Three months ago, I was called to investigate an incident on a multi-employer construction site where a subcontractor's employee fell from an unguarded floor opening. During the investigation, the general contractor insisted that safety was the subcontractor's responsibility. The subcontractor claimed they were never told about the opening. The project owner maintained that they had hired professionals and shouldn't be involved in day-to-day safety matters. All three received OSHA citations under the multi-employer citation policy.
This scenario repeats itself across construction sites nationwide because the roles of construction safety management are poorly understood or deliberately ignored. When everyone assumes someone else is responsible for safety, hazards persist, and workers get hurt.
Understanding who is responsible for what on a construction site isn't just about avoiding citations. It's about creating a system that identifies and corrects hazards.
This article provides a practical breakdown of who is responsible for what and where roles overlap. Specifically, you'll learn:
Construction safety management roles encompass planning, oversight, enforcement, and documentation to maintain a safe construction site. These roles involve identifying hazards, implementing controls, training workers, monitoring conditions, and taking corrective action when problems arise.
In practice, construction safety management means assigning specific authority and responsibility to each safety function. The complexity arises because construction sites typically involve multiple employers—owners, general contractors, subcontractors, and specialty contractors—all working simultaneously.
How roles vary by project size and structure affects the specifics, but the core principle remains constant: every safety function must have a clearly assigned responsible party. On small projects, one person may fill multiple roles. On large projects, elaborate organizational structures may distribute responsibilities across dozens of people.
The critical point is that when roles are undefined or assumed rather than explicitly defined, gaps emerge in which hazards fall through the cracks.
Project owners often believe they can outsource all safety responsibility by hiring contractors. OSHA and the courts have repeatedly demonstrated that this assumption is wrong.
Due diligence and contractor selection represent the owner's first safety obligation. Owners must verify that contractors have appropriate safety programs, adequate insurance, acceptable safety records, and the competency to perform the work safely. Hiring the lowest bidder with a history of citations and incidents creates foreseeable risk.
Oversight expectations continue throughout the project. Owners cannot simply hire contractors and walk away. Depending on the contract terms and the owner's level of control over the site, owners may be responsible for monitoring safety conditions, requiring corrections of hazards, and halting work when imminent dangers exist.
The limits of owner control vs. responsibility create a nuanced area. Even when owners lack day-to-day control over contractor operations, they may still be held responsible under OSHA's multi-employer citation policy as a controlling employer if they have general supervisory authority over the worksite.
Assuming safety is fully outsourced is the most prevalent owner mistake. Contracts that state "contractor is solely responsible for safety" do not eliminate the owner's potential liability under OSHA regulations or civil law.
Failing to act on audit findings puts owners at risk. When safety audits or inspections identify hazards, owners who are notified but fail to require correction can be cited as controlling employers.
Poor contractor vetting leads to problems before work even begins. Owners who fail to pre-qualify contractors for safety capability often discover too late that their contractors lack adequate programs, insurance, or competency.
On multi-employer worksites, general contractors typically bear the broadest safety responsibilities because they usually have the most control.
Site-wide safety programs are generally the GC's responsibility. This includes establishing site-specific safety rules, conducting regular inspections, coordinating fall protection and other hazard controls that affect multiple trades, and ensuring adequate access to first aid and emergency equipment.
Coordination between subcontractors prevents many incidents. General contractors must schedule work to minimize conflicts between trades, ensure subcontractors communicate about shared hazards, and coordinate multi-employer tasks like crane operations or confined space entry.
Enforcement authority is essential for the GC role. General contractors must have contractual authority to stop work, require correction of hazards, and remove noncompliant subcontractors from the site. Without enforcement authority, coordination becomes meaningless.
Understanding OSHA's multi-employer citation policy is critical for general contractors because it defines when and how they can be cited for subcontractor violations.
According to OSHA Directive CPL 2-0.124, on multi-employer worksites, more than one employer may be citable for a hazardous condition that violates an OSHA standard. OSHA follows a two-step process to determine citations.
Step One identifies whether an employer falls into one of four categories:
Creating employer: The employer who caused a hazardous condition that violates an OSHA standard. Creating employers can be cited even if none of their own employees are exposed to the hazard.
Exposing employer: An employer whose own employees are exposed to the hazard. If an employer's workers are exposed to a violative condition, that employer can be cited regardless of who created the hazard.
Correcting employer: An employer responsible for correcting a hazard. This often applies to employers contracted to install or maintain safety equipment. Correcting employers can be cited for failing to fulfill their obligation to correct hazards even when their own employees are not exposed.
Controlling employer: An employer who has general supervisory authority over the worksite, including the power to correct safety and health violations itself or require others to correct them. General contractors typically fall into this category. The controlling employer has a duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent and detect violations.
Step Two determines if the employer met its obligations within its role. The extent of action required varies by category, but employers cannot avoid citations simply by pointing to contracts that assign responsibility elsewhere.
An employer can occupy multiple categories simultaneously. A general contractor is often both a controlling employer and an exposing employer. A subcontractor who creates a hazard that affects their own workers is both a creating employer and an exposing employer.
Supervisors and foremen represent the critical link between written safety programs and actual field implementation.
Toolbox talks or pre-task planning provide daily safety communication. Competent supervisors review the day's work activities, identify hazards specific to those tasks, and ensure workers understand protective measures before work begins.
Hazard recognition is perhaps the supervisor's most important function. Supervisors must identify changing conditions, new hazards, and unsafe behaviors as work progresses. This requires constant attention and the knowledge to distinguish safe from unsafe conditions.
Immediate corrective action must be within the supervisor's authority. When supervisors observe hazards or unsafe behaviors, they must have the authority to stop work, implement interim controls, and require correction before work resumes.
Documentation of safety activities creates accountability. Supervisors should document toolbox talks, safety observations, hazard reports, and corrective actions. This documentation demonstrates that the company's safety obligations were fulfilled and provides evidence of its safety commitment.
Failure to correct known hazards exposes supervisors and their employers to willful or repeat citation classifications. Once a supervisor becomes aware of a hazard, the company is deemed to have knowledge. Failure to correct the hazard can result in significantly higher penalties.
Training oversight is another supervisor's responsibility. Supervisors must verify that workers under their supervision have received the required training, understand the content, and can demonstrate competency in safe work practices.
The question of ultimate responsibility has a legally clear answer but a practically complex one.
Under the OSH Act and OSHA regulations, each employer is responsible for the safety of its own employees. Additionally, under the multi-employer citation policy, employers may be responsible for hazards that affect other employers' workers if they fall into the creating, correcting, or controlling employer categories.
OSHA assigns citations based on the employer's role and whether they met their obligations within that role. Multiple employers can be—and frequently are—cited for the same violation.
Common misconceptions about responsibility include the belief that contract language eliminates OSHA obligations, the assumption that hiring a safety consultant transfers responsibility, or the idea that only the employer whose workers were injured can be cited. None of these is true.
After nearly three decades iof nvestigating incidents and conducting audits, I've observed consistent patterns where safety roles fail.
Role overlap occurs when multiple parties could address a hazard, but each assumes someone else will handle it. For example, the GC assumes the subcontractor will guard their own floor openings, while the subcontractor assumes the GC is responsible for general site housekeeping hazards.
Assumptions about "whose job it is" lead to unguarded hazards. Without explicit assignment of responsibility, critical safety functions simply don't get performed.
Poor communication between employers creates gaps. When the steel erector doesn't tell the electrical contractor about temporary floor openings they've created, or when the GC fails to inform subcontractors about site-specific hazards, incidents become predictable.
Communication must be formal and documented, not left to chance conversations in the field.
Inadequate documentation of responsibilities makes accountability impossible. When contracts don't clearly specify who is responsible for what safety functions, disputes arise during incidents and OSHA inspections.
Without documentation, everyone claims they weren't responsible, and someone else should have handled the issue.
Lack of enforcement authority renders safety programs meaningless. A GC who cannot stop work or remove noncompliant subcontractors has no real control. A supervisor who identifies hazards but cannot require correction is powerless.
Enforcement authority must be written into contracts and supported by management.
Based on my experience helping companies establish effective safety management systems, several elements are essential.
Contracts must explicitly define safety responsibilities. Rather than generic language stating "contractor is responsible for safety," contracts should specify:
Site-specific safety plans address the actual hazards present on a particular project. These plans should identify:
The plans must be shared with all employers on the site and updated as conditions change.
Training must align with assigned responsibilities. Supervisors responsible for scaffolding inspections must receive competent person training for scaffolds. GCs serving as controlling employers must understand the multi-employer citation policy and their obligations under it.
General OSHA awareness training, like OSHA 10 or OSHA 30, does not fulfill these specific competency requirements.
Regular audits and inspections verify that assigned responsibilities are being fulfilled. Third-party audits can identify gaps that internal personnel miss due to familiarity or bias.
At SafetyPro Resources, we conduct construction safety audits that evaluate whether safety roles are clearly defined, adequately communicated, and consistently performed. Our assessments identify specific areas for improvement and provide practical recommendations.
Safety responsibility on construction sites is shared among multiple parties. Each employer is responsible for protecting its own employees and may also be responsible for hazards affecting other employers' workers, depending on whether they are a creating, exposing, correcting, or controlling employer under OSHA's multi-employer citation policy. Project owners are responsible for contractor selection and oversight. General contractors typically have broad responsibility as controlling employers. Subcontractors are responsible for their own work areas and activities. Supervisors are responsible for day-to-day implementation and oversight.
Yes. Under OSHA's multi-employer citation policy, multiple employers can be cited for the same violation if each employer falls into one of the four categories: creating, exposing, correcting, or controlling the employer. For example, a subcontractor who creates an unguarded floor opening can be cited as the creating employer, while the general contractor can be cited as the controlling employer for failing to ensure the hazard was corrected, and another subcontractor can be cited as an exposing employer if their workers were near the hazard.
A safety manager's role varies by company size and structure, but typically includes developing and implementing safety programs, conducting site inspections, providing or coordinating safety training, investigating incidents, ensuring regulatory compliance, maintaining safety documentation and records, serving as a resource for supervisors and workers on safety questions, and coordinating with OSHA and other regulatory agencies. The safety manager supports line management in fulfilling their safety responsibilities but does not replace the supervisor's or manager's direct responsibility for worker safety.
Yes. Subcontractors are responsible for OSHA compliance for their own employees and work activities. They must comply with all applicable OSHA standards, provide required training, maintain safe equipment and tools, and protect their workers from hazards. However, subcontractors may also be cited as creating employers if they create hazards that affect other workers, even if their own employees are not exposed. Additionally, general contractors serving as controlling employers remain responsible for ensuring overall site safety even when subcontractors are present.
Construction safety responsibilities should be documented in multiple places: contracts and subcontracts should clearly specify each party's safety obligations; site-specific safety plans should identify responsible parties for each hazard control measure; written safety programs should designate responsible personnel by position; job hazard analyses should specify who implements each control; meeting minutes should document safety discussions and assigned action items; and inspection reports should identify who is responsible for correcting deficiencies. All documentation should be specific, naming positions or companies rather than using vague language like "responsible parties."
Clearly defined construction safety management roles create accountability and prevent hazards from falling through the cracks. When everyone knows who is responsible for each safety function, hazards get identified and corrected before workers are injured.
Shared responsibility does not mean diffused responsibility. Each employer on a construction site must understand their specific obligations under OSHA regulations and the multi-employer citation policy. Owners cannot outsource all safety responsibility. General contractors must exercise reasonable care as controlling employers. Subcontractors remain accountable for their own work and may be held responsible for hazards they create. Supervisors must fulfill their day-to-day implementation and oversight duties.
The next practical step is to review your current contracts, safety plans, and organizational structure to verify that safety responsibilities are explicitly defined, clearly communicated, and consistently enforced. If gaps exist—and they almost always do—addressing them before an incident or inspection occurs is far more cost-effective than explaining them afterward.
SafetyPro Resources provides safety management consulting for construction companies, including contract review, site-specific safety plan development, multi-employer worksite training, and ongoing safety oversight services. Our team understands construction hazards and OSHA's expectations for multi-employer worksites.
Lance Roux, CSP, is the Founder and Principal Consultant at SafetyPro Resources, LLC. He is a Certified Safety Professional with nearly 30 years of experience across petrochemical, construction, healthcare, chemical processing, refinery, power generation, and shipyard industries. Lance has served as the Louisiana Area Director for the American Society of Safety Professionals, as President of the Greater Baton Rouge ASSP Chapter, and as Chairman of the Associated General Contractors of Louisiana Safety Committee. He has received ASSP Safety Professional of the Year awards at both chapter and regional levels.
Safety Staffing vs Full-Time Safety Managers: Which Is Right for Your Company?
Building a Cost-Effective Safety Program: Calculating Your True ROI
Fall Protection Rescue Plan Essentials for Roofing Contractors
The Benefits of Outsourcing to a Safety Consultant
Why Monthly Safety Management Matters for Compliance & Risk Reduction