J. J. Keller® Compliance Network

What’s changing and why it matters

Although EPA has been deregulating or loosening some requirements, there are still some standards being tightened across multiple fronts in the coming year:

• Renewable fuel standards (RFS): The EPA proposed higher volume requirements for 2026, including 24.02 billion renewable identification numbers (RINs), up nearly 8% from 2025. This increase pushes stricter expectations on fuel producers and organizations purchasing renewable fuels.
• Stormwater multi-sector general permit (MSGP): A new MSGP set to take effect by February 2026 will require quarterly PFAS indicator monitoring, expanded benchmark sampling, and resiliency measures in stormwater control designs.
• PFAS Reporting under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA): TSCA Section 8(a)(7) mandates PFAS manufacturing and import data collection beginning in April 2026, through October 2026, with extended deadlines for certain small manufacturers.

Failure to prepare could lead to fines, reputational damage, supply chain disruptions, and permit delays. Companies that weave compliance planning into their 2026 strategy will be positioned not just to meet legal deadlines but to sustain operations smoothly.

Key areas of impact

• Renewable fuel standards (RFS) and air emissions The proposed increase in 2026 Renewable Identification Numbers (RIN) volumes, from 24.02 billion to 24.46 billion for 2027, signals tightening air and fuels policy that affects fuel use and emissions accounting.
• Stormwater management The upcoming 2026 MSGP requires expanded quarterly PFAS monitoring, new benchmark triggers, corrective action plans, and integration of climate resilience in design standards.
• PFAS disclosure (TSCA Section 8(a)(7)) Manufacturers and importers of PFAS must submit electronic reporting of usage, volumes, disposal, and exposure data between April and October 2026, with extensions available for smaller operations.

Steps to take now

• Audit compliance programs: Cross-check operations against RIN inventory, stormwater permits, and TSCA reporting duties.
• Upgrade monitoring and recordkeeping: Implement robust electronic systems to track PFAS, stormwater quality, fuel volumes, and emissions.
• Staff training: Educate teams on PFAS obligations, new stormwater protocols, and RFS structures.
• Engage regulators early: Comment on proposed rules, consult during permit drafting, and flag issues during the notice-and-comment period.

Looking ahead

The EPA’s 2026 updates reflect a trend toward increased transparency and environmental accountability. Companies that treat compliance as strategic will not only avoid enforcement but also gain resilience and stakeholder trust.

Key to remember: Start planning now. Early action on EPA rule changes will save time, money, and headaches when enforcement begins.

Why EPA wants to eliminate paper manifests

EPA’s reasoning is pretty straightforward. Paper manifests are slower, easier to lose, and more prone to errors. They rely on manual handling and delayed processing, which can create gaps in tracking and compliance. A fully electronic system, on the other hand, allows for real-time visibility, standardized data entry, and faster correction of mistakes. It also gives regulators a clearer, more immediate picture of what’s happening across the entire waste life cycle.

Addressing one of the biggest digital barriers: signatures

One overlooked part of the proposed rule is how EPA is trying to solve one of the biggest barriers to going fully digital, which is signatures in the field. Anyone who has dealt with manifests knows that the weak point is often the hand-off between the generator and the transporter, especially when drivers don’t have system access or reliable connectivity. To address that, EPA is proposing new functionality that would allow users to sign manifests using quick response (QR) codes or even short message service (SMS). In practice, this could mean a driver scans a QR code or receives a text prompt, then completes the signature process directly from their phone. So, no login or full system access needed. EPA is also exploring the ability to use SMS and QR-based tools to make updates to manifest data without needing full system permissions. That’s a big deal operationally, because it removes one of the most common bottlenecks in needing a registered user at a specific site to make even minor corrections.

Operational challenges companies should expect

With that said, moving to a fully digital system still comes with potential issues. It requires coordination across your entire operation. Generators, transporters, and disposal facilities all have to be aligned and capable of using the system effectively. If one party in that chain struggles, it can create delays or compliance issues for everyone involved. There’s also an upfront investment to consider. Companies may need to upgrade internal systems, ensure reliable connectivity, and train employees in new work processes. For organizations with multiple sites or field operations, which can take some planning. But over time, many of those burdens are expected to decrease. Electronic signatures, reusable templates, and centralized record-keeping can significantly reduce administrative work.

One of the biggest shifts employers will notice is the level of visibility. With paper manifests, there’s often a lag between shipment and final documentation. In a digital system, that lag disappears. Information becomes available almost immediately, and regulators have access to the same data. That means errors or discrepancies are easier to find and harder to ignore.

The good news is that companies don’t have to wait for the final rule to start preparing. Taking a close look at your current manifest process is a good first step. If paper is still a major part of your workflow, that’s a clear signal that changes are coming. Making sure your e-Manifest account is fully set up and that employees understand how to use it, will go a long way in avoiding future disruptions.

Keys to remember: The EPA’s proposed Paper Manifest Sunset Rule would set a firm date to phase out paper hazardous waste manifests and require that all covered shipments be tracked through the agency’s electronic e‑Manifest system, in which the Agency says will improve hazardous‑waste tracking and transparency while reducing administrative burden and saving regulated entities roughly $28.5 million per year.

The basics of logging exemptions

To be able to use this logging exemption in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must:

• Stay within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day (draw a 150 air-mile radius circle around the work reporting location for the day — the driver must stay within this circle),
• Be back to — and released from — the work reporting location for his/her 8- or 10-hour break within 14 hours, and
• Include the starting and ending times for the day and the total hours on duty on the time record for the day.

The company must retain the time record and have it available for inspection for six months.

What if the driver goes too far or works too many hours?

If the driver cannot meet the terms of the exemption (he or she goes too far or works too many hours), the driver must complete a regular driver’s log for the day as soon as the exemption no longer applies.

If the driver has had to complete a log 8 or fewer days out of the last 30 days, the driver can use a paper log for the day. If the driver had to complete a log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver needs to use an electronic log for the day (unless one of the ELD exemptions applies, such as operating a vehicle older than model year 2000).

30-minute break exemption

When a property-carrying driver is operating under the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver is also exempt from having to take the required 30-minute break (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)).

If the driver began the day as a 150 air-mile driver and has driven more than 8 consecutive hours without a break, and something unexpected happens and the driver can no longer use the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver must stop and immediately take the 30-minute break as well as start logging. If the driver went outside of the 150 air-mile area before the driver had 8 hours of driving without a break from driving, the driver would be expected to take the break at the appropriate time.

Common myths

Here are some of the common myths and misunderstandings about the 150 air-mile exemption:

• The driver must have the time records in the vehicle. Myth. The driver simply needs to explain to an officer during a roadside inspection that he/she does not have logs due to operating under the 150 air-mile exemption and that the required time records are back at the carrier’s office (just telling the officer, “I don’t have any logs” will lead to a violation, so the driver needs to know to provide the full explanation).
• The driver must log the previous seven days if he/she had been using this exemption and suddenly can’t. Myth. If the driver cannot use the exemption on one particular day, that is the only day the driver must use a regular log (either paper or electronic).
• Passenger-carrying drivers and drivers hauling hazardous materials cannot use this exemption. Myth. There are no restrictions on the use of this exemption, so any commercial driver can use it.
• A driver that crosses state lines cannot use this exemption. Myth. As this exemption appears in the Federal Motor Carrier Administration (FMCSA) regulations, it can be used by interstate drivers.
• Only drivers that operate out of a “company terminal” can use the 150 air-mile exemption. Myth. As long as the driver makes it back to the work reporting location for the day within the appropriate number of hours, the driver can use the exemption.
• Drivers that move from one jobsite to another every few weeks cannot use this exemption. Myth. If a driver that normally uses this exemption switches work reporting locations, the day the driver switches work reporting locations is the only day the driver cannot use the exemption.
• Drivers covered by this exemption are also exempt from the driver qualification (licensing and medical cards), driving, and vehicle inspection requirements. Myth. The only rules the driver is exempt from are the logging requirement in 395.8 and the 30-minute break requirement in 395.3.
• The driver cannot drive more than 150 miles for the day. Myth. The driver can drive as many miles as he/she wants to or needs to, as long as the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius circle and gets back to the work reporting location within the appropriate number of hours.
• If a 150 air-mile driver gets into a vehicle with an ELD, the driver must use it. Myth. The carrier can have the driver log in and have the driver entered into the system as an “exempt driver,” or the carrier can request that the driver not log into the device and then attach a comment to the unassigned driving time generated by the driver’s movements. The comment would need to explain that the driver using the vehicle was a 150 air-mile driver who submitted a time record. It is up to the carrier to decide which option to use. If stopped for a roadside inspection, the driver will need to be able to explain to the inspector that he/she is an exempt driver using the 150 air-mile exemption, so using the electronic log is not required.

What’s different with the ‘150 air-mile non-CDL property-carrying drivers’

The 150 air-mile exemption at 395.1(e)(2) only applies to drivers that: Operate property-carrying vehicles that do not require a CDL to operate, and Stay within the 150 air-miles of their work reporting location.

If the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius of the work reporting location, and returns to the work reporting location within 14 hours on 5 of the last 7 days, and 16 hours on 2 of the last seven days, the driver is allowed to use a time record in place of a log.

If the driver does not meet the terms of the exception, the driver will need to complete a log for the day. If the driver had to log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver will need to use an electronic log for the day. All of the other issues discussed above would apply to these drivers as well.

Managing the use

If you have drivers that use these exemptions, you will need to check time records to make sure they are complying with the appropriate time limits. You will also need to check movement records to verify that the drivers using these exemptions are staying within the mandated area (within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day).

If a driver is over the hours limit, or has gone too far, you need to verify that the submitted a log for the day, either paper or electronic, depending on how many days the driver had to log out of the previous 30 days.

Verifying compliance is important

During an audit, if it is discovered that your drivers are using these exemptions incorrectly, you will be cited for not having drivers’ logs when required. Each day this occurred will be another violation, so the fine could be rather large if you are not managing the use of these exemptions!

The death of a test: Fatal flaws

The medical review officer (MRO) is required to cancel a test if the lab reports a “fatal flaw” that was observed when processing an incoming specimen.

Fatal-flaw scenarios include:

• The specimen has no chain of custody form (CCF) accompanying it.
• No specimen was submitted with the CCF, in cases where a specimen has been collected.
• The CCF is missing the collector’s printed name and signature.
• Two separate collections were performed using one CCF.
• The specimen ID numbers on the specimen bottle and the CCF do not match.
• A split specimen cannot be redesignated when the primary specimen bottle:
  • Has a broken seal,
  • Shows evidence of tampering, or
  • Has an insufficient sample for analysis due to leakage.

Specific to oral-fluid collections, a fatal flaw occurs when the collector:

• Used an expired device at the time of collection.
• Failed to enter the expiration date on the CCF and the lab confirmed that the device was expired.

A chance to fix the error: Correctable flaws

When a lab discovers a “correctable flaw” when processing incoming specimens, it will attempt to fix the mistake.

The lab must attempt to correct the omission of the collector’s signature on the certification statement on the CCF.

If the MRO’s review of the MRO reveals one of the following, the test is canceled unless remedied:

• Omission of the employee’s signature from the certification statement (unless the employee’s failure or refusal to sign is noted on the “Remarks” line of the CCF).
• Omission of the certifying scientist’s signature on Copy 1 of the CCF for a positive, adulterated, substituted, or invalid test result.
• The collector’s use of a non-federal form or an expired CCF for the test.

In most instances, the problem can be corrected by a written statement by the party (employer, lab, collector, etc.) who is responsible for providing the omitted information.

If the problem is the use of a non-federal form or an expired federal form, the signed statement must:

• Confirm the form and testing complied with Part 40 procedures,
• Indicate the form was used inadvertently or as the only means of conducting the test, and
• Address steps so the error does not happen again.

The written statement for correctable flaws must be transmitted by fax or courier to the MRO on the same business day that the individual learns of the problem.

When the problem is the clinic

Since employers are responsible for the actions of the clinics, it is vital to follow up to ensure collector’s error correction training is performed when required.

If a canceled test was due to mistakes made by the collector, the collector must undergo the training within 30 days of the test. The training covers only the subject matter area that caused the canceled test.

Employers may ask to verify that training occurred. The clinic must provide this documentation according to 40.33(g).

If problems persist with a specific collection site, even if the errors are corrected and the test is saved, the carrier might consider finding another facility for its DOT testing.

Key to remember: A canceled test can cost a carrier money and leave an impaired driver on the road. If the error can be corrected, work with your MRO to correct the mistake. If the error was due to mistakes at the collection site, make sure concerns are communicated to the facility.

‘State and local laws’

A violation of 392.2 is a violation of a local or state law, regulation, or ordinance. These must be obeyed due to 392.2, which reads, “Every commercial motor vehicle must be operated in accordance with the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the jurisdiction in which it is being operated.”

The confusion is that there are no paragraphs in 392.2, so there technically should be no letters following that section. However, to inform the driver, carrier, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) what particular state or local law or regulation was involved, FMCSA has developed a system of suffix codes. The letters following “392.2” – the “suffix” — show which state or local law or regulation was involved.

When one of these codes is used, the officer should include a description of the specific violation in the “violation details” area on the actual inspection report. FYI: Summary roadside inspection reports (such as the ones visible in CSA’s SMS) do not show these details.

Not all 392.2 violations are used in CSA

Not all of these state and local law or regulation violations are used by the FMCSA for scoring purposes. The Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) Safety Measurement System (SMS) does not use the 392.2 violations that cannot be tied to crash causation. Here are a couple of examples: 392.2UCR Failure to pay UCR fee and 392.2W Size and weight are not used.

Most common 392.2 violations

Below are the top 10 392.2 violations written during 2021. All of these violations are safety-related, and therefore used in the CSA SMS for scoring. The BASIC within the SMS the violation is scored in is shown following the violation description.

1. 392.2SLLS2 Speeding 6-10 miles per hour over the speed limit (Unsafe Driving)
2. 392.2C Failure to obey traffic control device (Unsafe Driving)
3. 392.2LV Lane Restriction violation (Unsafe Driving)
4. 392.2SLLS3 Speeding 11-14 miles per hour over the speed limit (Unsafe Driving)
5. 392.2WC Wheel (Mud) flaps missing or defective (Vehicle Maintenance)
6. 392.2SLLS4 Speeding 15 or more miles per hour over the speed limit (Unsafe Driving)
7. 392.2ML Failure to maintain lane (Unsafe Driving)
8. 392.2SLLSWZ Speeding work/construction zone (Unsafe Driving)
9. 392.2PK Unlawfully parking and/or leaving vehicle in the roadway (Unsafe Driving)
10. 392.2FC Following too close (Unsafe Driving)

Key to remember

In general, FMCSA does not write traffic codes. They rely on local and state agencies to do that. When state or local traffic codes are violated, it appears on a roadside inspection report as a violation of 392.2, with a suffix indicating which traffic code was involved.

Communication

Before the employee returns, the employer should talk to the employee and solidify the employee’s return date and time. It’s also a good idea to make sure the employee knows what to expect and what is expected of them upon return.

If the employee has any continuing restrictions, the employer might have to make changes to the work, workplace, or company policies. This might indicate the need to engage in an interactive process with the employee to identify any effective, reasonable accommodations under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act.

The employer should also talk to the employee’s supervisor to help coordinate the process of bringing the employee back, whether the employee works onsite or remotely. Upon return, the supervisor should discuss any updates with the employee that occurred during the leave.

The supervisor might also want to inform other team members of the employee’s return and what is expected, including workload distribution.

Fitness for duty

Also, if the employee took leave for their own condition, before the employee returns, the employer might have indicated in the FMLA designation notice that the employee would need to provide an FMLA fitness-for-duty (FFD) certification before returning to work. If so, the employer should indicate when the employee should provide the certification, to whom, and in what particular format or form.

An FFD certification is sufficient if it indicates that the employee is able to resume work. If the employer indicated in the designation notice that the FFD certification must address the employee’s ability to perform the job’s essential functions, and the employer gave a list of those duties, the employer may hold the employee to providing information regarding their ability to perform the functions.

Prepare the workplace

Before the employee returns, the employer should ensure that the employee has access to the facility, as well as any computers and other systems. The latter might call for help from the IT department.

If the employee needs any workplace changes, those should be in place before the employee returns.

The employee's perspective

From an employee’s perspective, returning to work can be a big transition. The smoother the transition, the less risk of production or employee relations issues. If an employee were to return to an unprepared workplace and be greeted with unforeseen expectations, the employee would be more apt to complain, even to coworkers. Such negative news travels fast.

Key to remember: Employers should carefully plan and prepare for an employee’s return from extended FMLA leave.

FMLA certification basics

Employers aren’t required to use certifications, but if they do, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has five different certification forms to use for various FMLA leave situations.

The forms are as follows:

1. Certification of Health Care Provider for Employee's Serious Health Condition,
2. Certification of Health Care Provider for Family Member's Serious Health Condition,
3. Certification of Qualifying Exigency for Military Family Leave,
4. Certification for Serious Injury or Illness of a Current Servicemember for Military Family Leave, and
5. Certification for Serious Injury or Illness of a Veteran for Military Family Leave.

Let’s focus on the first two, as these are the most common ones HR administrators use.

Who can fill out an FMLA certification?

The FMLA regulations describe the person who has the authority to fill out a certification as a “health care provider.” The good news is, the regulations include a lengthy list of medical professionals who fit this role.

Under the FMLA, a health care provider includes:

• A doctor of medicine or osteopathy,
• A podiatrist,
• A dentist,
• A clinical psychologist,
• An optometrist,
• A chiropractor (limited to manual manipulation of the spine as demonstrated by X-ray),
• A nurse practitioner,
• A nurse midwife,
• A clinical social worker,
• A physician assistant,
• A Christian Science practitioner, and
• Any health care provider from whom the employer or the employer's group health plan's benefits manager will accept a medical certification to substantiate a claim for benefits.

To be qualified to fill out FMLA forms, medical professionals must be authorized to practice in the state and perform within the scope of their practice. This means that the provider must be authorized to diagnose and treat physical or mental health conditions.

What about doctors in a foreign country?

If an employee or an employee's family member is visiting another country, or a family member resides in another country, and a serious health condition develops, the employer must accept a medical certification from a health care provider who practices in that country. This includes second and third opinions.

If a medical certification from a foreign health care provider is not in English, the employee may be required to provide a written translation of the certification.

Key to remember: The FMLA regulations spell out which medical professionals can fill out certification forms.

Why does this matter?

Employers may require that employees support their need for FMLA leave with a certification from a health care provider, but employees bear the cost of the certification. The FMLA doesn’t govern whether or how much health care providers charge for a certification, and in some situations, health care providers charge over $100 to complete them.

Such high costs can deter employees from getting a certification completed. But without a certification, employers might not be able to determine if the reason for the leave qualifies for FMLA protections. Without it, they might risk losing their job.

In some cases, employees might be left trying to find a doctor who doesn’t charge any fees to complete an FMLA certification, or at least charges less.

FMLA certification deadline

Since employees have 15 calendar days to give the employer the requested certification, hunting for a new doctor who doesn’t charge a certification fee can be challenging. The current doctor shortage can make it even harder.

Employers can hold employees to the deadline unless extenuating circumstances are involved. The FMLA regulations don’t explain what does or doesn’t qualify as “extenuating circumstances.” Trying to find a doctor who will complete a certification for a reasonable fee might be an extenuating circumstance. As long as the employee is putting forth a good-faith effort to get a certification, the employer might need to be flexible.

Takeaways for all employers

Nevada isn’t usually a bellwether state, but it’s at the forefront of controlling FMLA certification costs. Now that one state has blazed the trail on curbing certification costs, perhaps others will follow suit.

It’s important to note that no employer — in Nevada or any other state — is required to use FMLA certifications to approve (or deny) an employee’s leave. Many employers use certifications to help verify that the leave qualifies and to obtain information about leave schedules. But it’s not a mandated part of the FMLA process.

Key to remember: Employers in Nevada might find that employees are more forthcoming with FMLA certifications, now that they cost no more than $30.

Tracking leave

For hourly (nonexempt) employees, employers must pay employees for any hours worked and keep track of that time. If employees work remotely, they might be required to track and report their work hours.

For salaried (exempt) employees, employers don’t have to track their work hours, but must still keep accurate records of the time spent on FMLA leave.

Blocking access

To avoid non-compliance risks with tracking leaves, employers might choose to cut employees’ work access while on extended leave. This can include not only access to the physical workplace but also access to the virtual workplace, including emails and messages. Someone from IT might need to be involved.

If employers don’t want all communications shut down, they could work with employees to identify other means of communication, such as a personal email or phone number. That way, employees can continue to share information such as their intended return date. Employers should also ensure that important messages get through.

If access is not cut off, employers need to make sure that employees know that they should not work during leave and that there could be consequences for doing so.

Policies help

To help ensure consistency, employers should have well-communicated policies on not working during leave and what employees can expect. A well-written and communicated policy can:

• Help employees feel like they are not being punished by being banned from work,
• Show that employers take FMLA leave seriously, and
• Prohibit supervisors from asking employees to work while on leave.

If an employee violates the policy and does any work during leave, employers can look at it as a policy violation and apply their applicable discipline.

Key to remember: Employers may cut off access to work during leave, but doing so requires some careful forethought.

What information must the written program include?

Paragraph (e) of 1910.1200 outlines written program requirements. Although the program doesn’t need to be lengthy or complicated, it must include enough detail to explain how your organization is complying with the HazCom standard. There are specific elements OSHA will look for to ensure compliance:

• A list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present in the workplace that matches the identifier on the container label and the safety data sheet (SDS).
• The designation of person(s) responsible for ensuring labeling of in-house containers and the person(s) responsible for ensuring labeling of shipped containers (if any).
• A description of any in-house labeling system(s) and any labeling alternatives used in the facility (if applicable).
• A description of HazCom training provided to employees.
• Procedures to review and update label information when necessary.
• Methods used to inform employees of the hazards of non-routine tasks, such as cleaning reactor vessels, and the hazards of unlabeled pipes in their work areas.
• An explanation of how the employer will comply on multi-employer worksites. Employers on multi-employer worksites who do not use hazardous chemicals, but whose employees are exposed to the chemicals used by other employers on the worksite, are required to have a program and train their employees on the hazards of the chemicals in the work areas.

Key to remember: If you’re covered by the HazCom standard, you may need a written program. It must include specific elements listed in 1910.1200(e).

Ladders feel safe, until they’re not

Ladders don’t usually trigger a sense of risk because they’re seen as a part of everyday work. When tasks feel quick and familiar, people don’t always stop reassessing the setup. That’s how unsafe ladder habits with big consequences can develop, including:

• standing on the top step “just for a second;”
• reaching too far instead of climbing down;
• using whatever ladder is closest, not the right one; and
• skipping ladder inspections because “it worked last time.”

Ladder safety isn’t going away, and that’s not a bad thing

If ladder safety feels like a repeat conversation, that’s because the same risks keep showing up. New employees are hired; facilities and equipment changes, and old habits stick around longer than they should. Even experienced workers fall into this trap. Familiar tasks start to invite rushing. Rushing leads to shortcuts, and shortcuts are where ladder injuries happen.

Emphasis must be placed on recognizing the risk before the climb starts. This means knowing when a ladder is the wrong choice, repositioning is safer than reaching, and when a quick task deserves the same setup as a longer one.

Most incidents don’t start with bad intentions. They start with “just this once” decisions, one more rung, one quick reach, one skipped check. Effective ladder safety training is about breaking routines and refocusing attention on the decisions that make ladder work safer.

Routine work, repeat injuries

Ladder injuries follow a familiar pattern. They don’t usually come from unusual jobs or unexpected hazards, and they happen during everyday tasks that feel common. Injury reports often look the same, such as short tasks, quick setups, and decisions made under time pressure. The ladder didn’t fail. The setup and the decisions around it did.

Injury data from OSHA and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) consistently point to the same causes. That’s why the same types of ladder injuries keep occurring repeatedly, not because the hazards are unknown, but because routine work makes those hazards easier to overlook. These reasons include:

• people underestimate the risk because ladders feel familiar;
• jobs feel “too small” to stop and reset the ladder;
• time pressure encourages leaning, rushing, and overreaching; and
• experience leads to comfort, and comfort leads to shortcuts.

The rules are written in injuries

OSHA ladder requirements are built around real injury trends and are based on decades of injury data. Falls from ladders remain one of the leading causes of workplace injuries, which is why OSHA keeps ladders near the top of its enforcement priorities year after year:

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.23 defines how ladders are intended to be used, specifically prohibiting practices such as standing on the top step of a stepladder, using ladders for purposes they were not designed for, and climbing ladders that have not been inspected. These requirements exist because improper use, poor setup, and skipped inspections consistently show up in ladder fall investigations.

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.30 reinforces that preventing ladder injuries depends on training employees to recognize hazards before they climb, understand proper ladder selection and positioning, and know when a ladder is not the right tool for the task. Together, these standards emphasize that ladder injuries are not random events, they are predictable outcomes of routine decisions made during everyday work.

Small choices make a big difference

Ladder safety isn’t only about compliance. Incidents develop from a series of small, moment to moment decisions made during routine work. These choices made daily either reduce risk or quietly add to it. Ladder injuries can be avoided by taking the time to make simple improvements including:

• inspecting and securing the ladder,
• climbing down and repositioning,
• selecting the proper ladder for the task, and
• stopping when the ladder no longer feels stable or safe.

Key to remember: Take the time to choose safer setups, stay alert, and prevent routine decisions from turning into preventable injuries. When employees choose the correct ladder, reposition instead of reaching, and inspect before use, the risk of ladder injuries falls, not your employees.

Hidden in plain sight

When Sebastian walked into the office each morning, no one could see the weight he carried. Deadlines were met, meetings attended, yet his smile never faltered. Inside, stress and anxiety were taking a toll, and his story isn’t unique.

One study showed a very interesting contrast: most employees (about 77%) stated they were comfortable supporting a coworker’s mental health. However, when it comes to their own stress or burnout, 42% worry that opening up about it or seeking help could hurt their career or make them a target. Even more striking, one in four have thought about quitting because of mental health challenges. And it’s not just long-term stress. A recent Gallup poll found that 41% of workers felt highly stressed just “yesterday.”

These statistics underscore a troubling theme that employees value and wish to nurture mental wellness; however, stigma, insufficient support, and overwhelming stress persist. Employers need to begin recognizing and proactively addressing workplace mental health in order to cultivate resilient, productive teams.

What one state is doing

The state of Michigan is piloting a new initiative aimed at improving workplace mental health which is increasingly being recognized as an occupational safety and health issue. This expands the state’s historically stringent approach to reducing on-the-job risks.

Michigan’s LEADS program—short for Learn, Educate, Act, Deploy, Study—is a four-month initiative designed to give employers practical tools to tackle stress, burnout, and communication breakdowns that often lead to safety incidents. The idea is simple: when communication falters and stress goes unchecked, mistakes happen. Those mistakes can mean more human errors, higher injury rates, quiet quitting, and turnover.

One of the program’s key features is an evidence-based organizational assessment. Think of it like a safety audit that’s focused on mental health risks rather than physical hazards. Employers get a clear picture of issues such as heavy workloads, unclear roles, workplace conflict or bullying, and weak support systems that can quickly erode a strong safety culture.

The end goal of the LEADS program is not to replace existing safety programs but rather strengthen them. Consider joining Michigan in their effort to enhance communication, better define workers’ roles, support unfettered reporting, and more effectively engage employees.

Key to remember: Stress doesn’t just weigh people down; it can have significant safety and productivity consequences. Programs like Michigan’s LEADS pilot initiative are giving employers the ability to tackle stress and burnout before they lead to mistakes, injuries, or turnover.