Monday, September 30, 2013


Hong Kong based businesswoman Zolna Murray announces a hunger strike from 8am HK time on the 1st of October 2013, protesting unprofessional and highly unethical treatment by Gammon Construction in their process of recruiting,  hiring then firing her.

Local and global media are asked to take proper interest in this claim and perform a robust investigation into the story. It brings into question the ‘INTEGRITY’ not just of Gammon but also its parent companies (Jardines and Balfour Beatty) and its well-known partners and clients that have proven unable to answer a direct question about Gammons’ action.
One of the parent companies claims to be operating in over 80 countries.
In 2013, in 80 countries, they are redefining a word that outlasts all of their buildings – INTEGRITY.

Integrity or Gammon: is it a difficult choice?

Background story can be found on Zolna Murray’s blogs:

She can be reached here:

++ (852) 6597 8683

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Good news Mr Ho! (a note to Thomas Ho, CEO of Gammon)

Good news Mr Ho! (a note to Thomas Ho, CEO of Gammon)

I have been researching Gammon’s long term partners recently and dug into information available on Swire properties; I looked in detail into the ‘values’ claims published on their  website;

And, you know what?
There is no ‘integrity’ on it. Just to make sure, I searched for the word both directly on the site (on the values page) and again after I copied the text into a word document.

So, what does that mean to you?
If Swire Properties can be successful (and they obviously ARE) without publicly claiming ‘integrity’ why not Gammon Construction too?
You can actually take the little word from your logo and move on doing what you’ve always done and I can move on with my life too.

Otherwise, there still is this little issue of an outstanding payment by you using the world undeservedly.

Spot me and snap me

Spot me and snap me around Hong Kong over the next couple of days displaying various versions of my ‘Gammon and Friends’ fan-pamphlets;
Then, share the pictures! Trust me, it is for a good cause!

(or email me

You be the judge!

(supplementary information to the opening question of this blog and addressed to all associated with Gammon Construction)

Maybe I am wrong.
Maybe I have committed a sin totally unacceptable for people living/working in Hong Kong.

According to the HR director, this email (of mine) following the ambush-meeting (by the two directors noted below) and their subsequent email was the cardinal sin that made me get fired on the spot.
(he quoted a paragraph from a HK law for it too)

I’ve asked Swire to tell me if they condone Gammon’s behavior.
I’ll keep asking them and all the others that claim to be closely associated to Gammon.

Here is the opportunity for anyone (absolutely anyone) to comment though;
Be my guest! Be my judge!

(MESSAGES 1 and 2 from the Directors)

From: Derek Kwok Leung So
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 3:26 PM
To: Zolna Murray
Cc: Sai Yen Yu; Rachel Wei Lee; Edmond Wing Kok Lai
Subject: RE: BIM Development in Gammon
Sensitivity: Confidential


Further to Edmond’s email as below, please prepare the necessary information as stated in the email for my review early next week. For the implementation plan for SCL1111, please prepare this based on the outcome of the discussion between you and the site team and SY and discuss on Monday.

For the six project, I would expect a comprehensive table for these 6 projects the contractual risk or other risk and the possible mitigation measures for my review on or before next Friday.



From: Edmond Wing Kok Lai
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 12:08 PM
To: Zolna Murray
Cc: Derek Kwok Leung So; Sai Yen Yu; Rachel Wei Lee
Subject: BIM Development in Gammon
Sensitivity: Confidential


Many thanks for your input in the open discussion on BIM development in Gammon this morning. I sincerely hope that we can move things forward in a constructive manner.

As a priority, please review with Derek your BIM implementation plans for SCL 1111 and TM-CLK Viaduct, which contain solid actions, resources and milestone dates.

In addition, please identify the key risks facing the six projects you mentioned (SCL 1111, 810A, TM CLK Viaduct, Lei Yue Mun, Lower Ngau Tau Kok and Mt Nicholson) and propose mitigating actions for onward review with Derek, SY and the Unit Directors / Project Leaders.

Your suggestion on performing a follow-up audit for these projects will be reviewed accordingly.

Any questions, please feel free to discuss with Derek, SY and me.


MESSAGE 3 from me to the Directors

From: Zolna Murray
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 9:25 AM
To: Derek Kwok Leung So

Cc: Sai Yen Yu; Rachel Wei Lee; Edmond Wing Kok Lai
Subject: RE: BIM Development in 
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential

Dear Edmond and Derek,

 In response to the meeting held yesterday morning at Edmond’s office and the subsequent email messages originated by Derek and Edmond, I wish to make the following points:

1.     Due to the present structure of the BIM/Innovation team and the activities of its two key members (Derek and Welie) I am unable to perform my professional duties related to the implementation of BIM on the currently running projects
the 6 you mentioned plus any others that I am not yet aware of), nor report to Derek, without putting the company under significant risks and compromising my personal and professional integrity.

 2.       At the heart of this situation is, I believe is me recognizing early after joining the company just how frightfully high the level of incompetence, negligence and damaging activity were within this department and quickly and persistently voice my concerns.
An aggressive campaign built on a mix of intimidation, manipulation and other types of unprofessional behavior was then employed against me, first to make me support the unsupportable behaviors, then to pressure me into absconding.

 3.       A company of Gammon’s statute I believe should have proper processes in place to handle the current situation in a way that will not increase the damage to those already impacted by it. ‘The Zero Harm’ policy must apply to all, including the company itself.

 4.       Therefore, until the matters are investigated and properly resolved I will focus my activities on the other half of my portfolio:
a.       of innovation, where I set up a number of highly promising projects for the company and am assisted by the dedicated team of Vincent and Stella. We also have a number of ongoing tasks that we manage, including preparations for the annual competition gala.
b.      I will also carry on investigating possible uses of BIM on projects uncompromised by the vindictive activities of Derek, such as 704 where we will are looking at the use of BIM for visually tracking and representing hot-work permits.
c.       I will also continue to visit my team members based on construction sites, to get to know them and ensure they are adequately supported without personally getting involved in the BIM implementation on the same and such prevent my staff being used in manipulative games.
d.      The above workload permitting I intend to initiate the use of BIM forensics in escalating our success in claiming for work done, something I have a lot of experience in and can be very useful at times when the company’s stable cash flow is under threat.
e.      I believe it to be unprofessional to take part in activities related to the hiring of new staff into the team until I can confidently undertake to provide them safe working conditions, free of bullying.
f.        I will report on my and the innovation trio’s activities fortnightly, direct to SY.

Please do the needful to address my concerns.

Should the company choose to undertake an investigation in the past conduct of the BIM department, I’d prioritize the following projects for that exercise:
1111; 810A; Housing Corp projects; TM CLK; Nicholson road; in-house development with IMS; external representation of the company; reporting to top management;
I look forward to a mutually satisfying resolution to the current situation and the establishing of an environment where Gammon can truly benefit from my experience, knowledge, skills and enthusiasm.


Zolna Murray

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

If friends doing good things give their friends good credibility – would their bad actions be just as contagious?

Welcome to a new blog I set up to address a single, simple question:

If friends doing good things give their friends good credibility –
would their bad actions be just as contagious?

Those that know the background to this question will know that it comes from a personal experience, where I (Zolna Murray) have made an assumption to join a company judging its integrity by its claimed long association with other apparently ‘decent’ companies.
(including the parent companies);
I had accepted employment despite of misgivings of the honesty of the company (publicly documented), because of the overwhelming implied wholesomeness of Gammon’s image in Hong Kong.
I claim that Gammon had acted with no integrity when they hired-and-swiftly-fired me and are (and have been) eager to prove this to the world.
No one has been interested in my side of this story.

Fair enough, what can a little squeaky mouse do alongside these elephants?

Maybe. Maybe things are just the way they are.
And again, I am new to Hong Kong, maybe Hong Kong is just totally different from anywhere else I worked/lived at and this behaviour is the norm.

It is hard for me to believe this to be the case still, no matter how particular the culture here is.
I am really hopefully, even if not convinced  that an investigation into the reaction of 6 selected long term associates (friends) of Gammon into this company’s action will bring up at least ONE that will say, ‘no, Mr Gammon, we object to you using us in this way’.

So, I’m on my way to try to get their opinion any way I can.
For a start, check out this link where I’m asking the question publicly from Swire.

click below:

If you want to know more about the background, there is plenty of information on the ‘parent blog’