In the past decade, federal safety inspectors have fined Elmer Miller and his construction company based in Arcola, Illinois more than $1.8 million.

Last year in Savoy and Mahomet, officials said in inspection documents that Miller had continued to repeatedly expose his workers to falls from unsafe heights. None of his employees had protection from a harness, guardrail or safety net system, the reports from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) said.

From these inspections, the administration fined Miller Building Systems LLC about $355,000 in penalties for the continued violations. Miller is among the most fined roofing companies in Illinois.

“Elmer Miller’s repeated failure to follow federal workplace safety rules shows a disturbing disregard for his employee’s lives and well-being,” Edward Marshall, the Peoria area OSHA director, said in a press release.

Miller did not return four calls for comment. He and his company have been cited for 65 violations in the past decade, from Jan. 1, 2015 to Dec. 31, 2024, many related to safety issues.

In total, there are 4,800 roofing companies licensed to work in Illinois, according to the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation. Over the past five years, Illinois officials inspected about 1,700 of these roofing businesses and fined them about $22 million, typically for safety-related violations.

During these inspections, officials found about 5,500 violations in about 2,500 inspections, according to the OSHA enforcement database. On average, officials found 2.2 violations per inspection, with about 80% of inspections finding a violation.

In 2023, roofing had the second-highest death rate of any civilian profession nationwide. 

According to an OSHA press release, federal inspectors were met with hostility at one of Miller’s worksites the year prior.

Lack of fall protection most common roofing violation

Of Miller’s 65 violations, 26 came from a lack of fall protection. In 2023, this was also the most common violation officials found in the roofing industry nationwide.

The next five most common violations are the unsafe use of ladders, lack of workplace hazard safety training, insufficient eye and face protection, general safety requirements and abatement verification.

General safety requirements lay out the general requirements employers must fulfill, such as accident prevention, employee training and ensuring each employee has personal protective equipment. When employees use equipment or perform actions with specific standards, such as ladder or scaffolding use, these standards override the general requirements.

Once a business is cited by OSHA, it has 15 working days to correct the violation or contest it. If the employer does not eliminate the workplace hazard within the given timeframe, they are found in violation of abatement verification, which is the process an employer goes through to confirm their workplace follows safety guidelines.

In a 2019 inspection, officials found Miller’s employees using an extension ladder to access a roof without the proper safety precautions. The ladder’s rails did not extend three feet past the roof’s surface, which exposed them to a fall greater than 10 feet.

Because officials already found Miller in violation of this standard over the past five years, they issued a repeat citation. In comparison to single-instance violations, repeat citations have their maximum penalty amount increased tenfold, from about $16,500 to $165,000 in this case.

For the ladder violation, officials proposed Miller pay $8,482. Through a formal settlement, the fine was reduced to $7,000.

Within 15 working days of receiving a citation, employers can schedule an informal conference with an OSHA area director. If the employer can show they have taken steps toward remedying the problem, the fines may be decreased or eliminated.

“The informal conference presents a situation where the parties are attempting to resolve the case before the employer has to contest,” Philip Siegel, a construction attorney at HPSS Law, said in an interview.

If an employer contests the citation, the fine or both within 15 working days, then the two parties move into an administrative dispute resolution process.

“I call it a mini lawsuit,” Siegel said. “You don’t get a jury trial. I mean, these are administrative hearings.”

Employers typically use one of two defenses during these hearings, either they say no violation occurred or that their employee’s misconduct was unforeseeable, he said.

To uphold this defense, Siegel said, the company needs to prove they provide sufficient training, inspect their job sites to ensure the rules and trainings are understood, administer effective discipline and have work rules that were violated by the employee.

“OSHA could have a smoking gun video or photographic evidence of a violation,” Siegel said. “But if the employer can prove unforeseeable employee misconduct, that’s a defense to the citation, even when there’s actually been a violation.”

When the company does not have a good defense, it can try to compromise with OSHA and promise to improve their safety program, he said. However, this depends much more on the official they are negotiating with.

“Every area office has its own area director, They don’t have the same personality,” Siegel said. “Some are more willing to work with the employer and others are not.”