Compliance Just Got Easier: Stay ahead of regulatory changes with instant notifications on updates that matter.
Copyright 2026 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.
Regulatory Compliance News & Updates
Keep up to date on the latest
developments affecting OSHA, DOT,
EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.
Safety & Compliance News
FEATURED NEWS
2026-05-01T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyRisk Management TransportationRisk Management - Motor CarrierExpert InsightsFocus AreaEnglishTransportationUSA
Expert Insights: When the road triggers bad memories
Recently, friends were in one of the first cars to happen upon a crash involving an automobile and motorcycle. As they related their story, I could tell it was horrific and unsettling for them; they saw the motorcyclist severely injured and the automobile driver appearing dazed but unharmed. They didn’t know the details of the crash or whether the motorcyclist survived. But even as bystanders, it’s something they’ll never forget.
I can only imagine how hard it will be for the automobile driver to get behind the wheel again. She will probably struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD occurs when a traumatic event is relived through memory flashbacks. An intense memory is created when adrenaline is released during an event. The more adrenaline, the deeper the memory. Stimuli reminding them of the incident trigger intense emotions.
I suspect that commercial drivers who have been in a serious crash also struggle with PTSD.
Don’t lose good drivers to crash trauma
PTSD following a serious crash can leave a driver gun-shy — posing a safety risk on the road. Or it could result in a driver leaving the industry entirely. Following a serious crash, you might observe your driver:
- Having trouble getting back into a routine,
- Appearing troubled or withdrawn,
- Unable to concentrate,
- Experiencing heightened emotions, and/or
- Easily startled or frightened.
If you observe any of these behaviors, don’t ignore them. Express your concern to the driver and ask if there’s anything you can do to help. PTSD, if left unchecked, could result in depression, self-destructive behavior, substance abuse, or even suicide. Anxiety can lead to health issues.
If your company offers an employee assistance program (EAP), a driver struggling with the events of a serious crash could benefit from it.
By supporting drivers through difficult times, you can help save their emotional and physical health, and possibly their jobs.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-05-01T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyFall ProtectionGeneral Industry SafetyFall ProtectionFall Protection for ConstructionIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
Don’t fall for it! Anchor points may not be all they seem!
Will your anchor points hold? At first glance, fall protection anchor points may appear to be simple, reliable, and solid fixtures that are secure and ready to safeguard your workers at heights. But beneath their seemingly straightforward design lies a complex reality. Not all anchor points are created equal, and assuming they’re safe without proper evaluation can lead to serious consequences.
From questionable installation practices to misunderstood load ratings and compatibility issues, OSHA continually cites fall protection violations more than any other safety standard. In fact, fall protection has made its top ten citations list for 15 years in a row. Misused or improperly installed anchor points are often at the heart of these failures. Understanding the nuances of anchor point selection, inspection, and use is essential to ensuring effective fall protection and potentially saving a life!
Failure is not an option
Anchor point failures can occur for a variety of reasons, many of which are easily avoided. Here are some of the most frequent factors that contribute to structural compromise and system breakdowns:
- Improper installation — Anchor points must be designed and installed by or under the supervision of a qualified person who understands the structural integrity of the anchorage, load limits, and proper mounting procedures. OSHA considers a qualified person one who has demonstrated the ability to solve problems related to work after gaining extensive knowledge, training, or experience for that work.
- Inadequate structural strength — OSHA requires in both the construction standard (1926.502) and the general industry standard (1910.140) that anchor points must be capable of supporting at least 5,000 pounds per attached worker or as determined safe by a professional engineer. Anything less can result in failure under forces exerted during a fall.
- Incompatibility or misuse — Using the wrong type of anchor point or connectors, tying off to non-rated structures, or using a single anchor for multiple workers can lead to improper loading and failure. Unauthorized alterations to anchor points or connectors can also increase the chances of failure. Also, anchor points placed too far from the work area can become damaged from overswing (pendulum effect) that places added stress on the anchor point.
- Physical damage — Anchor points can be damaged by:
- Contact with other equipment,
- Exposure to environmental conditions (e.g., corrosion, temperature extremes),
- Crushing by heavy materials,
- Mechanical stress (e.g., overloading, shock loading), or o Overuse (e.g., abrasion, excessive vibration).
- Ineffective inspections or maintenance — OSHA requires daily visual checks and formal annual inspections by a competent person. Fall protection systems, including anchor points, subjected to impact loading must be immediately removed from service until an inspection indicates there is no damage and is again safe for employee use.
Strong anchors, strong outcomes
Since not all anchor points are created equal, it’s best to choose those that are strong, durable, and can weather environmental challenges while meeting regulatory requirements. Some of the safest and most reliable anchor points are made of:
- Galvanized steel,
- Carbon or alloy steel, or
- High-grade stainless steel.
Versatile anchor points improve both worker safety and operational efficiency. In addition to meeting OSHA’s 5,000-pound requirement, the entire system must be certified to a safety factor of two (meaning twice the expected impact force) and must limit the arrest force on workers to 1,800 pounds.
Examples of effective anchor points include:
- I-beams, H-beams, or wide flange beams;
- Concrete anchors that are cast in place, set with epoxy with through bolts;
- Engineers anchor systems (e.g., davit arms, roof anchors);
- Portable anchors like deadweight anchors, vacuum anchors, or mobile roof clamps; or
- Specialty anchors such as standing steam anchors or parapet anchors.
The work area should also be evaluated by a competent person for safe fall protection anchoring. Where employees are working at heights, anchor points allow for emergency rescue access and tie-off. Anchor points should also ensure that fall distances are minimized whenever possible and that swing falls are prevented.
Keys to remember: Effective anchor points are those that are properly rated, securely installed, and are inspected regularly. Anchor points must meet OSHA’s minimum strength requirements or be certified by a qualified person to ensure reliable performance should a fall occur.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-01T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSexual HarassmentSexual HarassmentAssociate RelationsTraining & DevelopmentHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleUSAHR ManagementEnglishFocus AreaHuman Resources
Is using the ‘f-word’ at work sexual harassment?
Profanity in most workplaces isn’t the taboo it once was. It’s unlikely that a worker who drops a tool and lets out a mild expletive will be disciplined. Under some circumstances, however, directing the “f-word” or other obscenities at someone could be considered sexual harassment.
Sexual harassment is defined as unwelcome behavior of a sexual nature, and a “hostile work environment,” is a type of sexual harassment.
A hostile work environment is a workplace where harassing conduct makes it difficult for someone to do their job. Vulgar language, as well as inappropriate conduct, can create a hostile work environment. At the same time, vulgar language isn’t always grounds for an actionable sexual harassment claim.
What the courts say
In 2010, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the regular use of sexually charged profanity in the workplace constituted sexual harassment. In Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, the court found that words alone, without inappropriate touching, may be enough to constitute sexual harassment.
Also, the words don’t have to be directed at one individual. In the Reeves case, the coworkers referred to women as a group in a derogatory way by using profanity that referred to females.
"Severe or pervasive" is the legal standard used to determine if harassment creates a hostile work environment. A sexual harassment claim can result from a single incident if it’s severe enough to create a hostile workplace. However, most sexual harassment claims involve less severe incidents over time. A single offensive comment doesn’t create a hostile work environment, but repeated sexual comments after it’s clear that it’s unwelcome could become pervasive. For example, an employee’s frequent use of derogatory words about a female coworker can create a hostile work environment.
Reception is more important than intention
Sexual harassment doesn’t require offensive language; even polite language can be construed as harassment. Unwanted and persistent comments about sexual situations or someone’s sexual orientation can amount to harassment.
Jokes, whether or not they contain curse words, are sometimes a problem. Even if offensive jokes aren’t intended to hurt someone, it’s best to keep them out of the workplace. How a joke or statement is received is more relevant than how it’s intended.
The occasional use of a bad word that isn’t gender-specific or sexually charged isn’t enough for a sexual harassment claim. For example, if you use a curse word when frustrated, it’s unlikely to become a sexual harassment case.
According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), verbal conduct that doesn’t discriminate on the basis of sex or isn’t of a sexual nature isn’t sexual harassment. However, making comments to someone using sexualized or vulgar language directed toward a specific individual or group might be.
The lesson for employers is that not all vulgar conduct or profane language will necessarily result in liability for sexual harassment. Three key determining factors are the:
- Context in which the vulgar conduct occurs;
- Use of gender-specific vulgarity or profanity, especially if it’s offensive to one gender; and
- Employer’s response to employee complaints about the vulgar language and offensive conduct.
Employers are liable for sexual harassment at work if they fail to act. To be liable, an employer knew or should have known about unwelcome or offensive conduct.
To create and maintain a respectful workplace that’s free of sexual harassment, companies should have a clear sexual harassment policy that defines conduct that won’t be tolerated, including sexually offensive language. A training program should also be developed and shared to help prevent sexual harassment from occurring in the workplace. In fact, some states require it.
Other aspects of a training program can include:
- Civility training, which promotes a respectful work environment overall; and
- Bystander training, a harassment and violence prevention strategy.
Key to remember: Not all profanity is sexual harassment, but a sexual harassment claim might be made if sexually charged profanity is creating a hostile work environment.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-04-30T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishFleet SafetyFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleEnforcement - DOTRoadside InspectionsTransportationUSA
A new DataQs risk: When ‘clean’ inspections go missing
Most fleet safety managers know DataQs as an essential online tool for correcting bad roadside inspection data. When used properly, it protects carriers from errors that can unfairly damage the company’s Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) scores.
But there’s a troubling trend emerging: bad actors are using DataQs not to fix bad data, but to steal good data.
What’s happening?
DataQs allows almost anyone to submit a “request for data review” (RDR) asking an enforcement agency to correct or reassign inspection or crash data. Increasingly, some carriers are submitting RDRs claiming that a clean (violation-free) roadside inspection attributed to another carrier should instead belong to them. They may even submit falsified, outdated, or publicly available records to support their claim.
If successful, the result is a double hit:
- The requesting carrier gains a clean inspection, improving its CSA scores and its image among enforcement, customers, brokers, and insurers.
- The rightful carrier loses that inspection, harming its scores and safety profile.
In many cases, this happens quietly — unless the affected carrier is watching for it. And because DataQs reviews can take weeks or months, damage may persist even if the error is eventually corrected.
Inspection data involving leased vehicles may be at particular risk, since multiple companies are involved and the operating motor carrier may not be apparent.
How would you even know?
When an RDR is submitted that involves your USDOT number, the DataQs account holder associated with your company typically receives an email notification.
Another way you may be alerted to activity involving your data is if an astute employee at the state agency reviewing the RDR contacts you to alert you to the possible fraud.
In both cases, these emails or notifications may be overlooked, ignored, or filtered, especially if the DataQs account is tied to a former employee. If no one is monitoring the notifications, a fraudulent reassignment request could be approved without your knowledge.
What can you do to protect your data?
Keeping a close eye on your roadside inspection data and CSA scores can help alert you to changes that you did not approve. Be sure to:
- Confirm that the DataQs account holder is a current, responsible employee who actively monitors the email address.
- Respond quickly to suspicious RDRs involving your account; silence may be interpreted as agreement.
- Be ready to submit documentation showing a clean inspection legitimately belongs to your company (this means keeping inspection records organized).
- Periodically reconcile your inspection history, looking for any missing inspections, especially clean ones, and investigating unexplained changes.
Most safety programs focus on using DataQs offensively to challenge violations or crashes that don’t belong. Increasingly, it also needs to be used defensively to protect the integrity of the data.
Key to remember: Fraudsters are using DataQs to steal clean inspection data from unsuspecting motor carriers. Fleet managers need to watch the data — and their email box — closely to avoid harm to their company’s CSA scores.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-04-30T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthElectrical SafetyConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyElectrical SafetyIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
National Electrical Safety Month: A good time to re-energize your safety program
Every May, National Electrical Safety Month offers employers a timely reminder to revisit a hazard that often hides in plain sight. Electricity powers nearly every workplace, and because it is so routine, people often underestimate the risk. But electrical hazards remain a serious cause of workplace injuries, fatalities, fires, and costly downtime.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, a total of 70,276 occupational fatalities occurred from all causes with 2,070 of these were due to contact with electricity. Beyond worker injuries, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has consistently identified electrical failures and malfunctions as a significant cause of commercial and industrial fires. The construction industry had the highest number of electrical fatalities (907), followed by professional and business services (212), trade, transportation, and utilities (171), natural resources and mining (138), and manufacturing (120). Just five occupations in the construction trades (electricians, construction laborers, roofers, painters, and carpenters) experienced 30% of all electrical fatalities.
The important thing to remember is this: electrical incidents do not only happen to electricians. Maintenance personnel, machine operators, contractors, and even office staff can be exposed to electrical hazards.
The risks are often ordinary things
Some of the biggest electrical hazards are everyday issues that get overlooked until something goes wrong. It is often these “small” issues that lead to larger events. Common examples include:
- Damaged cords or plugs
- Overloaded circuits or power strips
- Improper use of extension cords
- Missing panel covers or unlabeled breakers
- Energized troubleshooting without proper controls
- Poor lockout/tagout practices during maintenance
- Worn tools or equipment with damaged insulation
Electrical safety is more than compliance
Electrical Safety Month can be a great trigger for employers to move beyond compliance and focus on prevention. A few practical things organizations can revisit this month include:
- Basic shock and fire hazards
- Safe use of portable electrical equipment
- Recognition of damaged wiring or components
- Arc flash awareness
- Emergency response procedures related to electrical incidents
Revisit lockout/tagout
Many serious electrical injuries happen during servicing and maintenance when hazardous energy is not fully isolated. Electrical Safety Month can be a good opportunity to:
- Audit lockout/tagout procedures
- Observe whether procedures are being followed in the field
- Review authorized employee training
- Verify disconnects, labels, and isolation points are accurate
Even the most compliant programs often uncover gaps during these reviews.
Check the health of your equipment
Electrical safety often starts with the condition of your equipment, so use May as a good reminder to give things a quick check. This can include inspecting:
- Electrical panels
- Checking cords and tools for wear or damage
- Verifying proper grounding and bonding
- Reviewing preventive maintenance
- Using thermographic inspections to spot hot spots
Catching a loose connection or an overloaded component early can save you from dealing with a much bigger issue down the road.
Don’t forget arc flash
Along with checking the condition of your equipment, it’s also a good time to take a closer look at arc flash hazards, which remain one of the most serious risks in industrial environments. An arc flash can happen in a split second, producing extreme heat, pressure waves, and severe burns, yet it’s not uncommon for facilities to be working with outdated studies, missing or incorrect labels, or PPE requirements that have slowly drifted over time as equipment changes. Use the opportunity to pause and ask a few important questions:
- Is our arc flash study still current?
- Are labels accurate after recent modifications?
- Are employees wearing the right protective equipment, and do they clearly understand approach boundaries and work restrictions?
Taking the time to revisit these basics often uncovers gaps that aren’t obvious during day to day operations but can make a big difference in keeping people safe.
Contractors matter too
Finally, you can’t forget about contractor oversight. Even the strongest internal electrical safety programs can start to break down if expectations for contractors aren’t clearly defined or consistently reinforced. This can be a good time to revisit host contractor responsibilities, energized work rules, permit expectations, lockout/tagout coordination, and how communication is handled during outages or maintenance activities. When everyone isn’t aligned on roles and procedures, small misunderstandings can quickly turn into serious risks. In fact, many electrical incidents stem from coordination breakdowns just as often as technical failures.
Keys to remember: National Electrical Safety Month is a chance to pause, look critically at controls, and strengthen the systems that keep people safe.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-04-30T05:00:00Z
NewsHuman Resource ManagementHuman Resource ManagementIn-Depth ArticleJob SpecificationsHR ManagementEnglishHuman ResourcesIndustry NewsWage and HourWage and HourHR GeneralistFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)Associate RelationsFocus AreaUSA
What the joint employer proposal means
The U. S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD)’s proposed rule on joint employer status revises the analysis for assessing joint employer relationships under three federal wage and hour laws:
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA
- Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA)
If the rule were finalized as written, joint employment would be harder to prove — meaning it’s more beneficial for employers since it involves less compliance risk.
The proposed rule covers general principles, vertical joint employment, horizontal joint employment, and the relevance of certain common business practices
Vertical relationships
Vertical joint employment occurs where an employee’s work simultaneously benefits two unrelated entities at the same time. It often centers around whether business partners that are either higher or lower than the other in a particular business structure — such as general contractors and subcontractors, franchisors and franchisees, or staffing agencies and their clients — are joint employers of an employee.
The proposed rule has a four-factor test for potential vertical joint employment situations. It looks at who:
- Hires or fires the employee,
- Substantially supervises and controls the employee’s work schedule or conditions of employment,
- Determines the rate and method of pay, and
- Maintains the employee’s employment records.
Additional factors might be relevant in assessing vertical joint employment, but a unanimous finding on the four factors in either direction would establish a "substantial likelihood" regarding whether an individual or entity is a joint employer with another.
The proposal differs from the 2020 rule for vertical relationships in a handful of ways:
- An employer’s “reserved control," — the reserved right to act — may be considered, but carries less weight than exercised control.
- Economic dependence factors may be considered, but they carry less weight than the four core factors and aren’t the “ultimate question” of the analysis.
- Other additional factors, such as whether the employee has a continuous or repeated relationship with the potential joint employer, or whether the employee performs work at a location owned or controlled by the potential joint employer, may be considered.
- Excludes three independent contractor factors, as those are relevant only in assessing whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. The three factors are:
- Whether the employee is in a job that otherwise requires special skill, initiative, judgment, or foresight;
- Whether the employee has the opportunity for profit or loss based on their managerial skill; and
- Whether the employee invests in equipment or materials required for work or the employment of helpers.
Horizontal relationships
In "horizontal" joint employment relationships, an employee works separate hours for two (or more) employers in the same workweek. The issue is whether the employers are associated enough with the worker’s employment to be seen as both employing the worker. Typically, each employer employs the worker for some hours worked, and if the employers are connected with each other with respect to the employee, then they’re joint employers and must combine all hours worked for them by the worker during the workweek to determine legal compliance.
Under the proposed rule, employers will generally be sufficiently associated if:
- There is an arrangement between them to share the employee's services;
- One employer is acting directly or indirectly in the interest of the other employer in relation to the employee; or
- They share control of the employee, directly or indirectly, because one employer controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the other employer.
Situations where the employers have little to do with the employment of specific employees — such as sharing a vendor or being franchisees of the same franchisor — alone aren’t enough to establish joint employment.
Key to remember: The joint employer proposed rule is designed to change how employers determine their relationship with workers.
Keep reading...Show less
Search all news
Got a Compliance Question?
We’ve Got You Covered!
Get clear, reliable answers from experts with 500+ years of combined experience.
J. J. Keller is the trusted source for DOT / Transportation, OSHA / Workplace Safety, Human Resources, Construction Safety and Hazmat / Hazardous Materials regulation compliance products and services. J. J. Keller helps you increase safety awareness, reduce risk, follow best practices, improve safety training, and stay current with changing regulations.
Copyright 2026 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.