Large construction projects frequently operate with multi-national workforces, utilizing migrant workers to provide both skilled and unskilled labour. Multi-national workforces are also brought together through joint ventures, as companies from different countries collaborate and share their expertise to construct large and complex construction projects. A multi-national joint venture in the UK provides the case study for an examination of the safety management challenges found on such projects. Whilst language and communication issues amongst workers are typically primary concerns, here they have not been prioritized. Instead, findings are presented that illuminate more nuanced and unquantifiable problems that faced the safety management team. An ethnographically informed approach was mobilized, with the lead researcher spending three years on the site with the safety team gathering data. Analysis revealed several challenges: problems with non-UK company compliance with UK legislation and standards; differences in working practices amongst both non-UK workers and their managers; differences associated with national cultures; and problems of poor worker welfare. It is suggested that awareness of these challenges should inform both the way in which such projects are initially contracted, as well as the development of more sophisticated safety management systems that better support multi-national construction projects in practice.

The UK construction industry is in poor health, statistics show rates of occupational illness significantly higher than for workers in any other industry. Recently, the scope of occupational health management on large sites has increased as public health has become included within the organizational remit. Concerns have been raised around the consequences of this development, its close relationships to Corporate Social Responsibility, and how this is now shaping the wider discourse. To explore this phenomenon, a critical discourse analysis of UK “construction worker health” has been carried out, using the public-facing data of ten large UK contractors. Findings show that “public” has now overtaken “occupational”, the latter restricted to legal compliance presented as corporate citizenship, the former championed as evidence of benevolent organizational values. Yet public health concerns are limited to those of lifestyle and individual responsibility, whilst more complex issues around the social determinants of health as associated with work are missing from the discourse, separating organizations from the impacts of their work on their workers. A contemporary mapping of “construction worker health” is developed for consideration by industry and academics to support future health initiatives and research.

Construction 4.0 is bringing change to the industry through digitisation and technological innovation. Such change deliberately impacts ‘traditional’ ways of working, as it actively seeks to disrupt the norm and so enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of construction project delivery. Yet technology is not neutral; it brings with it an autonomy and an amorality that is potentially a cause for concern. The authors used Ellul’s theory of technique, as associated with technology, to unpack Construction 4.0 from critical perspectives and explore the potential it has to bring social and ethical challenges to the industry and specifically its people. For example, trade workers may become usurped by technologies that automate their work, while professionals may find their roles within the design, engineering and construction processes become more heavily influenced and shaped by the technologies themselves. Indeed, the role of the ‘technology owner’ may become more powerful than any traditional profession in the future as they become dominant actors within the construction industry space. This paper aims to stimulate discussion and debate in this area and encourage the development of a more critical voice to supplement the technocratic optimism that currently surrounds Construction 4.0.

With increasing demands for new infrastructure and a decreased availability of skilled construction craft workers, the need to recruit and retain workers is becoming critical. It is important to understand the preferences of workers and, consequentially, ensure that positive attributes of the job are preserved and negative attributes are mitigated in practice. To better understand the preferences of construction workers, 222 interviews were conducted with workers on active commercial construction sites in Colorado. Workers were asked simple, open-ended questions about their jobs and work preferences using a social constructionist approach. The results indicate that workers most enjoy seeing tangible results, social interaction with coworkers, problem-solving, challenging and diverse work tasks, and working with their hands. Conversely, negative attributes were work pressure, indirect communication, mandates from upper management, dangerous work, and a feeling of indifference perceived by their coworkers. These results improve understandings of the fundamental reasons why construction workers are attracted to their profession.