By Myra A. Cunningham, Carson Law Group, PLLC

A commercial construction project is approaching a major deadline. Electricians are working overhead while a drywall crew moves material through a shared corridor. Temporary laborers unload equipment nearby as multiple subcontractors attempt to complete punch-list items before an owner walkthrough scheduled for the next morning.

During the middle of the shift, an employee trips over debris and materials that had accumulated in a shared work area used by multiple subcontractors and suffers a serious head injury.

The incident itself may appear relatively straightforward. The questions that follow rarely are.

Who controlled the work area? Had the hazard already been reported? Which contractor maintained responsibility for correcting it? Were site coordination procedures actually being followed in practice?

On modern construction projects, the answers are not always obvious.

Many projects now operate within workforce structures involving numerous subcontractors, specialty trades, staffing agencies, and temporary labor providers working simultaneously under overlapping schedules and reporting systems. As projects become more operationally complex, maintaining consistent communication and coordination across multiple employers may require a more deliberate approach than many contractors historically needed to implement.

Coordination Challenges on Layered Projects

On heavily layered projects, responsibility can sometimes become unclear in ways that are not immediately apparent until after an incident occurs.

Workers may receive direction from multiple supervisors. Reporting procedures may differ between contractors. Hazards identified by one trade may affect several others working nearby. On fast-moving projects, even relatively minor communication gaps may create uncertainty regarding who was responsible for correcting a hazard or communicating changing site conditions.

A 2024 CPWR study examining injuries along subcontracting chains in the construction industry observed that lower-tier subcontractors and contingent workers experienced higher rates of injury in certain subcontracting arrangements, particularly where work structures involved multiple layers of subcontracting and coordination responsibilities varied across the project.1 The study reflects a broader reality many contractors already recognize in practice: as projects become more operationally complex, maintaining consistent accountability across multiple employers may require greater planning and oversight.

A separate 2020 study published in the Journal of Safety Research found substantial differences in how subcontractors approached safety management across commercial construction projects, particularly with respect to training procedures, hazard communication practices, and project-level coordination efforts.2 On projects involving numerous trades and overlapping scopes of work, those inconsistencies may create confusion regarding reporting procedures, supervisory authority, or responsibility for correcting hazards—issues that often become increasingly important following a workplace incident.

Why These Issues Matter Legally

Following a workplace incident, investigators, insurers, and litigants frequently focus less on the existence of the hazard itself and more on how the project was being managed before the incident occurred.

Who maintained authority over the work area? Was the issue documented? Did contractors follow the site-specific safety plan? Were reporting procedures clearly communicated? Did project personnel respond appropriately once the hazard became known?

On multi-employer worksites, those questions may involve several contractors simultaneously.

At the same time, subcontract agreements themselves have become increasingly detailed with respect to safety obligations. Many now include provisions addressing site-specific safety plans, reporting procedures, coordination meetings, training requirements, and incident response obligations. Broad contractual language assigning responsibility for “all jobsite safety” or “all site conditions” may create obligations extending beyond a subcontractor’s immediate scope of work.

Accordingly, subcontractors should carefully review contractual safety provisions before work begins and ensure that field practices align with written project procedures. Following a serious incident, investigators often examine not only what policies existed on paper, but whether those procedures were consistently implemented and documented in practice.

What This Looks Like in Practice

Consider two drywall subcontractors working on similar commercial projects involving multiple trades operating within the same work areas.

On the first project, safety coordination is handled informally. Foremen discuss issues during walkthroughs, but concerns are rarely documented unless someone believes the issue presents an immediate danger. Temporary laborers receive only brief verbal instructions before beginning work, and housekeeping responsibilities in shared corridors shift constantly depending on which crews are working in the area that day.

One afternoon, a laborer carrying sheets of drywall through a shared access corridor trips over scrap metal studs, extension cords, and abandoned packaging left near an area where the electrical and framing crews had both been working throughout the morning. After the incident, confusion develops almost immediately. The framing subcontractor insists the electrical crew left the materials behind, while the electrical foreman claims the drywall crew had already raised housekeeping concerns earlier in the week. The general contractor asks whether the condition had previously been reported, but no one can point to any written documentation. Daily reports contain little information regarding housekeeping issues, and project personnel disagree regarding who maintained responsibility for the corridor under the site logistics plan.

On the second project, the underlying incident is nearly identical. The difference is that the subcontractors implemented more structured coordination procedures before work began.

Temporary laborers completed site-specific onboarding that included housekeeping expectations, reporting procedures, and designated supervisory contacts. Foremen conducted documented weekly toolbox talks addressing material staging, shared work areas, and housekeeping obligations between trades. The project logistics plan specifically assigned responsibility for maintaining common access corridors, and hazards identified during walkthroughs were logged through a centralized reporting system requiring documented follow-up once corrective action was completed.

Midway through the project, the drywall foreman notices scrap material and extension cords beginning to accumulate near a shared staging area being used by the framing and electrical crews. Instead of raising the issue informally during a walkthrough, the drywall foreman photographs the condition, logs it through the project reporting system, and sends it directly to the responsible subcontractor that same afternoon. By the following morning, the area has been cleared and the corrective action has been documented through the project’s daily reporting procedures.

Neither project eliminated workplace risk entirely. Construction sites remain active, fast-moving environments. The difference is that one contractor relied largely on assumptions and informal communication, while the other implemented clear procedures designed to reduce confusion before problems developed.

For the average contractor, those practices may matter just as much after an incident occurs as they do before one.

The Industry’s Response

Fortunately, many contractors are already responding proactively to these evolving project conditions.

A 2023 CPWR SmartMarket Report examining safety management practices in the construction industry found that companies are increasingly investing in standardized onboarding procedures, pre-task planning, digital reporting systems, and project-wide communication practices designed to improve coordination across multiple employers and trades.3 The report further noted that many contractors view stronger communication and coordination practices as essential components of both project efficiency and overall safety performance.

Those efforts may provide benefits extending well beyond safety performance alone. Clear reporting procedures, consistent documentation practices, and well-defined coordination structures may also help reduce project delays, strengthen owner relationships, improve workforce retention, and minimize confusion when incidents arise.

In many respects, effective coordination is becoming both a safety tool and a business advantage.

Looking Ahead

Construction projects are unlikely to become less operationally complex in the years ahead. Specialized trades, workforce shortages, and increasingly aggressive project schedules will continue shaping how projects are staffed and managed across the industry.

As projects become more layered, questions regarding supervision, coordination, and responsibility may become increasingly difficult to untangle following a workplace incident. Subcontractors who prioritize communication, documentation, and clearly defined project responsibilities will likely be better positioned not only to reduce legal exposure, but also to operate more efficiently and competitively in an increasingly demanding construction environment.

About the author

About the author: Myra Cunningham is an attorney with Carson Law Group, PLLC, where her practice focuses on construction law and commercial litigation. She regularly works with owners, contractors, and subcontractors on a variety of construction-related disputes. More information about Carson Law Group can be found at https://www.thecarsonlawgroup.com/.

1 CPWR – The Center for Construction Research and Training, Measuring Injuries Along the Subcontracting Chain in the U.S. Construction Industry (2024), available at https://www.cpwr.com/wp-content/uploads/SS2024-measuring_injuries_along_subcontracting.pdf.

2 Ann Marie Dale et al., The Association Between Subcontractor Safety Management Programs and Worker Perceived Safety Climate in Commercial Construction Projects, 74 Journal of Safety Research 33–42 (2020), available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022437520300761.

3 CPWR – The Center for Construction Research and Training, Safety Management in the Construction Industry SmartMarket Report (2023), available at https://www.cpwr.com/wp-content/uploads/RR-Dodge_Safety_Management_SmartMarket_2023.pdf.