The decision in Secretary of Labor v. Prime International Shipping, LLC precisely shows these issues, which were documented as a result of an inspection following a workplace fatality. In this matter, OSHA investigated a shipping and loading facility where employees loaded vehicles into shipping containers utilizing forklifts, wire rope, lumber and other materials. Although the case involved shipping operations rather than traditional construction projects, the hazards identified by OSHA are the same types of hazards routinely observed at construction sites involving material handling operations.

During the inspection, OSHA observed forklift operators working without seatbelts and determined that employees operating powered industrial trucks had not received compliant operator training under relevant safety rules, such as OSHA 29 C.F.R. § 1910.178(l). OSHA also identified additional hazards involving fall protection gaps at loading docks and an improperly guarded chop saw used in connection with loading operations.

The employer attempted to defend the citations by arguing that the exposed workers were independent contractors rather than employees. The court rejected that argument and found that the workers were economically dependent upon the company and operated under the employer’s control despite the issuance of IRS 1099 forms. 

Judges such as the administrative law judge in Prime International Shipping look beyond labels and contractual characterizations when determining responsibility for workplace safety. If a company controls the manner and means of the work, supplies the equipment, directs operations, or supervises workers, OSHA may still treat those workers as employees for enforcement purposes.

The forklift training violations themselves were significant here. OSHA determined and the ALJ agreed that the company lacked evidence of formal operator training, evaluations, certifications, or documentation showing compliance with OSHA’s powered industrial truck standard. The administrative law judge emphasized that practical “hands-on” instruction alone is insufficient under OSHA regulations.

Indeed, OSHA’s forklift standard specifically requires a combination of formal instruction, practical training, and evaluation by a qualified trainer. OSHA’s guidance issued in April 2025 reinforced this requirement by clarifying that practical forklift training and evaluations must occur under the direct supervision of a qualified individual physically present at the training location. That guidance is particularly relevant in an era where employers increasingly rely upon remote instruction, online safety modules, or informal “on-the-job” shadowing. OSHA’s recent guidance expressly noted that remote livestream instruction alone cannot satisfy the practical evaluation component required under 29 C.F.R. § 1910.178(l).

The OSHRC decision further highlights another recurring issue on construction sites: experienced operators are not exempt from evaluation requirements merely because they operated forklifts elsewhere in the past. The court noted that even where a worker previously operated forklifts, the employer still bore responsibility to evaluate the operator’s competence under the conditions present at that workplace, which they had failed to do here. 

The five practical lessons and call-to-actions for construction employers are clear:

• Employers should ensure that every forklift or powered industrial truck operator has current and documented training that complies with OSHA’s requirements. That includes classroom or formal instruction, practical demonstration, hands-on evaluation and certification documentation maintained by the employer.
• Employers should routinely evaluate operators for site-specific hazards. Construction sites constantly change. Surface conditions, pedestrian traffic, material storage configurations, excavation work, ramps, blind corners and overhead hazards can materially impact forklift safety.
• Employers must actively enforce basic operational rules, including seatbelt usage, safe speeds, load handling procedures and separation between forklifts and workers on foot to prevent tip-overs, collisions, obstructed views, unstable loads and pedestrian strikes, which have been recurring causes of serious injury and death.
• Employers should maintain documented inspection and maintenance procedures for powered industrial trucks to avoid circumstances such as hydraulic failures, brake failures and carbon monoxide hazards. 
• Employers should understand that OSHA increasingly expects powered industrial truck safety to be part of an overall safety management system rather than an isolated training issue. The decision in Prime International Shipping repeatedly emphasized the employer’s failure to implement inspections, safety rulesmand oversight procedures.

Forklifts and powered industrial trucks remain essential tools throughout the construction industry. These operations remain under heightened OSHA scrutiny, so employers who fail to properly train operators, document evaluations, inspect equipment and enforce safe practices may quickly find themselves facing substantial citations following an incident or inspection.

More important, these requirements exist to prevent precisely the types of crushing, struck-by, tip-over and fall hazards that continue to cause serious injuries and fatalities throughout the industry every year.

About the author: Costas Cyprus, Esq., is a partner at the firm of Welby, Brady & Greenblatt, LLP, in White Plains, NY. He practices construction law and commercial litigation and can be reached at 914-428-2100 and at ccyprus@wbgllp.com. The articles in this series do not constitute legal advice and are intended for general guidance only.

Published: May 26, 2026.