NY Scaffold Law (part of NY Labor Law Section 240) has significantly impacted the construction industry, driving up insurance costs and leading to some of the highest lawsuit payouts in the country. This law, designed to protect workers from gravity-related accidents, holds property owners & contractors strictly liable for any injury, regardless of the circumstances.
This law is estimated to have added $200-400M in costs to the Tappan Zee (now Mario Cuomo) Bridge reconstruction project. The law is complex and carries a large financial burden, fueling legal expenses and insurance premiums in New York.
How the law works
The Scaffold Law is a statute that holds property owners and contractors strictly liable for gravity-related injuries to workers at construction sites if a worker suffers injury caused by a fall or from being struck by a falling object.
This law, dating back to 1885, underscores a strict liability standard that holds owners and contractors fully accountable for injuries on construction sites, regardless of intent or negligence.
Over time, the law has been amended several times to broaden its protective scope. For example, a 1921 amendment expanded the required safety equipment to protect workers beyond scaffolding, including blocks, braces, hangers, irons, pulleys, ropes, and slings.
Liability under this law isn’t absolute. If safety equipment is accessible — or if an injured worker was impaired by drugs or alcohol or chose intentionally not to use the safety equipment — an owner or contractor may avoid liability. But there’s no guarantee.
New York’s approach to construction worker safety is unique because the law eliminates the ability of property owners and contractors to cite their historical safety records or actions as a defense in liability cases under this statute.
This nuance has sparked debate, with some arguing that the law unfairly burdens owners and contractors who assert they shouldn’t be liable under any circumstances. Conversely, worker advocates contend that the Scaffold Law’s emphasis on prioritizing worker safety has been instrumental in preventing numerous injuries and fatalities. The ongoing discourse highlights the complex balance between protecting workers and ensuring fairness for owners and contractors in the construction industry.
Scaffold Law’s effect on insurance
The construction industry poses high risks to worker safety. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, there were 1,075 fatalities in 2023 (2024 data has yet to be released). Slips and falls accounted for 39.2% of all construction fatalities.
Those suffering injuries or fatalities on construction sites — or their survivors — are often eligible for workers’ compensation benefits. Many point to the Scaffold Law as the reason why NY construction companies pay some of the highest insurance premiums in the country. Insurers are adjusting their underwriting practices, leading to high premiums, increased deductibles, and higher attachment points for excess coverage.
The prevalence of claims under Labor Law 240 has driven deductibles for general liability to $1 million or more, with excess coverage often starting between $2 million and $5 million. Construction companies with past Scaffold Law claims face particularly steep premium increases and higher deductibles across their general liability and worker’s compensation programs.
Excess insurers are also raising attachment points for contractors working in New York, particularly those with prior Scaffold Law losses. Here are the proposed increases:
- Practice policies: $2 million/ $4 million/ $4 million (if no prior NY labor law losses)
- Project-specific policies: $5 million/ $10 million/ $10 million
- Accounts with NY labor law losses: $5 million/ $10 million/ $10 million
This shift will lead to significant premium increases for primary liability coverage or the purchase of additional buffer layers to meet the new attachment point requirements.
Conversely, general liability wrap-up policies in other states remain competitive and are often used to address limitations on indemnity and additional insured provisions. They’re particularly common for construction projects involving building sales, especially residential properties, where ensuring completed operations coverage through the statute of repose is crucial.
Future reform
Many organizations have requested that the Scaffold Law be reformed so that owners, employers, and contractors — including parties without direct supervisory control over work — are no longer “absolutely liable” for gravity-related injuries, especially when those injuries result from worker negligence.
According to Scaffoldlaw.org:
- The NY School Boards Association estimates the Scaffold Law costs schools upstate $200 million annually
- The School Construction Authority (SCA) paid $240 million in insurance costs in 2013 — nearly triple the previous year — and with $17 billion in capital spending planned for construction projects from FY 2025-2029, those costs will likely soar even higher.
- The law costs the state’s taxpayers nearly $800 million in public dollars annually.
- The $16 billion Hudson Gateway project could incur up to $300 million in costs because of the Scaffold Law.
- While the injury rate has decreased, the number of Scaffold Law cases has increased by over 500% since 1990.
In her January 2025 State of the State address, NY Governor Kathy Hochul proposed investing $110 million to build additional childcare centers to reduce the number of “childcare center deserts” and address the 70% of those areas lacking adequate childcare facilities. Endangering this investment? The Scaffold Law.
According to Tom Stebbins, executive director at the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York, a coalition dedicated to reforming the state’s civil justice system, “The Scaffold Law has long outlived its purpose. Today, it does nothing to enhance safety but serves as a financial albatross, burdening taxpayers and blocking progress. The potential public sector savings from getting rid of the Scaffold Law have been estimated in the hundreds of millions per year.
“New Yorkers are left paying more and getting less, as the Scaffold Law inflates costs while delivering fewer completed projects and diminished public services. Projects are delayed, scaled back, or way beyond budget due to the spiraling costs associated with the law.”
Stebbins says that those favoring the Scaffold Law — primarily personal injury attorneys who receive a percentage of settlements — contend it promotes worker safety. However, data suggests that states with comparative negligence laws, which assign responsibility based on each party’s contributions to an accident, achieve similar safety results without excessive liability costs.
He and others contend that reforming this law wouldn’t compromise safety but rather establish a system encouraging proactive safety measures while reducing expenses, raising an important question: Should public funds be hindered by outdated laws primarily serving special interests, or should they be directed toward creating opportunities for everyone?
Shifting to a comparative negligence standard would enable NY to lower costs, stimulate economic growth, and ensure more efficient use of taxpayer money. Addressing the Scaffold Law would safeguard public funds, facilitate infrastructure improvements, enhance access to various services — like childcare — and ultimately benefit all New Yorkers.
Are you a commercial real estate investor — or looking for a specific property to meet your company’s needs? We invite you to talk to the professionals at CREA United, an organization of CRE professionals from 92 firms representing all disciplines within the CRE industry, from brokers to subcontractors, financial services to security systems, interior designers to architects, movers to IT, and more.
