Construction Safety Training Bill

Summary#

HB 2858 would create a new law, the Construction Worker Safety Act; it does not amend an existing Act. Its stated goal is to set training requirements for construction workers and site supervisors. The bill is introduced and is not law; if enacted, it would take effect 60 days later.

  • Construction workers would have to complete at least 10 hours of construction safety and health training approved by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) before doing any work in Pennsylvania, subject to listed exceptions.
  • A site supervisor would have to be present where work is being done on a “major building” and complete at least 30 hours of approved training before a subordinate does construction work there.
  • Workers and supervisors would have to carry proof of their training on construction sites. The Department of Labor and Industry would have to accept specified types of written proof.
  • A licensed contractor employing a worker or supervisor covered by the bill would have to keep the training provider’s written proof and provide it to the Department on request.
  • The Department would enforce the law and could make regulations to implement it.

What it means for you#

  • Construction workers: You would need the 10-hour course before doing any work in Pennsylvania and would have to carry proof on site. The bill exempts delivery people, design professionals and their staff, special inspectors, and similar people whose site work is not construction regulated by a permit.
  • Site supervisors and their subordinates: At a site doing work on a major building, a supervisor would have to be present and complete the 30-hour course before a subordinate does construction work. “Major building” means a building more than three stories tall, more than 40 feet tall, or with at least 10,000 square feet of lot space.
  • Licensed contractors: You would have to keep written training records for covered workers and supervisors you employ and show them to the Department on request.
  • The public: The bill creates training and record-keeping duties, but does not set penalties, create a training program, or require workers to apply for approval from the Department.

Money#

No publicly available information on estimated public costs, course prices, or who would pay for training.

  • The bill sets no training fee and names no payer. Workers and supervisors would still have to complete the required courses.
  • It requires Department enforcement and lets the Department make regulations, but gives no estimate of staffing or other government costs and does not appropriate money.
  • Licensed contractors covered by the bill would have a record-keeping duty; the bill does not estimate its cost.

What is unclear#

  • The bill does not define “construction worker,” “site supervisor,” or “subordinate,” or explain who decides whether a course meets the OSHA-approval requirement.
  • It does not explain how the listed exceptions would be applied in practice.
  • It does not specify penalties for failing to complete training, carry proof, or keep records.
  • The bill does not say how the Department would inspect sites or enforce the requirements, or set rules for challenges or appeals.
  • The supplied material does not establish what training requirements or related rules already apply under current law.

Case for#

  • The bill appears intended to ensure construction workers receive safety and health training before working.
  • Requiring a trained supervisor at major-building sites could give crews an onsite person with more extensive training.
  • Requiring proof to be carried and contractor records to be kept could help the Department check whether the requirements are being met.

Case against#

  • The bill does not define key roles such as “construction worker” and “site supervisor,” so people and employers may be unsure who is covered.
  • It does not set penalties or explain how enforcement would work, leaving important parts of implementation unsettled.
  • The bill requires courses but does not say who pays or how accessible they must be; the cost and practical burden are unknown.
  • It does not explain how these duties would fit with existing requirements.