Matt Construction Corp safety record at a glance
Matt Construction Corp has been the subject of 29 Cal/OSHA inspections in California since 2000, opened between Oct 24, 2001 and Apr 29, 2025. 11 of them were unprogrammed related inspections. 7 of them produced citations, 7 in all: 0 serious. Inspectors proposed $2,645 in penalties; after appeals and settlements the current total is $1,275. The largest single penalty, $450, came from an inspection opened Jun 18, 2015 in Los Angeles. That places the employer at #47,875 of 122,854 California employers in the database by penalties.
Industry as coded by the inspecting office: Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation; Construction; Other Services (except Public Administration). Worksites in Los Angeles, North Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Ylairmount, Agoura Hills, Irvine, Claremont, Santa Clara.
Every inspection, newest first
Click a date for the citations in that inspection.
| Opened | City | Why | Result | Proposed | Penalty | Closed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 29, 2025 | Los Angeles | Complaint | 1 citation | $700 | 0 | Apr 27, 2026 |
| May 9, 2024 | Los Angeles | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jul 22, 2025 |
| May 10, 2016 | Los Angeles | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Nov 1, 2016 |
| Jun 18, 2015 | Los Angeles | Complaint | 1 citation | $450 | $450 | Mar 27, 2018 |
| Jun 18, 2015 | North Hollywood | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Nov 12, 2015 |
| Jan 16, 2014 | Los Angeles | Complaint | 1 citation | $560 | $450 | May 9, 2015 |
| Aug 14, 2013 | Beverly Hills | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jan 30, 2014 |
| Jun 19, 2012 | Ylairmount | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jun 21, 2012 |
| Mar 29, 2012 | Agoura Hills | Complaint | 1 citation | $185 | 0 | Oct 2, 2012 |
| Jan 6, 2012 | Irvine | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jun 29, 2012 |
| Dec 15, 2011 | Claremont | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jan 3, 2012 |
| Nov 3, 2011 | Los Angeles | Complaint | no citations | 0 | 0 | Nov 14, 2011 |
| Jun 27, 2011 | Los Angeles | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jul 22, 2011 |
| Nov 25, 2009 | Santa Clara | Complaint | no citations | 0 | 0 | Dec 7, 2009 |
| Jun 21, 2008 | Fresno | Planned | 1 citation | $375 | $375 | Mar 17, 2011 |
| Dec 27, 2007 | Los Angeles | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | May 12, 2008 |
| Jul 12, 2007 | Los Angeles | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Aug 27, 2008 |
| Jun 1, 2006 | Los Angeles | Complaint | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jun 16, 2006 |
| Apr 7, 2006 | Los Angeles | Complaint | 1 citation | $375 | 0 | Jul 11, 2008 |
| Jun 7, 2005 | Los Angeles | Unprogrammed related | 1 citation | 0 | 0 | Aug 6, 2005 |
| Feb 26, 2005 | Westlake Village | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Feb 26, 2005 |
| Feb 26, 2005 | Westlake Village | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Feb 28, 2005 |
| Aug 12, 2004 | Westlake Village | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Aug 13, 2004 |
| Aug 12, 2004 | Westlake Village | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Aug 18, 2004 |
| Jun 22, 2004 | Indio | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Jun 23, 2004 |
| Mar 26, 2004 | Indio | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Mar 26, 2004 |
| Dec 10, 2003 | Indio | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Dec 29, 2003 |
| Sep 5, 2003 | Santa Barbara | Planned | no citations | 0 | 0 | Sep 6, 2003 |
| Oct 24, 2001 | Los Angeles | Unprogrammed related | no citations | 0 | 0 | Oct 25, 2001 |
Also recorded as: C Matt Construction; Matt Construction Corporation; Matt Construction Company; Matt Construction; Matt Construction Inc; Matt Construction Inc.
The rules this employer was cited under
- 8 CCR 1630: 2 citations, $900
- 8 CCR 1509, Injury and Illness Prevention Program (construction): 2 citations
- 8 CCR 3395, Heat illness prevention, outdoor: 1 citation, $375
- 8 CCR 1527: 1 citation
- 8 CCR 1621, Railings and toeboards (construction): 1 citation
Local pages: Los Angeles employment lawyer.
How to read this record
Each row is one inspection by Cal/OSHA (or, rarely, federal OSHA) of one worksite. Why is the reason it was opened. Proposed is the penalty the inspector assessed; penalty is the current figure after any appeal or settlement. "Serious" means a realistic possibility of death or serious harm; "willful" and "repeat" carry penalties up to $162,851 each.
Citations document that the employer was told, in writing, what the rule required and when. That knowledge is often the center of a retaliation case: a worker who complained about the hazard an inspector later cited, and was then fired or cut, has a Labor Code 6310 claim, with lost wages and attorney's fees.
Full explainer: how to read a Cal/OSHA record.
If you work, or worked, at Matt Construction Corp
Write down what you reported, to whom and when, and what changed afterward: shifts, pay, duties, write-ups. Request the inspection file from the Cal/OSHA district office using the activity number on the inspection page. An injury goes through workers' compensation; a firing, demotion or threat after a safety complaint or injury report is an employment claim with a one-year deadline at the Labor Commissioner (Labor Code 6310) and a longer one in court. Free, confidential review: (800) 371-3088 or send what you have.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor OSHA enforcement data, California inspections. Record last checked Nov 1, 2026. Back to the safety tracker.
About this data: Records come from the U.S. Department of Labor's OSHA enforcement datasets (inspection, violation, accident and accident injury tables), which carry Cal/OSHA's state-plan inspections alongside federal ones. We load every inspection of a California worksite opened since January 1, 2000 and refresh it weekly. Employer names, addresses and industry codes are as the inspecting office recorded them; similar names are grouped where they clearly refer to the same employer. A citation can be reduced, vacated or withdrawn on appeal, and an inspection can stay open for months, so a record can change. Penalties shown as "current" reflect the latest status in the federal file. This page is public information about the employer's regulatory record, not legal advice and not a statement that any person was harmed or any law broken beyond what the record states.