Thread: tiles or skirting boards first?

Originally Posted by silentC

I have NEVER seen a tiler using a straight edge or spirit level around the edge of a room and wouldn't expect them to.

Maybe you need to find a better tiler.

When I did the laundry I used a straight edge to ensure all the tiles were flat ... but then again I also had the skirting down first and tiled afterwards.

I would if you can, leave the skirting till after. Its much faster, you get a neater finish under the skirting. The builder may cut and temporarily set up the skirting if he needs to finish his contract.

Skirting first you will have to put a neat joint along the skirting. Any expansion of the skirting with moisture will put pressure on the tiles. You should really have a silicon joint between the wall and the tile of I "assume" 6mm but that should be checked. It is rarely practiced but worth leaving at least a gap and grout between the wall and the tile.

My point is that tiles are never going to be as flat as floorboards should be. You have grout gaps, you have tiles that have a textured surface, or a slight crown, they are rarely ever perfectly flat.

A tiler worth his salt will put the glue down and get the tiles on fairly quickly without stuffing about. Have you ever seen a professional tiler at work? They don't even gauge the gap, it's done by eye. He will do it without getting glue and grout all over the skirting.

Now a handy man will probably fuss about with string lines and spirit levels and so on. It will take him at least twice as long. In some cases, the finish might be better if he takes his time. Some tradies can be a bit rough.

You will never convince me that a skirting plonked on top of tiles and then caulked will look as good as skirting laid first. That is my opinion. I like to see a grout (or flexible sealant if you prefer) border all the way around. It just looks better in my opinion.

I don't abide by the people who assert that skirting last is the ONLY way. It's a personal preference I reckon. I'm coming at it from a combined consideration for the order of trades coming through as well as a personal preference for the finish. Others will disagree, but that doesn't make them right

As I said, I've done it both ways and last time I made the deliberate decision to fit the skirting first because of the above. It makes the most sense to me from the point of view of appearance and efficiency.

BTW I'd never use skirting in a laundry anyway - it would have a single tile strip all the way around the room.

Its much faster, you get a neater finish under the skirting.

How is it faster?

I presume that you are also suggesting that the door jambs and architraves are left off as well? Or do you get the chippy to hang the doors, fit the arcs and then come back and do the skirts?

Originally Posted by silentC

BTW I'd never use skirting in a laundry anyway - it would have a single tile strip all the way around the room.

Again, that's probably a personal preference thing.
In our situation, the skirting is painted and there is sealant between the skirting and the tiles (and skirting and floor). It can easily cope with the normal laundry splashes and spills.

Yeah fair enough. Our skirtings are MDF so there's no way I'd have put them in a wet area. I used meranti for the architraves.

How is it faster?

I presume that you are also suggesting that the door jambs and architraves are left off as well? Or do you get the chippy to hang the doors, fit the arcs and then come back and do the skirts?

Because the cuts near the wall don't have to be as precise to create the neat joint down the edge of the skirting board.

The chippy can fit the doors but you will have to show him the height of tile plus glue or he will be back to rip the doors down if the tile is large thick plus the depth of glue.
So tile plus glue depth so the door passes over neatly.

Pending "the floor is flat" you could also once the tiler is consulted raise the skirting the tile+glue+2mm height and lay under the skirt and lay the tile under but you will get a better finish if the skirt is put on after.

Very little timber frames in WA anymore. Mostly steel. 99%

Because the cuts near the wall don't have to be as precise to create the neat joint down the edge of the skirting board.

Righto, fair call. Faster for the tiler. But since tilers charge by the sq. metre, who cares how long they take

Chippies and painters usually charge by the hour on the other hand, so it's important not to mess them about I reckon...

I think the only real con for skirting first is that you have the potential for a crack to form between the grout and the skirting as things move about. You can address that by using a caulk instead of cement grout at the perimeter. I didn't bother and it hasn't seemed to be a problem.

On the other hand, it is much quicker for painting if you fit the door jambs, skirting, arcs first, then lay your tiles. There's no cutting in to the tiles. No drop sheets required. They can splash paint on the floor as much as they like. You also don't need to clean up twice - once before tiling and then again before painting. Painters get very ancy if you let chippies in after they have painted ceilings etc, and they don't like having to use drop sheets, so letting them paint the whole room before laying the tiles makes things much more efficient from that point of view.

Chippies in - fit out done - remove doors - clean top to bottom - paint the room - lay the tiles - check the doors for height - paint the doors - hang the doors.

Happy chippy, happy painter, slightly annoyed tiler. What better outcome?

[quote] Chippies and painters usually charge by the hour on the other hand, so it's important not to mess them about I reckon.../QUOTE]

In Western Australia this is not the case. They wished to be paid on a productivity basis.
On some more complex jobs they may charge by the hour where things like cavity doors or damaged walls and patching are required.

On WA project homes all trades are paid productivity based because the builders are concerned that some may stand around and pick their nose. Its cheaper for the builders.

The last thing they want is trades on wages because wages are expensive. Builders don't wish to incur the overhead costs such as Superannuation, Workers Comp, Vehicle costs, Mobile phone costs, Tool supply etc etc.

Its much cheaper to pay as a contract total sum.

Some trades are now having 5 minutes morning tea, skipping lunch and going hard to increase productivity. Thats why you see them starting at 6:30 and going home at 2:30 or 3:00. They get subcontracted as a company for how much they do, not how long they are there.

Some jobs such as "large" houses , renovations builders may fold to a day contract as they are too complex to quote and better quality can be achieved under close supervision and also be cheaper/faster.

Yes I believe that project homes here too are done on a fixed price for everything. That's why they are so full of faults.

As an owner builder last year, I had in some cases the opportunity to pay for the completed job - eg. the plasters would either work on a sq. metre rate, or an a time + materials. I went for time + materials, which was probably the wrong decision in hind sight but no big deal. The two carpenters, the painter and the roof plumber I hired were all on hourly rates.

I figure that on the one hand, you might save money with the fixed price - on the other if the trade has under-quoted to get the job, they usually want to cut corners to save time. On an hourly rate, you can go the other way with long smokos, stretching smaller jobs out to fit in with knock off time etc. You need to be on site, or have someone on site you can trust to keep an eye out.

My friends have a story about a project home they moved into. They were celebrating in the spa when it crashed through the bathroom floor. But it was done for a price...

Originally Posted by silentC

Yeah fair enough. Our skirtings are MDF so there's no way I'd have put them in a wet area. I used meranti for the architraves.

IT's not uncommon to put down mdf in wet areas - especially next to tiled showers as if there's any leak it will show the signs well before major damage is done to anything else.

I did both the tiling and fixing at our home and I laid tiles first, skirts last. Tiles were quicker to lay as they do not need to be mm perfect and it leaves a cleaner look.

How did you deal with the gaps under the skirting?

Originally Posted by silentC

How did you deal with the gaps under the skirting?

Did not have any major gaps- Biggest would have been around 1mm. Tiles are polished porcellin 500x500 so as long as you lay them all level, should not have gaps. Rough finish tiles like slate would leave randon gaps. Once I laid the skirts, ran some grout between the skirt and tile to fill any inperfections. Nearly 3 years down the track and no cracks at all. Completing it this way worked well because the tiles, grout and final skirting colour are all very close (Alabaster colour).