Categories » Home Improvement And DIY » LADDERS & SCAFFOLDING » Health & Safety 

Real Estate Weekly, June 30, 2004 by Louis J. Coletti

We see it all too often.

A Chinese immigrant in Elmhurst crushed and killed by a concrete wall.

A worker sending home half of his weekly paycheck to his family in Ecuador falls to his death thanks to an illegally built balcony roof.

An Upper West Side worker is electrocuted while dismantling an illegal light fixture.

All of these accidents have a common thread throughout. All occurred on nonunion sites, workers received little or no safety training and workers didn't speak English.

But it's not a secret anymore. New York's $13.2 billion construction industry is sharply divided into two separate, distinctly different sectors.

One sector is comprised of contractors who are mindful of city and federal worksite safety rules and regulations. And spend roughly $40 million annually on critical training and pre-apprenticeship programs.

However, there is also a growing "underground" sector, made up of unscrupulous contractors, who place the public and workers alike at risk by employing poor construction practices and failing to comply with safety rules.

The rapid growth of the underground sector magnifies the need for sweeping safety reforms.

The division between New York's two construction sectors is dangerous and increasingly costly, according to a report titled "Construction Safety: A Tale of Two Cities," issued by the Construction Industry Partnership (CIP), a coalition representing the Building Trades Employers' Association (BTEA) and the Building and Construction Trades Council (BCTC).

The report states that the cost of construction fatalities and accidents in New York City totaled $858 million in 2002, without even attempting to put a price tag on personal loss. However, the report also says that a reasonable reduction in the frequency and severity of construction fatalities and accidents could reduce the cost by a whopping $266 million. Imagine reducing the costs of private and public projects by more than one-quarter of a billion dollars in one year alone?

As if the savings alone are not convincing enough, the rest of the case for construction reform is strong as well. For example, from October 1, 2001 to September 26, 2003, 63% of general worker fatalities in New York City occurred within the construction industry. In addition, 70% of the 25 fatalities on NYC construction sites during this time period occurred on nonunion sites.

On another occasion, NYC Department of Buildings construction inspectors conducted a "sweep" of scaffolding and sidewalk sheds in Manhattan, finding that 25% of the sites inspected did not have the proper building permit for that project, putting workers and pedestrians at risk.

Shocking statistics and examples like these should serve as a wake-up call for safety reforms.

Aside from not having the proper permits for construction projects, some of the leading factors that contribute to construction safety fatalities and accidents are a lack of safety training for management staff and workers, and a lack of safety supervision on sites.

Language barriers are another major roadblock, while the size and complexity of the industry itself, combined with limited governmental resources, require new inspection and enforcement strategies to protect public and worker safety.

As we gear up for major projects such as the redevelopment of Lower Manhattan, Hudson Yards and Downtown Brooklyn, construction safety must be priority number one.

We cannot afford anymore senseless accidents.

To accomplish this, the CIP recommends changing the Building Code to reflect the adoption of mandatory safety training requirements for project managers and trade labor personnel prior to issuing permits.

Currently, the lack of safety training is the most serious concern of the construction industry. The CIP advocates for the creation of a safety council that would develop safety training requirements.

Contractors applying for permits would be required to show proof that project managers and workers have completed the necessary training. Failure to comply would result in fines, the suspension of building permits, or both.

This measure would not be burden-some or become costly.

The existing safety courses offered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) could become the core of the training program, along with Buildings Department requirements. An individual that completes the OSHA training would then be certified to teach the rest of their team.

Since language barriers are a concern, these courses would have to be offered in multiple languages.

The CIP recommendations also include the establishment of a task force of industry and government leaders to develop new enforcement strategies, adopt site safety requirements for projects five to 14 stories tall, expand insurance and tax verification filing requirements for contractors, encourage owners to require random drug and alcohol testing and establish a unified construction accident reporting system.

While the Buildings Department and OSHA have made significant inroads in making worksites safer, both agencies have historically been hampered by a lack of funding to enforce safety provisions in such a large and complex industry.

The sheer volume of construction activity in New York City makes one wonder whether we need to take a serious look at implementing completely different strategies.

It has become clear that the construction industry must take the lead on safety reforms and work with public officials to achieve these worthy goals.

The Construction Industry Partnership has made passage of these reform measures one of our top priorities. We welcome the support and assistance from the entire real estate and construction communities.

COPYRIGHT 2004 Hagedorn Publication