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
2026-05-21T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsWage and HourWage and HourAssociate Benefits & CompensationHR GeneralistFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)OvertimeAssociate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Federal overtime threshold rule gone, for now
On May 15, members of Congress introduced a bill that would gradually increase the overtime salary threshold for determining whether employees may be classified as exempt under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
This news came on the heels of the U.S. Department of Labor's official rescission of the 2024 rule that increased the threshold. That rule was challenged in federal court, and employers didn’t have to comply with it since it was vacated in November 2024.
Employers may now comfortably continue to follow the 2019 rule, where the minimum salary threshold is $684 per week ($35,568 per year) for executive, administrative, and professional employees, and $107,432 for highly compensated employees.
Potential future increases
The bill, The Restoring Overtime Pay Act of 2026 (HR 8868), would increase the federal minimum salary level as follows:
- 2026 — $45,000
- 2027 — $55,000
- 2028 — $65,000
- 2029 — $75,000
- 2030 — 55th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally*, updated annually
*The current 55th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally is $89,440 and could increase to $98,000 by 2030.
The measure would allow the Secretary of Labor to establish a higher salary threshold through notice and comment rulemaking, as long as it can be updated annually.
The bill would also require the following:
- The Secretary of Labor would need to provide annual, automatic updates to the overtime threshold of at least the 55th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers.
- If the Secretary doesn’t establish an increased salary threshold, the 55th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers nationally would take effect, based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) from the second quarter of the preceding calendar year.
- The Secretary would need to publish a notice announcing the revised salary threshold no later than 60 days before the revised threshold takes effect.
- The BLS would need to publicly publish data on its website for each week of each quarter and data on weekly earnings by census region.
The bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. While it has a small chance of being enacted at this time, it does show that some members of Congress are interested in this topic.
Key to remember: Congress members introduced a bill increasing the federal salary threshold level. But for now, employers can use the 2019 federal salary threshold to determine whether they may classify an employee as exempt.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-05-21T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsFederal Motor Carrier Safety RegulationsFleet SafetyFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleEnglishTransportationBusiness planning - Motor CarrierUSA
A 1,000-page bill with big implications for trucking
You’ve probably heard the acronyms: FAST Act, MAP-21, SAFETEA-LU, TEA-21. These were all “surface transportation reauthorization” bills that have kept the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) funded in five-year increments over recent decades.
They also had significant policy implications, and the next version — the “BUILD America 250 Act” — is no different. At more than 1,000 pages, it will fund the FMCSA and other agencies through 2031 and may have a sizable impact on the FMCSA, motor carriers, and highway safety alike.
Key provisions
The House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee released a draft version of the legislation in May, and it’s due to be finalized by October. The following are some key provisions related to motor carrier safety.
Expanded record retention: Carriers could be required to retain post‑crash drug and alcohol test records for five years (instead of the current one year for negative results), increasing documentation burdens and audit exposure.
Renewed attention on truck parking: The bill would require a federal study on truck parking availability, continuing momentum from 2012’s Jason’s Law. It would also allocate $150 million per year for truck parking development.
Qualifications for brokers and forwarders: The FMCSA would be directed to develop new rules on the experience and qualifications of freight broker and forwarder personnel, a notable shift toward raising professional standards.
Lease-purchase program scrutiny: The legislation would mandate disclosures and outreach related to lease‑purchase programs and direct regulators to prohibit predatory arrangements.
Bathroom access for drivers: The bill would require access to restroom facilities for drivers at shipping and receiving locations.
Pulsating brake lights: The legislation would require the DOT to study whether to allow pulsating brake lights.
ELD oversight: The bill would require FMCSA to verify contact information and technical specifications of electronic logging device (ELD) certification applicants but falls short of calling for third-party certification. It would also codify an existing ELD exemption for livestock haulers.
Hair testing and collectors: The DOT would be required to adopt hair testing for drugs within one year after federal health guidelines are issued. In addition, the agency would need to issue new guidance on who may act as a specimen collector under Part 40.
Training Provider Registry (TPR) enforcement: The FMCSA would have to remove noncompliant training providers from the TPR within 90 days of a valid complaint, tightening oversight of entry‑level driver training programs.
Going beyond compliance: The bill would require the FMCSA to issue a “Beyond Compliance” program within 2 years, to give credit to motor carriers that take extra steps to ensure safety.
Data-challenge labeling: The bill would require the FMCSA to add a label to any safety violation that is undergoing a challenge — such as when a motor carrier or driver challenges a roadside violation — until the review is complete.
Autonomous truck regulations: The bill calls for safety regulations within two years for commercial vehicles equipped with automated driving systems (ADS). As part of the effort, the FMCSA will need to allow cab-mounted warning beacons in place of reflective triangles for stopped vehicles and establish a driver workforce development program for drivers replaced by ADS.
Other provisions: The bill also calls for easing some licensing restrictions, tightening rules for household goods shippers, and establishing an advisory committee on cargo theft.
The “Building Unrivaled Infrastructure and Long-term Development for America’s 250th” (BUILD America 250) Act is more than a funding bill; it’s a roadmap for the next phase of federal motor carrier policy. As Congress moves toward finalizing the legislation, the trucking industry may want to watch closely for the compliance, operational, and safety changes that may follow.
Key to remember: Congress is working to finalize a major piece of legislation that will impact motor carrier safety for years to come.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-21T05:00:00Z
NewsCranes, Lifts, and ScaffoldingElectrical SafetyFall ProtectionFall ProtectionFalling Object ProtectionIn-Depth ArticleEnglishMachine GuardingWork ZonesMobile CranesIndustry NewsSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyElectrical SafetyWork ZonesFocus AreaGeneral Duty ClauseMachine GuardingUSA
OSHA advisory panel clears way for tree care rulemaking
OSHA received the backing of an advisory committee as it advances a comprehensive Tree Care Operations proposal. During this week’s Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) meeting, the group unanimously voted 8-0 in favor of moving ahead.
ACCSH recommended that “OSHA proceed with the new Tree Care Operations standard under general industry and make necessary changes with applicable parts of [the construction standards at] 29 CFR 1926.” The nod clears a path for OSHA to publish its long-awaited proposal.
The action came after OSHA presented a slideshow entitled, “OSHA’s Tree Care Operations Proposed Regulation.” Together, the presentation and vote signal that the agency is closing in on publication.
Background
A Tree Care Operations proposal has been two decades in the making. On May 10, 2006, the Tree Care Industry Association (TCIA) petitioned OSHA to promulgate a standard specific to the industry. TCIA called tree care work one of the most hazardous occupations. The organization also contended that existing OSHA regulations did not adequately manage the hazards.
TCIA urged OSHA to consider using the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z133.1, American National Standard for Arboricultural Operations—Safety Requirements. ANSI Z133.1 has since evolved into today’s ANSI Z133.
The historical record shows that OSHA:
- Issued a preproposal in 2008,
- Held a stakeholder meeting in 2016, and
- Convened a small business panel in 2020.
Despite slating the proposed rule for April 2026 in the last agenda, OSHA has yet to publish it.
A construction connection
The 2008 preproposal notice pegged the Tree Care Operations rulemaking squarely under the general industry regulations at 29 CFR 1910. However, OSHA’s slideshow reveals that the agency is exploring whether its construction safety standards should come into play. Examples include crane operator certification and limited site clearance. Multi-employer worksites are also at issue.
The 2020 small business panel pressed OSHA to evaluate how and whether 29 CFR 1926 Subpart CC should apply to tree care operations. One approach may be to allow the Tree Care standard to reference Part 1926 where appropriate.
What’s driving the rulemaking?
Injury rates in landscaping services exceed most industries. The Bureau of Labor Statistics finds 124 injury and illness cases with days away from work per 10,000 workers from 2023 to 2024. (Compare this rate to just 94.5 per 10,000 for construction and 86.4 per 10,000 for manufacturing.) What’s more, the landscaping services industry records about 240 fatalities on average each year. That represents 4.6 percent of all work-related deaths in the U.S.
According to OSHA, tree trimming and tree removal can expose workers to serious hazards:
- Falling from trees,
- Being struck by falling trees/branches and flying objects,
- Vehicular traffic incidents,
- Cuts from high-speed saws,
- Being pulled into chippers, and
- Contact with energized power lines.
A pieced-together regulatory framework currently speaks to these hazards. This patchwork of standards covers ladders, lifts, cranes, slings, machine guarding, lockout/tagout, and hand and power tools. Other provisions govern noise, personal protective equipment, first aid, telecommunications, electrical safety, and hazardous chemicals. Likewise, the agency cites the General Duty Clause of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.
OSHA believes a comprehensive standard would:
- Help reduce injuries and fatalities,
- Provide clear and consistent guidance to employers,
- Be specific to hazards faced in these operations, and
- Address hazards not currently covered by OSHA standards.
An OSHA official adds that many day laborers, immigrants, and workers who don’t speak English are employed in the sector. OSHA calls these workers “disenfranchised,” making the rule a priority.
Anticipated proposed changes
OSHA is pursuing a regulatory (not deregulatory) proposed rule that would apply to “arboricultural operations and tree and ornamental palm maintenance and removal.” This includes protections for workers that:
- Prune, repair, maintain, or remove trees (not shrubs, hedges, bushes, or lawns);
- Provide any onsite support; or
- Use certain hazardous equipment related to tree care.
Provisions of the proposal would focus on:
- Pre-job preparation to identify hazards,
- Effective hazard controls, and
- Worker training.
The new standard may also set requirements for:
- Worker preparation, such as job hazard analyses, briefings, and communication;
- Worksite controls like traffic control;
- Fall protection; and
- Tools and equipment.
The scope of coverage will consider:
- General industry tree care activities (29 CFR 1910), and
- Construction activities like crane operation and site clearance (29 CFR 1926).
OSHA reports that the standard would be largely consistent with ANSI Z133 and OSHA state-plan state regulations on tree care. At the same time, the agency acknowledges the rulemaking remains a challenge to develop. Foundational questions like how to define tree versus multi-stemmed shrub are “deceptively complex.”
Key takeaway
After two decades, OSHA appears poised to issue a proposed rule for tree care operations. The agency presented a rulemaking summary and received unanimous support from ACCSH. The rule may impact Parts 1910 and 1926.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-21T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsClassification - HazmatHazmat SafetyHazmatIn-Depth ArticleFocus AreaEnglishTransportationUSA
Inbound hazmat risks you can’t ignore
Most hazmat programs are built around outbound shipments, which makes complete sense. You control what you ship, how it’s packaged, and how it’s described. However, one thing that normally gets overlooked is where undeclared hazmat shows up the most, and that’s with inbound shipments. Even if you didn’t create the problem, your team is the one handling it when it arrives.
The main reason this happens comes down to control. When you ship something out, you know exactly what’s in the package. On inbound shipments, you’re relying on suppliers to classify, package, and communicate hazards correctly. Not all of them have the same level of awareness or compliance discipline.
Some don’t realize their product is regulated, like when you have common items such as aerosols, lithium batteries, or flammable liquids. Others simplify descriptions and treat materials as general goods, or they may skip requirements altogether to save time or cost. By the time the shipment reaches your dock, there’s usually no clear indication that anything is hazardous.
Why it matters to your operation
That creates real risk for your operation. Your employees are the ones unloading trailers, opening packages, and placing materials into storage. If a hazardous product is undeclared, it can easily end up stored with incompatible materials or handled without the right precautions.
If something goes wrong, your team doesn’t have the information they need to respond quickly or safely. Even if responsibility sits with the shipper on paper, the exposure sits with you.
Spotting red flags
The good news is that most undeclared hazmat can be caught with some basic awareness. Receiving teams don’t need to be hazmat experts, but they should be comfortable recognizing when something doesn’t look right.
That might be a package with no labels that feels heavier than expected, has a strong odor, or looks unusual for what it’s supposed to contain. Damaged or leaking containers are another clear warning sign. Vague descriptions like “parts” or “supplies” can also raise concern, especially when paired with products that commonly fall under hazmat regulations, like batteries, liquids, or aerosols. If the paperwork doesn’t match what’s actually in the shipment, that’s another sign something may have been missed.
Practical ways to reduce risk
Reducing this risk doesn’t require a complicated process. It starts with setting clear expectations, so suppliers understand that regulated materials must be fully compliant before they ship.
From there, it helps to build simple screening into your receiving process. If something doesn’t match expectations, pause and take a closer look. Training should stay focused on awareness, so employees know what to watch for and what to do when something seems off. Just as important, your team should feel comfortable speaking up and escalating concerns without hesitation.
Key to remember: Inbound freight is where undeclared hazmat shows up the most, and it’s where your team has the least control. A little added awareness and a few practical checks can go a long way toward closing that gap and making sure your employees aren’t caught off guard by something they were never told was hazardous.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-20T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsEnglishAssociate Benefits & CompensationHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)LeaveFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Associate RelationsLeaveHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Outsourcing FMLA leave management doesn’t outsource employer liability
In early 2023, Rodney began taking intermittent leave for two separate reasons under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA): to care for his mother and for his own condition. The company approved both of his leaves through the beginning of August.
In July, the employer outsourced its FMLA claim management to a third-party administrator (TPA).
Subsequently, Rodney tried to report his absences as FMLA leave to the TPA but had major difficulties. He called the TPA several times, but the phone line often left him on hold or disconnected the call. In fact, if people were still on hold at 5 p.m., the TPA hung up. Rodney tried to use the TPA’s website and automated service but found those methods ineffective, as well.
Timothy, Rodney’s supervisor, assured him that as long as his FMLA paperwork was completed correctly, he wouldn’t be penalized if the TPA’s system didn’t work properly. Therefore, Rodney texted Timothy to report his absences.
In October, Timothy told Rodney that he had accrued 54 attendance points; that Rodney hadn’t reported absences to the TPA as FMLA leave. In response, Rodney reported any absences he believed were FMLA-related to the TPA for possible approval.
About a week later, Rodney met with a company HR representative to talk about his issues getting FMLA approval for his absences. The representative assured Rodney that she would handle it, telling him not to worry.
Termination and lawsuit
In January 2024, Rodney was surprised to receive a letter from the employer firing him for “excessive absenteeism, providing false, dishonest, or misleading information in connection with a request for leave, and failure to follow the notification procedure for leave time.”
Rodney sued, arguing that the employer denied his FMLA rights and that he never received proper notice from the TPA. He also claimed that the significant problems with the TPA’s system discouraged him from taking FMLA leave because he believed it wouldn’t be recorded correctly, and that he wouldn’t be able to speak with anyone at the TPA.
The employer argued that it gave Rodney FMLA benefits for all dates for which he provided a complete FMLA certification. The employer also claimed that the TPA sent letters to Rodney regarding his certifications, but Rodney claimed he never received the letters.
Court ruling
The court ruled in favor of Rodney, stating that a reasonable jury could find that the TPA’s system created a “burdensome approval process” that interfered with or discouraged Rodney from taking FMLA leave. The court also took issue with the fact that the HR department saw discrepancies with Rodney’s leave, but never discussed them with him before his termination.
Severson v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., Eastern District of Wisconsin, No. 24-CV-1063, April 27, 2026.
Key to remember: Employers are responsible for ensuring that they or their TPA doesn’t make the FMLA process overly burdensome for employees.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-20T05:00:00Z
NewsRecyclingChange NoticesChange NoticeCaliforniaSustainabilityEnvironmentalProduct StewardshipEnglishSustainabilityFocus Area
California approves plastic packaging regulations
Effective date: May 1, 2026
This applies to: Producers of single-use packaging and plastic single-use food service ware
Description of change: CalRecycle approved permanent regulations to implement the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act (SB 54). The regulations require producers of covered materials (single-use packaging and plastic single-use food service ware) to administer an extended producer responsibility program.
Producers must meet minimum recycled content requirements for covered materials and pay fees (including annual mitigation surcharges for all producers and fees to producers participating in a producer responsibility organization (PRO) plan).
By June 1, 2026, producers must:
- Register with Circular Action Alliance (CAA) and submit supply data to CAA if participating in an approved PRO plan,
- Register with CalRecycle and apply to be an independent producer if complying individually, or
- Register with CalRecycle and apply for the small producer exemption if qualified.
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.