Issue: On a Multi-Employer Jobsite with One Corporation that was an Owner Acting as Its Own General Contractor, Could The Corporation Be Relieved of Overall Responsibility for Compliance with OSHA Regulations for All Work to Be Performed Under a Contract under Nebraska Law.
| Area of Law: | Construction Law, Personal Injury & Negligence |
| Keywords: | OSHA Regulations; Compliance; Corporation's responsibility |
| Jurisdiction: | Nebraska |
| Cited Cases: | 66 F. Supp. 2d 1076; 956 F.2d 530; 513 F.2d 1032; 818 F.2d 1270; 516 F.2d 1081; 548 F.2d 248 |
| Cited Statutes: | 29 C.F.R. § 1926.16; 29 C.F.R. § 1926.16(b), § 1926.16(c), § 1926.16(a); § 654(a)(2); 29 U.S.C.A. § 654(a)(2); Section 5-3.2.1.4(e) of ANSI 30.5; ANSI B30.5 |
| Date: | 07/01/2001 |
A recognized exception to non-liability—that a duty may be established by statute—has not been fully addressed under Nebraska law, at least when OSHA is the duty-establishing statute. However, the duty is clearly established by the courts of other jurisdictions. In Alloway v. Bradlees, Inc., 723 A.2d 960 (N.J. 1999), for example, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that the prime contractor could face liability for violations of OSHA regulations by any of its subcontractors under 29 C.F.R. § 1926.16. 723 A.2d at 968. That regulation states that “[b]y contracting for full performance of a contract . . . the prime contractor assumes all obligations prescribed as employer obligations under the standards contained in this part, whether or not he subcontracts any part of the work.” 29 C.F.R. § 1926.16(b) (2000). It further provides that “[w]ith respect to subcontracted work, the prime contractor and any subcontractor or subcontractors shall be deemed to have joint responsibility,” id. § 1926.16(c), and that “[i]n no case shall the prime contractor be relieved of overall responsibility for compliance with the requirements of this part for all work to be performed under the contract,” id. § 1926.16(a). In Alloway, the court reasoned that
the failure by OSHA to find a violation against a particular party does not preclude a determination that the party nevertheless was subject to a duty imposed by OSHA regulations and that the standards prescribed by OSHA were violated. If it is determined that OSHA regulations are applicable to [the prime contractor] under the circumstances, they may […]
margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify’>