Let there be light: U.S. construction coalition pushes back against OSHA on jobsite illumination changes

Ditching rules that dictate the base level of light required for construction jobsites is a risky proposition that could have dangerous consequences and saddle contractors with additional costs, a coalition of associations led by the Associated General Contractors (AGC) of America has warned.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is proposing construction illumination requirements in codified regulations be rescinded and brought in line with an executive order and deregulatory agenda presently advocated by U.S. President Donald Trump.

The OSHA reasoned because citations for improper illumination were rare in the construction industry they should be able to repeal the rules without any impact to the sector.

However, the AGC, along with several national associations that represent members in the roadbuilding, paving, roofing and infrastructure sectors, maintain such a move would increase the risk that certain jobsites would be insufficiently lit, leading to more slips, trips and falls for workers.

In addition, due to the increased lack of clarity, they say it might invite more claims against employers and the OSHA if an employee is injured on the jobsite and opts to sue for negligence.

The coalition members recently wrote a letter to David Keeling, assistant secretary of labor at OSHA, warning insurance costs may go up if the proposed rule is finalized and goes into effect.

In addition to the AGC, the coalition includes the American Road and Transportation Builders Association, National Asphalt Paving Association and the National Roofing Contractors Association.

The key argument made on behalf of the industry is that proper lighting is foundational to safety and the prevention of incidents. The letter notes rescinding the requirements would provide zero benefits and create complications and uncertainty.

The 2025 Liberty Mutual Workplace Safety Index, which estimates the top 10 causes of the most serious workplace injuries and ranks them by their direct costs of medical and lost-wage payments, estimated slips, trips, falls and struck-by injuries cost American businesses nearly $25 billion and the proposed rule could contribute to a higher number in 2026.

In the letter, the coalition writes the associations appreciate the administration’s efforts to reduce the regulatory burdens faced by contractors, but it will likely lead to higher costs and, in this instance, believes the industry is best served by preserving the existing standard.

“This proposal increases the risk that certain jobsites will be insufficiently lit, leading to a greater incidence of workplace accidents, including slips, trips and falls,” the coalition states. “An employer may think a workspace is sufficiently lit, but an employee with weaker eyesight might have trouble spotting certain hazards.”

In the absence of codified OSHA regulations, the U.S. construction industry would have to rely on American National Standard A11.1-1965, R1970, Practice for Industrial Lighting to mitigate risk, the coalition states. The standard costs $120 to purchase, a new levy imposed by the proposed rule. Employers who are new to the market would also need to spend time familiarizing themselves with the new requirements.

“While we know contractors will continue to rely upon consensus industry standards, the proposal creates uncertainty regarding which standards OSHA inspectors will use for enforcement under the general duty clause,” the associations write. “The proposed rule says that sufficient illumination is obvious. We believe that, unfortunately, without guidance, the standard is ambiguous and leaves the door open for variability in the approval of jobsites based on subjectivity.”

The letter notes without well-defined regulations inspectors may enforce disparate ideas of what looks like sufficient illumination, so an objective standard is a much safer and consistent solution.

“Slips, trips, and falls are by far the most common hazard on a worksite,” the coalition states. “They account for the greatest number of fatalities in the construction industry, especially among small businesses. Over the past 10 years, at least, an average of 371 workers were killed from falls, slips and trips. We oppose any policy that may, even incidentally, raise the risk of this type of injury.”

The associations maintain due to the number of violations, the seriousness of injuries caused by lack of/or improper fall protection, and the number of fatalities caused by falls, it is imperative additional emphasis be placed on fall protection training in the construction industry.

The coalition says there are presently no legal challenges due to insufficient illumination on worksites, likely because the existing codified OSHA regulations are clear and remove the need for disputes. If regulations are rescinded, the associations say it would invite negligence claims.

“The proposed rule, due to the increased lack of clarity, may invite negligence claims if an employee is injured on the jobsite and sues OSHA and the employer for negligence.”