Lives in the Balance: Immigrants and Workers at Elevated Heights at Greatest Risk in Construction  |
|
Contents
B. Special trade contractors C. Building general contractor
B. Building general contractors C. Special trade contractors
B. Findings by Standard Industrial Classification C. Geographic and immigration status analysis
B. Safety lapses in the “underground” construction industry C. Smaller contractors = greater danger D. Immigrant and day labor construction accidents – the human toll. Appendix A OSHA standards that protect workers at elevated heights Appendix B OSHA inspection results Appendix C Inspection results, geographic and SIC breakouts Appendix D Accident inspections by geographic area Appendix E Numbers of accident inspections, violations, by SIC Appendix F Accident inspections by SIC Summary A comprehensive review by the New York State Trial Lawyers Association (NYSTLA) of United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) construction site inspections in New York State has found that OSHA safety standards are routinely violated. Among the most frequently violated standards are those that protect construction workers who work at elevated heights. The findings of this review underscore the urgency for New York to retain Sec. 240 of the Labor Law, the “scaffold law,” which specifically protects such workers. The review shows:
Attorneys who represent immigrants and day laborers injured at construction sites anecdotally corroborate these findings. Their clients are primarily employed at small and medium-size construction, conversion, renovation and repair projects, mostly in New York City outside of Midtown and lower Manhattan, and in Westchester and Long Island. Worksites where these workers are employed often fail to comply with critical safety requirements such as tie-offs for workers on scaffolds and barricades around open stairwells. As one attorney noted, “Basic safety equipment like harnesses is almost always missing” and another attorney observed, “Scaffolding often is substandard and not properly secured.” The evisceration of New York State Labor Law Sec. 240, proposed in legislation pending in Albany, would embolden this “underground” industry to cut even more safety corners and encourage the legitimate construction industry to pay less attention to worker safety. Clearly, the role of Labor Law 240 in pressing all contractors and builders to run safer worksites has never been more crucial. In addition, the changes proposed in Labor Law Sec. 240 would have a devastating personal impact on many immigrant workers and day laborers injured in accidents caused by the failure to provide required height-related safety equipment at the job site. Since employers of many such workers often do not name them on a workers compensation policy, repealing or weakening Labor Law Sec. 240 would eliminate their only effective means to receive reimbursement for medical expenses and lost wages. There is no evidence that enactment of the proposed Labor Law 240 legislation would have the sponsors’ intended effect of reducing or mitigating the recent increases in contractor liability insurance premiums that have been reported. What is clear, however, is that the best way to reduce premiums is to reduce the number of OSHA violations and make construction sites safer. This is the approach recommended in construction industry trade publications, such as Roofing Siding Insulation, which recently reported, “Probably the most critical issue in the roofing industry today is skyrocketing insurance rates. At the very core of the problem is the issue of safety.” 2 *** Part I of this study gives the results of NYSTLA’s analysis of construction site inspections by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC). Part II further analyzes SIC results by geographic region. Part III analyzes construction accident inspections by SIC and geographic region. Conclusions and recommendations are in Part IV. I. Findings by Standard Industrial Classification The percentage of OSHA inspections conducted during 20033 in New York that found violations was calculated for 25 of the 26 construction-industry Standard Industrial Classifications (SICs) in SIC Division C (construction).4 The number of violations found per inspection and the number of violations per inspection that found violations was also calculated. “Construction” includes new work, as well as additions, alterations, renovations and repairs. Division C encompasses Major Group 15 (“building general contractors,” with five SICs),5 Major Group 16 (“heavy construction other than building contractors,” with four SICs) and Major Group 17 (“special trades contractors,” with 17 SICs). Major Group 15 accounted for 37% of the reviewed inspections, Major Group 16 for 3% of the reviewed inspections, and Major Group 17 for 60% of the reviewed inspections. All planned, program-related, unprogram-related, referral, and complaint inspections6 were reviewed. A. Overall findings OSHA issues safety standards in every industry it monitors. These standards establish essential safety requirements for equipment and workers. Construction industry standards are found primarily in 29 CFR, Part 1926 (safety and health standards for construction). Subpart L covers scaffolds, Subpart M covers fall protection and Subpart X covers stairways and ladders. At least one violation of an OSHA construction industry standard was found in 47% of “general building contractor inspections,” in 48% of “heavy construction other than buildings” inspections, and in 73% of “special trades contractor” inspections, for a total of 62% of the 2,547 non-accident inspections reviewed. OSHA classified virtually all these violations as “serious.” A “serious” violation is one that poses a substantial probability of death or serious physical harm to workers. 1. Violations of OSHA safety standards occurred most frequently in special trades where workers make extensive use of scaffolds and ladders and typically work at elevated heights. These trades specifically included concrete work, painting-paper hanging, masonry-stone setting, and roofing-siding-sheet metal. There was a 73% violation rate for all special trades and a 62% rate for the entire construction industry, but among the special trades in the following table, violation rates ranged from 76% to 86%. In addition, substantial percentages of the inspections in these special trades found multiple violations. Fig 1. Percentage of inspections that found initial violation(s).
(See Appendix B for SIC breakouts of numbers of violations and percentages and Appendix C for breakouts of numbers of inspections with at least three and five violations for nine major SICs.) 2. Violations rates were also above average among residential building general contractors. In SIC 1521 (single family home general contractors), 72% of inspections found violations, and in SIC 1522 (more than single family residential general contractors), 70% of inspections found violations. In comparison, there was a 47% violation rate for all building general contractors and a 62% violations rate in all SICs.3. OSHA’s scaffolding standard (“general requirements for all types of scaffolding”) 7 and fall protection standard (“fall protection scope/applications/ definition” 8) were the most frequently violated standards. 20% of all OSHA safety standard violations were of the scaffolding standard and 11% were of the fall protection standard. (See Appendix B for breakouts.). Scaffolding standard violations were found in 16% of all inspections reviewed and violations of the fall protection standard violations were found in 19% of all inspections reviewed. These are the two major standards that protect construction workers at elevated heights from being injured or killed in a fall. They specify exactly when and how scaffolds are to be constructed and used and how workers must be protected from falls, such as through the use of guardrails, safety nets, and fall arrest systems. When a contractor fails to provide a tie-off harness to a worker on a suspended scaffold or neglects to erect a guardrail around an open stairwell, one of these standards is violated. When contractors flout these safety rules, they ignore the most important standards protecting construction workers at elevated heights. Violations of six additional OSHA standards that protect workers at elevated heights were less prevalent but also frequent. These standards include “fall protection systems criteria and practice,” “ladders,” “fall protection training requirements,” “ladder and stairway training program,” “ladder and stairway general requirements” “and “scaffolding training requirements.” (See Appendix A for definitions of all eight standards that protect workers at elevated heights.) According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, falls are the leading cause of construction deaths in the nation, accounting for 31% of construction work-related fatalities in 2002. In its construction “eTool,” 9 OSHA warns the industry of the dangers of falls and the necessity of taking appropriate safety measures: “Almost all sites have unprotected sides and edges, wall openings, or floor holes at some point during construction. If these sides and openings are not protected at your site, injuries from falls or falling objects may result, ranging from sprains and concussions to death.” The number of occupational fatalities due to falls has been steadily rising, highlighting the urgent need to improve fall prevention efforts. From 1992 to 2002, the number of occupational fall fatalities in the U.S. increased by 20%, from 600 to 719, with falls from a ladder rising from 78 to 126, falls from a roof from 108 to 143, and falls from a scaffold rising from 66 to 88.10 As noted in Workers Compensation Monitor, “Falls are the leading cause of fatalities in the construction industry” and “the trend is on the increase.” 11 4. OSHA commonly gave scaffolding and fall protection violations the agency’s highest possible “gravity” score. OSHA assigns each violation a gravity score of 1 to 5 or a 10 (6-9 are skipped). A score of 10 is the highest, meaning the violation has high “severity” with a “greater” probability that an injury will result. (See table at right.) NYSTLA tabulated OSHA “gravity” scores for violations in three SICs: roofing-sidingsheet metal contractors, residential building contractors other than single family, and single-family residential building contractor. The results for three particular SICs, shown in the following table, underscore the enormous danger many workers who work at elevated heights and in residential construction face because of the widespread failure by contractors to comply with safety standards. These are not minor, technical violations that present little risk of injury; rather, these are the worst possible violations that expose workers to immediate danger of serious harm.
Fig. 2. Percentage of scaffolding and fall protection violations assigned a gravity score of 10. Planned, program-related and un-programmed inspections.
5. Violations occurred less frequently among larger building general contractors than among smaller ones. The principal reason why larger contractors have fewer violations is that they are more likely than smaller contractors to implement effective risk management programs and employ site safety coordinators who rigorously monitor worksites and ensure that violations are corrected.12 Thus, while NYSTLA found violations in 47% of inspections of building general contractors and in 32% of inspections of non-residential building general contractors, in inspections conducted between 2000 to 2004, violations were found in only eight (10%) of the 78 inspections of Turner Construction Company sites, five (12%) of the 40 inspections of Bovis Lend Lease’s sites, two (12%) of 16 Skanska13 inspections, and seven (25%) of 28 Tishman Construction14 inspections; Crain’s New York Business reports these are among the New York City area’s largest construction companies.15 The Upstate experience was similar. Among major general contractors, only four (11%) of 35 Welliver/McGuire sites had violations, U.W. Marx had only one violation in 22 inspections (4%), and inspectors found no violations at all in 22 inspections of Sano-Rubin job sites.16 Clearly, big general contractors follow safety rules better than small ones. B. Special trades contractor (SIC Major Group 17) findings In 2003, there were 1,529 planned, program-related, un-program, referral and complaint inspections in SIC Major Group 17, which encompasses construction “special trades.” 17 Violations of OSHA safety standards were found in 73% of these inspections. Nineteen percent of the inspections found violations of the fall protection standard and 16% found violations of the scaffolding standard. Scaffolding and fall protection violations were especially frequent in the six special trades SICs listed below. Since workers in these special trades spend much of their time on scaffolds, around open stairwells, and on roofs, they are highly vulnerable to falling and being injured or killed. Yet at least 30% of the inspections in these SICs found violations of either the scaffolding or fall protection standards (See Appendixes B and C for percentages for all SICs.)
Building general contractors23 employ laborers, carpenters, supervisors and other workers not employed by a special trade contractor. Violations were found in 47% of the 944 inspections in SIC Major Group 15.
NYSTLA broke out the numbers of inspections and violations for Upstate, Westchester, Long Island, Bronx, Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island. For each SIC class and for each geographic area the percentage of inspections that found at least one violation was calculated. In addition, the number of violations found in each inspection that found violations was determined. Appendix D provides full results. In Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx and Queens, an additional analysis of inspections and violations was conducted by zip code for four four SICs: 1522 (general contractors-residential buildings more than single family), 1741 (masonry contractors), 1751 (electrical contractors), 1761 (roofing-siding-sheet metal contractors) and 1542 (general contractors-non residential buildings other than industrial). A. Overall findings New York City construction inspections were substantially more likely to find safety standard violations than were inspections elsewhere in the state. To be sure, violations were widespread outside of New York City: 50% of Upstate inspections, 73% of Long Island inspections, and 72% of Westchester inspections found at least one violation. However, in New York City, 78% of inspections found violations. The highest violation percentages were in Brooklyn, where 87% of inspections found violations; in Manhattan, where 82% of inspections found violations; and in the Bronx, where 80% of inspections found violations. In addition, when a New York City inspection found violations, it usually found more violations than inspections conducted elsewhere. In Brooklyn, for example, inspections that found violations had 4.72 violations on average. In contrast, Upstate inspections that found violations found 2.86 violations on average, on Long Island, 3.11, and in Westchester, 2.95. In the Bronx, the vast majority of violations were concentrated in the lowest income zip code areas, chiefly in the southern one-third of the borough. Few inspections in this zone failed to reveal violations. In Manhattan, violations by residential general contractors disproportionately occurred in the lowest income zip codes, primarily Harlem and Northern Manhattan; violations in the special trades were found throughout the borough, although relatively infrequently in Midtown and lower Manhattan. In Queens, violations were distributed throughout the borough, but were especially prevalent in a number of zip code areas that have recently experienced particularly high rates of immigrant population growth and development such as Jackson Heights and Flushing. In Brooklyn, violations occurred primarily in neighborhoods that have experienced extensive residential new construction and conversions in recent years, especially the Williamsburg and the Park Slope areas. As discussed in Part IV, the especially high violation rates that occurred in New York City as a whole can be tied in large part to the extensive use of immigrant workers and day labor and concomitant safety corner-cutting by the mostly small contractors who employ them. B. Building general contractor (SIC Major Group 15) geographic analysis Statewide, 47% of building general contractor inspections found violations. In New York City, 67% of general building contractor inspections found violations.
This SIC encompasses projects ranging from garden style apartments to skyscraper apartment buildings. Given the predominance of multi-family housing in New York City and the City’s recent residential construction boom, it was not unexpected that the vast majority of inspections of residential general contractors-other than single family in New York State were conducted in New York City. In 2003, New York City issued more than 21,000 housing construction permits, the most in any year since 1973.24 Residential general contractors-other than single family were more likely violate OSHA safety standards in New York City than they were elsewhere in the state. Some 87% of inspections in Brooklyn, 79% in Manhattan, and 75% in Queens found violations compared to 70% stateside and 56% Upstate25. In addition, each inspection in Brooklyn and Manhattan that found violations yielded significantly greater numbers of violations than did such inspections elsewhere. While inspections outside of Brooklyn and Manhattan yielded fewer than four violations on average, in Brooklyn each inspection yielded 6.00 violations, and in Manhattan, each inspection yielded 7.41 violations. These were highest numbers of any construction industry SIC.26 Fig 3. SIC 1522. General contractors, residential buildings other than single-family. Numbers of inspections and initial OSHA violations, 2003 and 2002.
Analysis of New York City violations by zip code area found that Bronx violations were heavily concentrated in the lowest-income sections of the borough, specifically, the areas lying south of Fordham Road, the Bronx Zoo, and Tremont Ave and west of White Plains Road. Seventeen (77%) of 22 Bronx zip code areas where inspections found violations were within this zone, specifically comprising the communities of Melrose, Morrisania, Tremont, and Mott Haven; in addition, 63 (86%) of the 73 violations found in the Bronx were in this area. In Manhattan, 19 (41%) of the 46 inspections that found violations were in the borough’s lowest-income communities, specifically, the communities north of 96th Street on the East Side, and north of 125th Street on the West Side, predominantly Harlem, East Harlem, and Washington Heights. Despite the construction of several thousand residential units in lower Manhattan during 2002 and 2003, few violations were found there. Brooklyn violations were concentrated in three major geographic areas. The largest concentration was in Williamsburg, an area experiencing significant new housing construction geared toward an expanding observant Jewish community. In addition, Williamsburg’s new status as a center for artists and young professionals has been reflected in an influx of younger residents and consequent housing expansion through new construction as well as conversion of manufacturing into residential space.30 The second major concentration in Brooklyn was Park Slope, where an upsurge in residential construction, especially in peripheral areas, is being spurred by recent zoning changes. Fort Greene was a third area of concentration. Violations also occurred in the lowerincome communities of Bedford-Stuyvesant and Bushwick, where substantial amounts of government-assisted “affordable housing” has been erected in recent years, and in Sheepshead Bay. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that from 1990 to 2000, the population of Queens increased by 277,781, the largest numerical growth of any county in the State. This growth was overwhelming from foreign immigration. The New York City Department of City Planning reports that from 1995 to 1999 Queens averaged 1,360 new housing permits a year, but from 2000 to 2003, the average rose to 3,460, an increase of more than 150%. It was therefore not unexpected that one of the largest concentrations of violations was in Flushing, a community experiencing a surge in residential as well as commercial construction and renovation targeted to a fast expanding population of recent immigrants. Additional areas of violation concentration included Corona and Woodside, two more areas that have experienced large increases in immigrant populations in recent years.31 There also were numerous violations in Bayside. 2. General contractors, non-residential buildings other than industrial (SIC 1542) SIC 1542, “general contractors, non-residential buildings other than industrial,” covers commercial (office and retail) buildings, religious buildings, and institutional buildings like schools and hospitals. More inspections were conducted in this SIC than in any other. Fig 4. SIC 1542. General contactors, non-residential buildings other than industrial. Number of OSHA inspections and initial violations, 2003.
Violations were significantly more likely to be found during inspections in the Bronx, Brooklyn and Manhattan than Upstate, Long Island and Queens. In addition, inspections that found violations found substantially more violations in the Bronx and Brooklyn than did inspections elsewhere – 4.71 violations per inspection in Brooklyn and 4.00 violations per inspection in the Bronx, compared to 2.61 violations per inspection for the entire state. In the Bronx, most of the violations occurred in the third of the borough with the lowest household incomes. 3. General contractors–single-family homes (SIC 1521) To review enough inspections to draw valid conclusions about this SIC, inspections for three years were reviewed as opposed to two years for multi-family residential general contactors and one year for all other SIC classes. Still, inspections were scant everywhere but Upstate and Long Island. In the latter two areas, well over one-half of the inspections found OSHA violations. The vast majority of contractors who violated OSHA standards violated subsections of the scaffolding or fall protection standards. Fig 5. SIC 1521. General contractors-single family homes. 2001, 2002 and 2003. Number of OSHA inspections and initial violations.
C. Special trades contractor (SIC Major Group 17) geographic analysis Inspectors were substantially more likely to find violations in Brooklyn (93% violations rate), Manhattan (89% violations rate) and the Bronx (88% violations rate) than elsewhere (73% violations rate stateside, 61% rate Upstate). In nearly all of the special trades contractor SICs, inspections that found violations found substantially greater numbers of them in New York City, particularly in the Bronx (3.83 violations per inspection), Manhattan (4.16 violations per inspection) and Brooklyn (4.08 violations per inspection), than they did statewide (3.17 violations per inspection) and Upstate (2.83 violations per inspection). The following inspection data is for SICs that had at least 100 inspections in 2003. They are presented in descending order of numbers of inspections. Results for all SICs are in Appendix D. 1. Masonry, stone setting, and other stone work contractors (SIC 1741) SIC 1741 work ranges from bricklaying and chimney construction and maintenance to foundation building and tuck-pointing. Fig. 6. SIC 1741, masonry, stone setting and other stonework. Number of inspections and initial OSHA violations found, 2003.
While violation rates for masonry-stone setting-other stonework contactors were high throughout the state, they were especially high in Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester, and the Bronx. In addition, when inspectors found violations, they found many more in Brooklyn (5.70 violations per inspection), Manhattan (5.10 violations per inspection) and the Bronx (4.50 violations per inspection) than elsewhere (e.g. 3.31 violations per inspection in Queens, 3.73 violations per inspection Upstate). In the Bronx, violations were concentrated in the lowest income communities; 14 (58%) of the 24 inspections of masonry-stone setting and other stonework with violations were located south of Fordham Road, the Bronx Zoo, and Tremont Ave and west of White Plains Road, the borough’s lowest-income communities. In Manhattan, 12 (43%) of the 28 inspections with violations were in Harlem or Washington Heights. In Brooklyn, the greatest concentrations of inspections with violations were in the Park Slope vicinity (11215 and 11217), with a smaller concentration in Fort Greene 11205 and the rest scattered across the borough. In Queens, the largest concentration of violations was in Bayside and there were violations in Flushing, Corona, Ridgewood, and College Point. 2. Plumbing, heating, air conditioning contractors (SIC 1711) SIC 1711 includes plumbing and heating equipment installation, steam-fitting, sprinkler system installation, boiler erection and installation, air conditioning equipment installation, sewer and gas hookups, and ventilation work. Fig. 7. SIC 1711, plumbing, heating, air conditioning. Numbers of OSHA inspections violations found, 2003.
In the Bronx, there was a considerably greater chance that an inspection would yield a violation than would an inspection Upstate. In addition, substantially greater numbers of violations were found during the typical Bronx inspection compared to Upstate – the 18 Bronx inspections where violations were found yielded 77 violations, compared to 64 Upstate inspections that yielded 124 violations. There were relatively few inspections in this SIC outside of the Bronx and Upstate. 3. Roofing, siding and sheet metal contractors (SIC 1761) In addition to installation of roofing, siding, and sheet metal work, SIC 1761 includes roofing repair, roof spraying or coating, gutter and downspout installation, skylight installation, and tinsmithing and coppersmithing. Fig 8. SIC 1761, roofing, siding and sheet metal work. Numbers of OSHA inspections and initial violations, 2003.
Fig. 8 shows that wherever OSHA inspected roofing-siding-sheet metal contractors, violations were likely to be found. 4. Electrical contractors (SIC 1731) In addition to general electrical work at construction sites, SIC 1731 covers installation of communications equipment, telephone and telephone equipment, fire and burglar alarms and electrical repair at construction sites. Fig 9. SIC 1731, electrical contractors. Number of OSHA inspections and initial violations found, 2003.
Inspections in the Bronx and Brooklyn were most likely to find violations; Bronx inspections that found violations found the most, 4.06 violations per inspection, substantially above the statewide average of 2.37. 5. Structural steel erection (SIC 1791) These establishments are primarily engaged in the erection of structural steel, placement of concrete reinforcement and structural ironwork, installation of curtain wall and pre-cast concrete, and erection of metal storage tanks. Fig. 10. SIC 1791, structural steel erection. Numbers of OSHA inspections and violations found, 2003.
Violations occurred frequently in every region, but they were most likely to be found during inspections in Westchester, Manhattan and Brooklyn. Inspections that found violations found substantially more violations in the Bronx, Brooklyn and Manhattan than elsewhere in the state -- 6.25 violations per inspection that found violations in the Bronx, 5.62 in Brooklyn, and 4.90 in Manhattan was far above the number of violations per inspection that found violations elsewhere. 6. Carpentry contractors (SIC 1751) SIC 1751 coves the full gamut of carpentry work done at the worksite, including cabinet work, framing, store fixture installation, and pre-fabricated window and door installation. Fig. 11. SIC 1751, carpentry Numbers of OSHA inspections and initial violations, 2003.
Inspections in all areas of the state were likely to find violations. Bronx inspections with violations had substantially more violations than did such inspections statewide. III. Accident Inspection Analysis According to OSHA officials,32 all of the “accident inspections” listed on OSHA’s Internet site33 resulted in a fatality and/or at least three workers hospitalized overnight. NYSTLA reviewed the 337 such Internet-listed construction accident inspections in New York that occurred from 1994 to August 2004.34 NYSTLA broke out these accident inspections by upstate, Westchester, Long Island, Bronx, Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island, by SIC, and by the numbers of violations found per accident, including, specifically, the numbers of violations of OSHA scaffolding and fall protection standards. (Appendix E gives accident inspection results by geographic area, Appendix F gives results by SIC.) Since October 2001, OSHA compliance officers investigating accidents have reported whether or not the victim primarily spoke a language other than English at the job site. A. Overall findings OSHA investigators found safety standard violations in 77% of accident inspections, compared to 62% of non-accident inspections. There were a total of 1,248 violations and 3.7 violations per accident inspection, well in excess of the 2.1 violations found in each non-accident construction inspection. Each accident inspection that found violations found an average of 4.8 violations, compared to 3.3 violations in non-accident inspections that found violations. It is possible that the number of construction accident inspections involving recent immigrants and day laborers is understated in OSHA records, although OSHA officials assert that any underreporting is minimal.35 B. Findings by Standard Industrial Classification 1. Three SICs where workers commonly work at elevated heights had among the highest violations rates. Accidents occurred most frequently in SICs with high violation rates. Among the nine SICs with at least 15 accident inspections from 1994 to 2002, safety standard violations occurred most frequently in the following:
Not surprisingly, these same four SICs where violations were most common also had the greatest numbers of accidents where a worker was killed or at least three workers were hospitalized overnight:
2. Scaffolding and fall protection standard violations were especially frequent in accidents involving roofing-siding-sheet metal contractors and masonry-stone setting contractors. OSHA’s scaffolding standard was violated in 15% of construction accident inspections from 1994 to 2004 and the fall protection standard was violated in 29% of accident inspections violations. These substantial percentages illustrate the seriousness of height-related hazards construction workers face. Accidents among roofing-sidingsheet metal contractors and masonry-stone setting contractors were especially likely to involve violations of the fall protection and scaffolding standards:
Fig. 12. Percentage of accident inspection violations with a gravity score of 10
Workers in wrecking-demolition, masonry-stone setting, and roofing-siding-sheet metal are likely to spend much or most of their working time on scaffolds or at elevated heights. It is clear that for them, violations of OSHA safety standards elevate the level of risk in what is already high-risk work and lead to fatalities and serious injuries. C. Geographic and immigration status analysis of accident inspections 1. From 1994 to 2004, most construction accident inspections were in New York City. Of the 337 OSHA accidents from 1994 to 2004 in which a worker was killed or at least three workers were hospitalized overnight:
|