That is not how construction works. In construction you're generally paid hourly, and workers can often be aware of issues that may not be readily apparent to management. Construction workers play a very active role in the process and are largely responsible for overall outcomes, not only for the building but for themselves as well. Good, skilled, experienced construction workers and you're generally going to have a pretty good outcome. Poor quality workers and you're going to have a poor quality outcome far more than otherwise necessary.
It's generally management that has the desire to rush the project forward and may be looking to cut corners. Good workers help create a favorable balance between economic concerns and practical outcomes. But needless to say when you get a bunch of workers who are just the cheapest possible, may have fabricated experience, and who will generally be willing to do anything to not risk losing their job, it's going to create a very dangerous situation for both themselves and the job at hand.
> Good workers help create a favorable balance between economic concerns and practical outcomes.
Workers soon become inured to their daily risks and will adopt unsafe working practices if it increases their efficiency. Sure, they'll complain about other people's working practices if they pose a danger to them, but they will not self-regulate. If you doubt this look at the builders working on small jobs like domestic roofs and extensions where there is no management. They will not be following the rules.
I'm talking about my experience of the UK. I guess you're talking about America. The incentives are different. Not least because many British workers are self-employed and working "on a price". The big construction firms directly employ approximately nobody.
I'm not sure very small scale construction is relevant in this case. I've worked in this exact sort of job before and like you said it's mostly self employed or very near it. And, at least in my case, we literally didn't know a single rule or regulation. It's not like you go grab the hundreds of pages of ever-shifting regulations and memorize them before you start working. And the chances of getting any sort of governmental audit is very near zero.
But in this case you tend to get involved in the work because you enjoy construction and you want to do a good job for the sake of doing a good job. It's like programming. If there weren't external forces, it's not like programmers want to do a haphazard job - but they end up getting pulled in a dozen different directions and, at the end, making code that won't even be formally attributed to them. I suppose one huge difference is also in construction if you do a poor job, you can end up getting sued for everything you own - whereas in code when code crashes, people just shrug.
It's generally management that has the desire to rush the project forward and may be looking to cut corners. Good workers help create a favorable balance between economic concerns and practical outcomes. But needless to say when you get a bunch of workers who are just the cheapest possible, may have fabricated experience, and who will generally be willing to do anything to not risk losing their job, it's going to create a very dangerous situation for both themselves and the job at hand.