The Femern project lacks a common and updated schedule. The contractor behind the tunnel construction, Femern Link Contractors, is working according to a revised plan that reflects significant delays, but the client, Femern A/S, will not approve it.
Therefore, the work is still being managed according to the so-called baseline from 2022, even though it no longer corresponds to the reality on the construction site. This is evident from the contractor's internal status report, which is sent to the client every month.
The disagreement over the schedule has a direct impact on both the finances, the progress, and the claims the contractor has raised against the client. And the very simple question has suddenly become very complicated on the 67 billion kroner construction project: How far along are we, and when will we be finished?
Two different timelines
The most recently approved schedule, 'Baseline Rev B', dates from July 2022. This is the plan that the state client, Femern A/S, continues to manage the project by.
However, the contractor, Femern Link Contractors (FLC), has developed a new version, 'Baseline Rev. D', which reflects the actual delays and a shifted timeline. This version has not been approved by the client, and therefore, in practice, there are two different timelines for how the project is progressing. The status report also shows that a third timeline called 'Baseline Rev C' was rejected in January 2025.
The contractor describes it in the report as an “inaccurate picture of the project's actual status”. Thus, the challenges of the past three years in construction are not included in the client's and therefore the Danish state's timeline for the project.
The consequence of the disagreement is that the official timeline still operates with milestones that have long been exceeded. The contractor, on the other hand, plans according to a new calendar, where, among other things, the first submersion of a tunnel element has been moved to May 2026, while Femern A/S aims to submerge the first element in 2025.
This means that what appears on paper as a delay is incorporated into the contractor's planning as a new normal. Thus, the management tool itself, the timeline, has become part of the conflict.
Expert: Common reference point
This type of breakdown in management is far from unusual in large construction projects, explains Joana Geraldi, associate professor at Copenhagen Business School and one of the leaders of the Centre for Organization and Time, where she researches how large construction projects are organised and managed.
She deals with so-called megaprojects: constructions that typically cost billions, involve many actors, and span many years.
- The baseline can act as a useful common reference point that keeps project stakeholders aligned. Yet, misalignments are not uncommon. Behind such misalignments are usually clashes of interest, that may lead to different understanding of where the project stands. This is very challenging. she says.
She points out that disagreements often arise because the stakeholders view the project from different perspectives: political, economic, or organisational.
- It can be costly and time-consuming when there’s no agreement on progress. Misunderstanding may add time and money, says Joana Geraldi.
Two sides of the same coin
The disagreement over the schedule is closely linked to the large financial claim of 14.5 billion kroner that the contractor has raised against Femern A/S. According to the contractor, the practical conditions for the work in the tunnel trench have changed compared to when the contract was signed, resulting in a 20-month delay.
Although the claim and the schedule are formally two different matters, they are closely connected. If there is no common plan, it is difficult to determine how much of the delay can be attributed to the contractor and how much should be placed with the client.
- You actually see such political tension and clashes of interest in almost every megaproject. It’s unusual if everything just runs smoothly from start to finish, says Joana Geraldi.
When there is no common plan, it becomes difficult to determine who bears the risk and who ultimately has to pay. But it must be resolved.
- It’s a problem that has to be addressed, but it’s rarely simple. There are many interests at stake and a strong tendency to blame the other side instead of finding common ground.
Lawyers are expensive
The disagreement over the schedule means that the project's official progress does not align with the contractor's own planning. Thus, the Femern project lacks a common framework for how the next years of construction should look.
According to Joana Geraldi, it is a classic feature of megaprojects that the management of time itself becomes part of the conflict.
- People often have the incentives to look backward rather than forward. A good agreement is usually one where everyone is equally dissatisfied. Nobody wants to be naive and take on all the financial responsibility alone. And of course, lawyers are expensive, but also potentially indispensable, she says.
At Femern A/S, they say that it is not unusual for disagreements to arise between a client and a contractor in large construction projects. Also about the schedule for the individual activities.
- It is part of the ongoing negotiation. FLC's status report is an expression of a proposal from the contractor, and we cannot comment on the ongoing contractual dialogue, it states.
Femern Link Contractors have no comments on the matter.
