General contractor's responsibility to appoint a foreman
Apr 4, 2020
By: Omri Nissany, Civil Engineer
When a contractor takes over a project as a "main contractor," he is defined by law as the "construction operator." By virtue of this definition, he is responsible for appointing a foreman and ensuring that all construction work is carried out under the direct and constant management of the foreman and in accordance with safety regulations.
As is known, the responsibility for ensuring compliance with safety regulations on the construction site, as well as their implementation on the ground, concerns everyone on the site, even if they are not a direct employee of the main contractor, but – for example – an employee of a subcontractor.
The responsibility of the foreman is defined in Regulation 5 of the Occupational Safety Regulations. A regulation that states that the foreman must also comply with the occupational safety regulations, and is also responsible for ensuring that all employees comply with the regulations in accordance with their work (except in cases where the obligation is expressly imposed on the construction operator). But what happens if the main contractor does not appoint a foreman? Well, to the extent that the main contractor has not appointed a foreman or the foreman has ceased his work and has not appointed a foreman under him, there are two essential aspects to this.
First, all the duties imposed on the foreman are placed entirely at the disposal of the main contractor. Second, and this must be remembered and internalized - according to occupational safety regulations, the main contractor does not fulfill his duty when he steps into the foreman's shoes, even if he ostensibly fulfills all the above duties. Failure to appoint a foreman is another obligation that stands on its own .
By: Omri Nissany, Civil Engineer
When a contractor takes over a project as a "main contractor," he is defined by law as the "construction operator." By virtue of this definition, he is responsible for appointing a foreman and ensuring that all construction work is carried out under the direct and constant management of the foreman and in accordance with safety regulations.
As is known, the responsibility for ensuring compliance with safety regulations on the construction site, as well as their implementation on the ground, concerns everyone on the site, even if they are not a direct employee of the main contractor, but – for example – an employee of a subcontractor.
The responsibility of the foreman is defined in Regulation 5 of the Occupational Safety Regulations. A regulation that states that the foreman must also comply with the occupational safety regulations, and is also responsible for ensuring that all employees comply with the regulations in accordance with their work (except in cases where the obligation is expressly imposed on the construction operator).
But what happens if the main contractor does not appoint a foreman? Well, to the extent that the main contractor has not appointed a foreman or the foreman has ceased his work and has not appointed a foreman under him, there are two essential aspects to this.
First, all the duties imposed on the foreman are placed entirely at the disposal of the main contractor. Second, and this must be remembered and internalized - according to occupational safety regulations, the main contractor does not fulfill his duty when he steps into the foreman's shoes, even if he ostensibly fulfills all the above duties.
Failure to appoint a foreman is another obligation that stands on its own .
You didn't appoint a foreman? You may have to pay compensation to victims
Often, even if a work accident occurred through no fault of the main contractor, the mere fact that he did not appoint a foreman will result in liability for the injured party's damages. An example of such a case can be seen in a recent ruling in the Haifa District Court (Tel. 3380-01-17).
This is a very unfortunate work accident in which an employee of a skeleton contractor employed at the construction site was injured.
The developer "handed over the keys" to the main contractor, who was defined as the "construction operator." When the victim filed a claim for damages totaling millions of shekels, he claimed that the main contractor was also liable to him, because it turned out that the latter had not appointed a site manager as required by regulations.
The court harshly criticized the contractor. Although the liability was primarily assigned to the injured party's direct employer (the skeleton contractor), at a rate of 70%, the main contractor was also required to pay compensation in the amount of 30% of the damage.
"Defendant 2 (the main contractor), being the " construction operator ", was responsible for the safety of the construction site in this case," the ruling states, " especially when it did not prove that it appointed, or ensured that a construction site manager was appointed , as required by Regulation 5(c) of the Construction Works Regulations" (emphasis not in the original).
Often, even if a work accident occurred through no fault of the main contractor, the mere fact that he did not appoint a foreman will result in liability for the injured party's damages. An example of such a case can be seen in a recent ruling in the Haifa District Court (Tel. 3380-01-17). This is a very unfortunate work accident in which an employee of a skeleton contractor employed at the construction site was injured.
The developer "handed over the keys" to the main contractor, who was defined as the "construction operator." When the victim filed a claim for damages totaling millions of shekels, he claimed that the main contractor was also liable to him, because it turned out that the latter had not appointed a site manager as required by regulations. The court harshly criticized the contractor. Although the liability was primarily assigned to the injured party's direct employer (the skeleton contractor), at a rate of 70%, the main contractor was also required to pay compensation in the amount of 30% of the damage. "Defendant 2 (the main contractor), being the " construction operator ", was responsible for the safety of the construction site in this case," the ruling states, " especially when it did not prove that it appointed, or ensured that a construction site manager was appointed , as required by Regulation 5(c) of the Construction Works Regulations" (emphasis not in the original).
But what does this mean in terms of the insurance policy, and the obvious question is whether there is insurance coverage for the negligent main contractor who did not appoint a foreman? What is the insurance angle of the matter? The answer begins in the initial stages of contracting with an insurance company to purchase a contractor policy.
Among the early stages of the process, the insurance company conducts a survey that seeks to outline the risks of the site, and no less than that – the means to reduce the risk. The survey entails obligations that the insured must fulfill in order for the policy to be fully valid.
If the insurance company determined risk reduction measures in the survey that did not actually occur, and included them in the policy terms, the insurance could lose its effectiveness on the day of the accident. This could create a "crack in the insurance wall" and, in severe cases, even lead to a lack of full insurance coverage.
Dear contractors, please note. Experience shows that insurance company surveys often mention or require the appointment of a foreman, and stipulate this as a condition for the validity of the policy. Therefore, the conclusions of the insurance company's preliminary survey should not be taken lightly, especially when the matters are written into the policy.
However, at the same time, it is important to know that the early stages of purchasing the policy can be the basis for negotiations with the insurer. Often, the survey results create high and unreasonable demands on the insured, which can certainly be discussed in professional negotiations with the insurance company.
The insurance angle regarding the appointment of a foreman
In conclusion,
When purchasing a contractor insurance policy, it is recommended to consult and use the help of an experienced insurance agent in construction insurance, who will ensure that the survey conditions are relaxed and agreed upon with the contractor. Furthermore, of course, a construction manager should be appointed not only out of a desire to maintain the insurance, but first and foremost to protect the health and safety of the workers and/or the various parties visiting the construction site.
In these days when we hear news about serious work accidents on construction sites in Israel, we – those involved in the construction industry – have a high responsibility. A responsibility that is not only tortious or legal, but (and no less) moral and social.
When purchasing a contractor insurance policy, it is recommended to consult and use the help of an experienced insurance agent in construction insurance, who will ensure that the survey conditions are relaxed and agreed upon with the contractor. Furthermore, of course, a construction manager should be appointed not only out of a desire to maintain the insurance, but first and foremost to protect the health and safety of the workers and/or the various parties visiting the construction site.
In these days when we hear news about serious work accidents on construction sites in Israel, we – those involved in the construction industry – have a high responsibility. A responsibility that is not only tortious or legal, but (and no less) moral and social.
מסמכים
