The Malta Development Association, in a statement on Friday, makes reference to the analysis [1] of socio-economic, political and legal factors which impact the health and safety of workers in the construction industry published by the Justice and Peace Commission, commissioned by the Church The ‘Ejja Ejja’ Culture.
The MDA made clear that it welcomes any study into the real estate and construction industry as it “helps foster an environment where policymakers take decisions based on scientific data rather than hunches.”
The MDA said the study focuses on health and safety on construction sites and “makes a number of very valid observations on the need for rules to be followed in everyone’s interest.”
The MDA welcomed the fact that the study endorses one of the many MDA’s proposals, which it said “has so far been shunned by Government, namely the mandatory insurance policy to be taken out by contractors as a condition for their license.”
“The latter is another MDA initiative which unfortunately goes practically unrecognised by the study,” it said.
However, the MDA noted that, there are a “number of flaws in the study that we are duty bound to point out, and which unfortunately undermine its effectiveness.”
The MDA said that the study “seems to attribute most problems to pressure by developers, be it private or public, in relation to time constraints.”
Nevertheless, according to the MDA, “it does not make the point that these are most of the time caused by contractors who bite more than they can chew, and who do not respect agreed timeframes thus leading to substantial losses for developers. This was one of the reasons why the MDA has lobbied for years for a licensing system for contractors.”
It added that “there is no mention of the fact that according to the Labour Force Survey wages in the construction industry compare well and in some cases are higher than other manual labour industries in the economy.”
“This is not only related to the additional skills required but also to the lack of supply in this area in Malta,” the MDA. “Unfortunately, the study references payment rates in Italy without going into the Maltese reality.”
The MDA also argued that “the study also fails to mention the fact that in many cases, the migrant workers who contractors fail to register accordingly are those who come to Malta from other EU member states and who would refuse to be registered as they would lose their protection status in the European country where they first landed.”
The above point on lack of supply of workers is “barely mentioned” in the study, “even though it is one of the main reasons for the problems identified, namely the daily struggle with deadlines,” the MDA said.
“This is clearly due to not having enough workers engaged in the industry,” the MDA said, “with social pressure mounting on Government to introduce even more barriers to entry of foreign workers.”
It noted that the study revolves around interviews of 22 workers and accounts of 3 major construction site accidents. “While the choice of the sample is not explained, it is clear that these do not represent a full picture of an industry that employs thousands of persons.”
Admittedly, the MDA said, “if one runs past the newspapers headlines, the interviews give a relatively balanced view of contractors as employers, with both positive and negative experiences.”
According to the MDA, “the flaw in this, according to the study, is that the attitude is mostly relationship based and that it should become more structural. While this is a legitimate point, the study gives the impression that this is a unique phenomenon in the construction industry rather than the case for most small and medium sized enterprises across sectors.”
“All the above flaws could have probably been rectified had those who carried out the study opted to share the conclusions for feedback with the MDA before publication rather than selectively using short extracts of interviews throughout,” it said.
The MDA concluded that “this would have not reduced the critical angle towards the industry, but rather sharpen it by pointing at the inaccuracies that the study makes its own by simply repeating without verifying.”