How OSHA's multi-employer citation policy works
Almost every construction site is a multi-employer worksite: a general contractor or construction manager runs the project while subcontractors do the work. Under OSHA Directive CPL 02-00-124 (Multi-Employer Citation Policy), OSHA can cite more than one employer for the same hazardous condition. The policy is an enforcement directive, not a codified regulation. The Fifth Circuit held in Acosta v. Hensel Phelps (909 F.3d 723, 5th Cir. 2018) that OSH Act 5(a)(2) / 29 U.S.C. 654(a)(2) authorizes citing controlling employers.
OSHA applies a two-step analysis to each employer:
- Step 1: which role does the employer occupy? Creating, exposing, correcting or controlling. An employer can hold more than one role for the same hazard.
- Step 2: did it meet that role's obligations? Creating and exposing employers owe direct duties: don't create violative conditions, protect your own crew. Correcting and controlling employers owe reasonable care, and for the controlling employer the directive says that care is less than what it owes its own employees.
The four multi-employer roles
| Role | Who it is | What it owes | What OSHA looks at |
|---|---|---|---|
| Creating | The employer that caused a hazardous condition that violates an OSHA standard. | Direct duty: don't create it | Citable even if only other employers' workers are exposed; keeping everyone away and telling the controlling employer kept one out of a citation (Example 2). |
| Exposing | An employer whose own employees are exposed to the hazard. | Direct duty: protect your crew | Correct it if it has the authority; otherwise ask for correction, inform the crew and take reasonable alternative protective measures. |
| Correcting | An employer responsible for correcting the hazard, usually the one that installs or maintains the safety equipment. | Reasonable care | Reasonable care in preventing and discovering violations, and correcting the hazard. |
| Controlling | An employer with general supervisory authority over the site (usually the GC or CM). | Reasonable care, lighter than for its own crew | Citable only for failing to exercise reasonable care to prevent and detect violations; not strict liability. |
Source: OSHA Directive CPL 02-00-124 (Multi-Employer Citation Policy). An employer may hold several roles at once (a sub that both creates a hazard and exposes its own crew to it, for example).
The controlling employer's duty: reasonable care, not strict liability
A controlling employer is not automatically liable for a subcontractor's violation. It is held to reasonable care to prevent and detect violations, which the directive says is less than what it owes its own employees. It is not normally required to inspect as often, or to know the trade's standards as well, as the specialty contractor it hired.
The directive evaluates whether the controlling employer:
- conducted periodic inspections of appropriate frequency, set by the scale of the project, the nature and pace of the work, and what it knows about the sub's safety history and expertise;
- implemented an effective system for promptly correcting hazards;
- enforced the sub's compliance with an effective, graduated system of enforcement and follow-up inspections.
Worked examples
Example 1: open electrical panel. An electrical sub leaves an energized panel open and unguarded (creating). Its own apprentice and a passing drywall crew are exposed (exposing: the electrical sub and the drywall sub). The GC runs the site and could order the panel secured (controlling). On these facts OSHA could cite the electrical sub, the drywall sub if it knew or should have known and did not ask, inform and protect, and the GC only if it failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent and detect the condition.
Example 2: unprotected edge. A framing sub leaves an edge without fall protection above the 6-ft trigger (29 CFR 1926.501). The framing sub is creating and exposing. A contractor hired to install and maintain the guardrails on the project is correcting. The CM with project-wide authority is controlling. If the CM inspected at an appropriate frequency, had a working correction system and enforced it in steps, its reasonable-care defense is strong even though the hazard existed.
What to do next
- Identify the controlling employer up front. Name the GC or CM, and any party with authority over safety, in the matrix so the reasonable-care duty is clearly assigned.
- Put inspection and enforcement in writing. A documented inspection frequency, a hazard log and a graduated enforcement policy are the evidence of reasonable care.
- Make sure each sub has its own HazCom program, SDS access and labels. Each employer that brings chemicals owes the others its SDS access, precautions and labeling system (29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(2)).
- Keep the matrix with your project file and update it as scopes change. The full breakdown is on the multi-employer worksites hub.
Frequently asked questions
What is OSHA's multi-employer worksite citation policy?
On a worksite with more than one employer, OSHA Directive CPL 02-00-124 (Multi-Employer Citation Policy) lets OSHA cite more than one employer for the same hazardous condition. It applies a two-step test: first OSHA decides which of four roles an employer occupies (creating, exposing, correcting, controlling), then whether it met the obligations of each role it holds. It is an enforcement directive, not a regulation. The Fifth Circuit held in Acosta v. Hensel Phelps Construction Co., 909 F.3d 723 (2018), that section 5(a)(2) of the OSH Act, 29 U.S.C. 654(a)(2), authorizes citations to controlling employers.
What are the four multi-employer roles?
Creating employer: caused the hazardous condition. Exposing employer: its own employees are exposed to the hazard. Correcting employer: engaged in a common undertaking on the same site and responsible for correcting the hazard, usually because it installs or maintains the safety equipment involved. Controlling employer: has general supervisory authority over the worksite, including the power to correct hazards or require others to correct them, typically the general contractor or construction manager. An employer can hold more than one role for the same hazard.
What duty does the controlling employer (GC or CM) owe?
Reasonable care to prevent and detect violations on the site. CPL 02-00-124 says that duty is less than what an employer owes its own employees: a controlling employer is not normally required to inspect as often, or to know the trade's standards as well, as the employer it hired. It is not strict liability for a subcontractor's violation.
How does a controlling employer show reasonable care?
The directive asks whether it conducted periodic inspections of appropriate frequency, implemented an effective system for promptly correcting hazards, and enforced the other employer's compliance with an effective, graduated system of enforcement and follow-up inspections. The right inspection frequency depends on the scale of the project, the nature and pace of the work, and what the controlling employer knows about the other employer's safety history and expertise.
Does the controlling employer escape liability if a sub created the hazard?
Not automatically. The sub that created the hazard, and the employer whose crew is exposed, answer for their own roles. The controlling employer can still be cited if it failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent and detect the violation. A controlling employer that did exercise reasonable care is not citable even though the sub's hazard existed, as in the directive's Examples 6 and 8.
Is CPL 02-00-124 an actual OSHA regulation?
No. It is an OSHA enforcement directive, not a standard in the Code of Federal Regulations. Citations under it are issued for violations of OSHA standards, and the Fifth Circuit held in 2018 that section 5(a)(2) of the OSH Act authorizes citing controlling employers; the Eighth Circuit held in 2009 that 29 CFR 1910.12(a) does not preclude it. Before 2018, the Fifth Circuit's 1981 Melerine rule barred these citations in its states. State-plan states were not required to adopt the directive.
Does this matrix make my jobsite OSHA-compliant?
No. It documents how the four CPL 02-00-124 roles map to the employers on your project and gives the controlling employer a reasonable-care checklist to work from. The role classification reflects the facts you enter; OSHA makes the final determination based on actual conditions. Use it as a planning and documentation aid, not a substitute for legal advice or a qualified safety professional.
Sources & verification
- OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-124, Multi-Employer Citation Policy (December 10, 1999)
- OSH Act section 5(a)(2), 29 U.S.C. 654(a)(2).
- Acosta v. Hensel Phelps Construction Co., 909 F.3d 723 (5th Cir. 2018)
- Solis v. Summit Contractors, Inc., 558 F.3d 815 (8th Cir. 2009)
Read on September 28, 2026. This matrix is a planning and documentation aid, not legal advice and not a certification of compliance. Role classification reflects the facts you enter; OSHA makes the final determination on actual site conditions. State-plan states may apply their own policy.
Multi-employer worksites hub →Citation role determiner →Job Hazard Analysis builder →Weekly site-safety inspection →Subcontractor RFI writer →