Most construction workers who file a workers’ compensation claim after a fall or a falling-object accident assume that’s the end of the legal road. It isn’t. New York Labor Law 240 creates a separate legal path against the property owner, general contractor, or construction manager. It shifts legal responsibility onto those parties in ways that standard personal injury law doesn’t. For workers recovering in Manhattan, that distinction can mean the difference between a workers’ compensation check covering partial wages and a third-party claim that accounts for everything workers’ compensation won’t touch.
At Loscalzo & Loscalzo, P.C., we’ve represented injured workers and their families in Manhattan for more than 50 years. The questions we hear most often about Labor Law 240 are the same ones this post addresses, starting with what the law actually covers.
What New York Labor Law 240 Actually Covers
Labor Law 240 is commonly called the Scaffold Law, but the name understates its reach. The statute requires contractors and property owners to furnish scaffolding, hoists, ladders, slings, ropes, and other protective devices for workers engaged in the erection, demolition, repair, alteration, painting, cleaning, or pointing of a building or structure. If the work involves a structure and a gravity-related hazard, the law almost certainly applies.
In practice, that means falls from scaffolds, ladders, rooftops, platforms, and unguarded floor openings are all covered. So are injuries from falling tools, materials, or improperly secured equipment dropped from above. The common thread is gravity: the hazard involves either a worker falling or an object falling onto a worker.
Coverage doesn’t depend on union membership, independent contractor classification, or immigration status. What matters is the type of work being performed and the nature of the project. Ironworkers, roofers, electricians, painters, masons, carpenters, and general laborers all fall within the statute’s protection.
Why Labor Law 240 Is Fundamentally Different from Other Injury Claims
Most personal injury claims in New York require proving that someone was negligent and that their negligence caused the injury. Labor Law 240 operates under a different standard: absolute liability. When a gravity-related hazard and an inadequate safety device combine to cause an injury, the owner and general contractor are liable regardless of whether they were careless in the conventional sense. A worker’s comparative negligence (the idea that a court could reduce an award because the worker was partly at fault) isn’t a defense under this statute.
Defendants do have one significant argument available: the sole proximate cause defense. To succeed, a defendant must prove four things. First, proper safety equipment was available at the worksite. Second, the injured worker knew it was there. Third, the worker chose not to use it for no good reason. Fourth, that choice alone caused the accident. Courts apply this defense narrowly. A general safety orientation or a posted rule about fall protection doesn’t satisfy it. The defense rarely succeeds unless the record clearly shows an inexplicable personal decision to ignore equipment that was within reach.
One important limitation: one- and two-family dwelling owners who don’t direct or control the work are exempt. Apartment buildings, condominiums, co-ops, commercial buildings, and three-or-more-family residential buildings are all covered.
Workers’ Compensation & a Labor Law 240 Claim Can Run at the Same Time
New York’s workers’ compensation system bars a direct lawsuit against a worker’s direct employer. It doesn’t bar a Labor Law 240 claim against the property owner, general contractor, or construction manager. These are separate legal proceedings, and pursuing them simultaneously is standard practice.
The practical significance is substantial. Workers’ compensation provides wage replacement at two-thirds of the average weekly wage, subject to a state cap, and covers medical treatment. It doesn’t compensate for pain and suffering, lost future earning capacity, lost union benefits, or other economic and personal losses. A Labor Law 240 third-party claim can seek compensation for all of those categories.
Workers who have already received workers’ compensation benefits should know that the carrier typically holds a lien against any third-party recovery, meaning it can seek reimbursement from a Labor Law 240 settlement or verdict. An attorney can negotiate that lien as part of resolving the case, and in many situations the amount is reduced significantly.
Filing Deadlines Manhattan Workers Can’t Afford to Miss
The general statute of limitations for a Labor Law 240 personal injury claim is three years from the date of the accident under CPLR Section 214(5). That deadline applies to claims against private property owners and general contractors.
When any defendant is a government or municipal entity, the timeline compresses dramatically. Under General Municipal Law Section 50-e, a Notice of Claim must be filed within 90 days of the accident when the defendant is a city agency or government body. NYCHA housing projects, MTA construction sites, New York City Department of Education school construction work, Port Authority facilities, and any NYC-owned buildings all trigger this requirement. Missing the 90-day deadline bars the claim entirely, regardless of how strong the liability case is.
This is a particular risk in Manhattan. The borough led all five New York City boroughs in construction incidents involving injury or fatality in 2025, with 148 incidents recorded in the NYC DOB’s 2025 Construction Safety Report. Manhattan’s concentration of high-rise, renovation, and public infrastructure projects means a significant portion of those sites involve government ownership, government funding, or a government agency in the contracting chain. Workers who aren’t certain whether any government entity had a role in their project shouldn’t wait weeks to find out. They should speak with an attorney in the first days after an accident.
Cases that proceed to litigation in Manhattan are filed in the New York County Supreme Court, Civil Term, at 60 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007. Familiarity with that venue and how these cases move through it matters in ways that general procedural knowledge doesn’t capture.
Steps That Protect a Claim from Day One
The actions a worker takes in the hours and days after an accident often shape what evidence is available later. Three steps matter most.
- Report the accident in writing. New York law requires reporting within 30 days to preserve workers’ compensation eligibility, and a written incident report creates a contemporaneous record of where the accident happened and how. Verbal reports to a supervisor are easier to dispute.
- Photograph everything before the site changes. Contractors have been known to alter or remove equipment within hours of a serious accident. Photographs of the scaffold, ladder, floor opening, harness, or other equipment involved, taken before any modifications, are often the most critical evidence in a Labor Law 240 claim. If the worker can’t take photographs, a family member or coworker should.
- Don’t give recorded statements or sign documents before speaking with an attorney. Insurers for property owners and general contractors begin building a defense immediately after an accident. Recorded statements and paperwork from those insurers are designed to create a record that limits their liability, not to help the injured worker.
What the Sole Proximate Cause Defense Looks Like in Practice
Workers sometimes worry that something they did, or didn’t do, will defeat their claim. That concern is understandable, but the sole proximate cause defense is harder for defendants to prove than the name suggests.
Consider a common scenario: a worker falls from a scaffold because the planking was improperly secured. The contractor argues that a harness was available somewhere on the site. For the defense to succeed, the defendant would need to prove the worker knew about the harness, that using it was feasible given the task, that the worker chose not to use it for no good reason, and that this choice alone caused the fall. If the harness was in a locked storage room, if the worker wasn’t told it was available, or if the scaffold failure would have caused the fall regardless, the defense fails. New York courts have consistently refused to let this defense substitute for a contractor’s own failure to provide adequate fall protection.
Manhattan Construction Workers Have Some of the Strongest Legal Protections in the Country
New York’s Labor Law 240 has no direct equivalent in any other state. Its absolute liability standard and broad coverage of gravity-related hazards give injured construction workers legal tools that workers in most other jurisdictions simply don’t have. That protection only translates into a result, though, if a worker acts before critical deadlines pass. The 90-day Notice of Claim deadline on government-involved sites is particularly unforgiving.
Falls remain the leading cause of construction-related injuries and fatalities across New York City. Through May 2026, the NYC DOB’s year-to-date incident data showed worker falls leading all incident categories with 49 incidents and 2 fatalities. The legal framework that addresses those falls is complex, and the deadlines are unforgiving.
If you or a family member was injured on a Manhattan construction site, we offer free consultations and can meet at home, in the hospital, or wherever is most convenient. One attorney handles each case from first call through resolution. Reach us at (646) 846-4776.