Safety

Personal protective equipment has to fit for two primary reasons, according to Jessica Bunting, director of research to practice for Silver Spring, Maryland-based CPWR — the Center for Construction Research and Training.

First, to work properly, gear needs to fit properly. A poorly fitted fall harness will not protect a worker nearly as well as a well-fitted harness, Bunting said. Second, gear that is too big or too small can end up creating secondary hazards, such as a baggy vest getting caught in machinery, she said.

Perhaps worse, if gear is too uncomfortable, workers may forgo wearing it at all, such as doffing loose gloves that impede work.

Starting Monday, OSHA will require construction employers to provide properly fitting PPE to their workers. The new standard aligns construction with a rule already in place for general industry.

“I’m glad that OSHA is acknowledging that in order for PPE to work, it has to fit,” Bunting said.

The rule, first announced in July 2023, applies to all kinds of PPE, such as hard hats, gloves, goggles, safety vests and harnesses. To comply with the rule, experts say contractors should read up on the standard, consult their lawyers and safety teams and ensure they have a wide variety of safety gear options.

A proper fit

At first glance, the rule seems pretty straightforward. Experts say it is, with a few caveats. During the open comment period, legal experts and construction employers took issue with the standard requiring gear to “properly fit,” as they found that term tough to define.

“Unfortunately, the new rule lacks specific guidance on what it means to fit properly or a definition of that term so that employers can be assured that they are in compliance,” said attorney Ashley Brightwell, partner in Atlanta-based Alston & Bird’s labor and employment group.

Phil Russell, OSHA and employment lawyer, litigator and advisor for Washington, D.C.-based firm Ogletree Deakins, said that the agency noted that the “properly fit” guidance was provided for the general industry standard, which didn’t result in problems.

So, does “proper fit” mean comfort? Most effectively safe fit? And what about universal fit items? They can carry a one-size-fits-all label, but still could be too baggy for smaller workers, such as women, who the standard seeks to protect. 

“Many employers in other industries comply with the obligation to provide properly fitting PPE by providing adjustable fit PPE,” Brightwell said. “Employers should keep in mind, however, that even PPE sold as ‘universal fit’ may still not fit the entirety of the employee population.”

Experts say it’s best to focus on what the gear itself is intended for and to keep in mind those two primary reasons PPE needs to fit.

“Because OSHA is a safety agency, I think you’ve got to connect it to safety, not necessarily comfort,” Russell said. 

But even with the lack of clarity, Matthew Cox, North Carolina-based partner at law firm Smith Currie Oles, says it should be obvious to any safety expert when someone’s gear fits.

“I think it’s just attention to detail, like anything else,” Cox said. “When you have those toolbox meetings on site and you look around, it’s easy to see if someone’s gear is not fitting.” 

Gearing up

In Russell’s experience, most of his clients already provided the right-fitting PPE for workers. He pointed to trade shows and conferences, such as the American Society of Safety Professionals conference, where retailers offering a variety of PPE fill the expo floor.

“I don’t know if [the new standard] was necessary, but now that it’s passed I don’t think it’ll be harmful,” Russell said.

Nonetheless, experts said the addition of the rule may bring some added scrutiny to OSHA inspections or citations. 

“It will be important for employers in the construction industry to ensure that a sufficient variety of sizes of PPE is provided,” Brightwell said. “By providing only larger sizes of PPE, employers could open themselves up to gender discrimination claims, particularly because the new rule is geared primarily toward women.”

Thankfully, resources abound for finding a variety of PPE options. For example, CPWR has a page listing options for various types of gear for various body types.

And when it comes to complying, Cox advised not waiting for OSHA to come to you.

“I think being proactive is the biggest key to success,” he said.

Construction last year counted the highest number of workplace deaths in the sector since 2011, according to newly released federal data. At the same time, the rate at which construction workers died on the job remained unchanged.

Construction had 1,075 fatalities in 2023, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries released Thursday. The BLS measured a fatal work injury rate of 9.6 deaths per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers, the same rate as a year ago. 

The fatal injury rate in construction has hovered at around 10 for over a decade. 

Meanwhile, the BLS found falls, slips and trips — some of the deadliest hazards in the industry every year — counted for 421, or 39.2%, of all construction fatalities.

The BLS reported that construction had the highest number of deaths of any private industry. However, it also listed 1,454 deaths in the trade, transportation and utilities sector, a broad area that includes retail workers and transportation and warehouse employees.

By the numbers

In total, 5,283 U.S. employees died at work last year, the BLS found, which meant about one in five occupational deaths in 2023 occurred at construction workplaces.

The construction industry’s fatality rate, however, ranked third, behind agriculture, fishing, forestry and hunting (20.3) and transportation and warehousing (12.9).

Drilling down into the data, the majority of fatal falls in construction — 260 or 64.4% — were from a height between 6 feet and 30 feet. Portable ladders and stairs were the primary source of 109 construction fatalities, the BLS said.

After falls, transportation incidents were the second highest cause of death, with 240 workplace fatalities. Transportation incidents record work-related injuries or fatalities that occur when an employee is impacted while operating or working around a vehicle. 

BLS releases data both on the industry — which records the type of business for whom someone works — and occupation — which puts more stock into what kind of work a person performs.

In construction and extraction occupations, the fatality rate decreased modestly, from 13.0 in 2022 to 12.9 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers in 2023. In terms of raw numbers, 1,055 construction and extraction workers died in 2023, one fewer than the year before. Of those fatalities, 809 were construction tradesworkers. 

Demographic breakdown

The overall fatality rate for U.S. workers in all industries was about 3.5 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. For some groups, those rates were higher. 

For example, the fatal injury rate for Black or African-American workers in all industries was 3.6 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers in 2023, higher than the nationwide average, but also lower than the rate of 4.2 a year prior.

Meanwhile, Hispanic or Latino workers in all industries had a fatality rate of 4.4. Again, that was lower than the prior year (4.6), but higher than the nationwide average. Of the 1,250 Hispanic or Latino workers who died on the job in 2023, 839 were foreign-born, according to the BLS. 

“More than 5,200 deaths on the job is still way too many,” Jessica E. Martinez, executive director of the National Council for Occupational Safety and Health, said in a statement.  “We are also deeply concerned that Black and Brown workers continue to suffer from a higher rate of occupational fatalities, a sign of the persistent effects of discrimination in our workplaces.” 

National COSH also called attention to the number of deaths not counted as part of the report. For example, many workers die due to long-term exposure to occupational hazards, and a recent Tampa Bay Times report uncovered a large number of heat illness deaths in Florida went unreported. 

When it came to age groups, workers aged 55 to 64 years had the most at-work deaths at 1,089, though the groups of 35 to 44 years and 45 to 54 years also each counted over 1,000 occupational deaths.

Finally, the vast majority of those who died at work in the U.S. were men, as women accounted for 8.5% of all workplace fatalities.

Industry response

Construction is hazardous work, and employers know it. Leaders in the industry have sought to find new ways to record, understand and prevent serious injuries and fatalities, as researchers study methods to improve personal protective equipment in case disaster strikes. 

Still, industry leaders acknowledge there is work to be done.

“Today’s data is a grim reminder of the challenge our industry faces when it comes to ensuring the health and safety of the men and women who build America,” said Brian Turmail, vice president of public affairs and workforce for the Associated General Contractors of America. 

He said the AGC offers safety training for fall protection, launched a trenching safety coalition and continues to pressure state and federal officials to improve safety in highway work zones. 

“Nobody should be at risk in this industry, which is why we and our members will not rest until we crack this challenge,” Turmail said. “In the meantime, we grieve with the families and loved ones of those who have lost their lives in our industry.”

Greg Sizemore, vice president of health, safety, environment and workforce development for Associated Builders and Contractors, also called upon employers to utilize the tools at their disposal to train, equip and empower their employees to recognize risk.

“Unfortunately, we are not seeing the gains or progress that we would consider favorable for the health and safety of construction workers,” Sizemore said. “We must also be relentless in ensuring every employee arrives and leaves jobsites in the same or better condition than ever before.”

Sponsored content

By OSHA Education Center

Construction crews have a challenging, complex job with a long list of tactics to remember – beyond the basic requirements of their jobs. From construction techniques to regulatory requirements and machine-specific best practices to site- or location- or company-specific rules, they have a lot to keep front of mind. Add safety to the mix, and it’s easier to understand why the industry faces tragic, deadly accidents at a higher rate than any other industry in the U.S.

Safety is Paramount

All workers deserve safety training that makes sense – after all, learning about hazards is the first step in learning to avoid them. However, OSHA’s recommended construction safety courses aren’t required, but workers are still responsible for the safety knowledge covered in these courses.

Challenges Abound

• Construction has a high regulatory burden. Between the OSHA standard and site- or location-specific requirements, it’s an extensive list to remember.

• Project have a high level of complexity, with a various jobs and experience levels, machine-specific requirements, and constant site changes.

• The expense related to bad safety practices can be staggering; OSHA violations start at $15k per infraction and downtime is incredibly expensive and may mean temporary layoffs. This may exacerbate hiring challenges.

• Construction is physically demanding work with dangerous equipment and situations. Muscle fatigue can lead to a higher chance of accidents, especially if they’re working longer hours due to worker shortages.

Top Causes of Construction Worker Death

Construction worker death accounts for over 20% of all private sector worker fatalities, with the Construction Focus (Fatal) Four leading the list:

1. Caught-in/Between

2. Electrocutions

3. Struck-by Objects

4. Falls, accounting for 39% of workplace fatalities in the industry. 1135 construction worker died from falls in 2023, which increased almost 10% 2022-2023.

It’s time to build a more safety-savvy workforce. Just reducing fall-related injuries and deaths will dramatically change the outlook for construction workers.

3 Steps for Reducing Fall-Related Deaths in the Construction Industry

Show your crew you’re invested in making your site a safer place to work by winning in these specific fall prevention and overall accident reduction areas:

1. PPE | Provide your crew with PPE and inspect it regularly to ensure there are no frays, rips, or other problems, and prohibit your team from using unsafe PPE components including lanyards, anchor points, harnesses, and safety nets.

2. Attitude | Talk about safety regularly and remind your crew that your site puts safety first. Choose a topic to focus on, using examples from your site when possible, and keep safety front of mind every day.

3. Training | Require training so your crew understands you’re serious about their safety. Provide access to no-nonsense, easy-to-understand, and up-to-date safety knowledge they can apply immediately when they get to your site.

Lean on an OSHA-Authorized Safety Training Provider

OSHA’s recommended 10- and 30-Hour safety training for the construction industry must meet specific requirements and cover all topics outlined by OSHA. Ensuring the training you adopt for your crew is OSHA-Authorized means your team will learn how to do their work in the safest way possible and help them understand how to avoid creating hazards for other crew members. You’ll be confident that the training you choose covers all required topics and has been validated by OSHA.

Why OSHA Education Center?

Consistent compliance | Simplified management | Reduced costs | Impactful training

Partner with us to bring better safety training to your crew and improve your safety culture. Our fully online OSHA-Authorized construction safety training, available in 10- and 30-Hour formats, is just the beginning. Your crew needs specialized safety training that goes beyond what OSHA requires, and our comprehensive construction safety library is how your team can rapidly improve their site safety knowledge, helping reduce accidents and injuries.

From onboarding to refreshers, critical topics like extended fall protection, cranes & rigging, hazardous materials, forklift certification and the rest of our extensive construction safety training catalog, we have your team’s needs covered.

Our 13-Hour Extended Fall Protection online training course covers fall protection, slips, trips, ladders, and competent person training, and it’s the perfect addition to your safety program to help reduce the risk of this major hazard.

Don’t let a single member of your crew become a statistic. Lean on us to help you foster your safety-first site culture so you and your crew can reap the benefits: fewer accidents, fewer costly citations, and the ultimate goal: zero deaths.

In 2024’s final quarter, some of the largest OSHA citations issued to construction firms stemmed from two of the most well-identified hazards: falls and trench cave-ins.

The agency has national emphasis programs for those standards, as they are some of the deadliest and most easily identified perils on a jobsite.

OSHA publicizes instances in which it issues large fines, as a means of showing its regulatory power and calling attention to violations. In the fourth quarter of last year, the agency highlighted several employers facing hefty penalties across multiple jobsites and inspections.

In construction, these cases often involve residential builders committing repeat violations, which carry a larger initial penalty. The original fine amounts are sometimes negotiated down in settlement, so they do not always represent the amount paid. Cases where firms have settled the initial amounts already have been noted here.

RRC Home Improvement
Initial fines: $328,545 (across three inspections)
Status: Contested

Federal OSHA safety officials have levied nearly $330,000 in initial fines against a Newark, New Jersey-based roofing contractor after three inspections in the summer of 2024 allegedly discovered that workers were exposed to falls.

In June, OSHA said inspectors on a Dover, Delaware, jobsite received reports of employees of RRC Home Improvement working on a roof without fall protection. A month after warning the company, OSHA opened inspections at two worksites in Lodi, New Jersey, in July. Those inspections were part of the agency’s national emphasis program for falls in construction. 

The agency alleges it again observed employees working without required fall protection, as well as a lack of hard hats, eye protection and fire extinguishers in addition to non-compliant pump jack scaffold poles and unsafe ladder use.

OSHA said it has cited the company for failing to provide workers with fall protection in five different inspections since 2017 and added RRC Home Improvement to the Severe Violators Enforcement Program. After the inspections, OSHA issued four willful and seven serious violations in December, totaling $328,545 in initial penalties. RRC Home Improvement is contesting all of the fines.

RRC Home Improvement did not respond to requests for comment.

Fino Exterior Inc.
Initial fines: $302,935 (across four inspections)
Status: Contested

OSHA inspectors allegedly observed employees of a Lake Zurich, Illinois-based roofing contractor working on top of residential structures without legally required fall protection on four occasions in 2024.

On Feb 6., June 12, Aug. 16 and Oct. 16 of last year, OSHA says it inspected Fino Exterior Inc. employees working without protections on four different Illinois jobsites. OSHA says federal inspectors have cited the contractor eight times since 2020 and that it currently is liable for $65,115 in unpaid OSHA penalties.

OSHA cited the company for the February offense in March, and for the other three occasions in December. Fino Exterior faces citations for 13 safety violations and a proposed $302,935 in penalties. The company is contesting the fines.

In addition to a lack of fall protection, OSHA cited Fino Exterior for:

• Permitting employees to work near energized power lines.
• Not providing employees with hard hats.
• Failing to train workers in fall protection hazards and prevention.
• Lack of eye protection for workers operating pneumatic nail guns.
• Improper use of ladders.

The company has no publicly available contact info, and could not be reached for comment.

595 Construction
Initial fines: $287,465 (across three inspections)
Status: Contested

OSHA has cited a framing contractor $287,465 after it allegedly observed workers exposed to fall hazards without proper protection three times at three residential jobsites in the same neighborhood in the same month. 

The agency says inspectors first observed Crystal Lake, Illinois-based 595 Construction employees at work without required equipment on two residential buildings on May 10 and again on May 31. 

As a result, OSHA cited the company for allowing employees to work without fall protection at heights greater than 6 feet and failing to certify they trained workers to recognize hazards or prevent falls. OSHA also claims 595 Construction permitted unsafe use of ladders, failed to ensure workers had certification to operate industrial vehicles and used damaged slings to hoist materials.

In November, 595 Construction received one willful violation, four repeat violations and three serious violations across three different inspections. 595 Construction faced similar citations for serious and repeat safety failures in 2022 and 2023.

595 Construction is contesting the fines. The company has no publicly available contact info, and could not be reached for comment.

Aleckssandro Tomaz Pereira
Initial fines: $283,116
Status: Issued

A federal OSHA investigation allegedly has found the operator of three Massachusetts waterproofing contracting companies could have prevented an employee from dying in February 2024.

OSHA claims Aleckssandro Tomaz Pereira — operating as Boston Concrete Corp, VMT Contractor and Boston Concrete and Remodeling — exposed workers to cave-in, caught-between and structural collapse hazards by failing to reinforce a trench and building foundation against collapse.

On Feb. 7, 2024, OSHA said, an employee was digging in a trench around an existing residential structure in Hanson, Massachusetts, when the foundation wall collapsed and killed the employee. OSHA says its investigators determined the employer instructed the worker to enter the trench to prepare a foundation wall for waterproofing and dig out an area under the wall to install concrete footings.

In addition, the agency said Pereira failed to:

• Ensure the employee did not dig beneath the unsupported foundation wall’s base.
• Train employees to recognize and avoid cave-in hazards.
• Train employees on operating an excavator and recognizing associated hazards.
• Provide a safe means of exiting the trench.
• Prevent water from accumulating in the trench.

As a result, Pereira faces two willful and six serious violations, totaling $283,116 in initial fines issued in November.

Construction Dive called a publicly available number listed for Boston Concrete Corp, but received word that the number was no longer in service.

Miguel A. Esquina Reyes
Initial fines: $266,175
Status: Issued

Federal OSHA inspectors have cited a Zion, Illinois-based roofing contractor for allegedly exposing workers to fall hazards. OSHA claims Miguel A. Esquina Reyes has “an extensive history of endangering workers by exposing them to fall hazards.”

An August 2024 inspection of a Glencoe, Illinois, worksite allegedly found employees of Reyes — operating as Corner Construction Corp. — working without the legally required fall protection. OSHA said it was the second such incident in six months and the fifth in two years.

As a result, OSHA cited the company for allowing employees to work at heights of greater than 6 feet without protection and the unsafe use of ladders. In December, OSHA handed Reyes three violations — one willful, one repeat and one serious — totaling $266,175 in proposed penalties. 

The company has no publicly available contact info and could not be reached for comment.

Masci General Contractor Inc.
Initial fines: $216,633
Status: Contested

On May 28, 2024, safety inspectors with OSHA allegedly viewed workers employed by Port Orange, Florida-based sewer line contractor Masci General Contractor Inc. installing a sewer line in an unsafe trench.

OSHA inspectors initiated the removal of the employees from the 6-foot-deep, 40-foot-long trench in Daytona Beach, Florida. The agency then cited Masci in November for willfully endangering workers by failing to provide essential cave-in protection, such as shoring or trench boxes. 

As a result, the contractor faces $216,633 in initial penalties from five serious and one willful violation. The firm is contesting the fines.

Masci did not respond to requests for comment. 

K T Carter Contracting Inc.
Initial fines: $146,803
Status: Informal settlement ($95,000)

Inspectors say they viewed workers from K T Carter Contracting Inc. in a 12-foot-deep trench without cave-in protection in Jacksonville, Florida.

OSHA initiated the removal of workers employed by the Jacksonville-based civil contractor. The agency levied two serious and one willful violation for the instance, totaling $146,803 in initial fines in November. The two parties reached an informal settlement, according to OSHA’s database, for $95,000.

K T Carter Contracting did not respond to requests for comment.

Patriot Paving Group
Initial fines: $161,325
Status: Formal settlement ($57,600)

A federal investigation into a June 2024 death at a Brownville, Maine, worksite resulted in initial fines for a Glenburn, Maine-based general contractor.

OSHA claims Patriot Paving Group ignored an onsite expert’s repeated warnings and its own site-specific plan for the project, which ultimately saw an unbraced retaining wall collapse and kill a worker.

OSHA determined two employees of Patriot Paving Group were installing storm drainage pipes in a roughly 3-foot-deep trench. At the same time, the company owner used an excavator near the retaining wall’s base, which destabilized it, causing the 40- to 60-foot-long section of the wall to tip over. One worker escaped, but the other died. 

Investigators determined the company knew the wall was unstable but did not use necessary protective systems. As a result of the investigation, OSHA cited the company for five willful violations in December. 

The two parties have reached a formal settlement for $57,600, per OSHA’s database.

Patriot Paving did not respond to requests for comment.

Bandera Utility Contractors
Initial fines: $107,228
Status: Informal settlement ($72,092)

An OSHA investigation allegedly found a Frisco, Texas-based contractor repeatedly exposed workers to serious hazards by allowing them to work in unprotected trenches without providing a safe means to escape.

In response to a formal complaint, OSHA officers observed employees of Bandera Utility Contractors working on water and sewer lines in a trench with inadequate protection. In addition, OSHA inspectors allegedly noted that the company failed to provide employees with basic safety measures, such as ladders in the trench and a means to escape in the event of a collapse. 

OSHA also said it cited Bandera Utility Contractors in 2022 for four serious violations of similar regulations after an employee died in a trench collapse.

As a result, OSHA cited the company, issuing three serious and two repeat violations in December. The two parties reached an informal settlement for $72,092, according to OSHA’s database.

Bandera Utility Contractors did not respond to requests for comment.

Between 2021 and 2022, U.S. workers suffered a reported 155,830 head injuries on the job that resulted in days away from work, restricted activity or a job transfer, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The alarming figures were the catalyst behind a recent study by Neenah, Wisconsin-based business safety consultant firm J.J. Keller & Associates Inc. and the International Safety Equipment Association, which uncovered troubling levels of confusion and misunderstanding regarding head protection equipment, including hard hats and safety helmets.

“Such misconceptions pose a significant danger, contributing to improper use and, consequently, an increased risk of injuries and fatalities in the workplace,” said Cam Mackey, president and CEO of ISEA, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia.

The study looked at many factors, such as comfort and fit, enforcement challenges and heat-related concerns, which have been more prevalent in recent years due to record-breaking temperatures that cause many workers to remove their protection while on the job.

“This disconnect often arises from variations in the strictness of employers’ PPE programs, inconsistencies between state and federal OSHA standards and differing PPE requirements among owners, contractors and subcontractors,” said Ray Qureshi-Chishti, senior editor with J. J. Keller. 

Other factor, like complacency or a lack of clear information contribute to the confusion, which contributes to the gap between perception of knowledge and actual understanding, Qureshi-Chishti said.

ISEA’s main concern is that workers will use the wrong type of head protection and suffer an injury or fatality.

“One of the biggest scary stats surrounding all this is that when there is a fatal head injury on the job, 80% of the time it’s because a worker wasn’t wearing any head protection at all,” Mackey said. “The biggest thing we want to get across is the importance of wearing head protection and figuring out what the right one is.”

ISEA realized there was a great deal of confusion going on in different sectors and different industries, such as manufacturing, transportation, utilities and mining.

“We realized this is a big deal and the stakes are high,” Mackey said. “These are potential life-and-death decisions.”

Misunderstandings abound

The study found that although 72% of respondents believed they understood the differences in head protection types, there were significant misconceptions.  

For instance, 59% of study respondents incorrectly thought that safety helmets offer more protection than hard hats, and 80% believed that only helmet-style protection could provide impact resistance on all sides. 

In reality, the kind of protection head gear offers varies by equipment.

Another big misunderstanding that ISEA discovered was an assumption that head protection is a one-size-fits-all solution, where simply by looking at it, one understood the type of safety it would provide.

“Probably 10 to 15 years ago, that was true; you could look at a piece of head protection and more or less get that right,” Mackey said. “The reality is that we live in a very different age now where you have to read the label. That label will tell you if this will protect you against 20,000 volts or not, or if it will provide protection or comfort if it’s hot out. That was the biggest confusion area we wanted to provide some content on.”

Though it may be more complicated now, the fact that there’s more choices improves the head protection game considerably.

“You can pick from a hard hat to a climbing-style helmet, and either of those could have protection on the top of the head or side of the head, and there are optional chin straps and other options, so that's all super exciting,” Mackey said. “It just creates a greater burden on the consumer — as well as the safety professional — to know what they need to buy at the job at hand.”

For instance, on a construction site, not every job requires the same level of hazard mitigation. Some workers may need a hard hat that provides just top-of-the-head protection while others need something much more robust.

So, ISEA set out to call out the pain points and areas of misunderstanding and come up with solutions to educate workers and their employers on making the right choice.

Dispelling misinformation

To navigate these challenges, ISEA has launched a comprehensive online resource with hopes of curtailing any misinformation and offering important guidance on head gear standards. Created with the American Society of Safety Professionals, the site takes a fact vs. fiction or myth-busting approach.

“If safety professionals are challenged to understand all these standards and regulations, it’s even tougher for workers,” Mackey said.

An ongoing dialogue will also lead to better comfort and fit for those wearing the head protection, because there are plenty of options out there — different brands, styles and materials — and that will increase the likelihood that workers will wear head protection and wear the right type.

“Change is a wonderful thing and is giving us more choices every day in head protection,” Mackey said.

A major snowstorm slammed the Gulf Coast this week, while bitter cold gripped much of the eastern half of the country as temperatures plummeted to dangerous lows. 

The frigid weather can create hazards not only for homeowners and motorists, but also for construction workers who must toil outside, especially those in regions that don’t typically experience freezing conditions.

“When you think about how heat affects [workers] based on what they’re used to, like someone who works in an environment that’s always hot, they’re going to be more accustomed to the heat,” said Jessica Bunting, director of research to practice for Silver Spring, Maryland-based CPWR — the Center for Construction Research and Training. “It can be similar with the cold. Not only are our bodies more acclimated, but also we have better gear, better clothing.”

And this is far from the first time in recent years that extreme cold has hit unusual locales. Temperatures measured at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport plummeted to 2 below in February 2021, as the cold created a statewide energy crisis, the Dallas Morning News reported. In 2022, much of Texas experienced below-freezing temperatures over the holidays.

These unusual lows contrast with summer temperatures that have soared above normal levels in recent years.  Scientists say climate change fuels those extreme weather events, both high and low temperatures. 

Safety experts say working in the cold requires a similar vigilance from jobsite superintendents and managers as working in heat. Having a safety plan, observing workers and providing worker education about newer hazards is key, they told Construction Dive.

Putting people first

New York City-based Turner Construction is no stranger to projects in different climates. The builder is currently working on the Buffalo Bills $1.4 billion stadium in Orchard Park, New York. The new venue, very near to the existing one, will undoubtedly become known for hosting snowy games.

But that snowfall doesn’t wait for construction to be done.

“I think the biggest thing is just awareness and knowing that you’re going to have winter weather issues,” said Steve Spaulding, environmental health and safety chief for Turner.

Spaulding repeatedly emphasized planning — safety teams should have an idea of when temperature drops and snow or sleet is coming — to prepare the site to protect materials and the workforce.

Todd Friis, senior vice president of risk management for Chicago-based Clayco, the largest contractor in the Midwest, said his firm also deals with projects in various climates, and he also emphasized the need to have a detailed scheme.

“Dealing with winter conditions requires proactive planning, which is why we develop detailed winter weather preparation plans well in advance of any anticipated extreme conditions,” Friis said. “These plans prioritize worker safety while maintaining efficient and effective construction progress.”

Both Turner and Friis have adopted the use of gas or electric heaters when necessary — when temperatures drop below 40 degrees for Clayco. But placing a warming zone requires planning, support for capacity, reliable heating sources, protection from the elements and knowledge of additional hazards, such as carbon monoxide, Friis said.

Employer responsibilities

In cold weather, workers can develop cold stress and hypothermia before they begin to notice the worst symptoms, Bunting said. 

Even on a frigid jobsite, employees still sweat, which in cold temperatures can be dangerous, as hypothermia sets in fast, said Mary Bauer, an OSHA compliance assistance specialist based in Wisconsin. Additionally, cold weather can impair a worker’s judgment in subtle ways.

For example, someone in the frigid cold may choose to take a shortcut, walking along a more hazardous route to get to warmth faster.

OSHA does not have a specific standard for cold weather safety, though it does have multiple resource pages to assist employers. It isn’t exactly clear how many injuries or fatalities are caused by extreme cold, Bunting said, as most data merely classifies incidents as temperature-related. That said, it may be safe to assume heat causes more of those injuries, as work is more likely to continue in heat than in freezing cold.

Even still, employers do have responsibilities, and failing to keep the jobsite safe could result in injury and citation. OSHA doesn’t have guidance on when a workplace should be shut down, Bauer said. Experts told Construction Dive the decision to carry on with work is not taken lightly and depends on a variety of factors, including if the roads are drivable.

“In OSHA’s eyes, everybody needs a safe and healthful workplace,” Bauer said. “And if the weather, the climate, or something is interfering with that, the employer needs to make a change.”

When it comes to dressing for the warmth, Bauer said, that’s actually the responsibility of the employee. Employers still must take into account what workers are accustomed to and what’s in their wardrobe.

“If you’re talking about the southern states having situations where they’re working in subfreezing, something below 30 degrees and they’re not used to it, they don’t own gloves, they don’t own jackets and the right type of shoes, the employer should be ensuring they have adequate protection before they go out,” Bauer said.

Nonetheless, she acknowledged that some people in her home state flaunt the freezing weather.

“We have people in northern Wisconsin that wear shorts in the winters,” she said. “I mean, it’s just crazy.”

In addition, the experts suggested:

• Ensuring proper safety gear and warm weather gear.
• Offering frequent breaks for workers to rest, warm up and hydrate.
• Educating employees on the early signs of cold stress and hypothermia, such as shivering, stomping to keep warm, confusion or loss of coordination.
• Paying close attention to potential hazards to ensure they aren’t worsened by the cold weather.
• Knowing how the cold weather can impact existing safeguards. For example, Friis said sometimes air horns used in case of emergency don’t function properly in the extreme cold.

Spaulding said that resources abound for cold weather safety, and it’s an area where the big players collaborate instead of compete by sharing resources and best practices.

“If you’re always thinking of the worker first, it makes it very easy,” Spaulding said.

New legislation designed to do away with OSHA at a federal level will not move forward, an employment attorney told Construction Dive.

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., last month proposed the Nullify Occupational Safety and Health Administration Act, which would abolish the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 that created OSHA. 

Biggs introduced similar legislation in 2021, which stalled out after it was referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.

“OSHA’s existence is yet another example of the federal government creating agencies to address issues that are more appropriately handled by state governments and private employers,” Biggs said in a statement in 2021.

Phillip Russell, Tampa, Florida-based OSHA and employment lawyer for Ogletree Deakins said that the new bill will not pass, as OSHA plays a vital role in workplace safety.

“I think that’s got zero chance of that thing ever seeing the light of day,” Russell said. “I believe the agency serves an important role, but it just needs to be more focused, it needs to stay within its statutory authority, and it needs to be effective.”

When asked if he thought President Donald Trump could support the bill, Russell said, “I really don’t know. There have been so many surprises.”

Even if Trump did support it, Russell said, Republicans would have to get rid of the filibuster in the Senate, which he does not see as likely.

Rule changes

Nevertheless, the Trump administration has taken other actions in recent days that could impact the agency, such as pausing rulemaking and attempts to cut departments’ and agencies’ headcounts.

On Jan. 20, Trump issued a memorandum directing executive agencies to stop proposing or issuing rules until a department head appointed by the president can review and approve them.

It also immediately withdrew rules that have been sent to the Office of the Federal Register but have not yet been published, according to a Feb. 4 blog post from Ogletree Deakins. 

Due to these moves, it appears that the directive halts the implementation of the agency’s heat injury and illness standard, per Ogletree Deakins. Already-issued updates, such as the walkaround rule and a construction standard requiring well-fitting personal protective equipment remain in effect, the blog said.

The pause to the heat illness rule is “no surprise,” Russell told Construction Dive.

OSHA’s open comment period for the heat rule closed on Dec. 30, and Russell said it can take months to review comments. Trump’s return to the White House means the rule will likely never go into effect. On Jan. 31, an executive order from Trump directed agencies to identify 10 rules or regulations to repeal every time they wish to issue one new one.

“I don’t think you’re going to feel so strongly about that particular heat illness standard, especially in the light of those public comments opposing it,” Russell said.

The president’s nominee for Department of Labor, Lori Chavez-DeRemer, awaits confirmation, and no new head of OSHA has been named yet, but Russell said he doubts anyone chosen would elect to get rid of 10 rules to make the heat standard a reality. 

Headcount reduction

Trump’s team has attempted to reduce headcount at federal agencies by offering federal workers a buyout. Employees at many agencies were given the option to resign from their jobs by last Thursday in exchange for going on leave with pay through the end of September. 

A federal judge in Boston has temporarily halted that buyout, Reuters reported. Nevertheless, it remains clear that it reflects Trump’s intention of shrinking the federal workforce.

Meanwhile, Trump has mandated that federal workers return to their offices, ending COVID-era policies that offered more remote or hybrid options. Russell said both a return to office and a reduction in the federal workforce could be positive for OSHA.

“I think that could substantially help the development of some of the newer compliance officers," Russell said of the return-to-office policy. “Maybe the efforts to make the agency more lean will make it more focused.”