working hours and mandated supervision during extended labour shifts. Results: higher productivity and lower accident rates.
• Middle East Mega Projects: Shift-based engineer deployment is routine in high-rise and infrastructure projects (Dubai, Doha). Separate teams handle day vs night works to ensure continuity and quality.
• Indian Metro Projects (Delhi, Mumbai, Pune): Two and three-shift systems were used for engineers and supervisors to meet aggressive deadlines. These projects highlight the feasibility of shift models even in India when timelines demand it.

5. The Proposed Two-Shift Model

Shift A (7 am – 3 pm)

• Conduct morning contractor briefing, set daily targets.
• Supervise critical activities (marking, reinforcement, shuttering, concreting).
• Coordinate with consultants/architects/vendors (available during day hours).
• Conduct QA/QC checks and ensure material availability.
• Begin DPR, bills, RFIs, and prepare for handover.

• Take handover from Shift A (2–3 pm overlap).
• Supervise afternoon/evening works (masonry, curing, deliveries, finishing).
• Monitor labour productivity during overtime.
• Conduct safety and QA checks during late pours.
• Prepare day-end report (progress, photos, labour, issues).
• Secure and close site at night.

• Joint site walk.
• Discuss unresolved issues.
• Confirm material for evening and next morning.
• Smooth handover.

6. Benefits of the Two-Shift Engineer Model

1. Continuous Coverage: Supervision from 7 am to 10 pm without gaps.
2. Improved Planning: Morning engineers focus on coordination with consultants/vendors.
3. Enhanced Quality & Safety: Fresh supervision across both halves of the day reduces fatigue-related errors.
4. Better Reporting: Shift B engineers close the day with structured reports, ensuring accountability.
5. Retention & Culture: Engineers no longer see themselves as overworked labour. A professional, structured culture attracts and retains better talent.
6. Cross-Verification: Two engineers reduce errors and chances of manipulation.
7. Schedule Realism: Joint involvement in MsP ensures achievable targets.
8. Cost Efficiency: Additional salary costs are minimal compared to the cost of project delays, rework, or client dissatisfaction.

7. Cost–Benefit Comparison

Scenario A: Current Practice (Single Engineer, 12–14 hours/day)

• Monthly salary: ~₹30,000
• Hidden costs: fatigue, errors, rework, delays.
• Productivity drops after 8–9 hours.
• High attrition → recruitment/training costs.
• Missed schedules due to unrealistic planning.
• Delays in project delivery: penalties, reputation damage.

• Monthly salary: ₹30,000 × 2 = ₹60,000
• Incremental cost: ₹30,000
• Gains: higher quality, reduced rework, fewer accidents.
• Faster project delivery → potential savings of lakhs per month in overheads and interest costs.
• Improved staff morale, lower turnover.
• Realistic schedules and proactive checks.

8. Implementation Blueprint

To make the two-shift model practical, structured formats must be adopted:

Daily Handover Format (2–3 pm overlap):

• Date, site name, shift in-charge.
• Status of morning targets (completed/pending).
• Critical issues pending consultant/vendor input.
• Material status (deliveries, shortages).
• Safety observations.
• Labour productivity notes.
• Sign-off by Shift A Engineer, acknowledgment by Shift B Engineer.

• Date: 3rd Oct 2025 | Site: Sunrise Towers | Shift A Engineer: R. Sharma
• Targets: Slab reinforcement (60% completed), shuttering of Lift Core (pending).
• Consultant Input: Awaiting structural approval on modified beam detail.
• Material: Steel stock adequate, concrete transit mixer delayed till 4 pm.
• Safety: One unsafe scaffolding identified near Tower B, rectification underway.
• Labour: 45 masons, 20 carpenters, 15 helpers. Productivity satisfactory.
• Sign-off: R. Sharma → Handover received by S. Kulkarni (Shift B).

• Date, weather conditions.
• Activities executed with quantities.
• Labour count by trade.
• Photos of key checks/activities.
• Issues encountered and solutions.
• Plan for next day.

• Date: 3rd Oct 2025 | Weather: Clear, 32°C

• Activities: RCC slab reinforcement completed (240 sqm), shuttering for Lift Core (in progress), 1 concrete pour planned for 7 pm.

• Labor Count: 45 masons, 20 carpenters, 15 helpers, 10 bar-benders.

• QA/QC: Rebar cover blocks checked and approved, cube samples cast at 11 am.

• Issues: Delay in transit mixer → rescheduled pour to 7 pm.

• Tomorrow: Begin slab pour continuation, start masonry on 3rd floor.

• Report Prepared by: S. Kulkarni (Shift B).

• Summary of DPRs.
• Labor productivity trends.
• QA/QC status.
• Material stock review.
• Safety audit notes.

• Use uniform checklists for QA/QC to avoid differences in methodology.
• Define escalation matrix for conflicting instructions.
• Train both shifts on standardized documentation to avoid duplication.

9. Risks and Mitigation

• Duplication of Instructions: Two engineers may issue conflicting directions.
  Solution: SOP-driven checklists and documented handovers.
• Different Checking Standards: Engineers may apply inconsistent QA/QC practices.
  Solution: Standardized checklists, joint audits by both shifts weekly.

• Resistance from Contractors: Multiple checks may be perceived as delay.
  Solution: Position engineers as facilitators, align checks with productivity.
• Additional Cost: Incremental salary.
  Solution: Demonstrate ROI using project-specific cost of delays and rework.

10. Case for Adoption

• Indian real estate faces chronic delays and poor quality perception.
• A simple structural change in engineer deployment can significantly improve outcomes.
• Early adopters will build reputations for professionalism, timely delivery, and quality - gaining long-term trust from buyers and investors.

11. Conclusion

The two-shift engineer deployment model is not a luxury—it is a necessity for the next generation of Indian construction projects. By balancing planning and supervision, reducing fatigue, ensuring realistic schedules, and creating built-in accountability, builders can achieve higher efficiency, better quality, and improved safety. The incremental cost of one additional engineer is negligible compared to the benefits.

Adopting this model can become a turning point in how Indian construction is managed, aligning real estate practices with global standards of professionalism.