Trent Cotney, Partner, Adams & Reese, LLP and FRSA General Counsel - May 2026
Contractors have always understood that OSHA inspections begin at the jobsite. That assumption is no longer sufficient. Today, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration increasingly builds enforcement cases using information gathered far beyond the physical project. Publicly available content, including company websites, social media posts, marketing materials and even drone footage, have become a routine starting point for investigations and, in some cases, a primary source of evidence.
The shift is driven by two realities. First, OSHA has limited resources relative to the number of active construction projects. Second, contractors now generate a constant stream of digital content that documents their work in real time. This includes progress photos, drone videos, employee spotlights and promotional posts highlighting completed projects. While these materials serve legitimate business purposes, they also create a detailed and time-stamped record of jobsite conditions that OSHA can review without ever setting foot on the property.
In practice, OSHA compliance officers and investigators monitor publicly available content to identify potential violations. A photograph showing employees working at height without apparent fall protection, a drone video capturing an unguarded edge or a marketing post featuring workers without personal protective equipment can all trigger scrutiny. Once identified, this content may be used to initiate an inspection, support a citation or corroborate observations made during a later site visit. Contractors should understand that these materials are not viewed in isolation. OSHA often combines public content with employee complaints,
referrals or prior inspection history to build a broader enforcement narrative.
One of the most significant risks arises from the disconnect between how content is created and how it is interpreted. Marketing teams or project managers typically capture images to showcase productivity or craftsmanship, not compliance. As a result, photographs may unintentionally highlight conditions that appear noncompliant when viewed by a regulator. A single image taken at the wrong moment, before safety measures were fully implemented or after they were temporarily removed, can create the impression of a violation even if the overall jobsite was compliant. OSHA does not need to prove that the condition existed for an extended period; it only needs to demonstrate that a violative condition existed at a point in time.
Drone technology has amplified this exposure. High-resolution aerial footage provides a comprehensive view of the jobsite, including areas that may not be visible from ground level. While contractors use drones for inspections, measurements and client reporting, the same footage can reveal safety gaps across an entire project. If that footage is shared publicly, it effectively becomes a self-generated record of site conditions. Even when drones are operated by third parties, the contractor may still face scrutiny if the content depicts its employees or scope of work.
Websites and project portfolios present a similar issue. Contractors often curate images to demonstrate experience and capability but these archives can span months or years of work. OSHA may review historical content to identify patterns or recurring issues. Repeated images showing similar conditions across multiple projects can support allegations of a systemic safety failure rather than an isolated incident. This increases the likelihood of more serious citations, including repeat or willful classifications, which carry significantly higher penalties and long-term implications.
The legal use of publicly available content in OSHA enforcement is well established. Materials posted by the employer are generally admissible as evidence, particularly when they can be authenticated and linked to a specific project or timeframe. Metadata, timestamps and contextual information in captions or descriptions can strengthen OSHA’s position. In many cases, contractors inadvertently provide the foundation for enforcement by clearly identifying the location, date and scope of the work depicted.
Contractors should respond to this environment with a coordinated approach that aligns marketing practices with safety compliance. This does not require eliminating jobsite photography or limiting business development efforts. Instead, it requires implementing internal controls. Companies should establish a review process for any content captured on active jobsites. This includes verifying that visible conditions comply with applicable safety standards, confirming that employees are using appropriate protective equipment and ensuring that temporary conditions are not misrepresented as standard practice.
Training is equally important. Employees responsible for capturing or posting content should understand the compliance implications of what they document. This includes basic awareness of fall protection requirements, personal protective equipment and other visible safety measures. A simple checklist can significantly
reduce risk by prompting reviewers to assess common exposure points before content is published.
Contract language can also play a role. Where third parties, such as consultants or drone operators, are involved, agreements should address ownership and control of images and footage. Contractors should retain the ability to review and approve any content that may be shared publicly, particularly where it depicts their work or personnel.
Finally, contractors should periodically audit their existing online presence. Reviewing websites, social media accounts and marketing archives for potentially problematic content allows companies to address issues proactively rather than reactively. Removing or contextualizing outdated or misleading images can reduce the risk that they will be misinterpreted in a future enforcement action.
The modern jobsite extends into the digital space. Contractors no longer control how their work is observed once it is posted online. OSHA understands this and has adapted its enforcement approach accordingly. Companies that recognize this shift and integrate compliance into their communications strategy will be better positioned to manage risk in an environment where a single image can carry significant legal consequences.
The information contained in this article is for general educational information only. This information does not constitute legal advice, is not intended to constitute legal advice, nor should it be relied upon as legal advice for your specific factual pattern or situation. Trent Cotney is a Partner and Construction Team Leader at the law firm of Adams & Reese, LLP and FRSA General Counsel. You can reach him at 866-303-5868 or by email at trent.cotney@arlaw.com.