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
2026-11-09T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthWork-Relatedness DeterminationConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyIn-Depth ArticleUSAEnglishFocus AreaInjury and Illness Recordkeeping
It happened at work. Is it OSHA recordable?
An employee gets hurt at work, and one of the first questions you may ask is, “Is this recordable?”
That’s an important question, but it may not be the best place to start. An injury happening at work doesn’t automatically mean it goes on the OSHA 300 Log. First determine whether it’s work-related. From there, determine whether it’s a new case and whether it meets one or more of OSHA’s recording criteria.
Start with work-relatedness
Under 29 CFR 1904.5, an injury or illness is work-related if an event or exposure in the work environment caused or contributed to the condition or significantly aggravated a pre-existing injury or illness. OSHA also presumes an injury or illness is work-related when it results from an event or exposure in the work environment unless a specific exception applies.
The work environment is broader than the spot where an employee normally does their job. It generally includes the workplace itself, along with other locations where employees are working or are required or expected to be because of their jobs. It also includes equipment and materials employees use while working.
In simple terms, don’t focus only on whether the employee was doing their normal job when the injury happened. Look at where they were, why they were there, what they were doing, and whether something in the work environment caused or contributed to the injury.
The exceptions matter
Even when an injury or illness happens in the work environment, it isn’t automatically work-related. OSHA recognizes specific exceptions under 1904.5(b)(2), including:
- Being at the workplace as a member of the general public rather than as an employee;
- Signs or symptoms that surface at work but result solely from a non-work-related event or exposure outside the work environment;
- An injury or illness resulting solely from voluntary participation in certain wellness, medical, fitness, or recreational activities;
- An injury or illness resulting solely from eating, drinking, or preparing food or drink for personal consumption;
- An injury or illness resulting solely from personal tasks unrelated to employment performed at the establishment outside assigned working hours;
- An injury or illness resulting solely from personal grooming, self-medication for a non-work-related condition, or an intentionally self-inflicted injury;
- A motor vehicle accident in a company parking lot or access road while commuting to or from work;
- The common cold or flu; and
- Mental illness, unless the employee voluntarily provides the employer with an opinion from a physician or other licensed health care professional with appropriate training and experience stating that the mental illness is work-related.
If one of these exceptions fits the situation, OSHA doesn’t consider the case work-related.
Pay attention to “solely”
You may have noticed that “solely” shows up in several of those exceptions. That little word can make a big difference.
For example, OSHA explains that if an employee has an epileptic seizure at work, falls, and breaks an arm, neither the seizure nor the broken arm is recordable if both resulted solely from the employee’s non-work-related medical condition.
Change the circumstances, though, and you could change the answer. Say a chemical exposure at work helped trigger the seizure. Now the work environment contributed, and the case may be work-related.
Don’t create your own exceptions
Some cases just don’t feel work-related.
Maybe the employee made a poor decision. Maybe the incident wasn’t preventable. Maybe it was outside the employer’s control. Or maybe it had little to do with the employee’s normal job.
Those things, by themselves, don’t make a case non-work-related. What matters is whether something in the work environment caused or contributed to the injury or illness. If it did, OSHA presumes the case is work-related unless one of its specific exceptions applies.
OSHA reinforced that approach in a 2023 interpretation involving workplace violence. The agency explained that work need only be a “tangible, discernible causal factor.” A case isn’t excluded simply because the incident wasn’t preventable or was outside the employer’s control.
There’s still more to consider
Even if you’ve determined the injury or illness is work-related, that doesn’t automatically put it on the OSHA 300 Log.
Under 29 CFR 1904.7, you still need to determine whether it meets one or more of OSHA’s general recording criteria, such as death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, loss of consciousness, or a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional. 1904.7 - General recording criteria
Key to remember: An injury happening at work doesn’t automatically make it OSHA recordable. Start with work-relatedness, check whether an exception applies, then determine whether it meets OSHA’s recording criteria.
Keep reading...Show less
NewsSexual HarassmentSexual HarassmentMonthly Roundup VideoTerminationFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)USAFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishTerminationHuman ResourcesAssociate Benefits & CompensationIndustry NewsHR GeneralistAssociate RelationsFocus AreaVideo
HR Monthly Round Up - October 2026
In this October 2026 roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful HR news.
Welcome, everyone! In the next few minutes, we’ll review the latest HR news. Let’s get started.
My HR colleagues and I get a lot of questions about whether a company can fire someone who’s on job-protected leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act. While the short answer is, “it depends,” a recent federal court case out of Ohio shows how one employer terminated an employee who was on FMLA leave and won its case.
This gist of the story is, an employee was taking FMLA leave for medical treatments and occasionally came into work late. HR investigated their timekeeping records from the company’s mobile timekeeping app and discovered that the employee had clocked in 33 times from outside of work, even though company policy prohibited employees from doing so.
The employer fired the employee, who then sued. The court, however, agreed with the employer that the policy violation, not the employee’s FMLA leave, was the reason for the termination and ruled in the employer’s favor.
In other news, on October 13th, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced that it settled a $3 million sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against a restaurant chain with 15 locations in California and Nevada. Both supervisors and employees at multiple locations repeatedly subjected female employees to sexual harassment, the suit alleged.
Female employees complained to their employer about the harassment, but the restaurant didn’t stop it and retaliated against many of them. As a result, several female employees resigned.
The alleged conduct violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits a hostile workplace environment based on sex, including sexual harassment, as well as retaliation against individuals who complain about sexual harassment.
And, finally, on October 19th, the U.S. Department of Labor announced that it withdrew three opinion letters from decades ago that pertained to tipped employees performing dual jobs, otherwise known as the “80/20” rule.
The DOL issued a new field assistance bulletin addressing how employers should treat tipped employees with dual jobs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Some courts might disregard the agency’s interpretation and look to related case law. Employers should also note that state or local laws on tipped wages might come into play.
A notice of proposed rulemaking is in the works that would amend the FLSA regulations for tipped employees. A proposed rule was scheduled for August, but the DOL missed that time frame. Public comments will be welcome on the proposed rule once it’s published in the Federal Register.
That’s all the HR news we have time for today. Thanks for watching. See you next month!
Keep reading...Show less
NewsGreenhouse GasesAir QualityEnforcement and Audits - OSHAToxic Substances Control Act - EPAToxic Subtances Control Act - EPAAir EmissionsTSCA ComplianceWater ProgramsWater QualityLockout/TagoutMonthly Roundup VideoCAA ComplianceFire Protection and PreventionUSACWA ComplianceEnglishIndustry NewsLockout/TagoutOSHA InspectionsSafety & HealthGeneral Industry SafetyEnvironmentalFocus AreaFire Protection and PreventionAir ProgramsStationary Emission SourcesVideo
EHS Monthly Round Up - October 2026
In this October 2026 roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Let’s take a look at what happened over the past month.
A Department of Labor Office of Inspector General investigation found that OSHA may have conducted certain small employer inspections in low-hazard industries that did not comply with its appropriations acts. The investigation stemmed from a September 2025 hotline complaint. OSHA disputes the findings, and its review of the cases and the Inspector General’s recommendations is ongoing.
OSHA issued guidance to help employers respond to opioid emergencies. The factsheet provides employers with practical information on recognizing the signs of an overdose and responding immediately.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health published toolbox talks addressing workplace fire hazards and lockout/tagout. The talks highlight the importance of fire prevention programs and following lockout/tagout procedures.
Turning to environmental news, EPA proposes to reallocate the excess 2025 small refinery exemption volumes to the 2026 and 2027 compliance years. The proposed rule would adjust the renewable volume and percentage standards for biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel. The deadline for public comments is December 4.
EPA further extended the submission deadline for the reporting year 2025 annual greenhouse gas report from October 30, 2026, to March 10, 2027. This applies to facilities subject to the greenhouse gas reporting program.
EPA proposes to extend additional compliance dates for the trichloroethylene risk management rule finalized in 2024. If finalized, the rule would delay compliance deadlines for certain chemical processors and refrigerant manufacturers.
And finally, EPA extended the compliance date to submit Facility Response Plans for worst-case discharges of Clean Water Act hazardous substances by 3 years, to June 1, 2030. Effective December 14, the final rule also removes provisions related to climate change and environmental justice.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Keep reading...Show less
2026-11-06T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsClassification - HazmatTransportationHazmat SafetyHazmatIn-Depth ArticleFocus AreaEnglishHazmat License/Permit/RegistrationHazmat RecordkeepingUSA
Expert Insights: When hazmat knowledge walks out the door
When hazmat professionals think about compliance risks, they often focus on permits, inspections, regulatory changes, and reporting deadlines. Those concerns matter. Yet one of the most significant risks facing hazmat operations has little to do with a new rule: employee turnover.
When an experienced hazmat employee leaves, the organization may lose more than a trained worker. It can also lose the practical knowledge that keeps shipments moving safely and legally — how to classify a recurring material, where approval documents are stored, which carriers accept certain commodities, or who verifies shipping papers before release.
Gaps can emerge quickly. A newly assigned employee may rely on an outdated procedure, miss a required marking, use the wrong packaging, or assume someone else is responsible for a final check. Even when the employee has received required training, unfamiliarity with the company’s products and processes can increase the risk of errors, rejected shipments, delays, or enforcement.
The good news is that you can reduce that risk before a resignation occurs. Document hazmat responsibilities by role, maintain current written procedures, and identify backups for critical tasks. Cross-train employees on recurring shipments and unusual scenarios. Keep training records, special permits, approvals, carrier requirements, and emergency contacts in a location that authorized staff can readily access. Before an experienced employee departs, conduct a structured knowledge-transfer session and capture unresolved issues.
Finally, treat role changes as a compliance trigger. Review the incoming employee’s duties, confirm that required hazmat training is current and function-specific, and provide appropriate supervision until the employee can perform independently. Turnover may be unavoidable, but allowing essential compliance knowledge to leave with one person is not.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-11-06T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsRecruiting and hiringAssociate Benefits & CompensationRecruiting and hiringApplications/ApplicantsHR GeneralistUSAIn-Depth ArticleAssociate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaTalent Management & RecruitingHuman Resources
Protecting job candidates from online recruiting scams
Trust is a priceless commodity for employers, especially during the recruiting and hiring process. Earning that trust has never been more challenging than it is today.
More than 77 percent of U.S. workers doubt the validity of online job postings, according to the Job Search Trust Report from online resume and cover letter builder MyPerfectResume.
High pay, poor communication create suspicion
From fake job postings to shady recruiting messages, job applicants are wary, and rightfully so. Fifty-nine percent of the 1,000 U.S. workers surveyed said they felt that they’ve faced some form of fraud in a job posting, from a recruiter, or in a hiring message.
The survey revealed that the biggest warning signs noted by applicants indicating that something was amiss during the recruiting process were when a company:
- Listed high pay or benefits that weren’t realistic (60 percent), or
- Used poor grammar or unprofessional communication (59 percent).
Blame placed on employers
Employers that are struggling to fill open positions with qualified candidates should take heed. Not only are candidates skeptical about recruiting scams, but they’re also putting some of the responsibility on employers’ shoulders to help protect them.
Of those surveyed, 7 percent of respondents said they feel companies are “definitely” doing enough to protect them from fake posts and scams, while a vast majority (54 percent) said they don’t think employers and job platforms are sufficient.
What can employers do?
Employers, too, are dealing with recruiting and hiring scams of their own — from fake resumes to lookalike company websites duping candidates.
There are, however, a few steps that employers can take to help reassure legitimate, interested applicants and make them feel comfortable applying for jobs, such as:
- Use reputable job platforms. Make sure the places used for recruiting stand behind what they do.
- Use safe communication channels. Tighten up all communications tools, access, and methods during the recruitment process.
- Standardize job postings. Create job ads that present a consistent message to those seeing them. Use the same tone, logos, contact numbers, etc., in every ad.
- Include safety disclaimers in job ads. Consider including messaging in job ads that lets applicants know that the company won’t ask for money to apply or that they don’t need to share private information, such as a social security number, during the application process. Also, include contact information if applicants need to report concerns about potential fraud.
- Train hiring and recruiting managers. Make sure those who are part of the hiring and recruiting process are aware of potential scams, red flags to watch for, and ways to report any scams they uncover along the way.
Key to remember: Job candidates are wary of online job postings, and employers need to address this mistrust to help ensure a smooth, safe recruiting process.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-11-05T06:00:00Z
NewsEmployee RelationsIn-Depth ArticleUSAHR ManagementEnglishAssociate Benefits & CompensationIndustry NewsWage and HourWage and HourBreaks and Meal PeriodsHours WorkedEmployee RelationsHR GeneralistFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)Non-Exempt employees Associate RelationsFocus AreaHuman Resources
More employees are skipping lunch; must you pay them?
More than half of workers now skip lunch altogether at least once a week, according to a recent Workplace Lunch Trends survey from ezCater. Younger employees are 60 percent more likely to consider lunch their favorite part of the workday, but 117 percent express being more likely to feel pressure from managers to skip it.
The survey revealed the number of lunch skippers is on the rise as follows:
- 2023: 48 percent
- 2024: 49 percent
- 2025: 51 percent
- 2026: 54 percent
While the survey focused on the risks of missing lunch, such as the loss of connections and hunger’s effect on productivity, employers must also remember that if nonexempt employees work through what is thought to be their lunch break, they must be paid for that time.
What does the FLSA say?
Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), meal periods (typically lasting at least 30 minutes) aren’t work time, and employers don’t have to pay nonexempt employees for that time – as long as they’re completely relieved from duty for the purposes of eating regular meals. If they aren’t, employers must pay for the time spent working. On the other hand, exempt employees get paid the same weekly salary whether or not they take lunch breaks.
The FLSA indicates that nonexempt employees aren’t relieved from work if they’re required to perform any duties while eating. Office employees who are required to eat at their desk or factory workers who must remain at their machine, for example, are working while eating and must be paid accordingly.
Even if nonexempt employees are allowed to leave the premises, if they aren’t otherwise completely freed from duties during the meal period, employers must pay for that time. If an employer has a policy requiring employees to take a meal break, and employees work through the meal anyway, they must still pay the employee for the time worked. They may, however, discipline employees for violating company policy.
The FLSA doesn’t require meal or coffee breaks, but many state laws do.
State laws
Break laws in the U.S. vary widely by state. About 21 states and the District of Columbia have such laws for adult employees who are classified as nonexempt. Some require strict schedules for rest and meal periods, and others are more flexible.
California law, for example, requires a 30-minute unpaid meal break after 5 consecutive work hours. Arizona, on the other hand, doesn’t have a related state law.
If a state doesn’t have a meal break law, the federal FLSA applies, which means employers don’t have to provide one, and if they do, employees don’t have to be paid unless they work through the meal period.
Key to remember: If nonexempt employees work through the meal period, they must be paid for that time, even if doing so violates a company policy.
Keep reading...Show less
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.