Are combination inspectors a good choice for municipalities?

The success of building inspections is often measured in terms of things that don’t happen (e.g., collapses, fires, etc.). The unfortunate thing about this is, it makes it harder to demonstrate their value to officials. If you were to investigate the history of building codes, you would find they have played a critical role in public safety. Our history has shown how cyclical the importance placed on building codes and their enforcement has been. Economic and political pressures, and changes in public awareness drive the political will to enforce codes. When there are a lack of recent disasters or high-profile failures, we have periods of relaxation when public awareness of building safety issues declines. This can lead to a gradual erosion of oversight and a focus on more immediate concerns, such as economic growth. 

Then often following high-profile incidents and media coverage there are periods of heightened public awareness about safety issues that tend to lead to changes and or stronger enforcement of building codes. This can be seen more recently after events like the 2021 Surfside, Fla., condo collapse that killed 98 people and the Grenfell Tower fire in London, killing 72 in 2017. Florida made legislative changes requiring buildings that are three stories or higher and more than 30 years old, to undergo a milestone inspection. The fire in London spurred renewed scrutiny of fire safety regulations globally following a report that showed there was a drive by both major political parties to free businesses from the burden of safety regulations. Promising to cut “red tape,” business-friendly politicians evidently judged that cost concerns outweighed the risks of allowing flammable materials to be used in facades.

The struggle is in the balancing act between safety, regulation and economic development, as well as the tendency for lessons learned from past disasters that fade with time. Throughout history, the adoption and enforcement of building codes came as a last step instead of the first. 

Projections by the Bureau of Labor Statistics show a decline in employment for construction and building inspectors by 2% through 2032, and about 15,000 job openings are projected each year, on average over the decade to replace workers who retire or leave the labor force. The consequences for the construction industry are project delays and increased cost. For governmental agencies this equates to economic and political pressures, as well as changes in public attention for a solution. 

One solution is to employ combination or multi-disciplined inspectors in lieu of individual trade specific inspectors. Although multi-disciplined construction inspectors can be the answer, is it right for your community? Many building inspection departments are faced with pressures to answer this question, but there are many factors to consider. Common reasons given for employing combination or multi-disciplined inspectors are, there is a shortage in the workforce, which is a growing problem nationally, and the idea that you can reduce inspection time and cost.

Multidisciplined inspectors can be the better choice and more cost-effective for smaller or less complex projects. The inspection process can be streamlined by using multi-disciplined inspectors, allowing for a more efficient use of human resources, reducing the need for a large staff of specialized inspectors. Separate construction inspectors offer advantages as well, particularly in larger and more complex construction projects, and where there is a larger variation in types of construction projects.

Code officials themselves will tell you working as a multidisciplined inspector, broadens their knowledge of the overall construction process and can make them more versatile in their careers. This also has the potential to increase their opportunities for employment or advancement because they can handle a broader range of inspections. Yet they will admit, where they are more experienced and proficient in one of the trades, they are better prepared and more likely to propose resolutions with issues on the job to help contractors. They are less likely to do this in the other disciplines based on their own limitations. 

Where are you and your community in the cycle of placing importance on compliance with construction codes? A false sense of security can be deceiving and risk compensation explains this safety paradox. An intervention designed to prevent or reduce unintentional injury decreases one’s perception of risk. Then that perception increases the person’s risk-taking behavior, especially when taking a risk has a benefit, such as comfort, convenience or getting a job done faster.

When you have a choice, multidisciplined inspectors might seem like a cost-saving measure, but it often reflects a lack of understanding of the complexity of modern construction and the need for specialized knowledge to ensure safety, code compliance and quality. It is crucial to balance advantages against potential risks such as lack of specialized knowledge, inspector overload, and training challenges. Building departments and their elected officials should make their decision based on the specific needs and constraints of the jurisdiction’s construction projects, regulatory environment, and ultimately, how they serve the public and consider their safety first.