New England Biz Law Update
Massachusetts’ highest court has clarified when a general contractor may be held liable for injuries suffered by a subcontractor’s employee, ruling that general responsibility for a worksite is not enough by itself to create a duty to control a subcontractor’s safety practices.
The decision is relevant to companies that use contractors and subcontractors because it reinforces the importance of how responsibility and control are actually allocated and exercised on a worksite.
The case arose after an employee of a roofing subcontractor suffered catastrophic injuries when he fell from a roof at a resort. The subcontractor supplied the employee’s fall-protection equipment and was responsible for its own work methods.
The injured worker sued the general contractor, arguing that it failed to maintain a safe worksite and negligently hired a subcontractor with a history of OSHA fall-protection citations.
The SJC affirmed summary judgment for the general contractor. Under longstanding state law, a general contractor may owe a duty to a subcontractor’s employee when it retains the right to control the subcontractor’s work, including relevant safety measures. The court found that the defendant here had not retained that level of control.
The court also rejected the argument that OSHA regulations or state building-code requirements could independently create a common-law duty where one did not otherwise exist.
Contract terms and actual practices
For employers and companies that rely on outside contractors, the decision underscores the importance of clearly defining who controls work methods, supervision and safety responsibilities.
At the same time, the ruling should not be read as eliminating potential liability for general contractors. The court’s analysis was tied closely to the fact that the general contractor neither retained nor exercised control over the condition that caused the injury.
Companies should therefore pay close attention not only to what their contracts say, but also to how responsibilities are handled in practice. A business that assumes direct control over a contractor’s work or safety procedures may face a different liability analysis.
