• Connect
  • Bookmark Us
  • AF Twitter
  • AF YouTube
  • AF LinkedIn
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Link
Arent Fox
  • Firm

    • History

    • Awards & Recognitions

    • Diversity

      • Overview
      • Diversity Scholarship
      • Employees on Diversity
      • LGBT Initiative
      • Women’s Leadership Development Initiative
    • Alumni

    • Pro Bono

      • Overview
      • Current Pro Bono Work
      • Community Involvement
      • Pro Bono Newsletter
      • Pro Bono Awards & Honors
      • FAQ: Pro Bono & Working at Arent Fox
    • Leadership

      • Firm Management
      • Administrative Leadership
  • Deals & Cases

  • People

  • Practices & Industries

    • Practices

      • Advertising, Promotions & Data Security
      • Government Relations
      • Antitrust & Competition Law
      • Health Care
      • Appellate
      • Insurance & Reinsurance
      • Bankruptcy & Financial Restructuring
      • Intellectual Property
      • Commercial Litigation
      • International Trade
      • Communications, Technology & Mobile
      • Labor & Employment
      • Construction
      • Municipal & Project Finance
      • Consumer Product Safety
      • OSHA
      • Corporate & Securities
      • Political Law
      • ERISA
      • Real Estate
      • Environmental
      • Tax
      • FDA Practice (Food & Drug)
      • Wealth Planning & Management
      • Finance
      • White Collar & Investigations
      • Government Contractor Services
    • Industries

      • Automotive
      • Energy Law & Policy
      • Fashion, Luxury Goods & Retail
      • Government Real Estate & Public Buildings
      • Hospitality
      • Life Sciences
      • Long Term Care & Senior Living
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Medical Devices
      • Nonprofit
      • Sports
  • Newsroom

    • Alerts

    • Events

    • Media Mentions

    • Press Releases

    • Social Media

    • Subscribe

  • Careers

    • Lawyers

    • Law Students

    • Professional Staff

  • Contact

    • Washington, DC

    • New York, NY

    • Los Angeles, CA

    Alerts

    • Newsroom Overview
      • Alerts

        Alerts by Criteria

        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
      • Events
      • Media Mentions
      • Press Releases
      • Social Media
      • Subscribe

    You are here

    Home » Newsroom » Alerts

    Share

    • Printer-friendly version
    • Send by email
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A
    • A
    • A

    Federal Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Limits 30 Years of Precedent Concerning Multi-employer Worksite Doctrine

    June 4, 2007

    Since the early days of enforcement of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 § U.S.C. 651 et seq., the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (Review Commission) has upheld citations issued to employers alleging a violation of the multi-employer worksite doctrine. Under this doctrine, an employer having control over a worksite has a duty to ensure that other employers at the worksite comply with occupational safety and health standards. This means that a controlling employer could be liable for violations of occupational safety and health standards even though none of its own employees have been exposed to a hazardous condition at the worksite.

    In a decision dated April 27, 2007, however, the Review Commission limited this longstanding precedent by concluding that under the plain language of 29 C.F.R. § 1910.12(a), a “controlling employer” engaged in construction work does not have a duty to ensure that other employers at the worksite comply with occupational safety and health standards. Summit Contractors, Inc., OSHRC Docket No. 03-1622 (2007).

    In Summit Contractors, Inc., OSHRC Docket No. 03-1622 (2007), Summit Contractors (Summit) was the prime contractor for the construction of a college dormitory in Little Rock, Arkansas. Summit had contracted with All Phase Construction, Inc. (All Phase) to perform exterior masonry work on the building. A compliance officer for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) visited the worksite and saw employees of All Phase working from scaffolds without appropriate fall protection. OSHA subsequently issued a citation to Summit alleging a violation of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.451(g)(1)(vii) for failure to guard a scaffold, even though none of Summit’s employees had been exposed to a fall hazard. OSHA contended that as a controlling employer, Summit failed to ensure that All Phase used appropriate fall protection. OSHA also issued a citation to All Phase alleging a violation of the very same standard under which Summit had been cited.

    The Review Commission vacated the citation and concluded that under the plain language of 29 C.F.R. § 1910.12(a), an employer engaged in construction work does not have a duty to ensure that other employers at the worksite comply with occupational safety and health standards. Section 1910.12(a) states, in pertinent part: “Each employer shall protect the employment and places of employment of each of his employees engaged in construction work” (emphasis added). The Review Commission explained, among other things, that the phrase “his employees” means that an employer who is engaged in construction work is responsible only for the safety and health of its own employees.

    The Summit Contractors decision is significant in that it modifies more than 30 years of Review Commission precedent. The decision does not affect, however, Review Commission precedent concerning the controlling employer duties in the general industry context. OSHA currently plans to appeal the decision to the Eighth or Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Related Practices

    Labor & Employment
    OSHA
    OSHA Inspections
    Rulemaking
    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Contact

    Footer Main

    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Subscribe
    • Alumni
    • Diversity
    • Legal Notice
    • Privacy Policy
    • Social Media Disclaimer
    • Nondiscrimination
    • Site Map
    • Client/Staff Login

    Offices

    • Washington, DC
      1717 K Street, NW
      Washington, DC 20036
      Tel: 202.857.6000
    • New York, NY
      1675 Broadway
      New York, New York 10019
      Tel: 212.484.3900
    • Los Angeles, CA
      555 West Fifth Street, 48th Floor
      Los Angeles, California 90013
      Tel: 213.629.7400
    • © Copyright 2013 Arent Fox LLP. All Rights Reserved.

      Legal Disclaimer
      Contents may contain attorney advertising under the laws of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.