2. MEAD TECHNICAL PAPER:
Construction Safety and its Relation to Engineering Liability
Prepared for:
ASCE PNW Student Conference
Idaho State University
Prepared by:
James M. Desmond, S.M.ASCE
Civil Engineering Student
Oregon State University

3. 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................2
CURRENT PRACTICE ......................................................................................................................................2
ETHICS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS................................................................................................................3
CASE STUDIES................................................................................................................................................5
PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS THROUGH DESIGN..........................................................................................7
CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................................................8
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................................9

4. 2
INTRODUCTION
As civil engineers, we have the end goal of designing infrastructure that is functional and safe for
the end-user. But what about the constructability and safety of those responsible for constructing
infrastructure projects? Should the contractor remain liable for all construction-related
problems/accidents or must the engineer assume liability for accidents that are inherently related to
construction practices with his/her design?
This paper will examine this question in further detail by discussing current practice and coverages
for engineers and contractors, canons of the ASCE Code of Ethics, case studies examining construction
risks, and strategies for prevention of accidents through design. Finally, the report will analyze findings
and determine if practicing engineers have an added liability for the safety of workers on their projects.
CURRENT PRACTICE
In the United States, government contracts are awarded based on whoever places the lowest bid,
to fulfill government regulations for a public project or save money for a private project. This selection is
also related to the General Contracting method of construction (also known as Design-Bid-Build). This
method of managing construction contracts in the U.S. sets up a triangular agreement between the
owner, designer, and builder. Each of these parties holds different responsibilities and warranties to
guarantee in their work, which can put the designer and builder into an adversarial relationship.
The engineer warrants that the design provides the proper standard of care and follows current
standards of practice and design code provisions. Sometimes a safe structure may not fully perform as
desired by the owner, so the designer should be cautious in promising or implying a level of performance
that the building could achieve. However, structural engineering is moving towards performance-based
design and this issue will become more important in this particular discipline. Also, if a design is are found

5. 3
to be inadequate, the engineer may have professional liability insurance to cover breaches of the standard
of care (Hinze 2011).
The builder or contractor will warrant that his construction materials and methods will produce
the project outcome specified in the contract documents. If the contractor has constructability questions
that may change the design, the engineer must be contacted to approve the design change or shop
drawings provided by the contractor. The contractor is also responsible for the safety of the workplace
and the surrounding areas that could be immediately affected. This includes compliance with the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards and the mitigation of attractive
nuisances or accidents just outside the construction areas. For this reason, the contractor has numerous
lia ilities ith o espo di g i su a e o e ages: o t a to s isk, o ke s o pe satio ,
operations/premises liability, automobile insurance, protective liability (to protect for damages of
su o t a to , o pletio lia ility, a d uilde s isk. The e a e also othe o e ages for the contractor,
depending on the project (Hinze 2011). The question that arises from the beginning is if the contractor is
liable for workplace safety and has the means and methods to insure his property, workers, and any third
parties or their property, why should the engineer be liable for injuries to workers or bystanders during
construction?
Engineers take on quite a bit of liability by designing for the end-user, without ever physically
uildi g the st u tu e, so the t aditio al a s e is o . To take on liability for construction injuries would
seem foolish for designers who are removed from physical construction once the contractor is awarded
the contract. From a legal sense, engineers who think this are absolutely right. But as members of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, we must consider the ethical implications of our design (Hinze 2011).
ETHICS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS
The ASCE Code of Ethics contains seven canons, which are listed below (ASCE 2006):

6. 4
1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public and shall strive to
comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of their professional
duties.
2. Engineers shall perform services only in areas of their competence.
3. Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
4. Engineers shall act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or
trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest.
5. Engineers shall build their professional reputation on the merit of their services and shall not
compete unfairly with others.
6. Engineers shall act in such a manner as to uphold and enhance the honor, integrity, and dignity
of the engineering profession and shall act with zero tolerance for bribery, fraud, and corruption.
7. Engineers shall continue their professional development throughout their careers, and shall
provide opportunities for the professional development of those engineers under their
supervision.
The very first canon of the code of ethics mentions safety and sustainable development. The safety of
the public is especially important, and not limited to only the end-user. More importantly, sustainable
development should include safer materials, efficient infrastructure, and sustain the lives of those who
build and occupy said infrastructure. Even though this is one code of ethics that only applies to civil
engineers, similar ethical codes can be found among other design professionals and their corresponding
professional organizations.
One example of a design where multiple deaths occurred is the World Cup infrastructure being built
in Qatar for the 2022 World Cup. According to a Smithsonian Article written by Eveleth (2014), Mo e
tha 9 o ke s ha e al eady died uildi g Qata s Wo ld Cup i frastructure. The International Trade
U io Co fede atio says that if o ditio s do t i p o e, at least ig a ts ill die efo e ki k-off.
Migrant workers have been a major source of labor for this project, pulling largely from India and Nepal.
Eveleth (2014) uotes that Workers described forced labour in 50°C (122°F) heat, employers who retain
salaries for several months and passports making it impossible for them to leave and being denied free

7. 5
drinking water. The investigation found sickness is endemic among workers living in overcrowded and
insanitary conditions and hunger has been reported. Thirty Nepalese construction workers took refuge in
thei ou t y s e assy and subsequently left the country, after they claimed they received no pay.
Legally, the architect is not responsible for the working conditions instilled by the contractor or
government as the case may be. The architect for this project, Zaha Hadid, has ee uoted sayi g, I have
othi g to do ith the o ke s. I thi k that s a issue the government – if the e s a p o le – should pick
up. Hopefully, these thi gs ill e esol ed, Va essa 2014). Ethically, she may not be bound the ASCE
canons specifically, but architect critic, James S. Russell brings up a good point that, Architects do have a
moral imperative to collectively work with labor-rights groups and other construction-related professions
to end abuse of the powerless by the powerful, 2014).
The Qatar World Cup Venue is an extreme case of the lack of worker safety. Some familiar cases where
deaths in construction have occurred would include the Sochi Olympics (25 workers dead), the Golden
Gate Bridge (13 workers dead), and the Brazil World Cup (6 workers dead). All of these cases were very
large infrastructure projects that are comparable to the 2022 World Cup venue. (Eveleth 2014). Of course,
more specifics are required on how these people may have died. For the Golden Gate Bridge, deaths may
have occurred due to older, unsafe construction methods that are no longer used today. The Williams-
Steiger Act (OSHAct) of 1971 was helpful in creating safer workplace standards in the United States (Hinze
2011). And currently, case studies are being conducted to determine risks associated with certain
construction alternatives on a project-by-project basis.
CASE STUDIES
There is an abundance of legal cases and studies that have been conducted to examine the source
of construction defects. One case study that was done at Oregon State University involved the newly built
Lonnie Harris Black Cultural Center (LHBCC). The study was conducted by Gambatese and Nnaji (2015),

8. 6
who sought to examine the risks involved with two design elements and their constructability: the exterior
skin and below-grade piping.
The LHBCC exterior skin is a brick veneer curtain wall (the as-built design option). The alternative
design was a glass and aluminum curtain wall. Table 1 below summarizes the findings by providing a
cumulative risk factor comparison for each of the design choices and the alternatives (Gambatese & Nnaji
2015). The cumulative risk is determined by assigning a unit risk factor per activity (severity/work hour)
and multiplying it by worker hours on a typical crew size. These risk values were then summed to obtain
the cumulative risk factor.
Table 1: Summary of Risk Values for As-built and Alternative Design Elements in the LHBCC
It becomes clear that the alternative design poses less risk for the workers building the LHBCC.
However, does this difference provide enough reason for the designer to choose the glass and aluminum
curtain wall with the cast iron piping over the as-built options? The LHBCC is one building with a much
smaller scope and duration than the World Cup infrastructure in Qatar. Does the time difference mitigate
most construction-related issues on the LHBCC building? The risk is much lower on shorter projects than
lo ge p oje ts, a d o ke s do t spe d ea ly as u h ti e i the uildi g as the futu e o upa ts ill.
So perhaps the alternative LHBCC designs pose less of a risk to workers, but is it adequate for the future
occupants?

9. 7
PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS THROUGH DESIGN
There are examples outside the U.S. where engineers are using different tactics to improve
construction safety through design improvements. Gambatese (2013) conducted another study related
to Prevention through Design (PtD) in the United Kingdom. The UK implemented regulations in 1994,
known as Construction Design and Management (CDM) regulations. Now, nearly twenty years later, the
study has been able to analyze the progress of these regulations and how the UK has adapted.
Targeted focus group interviews and an industry-wide survey were used. The industry participants
were comprised of architects, design engineers, facility owners/developers, constructors,
manufacturers/suppliers, and health and safety consultants. Common question topics in this study
centered around CDM Regulation effects, common PtD practice, effects of PtD on team member roles,
organization, and innovations from PtD. Ga atese e tio s that, fourteen focus group sessions were
conducted with a total of 110 participants, and 228 usable survey responses were received. Both efforts
provided data from a diverse segment of the UK construction industry representing all of the major
stakeholders in construction p oje ts.
Eventually, it was found that PtD implementation does not change or increase design cost and
du atio , ut, leads to i p o e e ts i o st u tability, workmanship/quality, and productivity, and
less e o k Ga atese . The la gest ha ges e e oti ed i the p oje t tea e e s. The e
was more collaboration, improved communication, and professionals were better-involved. By involving
the ight people at the ight ti e , desig a d o st u tio e a e safe a d o e effi ie t. A othe
positive aspect that the study shows is when regulations are instilled, change can come about rather
quickly. For the UK, it only took 20 years to greatly improve an industry that has historically claimed many
lives.

10. 8
CONCLUSION
Should the engineer be responsible in the US for construction safety? Ethically-speaking, they
should be responsible, but under the current systems of acquiring contracts in the US, the lack of
engineering coverage in comparison with contractor coverage, and the lack of regulations for prevention
through design, I would argue they cannot be responsible. As ASCE members, it should be our goal to
improve our profession to enable our ethics to be carried out and move away from Design-Bid-Build
approaches to Design-Build approaches. The UK has implemented CDM regulations successfully in 20
years, so the US already has a proven model to follow. More importantly, private international firms that
operate in the US and UK will already have experience with CDM regulations, something quite useful for
a transition in the US. Once PtD regulations are implemented, engineers will be required to collaborate
and design for construction safety, as well as future occupants. With these changes in laws and
regulations, we can expect to see major changes in the way design and construction are done.
Word Count: 1,994 words

11. 9
REFERENCES
ASCE. . Ethi s Ca o s. Code of Ethics, < http://www.asce.org/code_of_ethics/ > (March 24,
2015).
Eveleth, ‘. Mo e Tha 9 Wo ke s Ha e Al eady Died Buildi g Qata s Wo ld Cup
Infrastructure. Smithsonian, < www.smithsonianmag.com > (March 22, 2015).
Hinze, J. (2011). Construction Contracts. McGraw Hill. New York, NY.
Gambatese, J. & Nnaji, C. . Case “tudy # : Lo ie Ha is Bla k Cultu al Ce te LHBCC .
Construction SliDeRulE Case Studies, < www.constructionsliderule.org > (March 17, 2015).
Gambatese, J. . Fi al ‘epo t – Activity 2: Assess the Effects of PtD Regulations on Construction
Co pa ies i the UK. Prevention through Design (PtD) Project 1: Benchmarking Management
Practices related to PtD in the US and UK, < www.cdc.gov/niosh > (March 10, 2015).
Russell, J. Zaha Hadid Wins Defamation Battle, Loses Reputation War. < jamessrussell.net >
(March 22, 2015).
Quirk, V. (2014) ")aha Hadid o Wo ke Deaths i Qata : It s Not My Duty As a A hite t ." Archdaily,
< www.archdaily.com > (March 22, 2015).