Who is responsible when a “borrowed” construction worker hurts?

Listen to the item
7 min

This audio is automatically generated. Do us know if you have comments.

As construction companies are increasingly based on subcontractors and temporary workers to meet the demands of the project, the concept of “borrowed employees” has become fundamental in employment liability discussions.

This question has only grown sharper in 2025. With the continuous labor shortage and the immigration state that makes hiring more complex, many contractors are aimed at subcontractors and staff agencies to fill the lagoons. This confidence means a much higher percentage of temporary or “borrowed” employees in jobs than in the past, and this risks there is an added risk of responsibility.

An employee borrowed is someone who works for an employer, but temporarily lends himself to another, with consent. While working for the loans employer, the employer generally assumes responsibility.

Complication occurs when one of these workers is injured. Deciding who is responsible depends on the language of the contract, the state law and, above all, on the actual control exercised on the employee.

Assignment of responsibility

Prosecutor Jerry Lehocky, a founding partner of the Lehocky Giordano lake in Philadelphia, said that the extent of the responsibility depends on whether the injured worker is considered a employee provided by the General Contractor or is still an employee of the supply business. This determination is based on the amount of control that the contractor has.

If the general contractor is not enough control over the employee’s task, the subcontractor or the employment supply group is still the employer of this employee, he said.

“If the employee borrowed is not an employee of the general contractor, then this general contractor could face the exhibition by virtue of a negligence action that the employee in addition to a compensation action of workers against the subcontractor,” said Lehocky. “The amount of monetary exposure to the general contractor is the multiple of what is exposure to the compensation of workers.”

Lehocky said that contracts may address some of these problems, but the language does not control if the facts show otherwise.

“For example, the contract could very specifically say that the supply businessman is still the” entrepreneur “for the purposes of workers’ compensation; but, if the real facts are that the general contractor is controlling the work performed by the employee, the contract language can be easily annulled,” he said.

Maria Moffatt, a lawyer with Worm Snelson In Dallas, he said that the responsibility of the main contractor depends on several factors: state statutes, terms of contract, parameters of the labor agreement and, most importantly, the authority exercised on the job.

“Therefore, the provisions of the contract on the supervision of workers, security meetings and general control of job become very important, “he said.” And, if there are contracts or labor agreements governing the employee provided, these provisions must be read together with the provisions of the main contract. “”

In general, however, a general owner or contractor is responsible for the safety of the workplace or the workplace for all employees of the site and the contractor who oversees, using or directed the work of the employee provided, would probably have the responsibility for his security, unless otherwise stated, he said.

Prosecutor Carol Sigmond, a member of Greenspoon MARDER in New York, said the “borrowed employee doctrine”, which makes the borrower responsible.

“Sometimes the employee is considered a” special employee “, which is a matter of state law, so the rules will vary from state to state,” he said. “It is often used to transfer responsibility for a single -purpose entity proof of basically” real “company for financial reasons.

For this reason, when this doctrine is invoked to protect the real employer, the courts will examine the degree of control that the employer of the loans has on the borrower. They will also examine the supervision of the employer of the loans, the relationship between the borrower and the lender, the decision -making of the loan employer, who really controls the job and the employee borrowed.

Provisions of important contracts

Contractors should demand that their subdivisions disseminate if employees are used. Moffatt said that contracts should clearly assert who is responsible for supervision, payroll, determination of wages, insurance or compensation of workers, the status of employees, the provision of tools and materials and the scope of the work.

“The best practice is to include a provision that describes the responsibilities of the company that is the owner or general contractor, who is in charge of the construction site contract, and the company that supplies the labor or workers,” he said.

Matthew Koskinen, a lawyer for the construction of Dickinson Wright in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, said that in states such as Florida, courts boast of general occupation. Contractors need to reject this presumption and show that the employee’s relationship exists.

“The factors that the courts use to determine if this relationship exists around the existence of a contract, the work that is carried out at the time of injuries is that of the special employer, along with the special control of the employer on the work of the employees provided,” he said. “Consequently, having an agreement that touches each of these elements is critical and the agreements can and must be executed in each layer for optimal protection.”

He added that the provisions on the coverage and the limits of the insurance, the coverage test, the remedies if the coverage is canceled and the obligations of compensation are also key.

Lawyer Adam Richards, also with Dickinson Wright, said that, as long as the responsibility for building site injuries is analyzed, the start and end point is often the workers’ compensation coverage.

“Across the country, an entrepreneur is often immune to responsibility in exchange for providing this insurance coverage, unless an exception is applied, such as intentional misconduct or severe negligence,” he said. “ Therefore, if and when dealing with employees provided in a job, it is first essential that the general or main contractor guarantees that the workers’ compensation coverage is provided by the initial or employer of loans/subcontractors and, if not, that the contractor has an appropriate coverage that covers the employees provided in the absence of any other coverage.

In all cases, contractors must be able to show that the relationship of employees borrowed exists in order to claim immunity under the compensation laws of state workers.

“A contractor must always consult with a lawyer first if they will use workers or employees belonging to another businessman or contractor,” said Moffatt.

Employees borrowed help fill the vital lagoons in construction projects, but create liability layers that can be expensive if left without address. The contracts, the insurance coverage and a realistic look to those who direct the work are those who determine the responsibility.

For general contractors, the safest approach is transparency, strong agreements and early legal orientation before the workers go to the site