Building contractors in the spotlight
Oct 21, 2018
Persecution of Construction Contractors – Populism from Top to BottomOpinion Column by Asher Asban – Tekan Projects Ltd.
Recently, we have witnessed two developments with significant implications for the construction industry, which all professionals in the field must be aware of. Both relate to workplace accidents in the industry: one concerns dramatic (but primarily populist) actions by the Ministry of Labor, and the other involves the training of police officers to investigate accidents.
Unfortunately, when one filters out the background noise and looks beyond the PR surrounding these developments, a common goal becomes clear: increasing penalties for construction contractors. There is considerable doubt—mildly put—about whether these measures will have any real impact on workplace accidents.
“Enforcement Fines”? “Surveillance Drones”?
The number of casualties and the scale of accidents themselves testify to the level of functioning of those responsible for enforcement and oversight of this sensitive issue. Yet, instead of acting professionally and coherently, implementing real and long-term solutions, the Ministry of Labor seems to act in exactly the opposite way.
Frustrated and, perhaps, out of desperation, the Ministry periodically takes hasty actions, apparently to present itself to the public as a professional body combating accidents. These actions not only fail to reduce accident rates, but also impose unnecessary burdens on construction contractors.
Persecution of building contractors – populism from the establishment to the grassroots
Personal opinion column by: Asher Asban - 'Takan Projects' Co.
Recently, we have witnessed two developments with significant implications for the construction industry, which all those involved in the field must be aware of. Both concern work accidents in the industry, with one dealing with dramatic (but mostly populist) moves by the Ministry of Labor, and the other with the training of police officers to investigate accidents.
Unfortunately, when you clear away the background noise and see through the PR hype, both developments have a common goal, which is to increase penalties for building contractors. It is highly doubtful - to put it mildly - whether they will have any impact on work accidents in the industry.
"Enforcement fines"? "Spy drones"?
The number of victims of work accidents and the extent of the accidents themselves, testify to the level of performance of those involved in enforcement and supervision of this sensitive issue. However, instead of acting in a professional and coherent manner, while adopting real and long-term solutions, we see that the Ministry of Labor is acting in exactly the opposite way.
In its distress, and out of a loss of temper, the ministry tends, from time to time, to take hasty steps. Apparently in order to portray itself to the public as a professional body that fights accidents. These actions, not only do not affect the number of accidents, but they also cause unnecessary burdens on building contractors.
Enforcement fines
Suffice it to mention the "enforcement fines" project that emerged with great fanfare and faded away with a weak groan after a few weeks, without having the slightest effect on the number of accidents. Various sources, including my office, warned the Ministry of Labor in real time that the "enforcement fines" had more holes than cheese, but our numerous appeals were to no avail. The ministry dug in its heels until the entire system collapsed completely and is no longer with us.
So too did the "spy drone" project. Once again, the Ministry of Labor published and boasted ("2018 is a turning point in the field of safety on construction sites," remember?), until this process also apparently came to an early end, and that's a good thing.
The ministry realized, unnecessarily late, that in a democratic country, it is not possible to act with governmental tyranny. It is not possible to impose only on building contractors distorted conduct that does not meet professional standards such as evidentiary law, expert opinions, digital evidence, and the like.
It is enough to mention the “Enforcement Fines” project, which was announced with great fanfare and faded away quietly after just a few weeks, without having any impact on accident rates. Various parties, including my offices, warned the Ministry of Labor in real time that the “Enforcement Fines” initiative had more holes than Swiss cheese, yet our repeated warnings went unheeded. The Ministry dug in its heels until the entire system completely collapsed and ceased to function effectively.
The same applies to the “Surveillance Drones” project. Again, the Ministry of Labor announced and acted on its own authority (“2018 is a turning point in construction site safety,” remember?), yet this initiative, too, apparently reached an early and appropriate end.
The Ministry belatedly realized that in a democratic country, it is impossible to act with arbitrary authority. You cannot impose on construction contractors a distorted approach that does not meet professional standards, such as rules of evidence, expert opinions, digital testimony, and so forth.
Now, we are witnessing another puzzling behavior by the ministry, and here is its description. A building contractor receives an "innocent" letter in which he is required to report to the Ministry of Labor the details of the human resources contractors (for hire) he employs. The innocent and frightened contractor, who has no idea what the report means, sends a reply to the Ministry of Labor stating the details of the human resources contractors for hire.
The Ministry of Labor checks the names, and if it discovers that one of the manpower contractors does not have an appropriate license (a license that any layperson can obtain without any certification/education, etc.), a labor inspector arrives "by chance" at the site and conducts an "undercover investigation." This is done by misleading the building contractor, and after the labor inspector verifies that the contractor of the workers is indeed providing workers to the site.
What's next? Of course – an immediate summons of the building contractor to a criminal hearing before filing an indictment and taking criminal proceedings! And let me clarify – the crane operators themselves have a license and certification to operate a crane, but their employer does not have a certificate that he is a manpower contractor. The questions that arise from this situation are many. Many and disturbing. For example:
✋ Why doesn't the Ministry of Labor issue a letter to the building contractor stating that the beneficiary's contractor is operating without a license and that the building contractor should stop working with him, thus ensuring that the supervision is successful and effective?
✋ Why is the Ministry of Labor falling for innocent building contractors? Why is the Ministry of Labor acting like the ultimate swindler and performing a "red cap" (in criminal slang) on building contractors?
✋ Why is the ministry's limited energy not invested in punishing unlicensed laborers and/or punishing unapproved labor contractors? Why is the Ministry of Labor summoning a building contractor who legally employs licensed laborers to a criminal hearing?
✋ Will the Ministry of Labor start punishing construction contractors whose subcontractors do not pay VAT or whose driver's license is not valid?
✋ Why is the Ministry of Labor run by tyranny, lack of transparency, and stinking practices?
I did not remain indifferent, I asked the Ministry of Labor (under the Freedom of Information Law) for the minutes of the meetings in which the decision to carry out the above exercise was made. To this moment, I have not received a response or even confirmation of receipt of my request. I am sure that a review of the minutes will confirm my feelings that this is a pre-planned move to mislead building contractors.
What is the recommendation?
Dear building contractors, do not respond and/or answer any demand from the Ministry of Labor without consulting a lawyer.
An innocent letter turns into an indictment
Will police officers investigate?
Another development that is important to note is the training procedures that the Israel Police is currently completing for police officers (who are also academics such as lawyers, engineers, etc.). A project estimated to cost approximately 12 million shekels and which is intended to provide officers with tools to investigate work accidents on construction sites. Here too, the goal is clear: increasing penalties for building contractors.
Apparently the police believe that the Labor Ministry is not functioning effectively, which is why this unit was established. Does it make sense? Well, this is a populist move by a mediocre enforcement agency, whose only desire is to garner public relations at the expense of the building contractors. Here too, there are more questions than answers:
✋ Since when do the police have the authority to conduct professional (non-criminal) investigations into work accidents?
✋ Were the Labor Ministry's investigative powers on the matter taken away from it by a change in legislation?
✋ Will all legal proceedings (both tort and criminal) now be delayed until both bodies (police and the Ministry of Labor) complete their dual investigation procedures?
✋ Who will be subordinate to whom in making decisions about indictments? The labor inspector? The police officer who took a "safety course"?
✋ In which other country does a police officer have the authority to investigate (professional engineering investigation) work accidents?
The selective enforcement is suspiciously conspicuous. For example, instead of going after building contractors, why isn't a special unit being set up to punish electric bike sellers who violate speed limits? There's no need for a complicated investigation here. They all advertise themselves in the media - exposed for all to see. Why isn't the police setting up a special unit to enforce what they've been tasked with doing for many years, such as riding electric bikes on the sidewalk? Why isn't the police setting up a special unit to deal with accidents in industry, agriculture, and factories, where there are just as many accidents?
In conclusion,
My friends, as a safety expert and senior accident investigator, who has seen and investigated thousands of accidents, I spare those who depend on the results of the investigation by Ministry of Labor inspectors and police officers.
Whether it is the victims who are seeking comfort and compensation or the contractors who are seeking justice and professionalism.
Don't give up your rights and protect yourself. Consult with experts and lawyers in any "encounters" and don't take anything for granted.
Another Development in Construction Accident Oversight
It is important to note the training program that the Israel Police are currently completing for police officers, who include professionals such as lawyers, engineers, and other academics. The project, with an estimated cost of approximately 12 million shekels, is intended to provide officers with tools to investigate workplace accidents on construction sites.
Again, the goal is clear: increasing penalties for construction contractors.
Apparently, the police assume that the Ministry of Labor is not functioning efficiently, which is why this unit was established. Logical? Perhaps not. This appears to be a populist move by a middling enforcement body, primarily aimed at generating publicity at the expense of construction contractors.
Here too, the questions far outnumber the answers:
✋ Since when do the police have professional (non-criminal) investigation powers for workplace accidents?✋ Were the Ministry of Labor’s investigation powers stripped by legislative changes?✋ Will all legal proceedings (civil and criminal) now be delayed until both the police and the Ministry of Labor complete their parallel investigations?✋ Who will be subordinate to whom in deciding on indictments—the labor inspector or the police officer who completed the “safety course”?✋ In any other country, does a police officer have authority to conduct professional engineering investigations of workplace accidents?
The selective enforcement is conspicuously biased. For example, instead of targeting construction contractors, why hasn’t a special unit been created to penalize e-bike sellers who disable speed limits? There is no need for complicated investigations—they publicly advertise their actions, openly violating the law.
Why hasn’t the police established a dedicated unit to enforce longstanding obligations, such as riding e-bikes on sidewalks? Or a unit to address accidents in industry, agriculture, and factories, where accidents are no less frequent?
In conclusion:
Friends, as a safety expert and senior accident investigator who has seen and analyzed thousands of accidents, I warn against relying solely on the investigation results of Ministry of Labor inspectors or police officers.
Whether you are victims seeking relief and compensation or contractors seeking justice and professionalism, do not give up your rights and protect yourselves. Consult with experts and lawyers in every incident, and never take anything for granted.
מסמכים
