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
2026-07-15T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsAssociate Benefits & CompensationHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Associate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Employee didn’t follow company notice policy, loses FMLA claim
Employees must put employers on notice of the need for leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), but the law doesn’t protect employees from discipline for non-leave issues.
Employee misses work
Five years after he began working for the company, Dillon, an employee, transferred to a different department. During his interview for the transfer, he disclosed that he might need to take time off to care for his young son who had ongoing health problems.
As part of the transfer, Dillon had to complete three 80-hour training courses. During the first course, he missed a full day due to a stomach bug and fever. He told his instructor about his absence but didn’t tell Robert, his supervisor, as required by company policy. During the third course, he left class early to meet a roofer about storm damage to his house. Once again, he didn’t tell Robert.
Two days later, on March 10, he again missed a full day of class when he stayed home to take care of his son, who Dillon thought had COVID-19, but tested negative.
Investigation
After the trainer alerted Robert of Dillon’s absence, Robert started an investigation that revealed that Dillon had signed the attendance record for the March 10 class several days later. It also revealed that he had reported 1.5 hours of overtime for the day he left early and that his hours incorrectly reflected that he worked full days on the days of his absences.
Dillon admitted the hours were incorrect and that personal stressors related to his son’s poor health caused him to not let Robert know about his March 10 absence. The department, however, decided to fire Dillon for misreporting overtime, unbecoming conduct, and untruthfulness. Dillon resigned rather than being fired and sued under the FMLA and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In court
The employer argued that Dillon didn’t let it know about the need for FMLA leave and that his son didn’t have a chronic FMLA serious health condition as Dillon claimed.
The court ruled Dillon didn’t tell Robert as soon as practicable of the March 10 leave when it arose, despite knowing of his need to take leave. He didn’t provide such notice until days after the fact, and he didn’t follow the company policy for requesting leave.
The court also found that Dillon’s son suffered bouts of short-term ailments, but they didn’t amount to an FMLA serious health condition.
Given all this, Dillon’s FMLA claims failed.
Thompson v. Louisville Jefferson County Metro Government, Western District of Kentucky, No. 3:24-cv-00243, June 16, 2026.
Court decisions are based on the specific facts presented and each court’s interpretation of the law. Because courts may reach different conclusions, similar situations can lead to different outcomes. Employers should avoid relying on a single case as definitive guidance and instead assess each situation carefully, considering applicable laws, and seeking advice when needed.
Key to remember: Employers may hold employees to their usual and customary call-in procedures and may require employees or family members to have an FMLA serious health condition.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-15T05:00:00Z
NewsFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)LeaveTime offFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishLeaveAssociate Benefits & CompensationChange NoticesChange NoticeCaliforniaHR GeneralistAssociate RelationsFocus AreaHuman Resources
California adds paid maternity leave for community college district academic employees
Effective date: January 1, 2027
This applies to: Community college districts in California
Description of change: Academic employees or employees in the classified service of the community college district are entitled to up to 14 weeks of paid leave for pregnancy, miscarriage, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or recovery from those conditions.
Employees don’t have any other eligibility requirements, including, but not limited to, minimum hours worked or length of service, before an employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or related medical conditions is eligible for the paid leave.
Employees may begin taking the paid leave before and continue after childbirth if the employee is actually disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or a related condition.
The leave wouldn’t run concurrently with other forms of leave.
Community college districts must maintain group health coverage during leave at the same level and under the same conditions that coverage would have been provided if the employee hadn’t taken the leave.
The employee would be paid during the leave, including retirement fund contributions required by the community college district. Employees earn full-service credit during the leave of absence and must pay member contributions to the retirement fund.
View related state info: FMLA - California
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-15T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthMiningSpecialized IndustriesEnglishMine SafetyFocus AreaUSA
MSHA finalizes several deregulatory actions
Effective July 27, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) will withdraw regulations that address outdated effective dates and requirements for various industry equipment and procedures.
On June 25, the agency published several final rules based on a series of July 1, 2025, proposals issued after President Trump’s Executive Order directing agencies to “alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.” These rules address:
- Approval of conveyor belts in underground coal mines.
- Blacksmith shops at surface metal and nonmetal mines.
- Diesel emission limits for equipment in underground coal mines.
- Permissible flame safety lamps in underground coal mines.
The removal of outdated requirements will help MSHA streamline current requirements and improve the clarity of its standards.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-14T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)In-Depth ArticleFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishUSAFocus AreaHuman Resources
5 lesser-known FMLA requirements
Many employers have a process they follow when employees ask for leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). While each FMLA case can have its own quirks, employers might not be familiar with some of the law’s unique provisions.
What employers should know about the FMLA but might not
Here are five little-known FMLA requirements:
1. Poster: The FMLA poster has to be seen by applicants. Once employers are covered by the law, they must put the poster up where not only employees can see it, but applicants as well. This is true even if employers have no eligible employees.
If employers post job openings online and interview candidates electronically, they should place a prominent notice on the website where the job postings are listed stating that “Applicants have rights under federal employment laws” and link to the FMLA, EEO (Equal Employment Opportunity), and EPPA (Employee Polygraph Protection Act) posters.
825.300(a)(1)
2. Eligibility: The 1,250 hours worked that employees must meet to be eligible to take FMLA leave don’t include time not worked, like vacation, paid time off, and so forth. Employees must actually have worked the 1,250 hours, not just been paid for them. Therefore, when looking at whether an employee meets the 1,250 hours worked eligibility criteria, employers shouldn’t include hours that aren’t actually worked.
825.110.(c)(1)
3. Temp workers: Employers must include the time a temporary (“temp”) employee spent working for them toward their FMLA eligibility. As long as temp employees have worked for the company for at least 12 months and have performed at least 1,250 hours of work, they’re entitled to FMLA leave. If employers have temp employees that they then hire as regular employees, they must count all the time spent working as a temp employee toward their eligibility.
825.106 (OL FMLA-37)
4. Transferring: Employers may not transfer an employee to an alternative job during unforeseeable intermittent leave. The only time employers may transfer an employee to an alternate job is when the need for leave is foreseeable based on planned medical treatment. If employers allow employees to take bonding leave intermittently, they may also transfer employees.
825.204
5. Workers’ compensation: Employees on workers’ compensation (WC) can refuse light duty and remain on FMLA leave. They would lose their WC benefits. Employers may offer a "light duty" job to the employee to encourage them to return to work early, but if the employee is taking FMLA leave simultaneously, the employee isn’t required to end FMLA leave and accept the light-duty assignment. Employees who continue on FMLA leave may lose WC benefits, but may not be subjected to any form of disciplinary action for having exercised their FMLA rights.
825.207(e) (OL FMLA-38)
Key to remember: Employers won’t frequently run into the lesser-known FMLA provisions, but they must know what to do when they are in play.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-14T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishEnvironmental Management SystemsISO 14001EnvironmentalIn-Depth ArticleLifecycle AnalysisUSAEnvironmental Management SystemsFocus AreaEnvironmental Management Systems
ISO 14001:2026 arrives: Key changes for environmental management systems
Environmental management has changed significantly since ISO 14001 was last revised in 2015. Climate-related risks, resource constraints, supply chain challenges, and stakeholder expectations have reshaped how organizations manage environmental issues. In response, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) released ISO 14001:2026, the first major update to the environmental management system (EMS) standard in over a decade.
The revised standard does not change the purpose of ISO 14001. Organizations will continue to use an EMS to identify environmental aspects, meet compliance obligations, manage environmental risks, and improve environmental performance. However, the new edition clarifies requirements and places greater emphasis on measurable environmental results. ISO says the revision is intended to better align EMS programs with today's environmental challenges. Organizations certified to ISO 14001 may need to update procedures, documentation, audits, and management reviews.
Why was the standard updated?
When ISO published 14001:2015, many organizations focused primarily on regulatory compliance. While compliance remains a core component of an EMS, environmental managers today face a broader range of issues. Climate impacts, resource availability, supply chain disruptions, and stakeholder expectations can all affect environmental planning and performance. Rather than creating an entirely new framework, the 2026 version largely builds on concepts that already existed in the 2015 edition while expanding and clarifying expectations.
Environmental context receives greater attention
A major theme of the revision is a stronger focus on organizational context. Organizations are expected to look beyond day-to-day compliance activities when identifying environmental risks and opportunities.
The revised standard emphasizes consideration of environmental conditions that may affect the EMS, including climate-related concerns, biodiversity, ecosystem impacts, and natural resource availability. Organizations are expected to evaluate how external issues and stakeholder expectations may influence environmental objectives and planning.
For environmental managers, this may mean expanding annual EMS reviews to evaluate emerging environmental issues that could affect operations, compliance obligations, permit conditions, or environmental objectives.
Change management moves into the spotlight
The revised standard also introduces a more structured approach to managing change. Many organizations already evaluate environmental impacts when making operational changes, but those reviews are often informal.
ISO 14001:2026 expects organizations to plan, manage, and evaluate changes that may affect environmental performance. Examples include:
- Installing new equipment,
- Expanding production capacity,
- Changing raw materials,
- Modifying waste management practices,
- Switching suppliers, or
- Adding new products or processes.
This requirement should sound familiar to many environmental professionals. Operational changes can affect air emissions, waste generation, wastewater discharges, stormwater exposure, and permit applicability. A structured review process can help identify environmental impacts before changes are implemented.
Lifecycle thinking and supply chains gain importance
Lifecycle thinking was already part of ISO 14001:2015, but the revised standard places greater emphasis on it. Organizations are expected to consider environmental impacts throughout the lifecycle of products and services, including activities involving suppliers, contractors, and externally provided products and services.
This requirement does not mean organizations are responsible for every environmental impact within their supply chain. Rather, it encourages organizations to understand how purchasing decisions, outsourced activities, and supplier relationships may affect environmental performance.
For some organizations, this could mean greater emphasis on supplier evaluations, procurement procedures, contractor oversight, or product stewardship initiatives.
Leadership involvement becomes more visible
ISO 14001:2026 also strengthens expectations related to leadership accountability. Environmental management is no longer viewed solely as the responsibility of the environmental department.
The revised standard emphasizes visible leadership involvement and broader organizational participation. Environmental responsibilities may extend beyond EHS personnel to departments such as operations, purchasing, engineering, and management. Organizations will need to demonstrate that leadership is actively engaged in environmental planning, resource allocation, and performance evaluation activities.
What should organizations do now?
Although organizations have time to prepare for the transition, environmental managers may want to begin evaluating their programs now. Early reviews can help identify gaps and reduce the likelihood of surprises during future audits.
Questions organizations may want to consider include:
- Does the EMS adequately address climate, resources, and other emerging environmental issues?
- Is there a documented process for evaluating environmental impacts before operational changes are made?
- Are lifecycle considerations incorporated into purchasing and contractor management activities?
- Can leadership involvement be demonstrated through documented actions and decisions?
- Do environmental objectives show measurable performance improvements?
While ISO 14001:2026 is an evolution of the existing standard rather than a complete overhaul, organizations should not assume existing EMS procedures will meet the revised expectations. Environmental managers may want to review how their systems address organizational context, change management, lifecycle considerations, and leadership involvement before their next audit.
Key to remember: For environmental professionals, the revised standard provides an opportunity to strengthen that connection and demonstrate the value that effective environmental management brings to the organization.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-13T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsViolations - HazmatHazmat SafetyHazmat: HighwayFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleEnglishTransportationUSA
A midyear look at FMCSA's top hazmat violations
Roadside inspections are a fact of life for hazmat carriers. While inspectors encounter a wide range of compliance issues, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) data shows that a handful of violations account for a significant share of hazmat citations year after year. Understanding these trends can help carriers focus their compliance efforts where they're likely to have the biggest impact.
Here's a look at the five most frequently cited hazmat roadside inspection violations so far in 2026 and what you can do to stay off the list.
1. Cargo not properly secured
The most common hazmat violation so far this year involves hazardous materials that weren’t properly blocked, braced, or secured during transportation. Inspectors recorded more than 1,000 of these violations.
To avoid this issue, verify that hazmat packages are adequately secured before departure and periodically check cargo during transit. Drivers should never assume a load was secured properly without conducting their own inspection.
2. Failure to produce a current hazmat registration
More than 400 violations were issued for failing to produce a current Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) hazmat registration certificate or registration number during an inspection.
Usually, the company is registered but can’t provide proof of registration. Make sure registrations are renewed on time, current certificates are maintained, and employees know where the documentation is located.
3. No required shipping paper
FMCSA reported more than 360 violations involving vehicles operating without a required hazmat shipping paper.
Before a vehicle leaves the facility, confirm that the required shipping paper is present and complete. A simple shipping paper review as part of the pre-trip process can help prevent this violation.
4. Damaged or obscured placards
Nearly 350 violations involved placards that were damaged, faded, dirty, or otherwise difficult to read.
Include placards in routine vehicle inspections and replace them when necessary. Also ensure mud, snow, road grime, or other materials aren't obstructing their visibility.
5. Shipping paper accessibility
Rounding out the top five is shipping paper accessibility, with more than 340 violations reported so far this year.
Having a shipping paper isn't enough. It also has to be readily accessible. Drivers should be trained on accessibility requirements and consistently store shipping papers in the designated location. The best place for hazmat shipping papers in a vehicle is in a holder on the inside of the driver’s door.
A common theme
What's striking about the top violations so far this year is that most involve basic compliance fundamentals rather than complex regulatory requirements. Cargo securement, documentation, and placarding remain the areas where inspectors are finding the most problems.
Key to remember: Don't overlook the basics. Regular pre-trip inspections, refresher training, and periodic compliance reviews can go a long way toward preventing the violations that inspectors continue to find most often on the road.
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.