SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS
Keep up to date on the latest
developments affecting OSHA, DOT,
EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.
Copyright 2026 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.
FEATURED NEWS
2026-02-18T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHazmat SafetyHazmat: HighwayHazmat Driving and parkingIn-Depth ArticleFocus AreaEnglishTransportationUSA
Accepting a hazmat load is a decision not a formality
The trailer is loaded. The paperwork is ready. The clock is ticking.
For carriers, accepting a hazmat load can feel like a formality, sign the paperwork, close the doors, and get on the road. However, under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), that moment before a shipment leaves the facility is a critical compliance checkpoint. It’s often where small oversights turn into big enforcement problems.
DOT doesn’t expect carriers to reclassify hazardous materials or audit a shipper’s entire hazmat program. What it does expect is for carriers to recognize problems that are reasonably apparent. Many enforcement cases don’t involve complex regulatory interpretations, they involve obvious issues that went unchallenged at the dock.
You’re not hands off
The HMR clearly assigns responsibilities. Shippers are responsible for properly classifying, packaging, marking, labeling, and documenting hazmat. Carriers are responsible for transporting those materials safely and in compliance with DOT requirements.
That division matters, but it doesn’t mean carriers can accept anything placed in front of them. In fact, the HMR specifically states, “No person may accept for transportation or transport by motor vehicle a forbidden material or hazardous material that is not prepared in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.” If it’s not compliant, don’t accept it.
Verifying the load
Shipping papers are often the first place a carrier can spot an issue, and they’re also the easiest way to confirm whether a hazmat shipment “adds up.” Before accepting a load, carriers should review the paperwork for basic completeness. At a minimum, the shipping paper should clearly identify the material as hazardous and include the:
- UN or NA identification number,
- Proper shipping name,
- Hazard class,
- Packing group,
- Number/type of package,
- Emergency response information, and
- Shipper certification (if required).
Carriers aren’t expected to verify the technical accuracy of a classification, but missing information, incomplete descriptions, or paperwork that clearly doesn’t match the shipment being offered should raise questions. A quick check at this stage can prevent bigger problems later.
Just as important, the information on the shipping papers should match what’s on the packages. DOT expects carriers to notice marking and labeling problems during normal handling, especially when there’s an obvious mismatch. The UN or NA number and proper shipping name on the shipping papers should match the package markings, and the hazard class listed should make sense with the hazard labels applied to the package.
Carriers don’t need to open packages or inspect inner packagings. But if labels are missing, damaged, obscured, or clearly inconsistent with the shipping papers, that’s a reasonably apparent issue. If the paperwork and the packages aren’t telling the same story at the dock, they won’t hold up any better during an inspection.
Package condition
Once the paperwork and markings pass a basic consistency check, the next step is assessing the condition of the packages themselves. One of the most common carrier-side violations has nothing to do with classification or documentation; it involves accepting packages that are clearly compromised. Carriers should be alert for:
- Leaking,
- Stained,
- Bulging,
- Crushed, or
- Otherwise, damaged packages.
Carriers should also be aware of loads that don’t appear to be properly secured for transport.
Refusing the load
Refusing a load is never convenient, but sometimes it’s the most compliant option. Carriers should seriously consider refusing a hazmat shipment when shipping papers are incomplete or clearly incorrect, packages are leaking or visibly damaged, required labels or markings are missing, or the driver is not trained or qualified for the material being offered.
Key to remember: Accepting a hazmat load isn’t about catching every possible mistake. It’s about exercising reasonable care before a shipment enters the transportation system. Sometimes, compliance starts with one simple question at the dock, “Does this shipment look right?”
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-02-18T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsAssociate Benefits & CompensationAssociate RelationsHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Employer jumped to an FMLA abuse conclusion (and lost)
Employers don’t have to let employees take Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave for reasons that don’t qualify, nor should they. They shouldn’t, however, jump to conclusions about FMLA leave abuse when assessing someone’s leave reasons. Employers should look at all the facts involved before proceeding. A recent court decision agrees.
Case in point
In April, Toby, an employee, applied for FMLA leave for his chronic kidney stones. The certification indicated that he would need intermittent leave up to 3 times per month for 1 day per episode.
Things went fine until August 23, when Toby asked for time off. The conversation went something like this:
- Toby: Can I have a personal day tomorrow because my kids are starting a new school?
- Employer: Let me see if one’s available. It’s not available for tomorrow.
- Toby: Well, okay. I guess you’ll have to put me on FMLA leave then.
- Employer: OK, so FMLA for your kids’ school event.
- Toby: Thank you.
Toby ended up taking 4 days of medical leave.
Based on the phone conversation, the employer charged Toby with FMLA misuse and removed him from work pending an investigatory hearing.
At the hearing, Jolanda, the company’s FMLA manager, said it was clear, based on the conversation, that Toby “….marked off FMLA for an unapproved reason”—so clear that “[t]here wasn’t a need” for the company to “determine if the leave that [Toby] requested was actually used for FMLA protection or for purposes of the FMLA.”
Toby said that he needed to be off both because his kids were starting a new school and because his medical condition had started to flare up. He explained that he initially asked for a personal day, rather than FMLA leave, so he would be paid for the day and could avoid using up his FMLA time.
Toby said he saw a doctor for his flare-up and provided a doctor’s note dated August 24. The note said that Toby had been under a doctor’s care from August 24 to 27.
After the hearing (and despite the doctor’s note), the employer concluded that Toby had misused FMLA leave and fired him.
Toby sued, and the court sided with him, disagreeing with the employer’s argument that Toby had misused FMLA leave. Toby had enough evidence to establish that the employer’s decision to fire him wasn’t “reasonably informed and considered….”
The employer’s only basis for believing Toby misused FMLA leave was his phone call. The call didn’t conclusively establish that Toby engaged in misconduct, especially given his testimony that he needed to deal with both medical needs and family obligations. The doctor’s note also provided evidence that Toby’s request for leave was legitimate.
Pack v. CSX Transportation, Inc.; Southern District of West Virginia; No. 3:24-0688; January 14, 2026.
Key to remember: Employers should look at all the facts of a situation before concluding that an employee abused FMLA leave.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-02-17T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthGeneral Industry SafetyForklifts and Powered TrucksPIT Training RequirementsIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
These forklift operator violations commonly cause accidents
Forklift accidents often cause serious injuries. Unsafe behaviors can include failing to wear the seatbelt and reaching an arm outside the truck’s running lines. While those violations put the operator at risk, many unsafe behaviors also threaten other employees.
The most common forklift accidents involve rollovers, collisions with pedestrians, and loads falling from the tines. These incidents often result from operator error or (even worse) the operator knowingly engaging in unsafe behaviors.
Inspection failure
If the operator skips or rushes through the pre-shift inspection, safety concerns could get overlooked. Problems with systems like hydraulics, brakes, or steering can obviously contribute to accidents. However, even things like a non-functioning horn or lights could increase the likelihood of collisions.
Also, operators must report any problems that arise during the shift. If a pre-shift inspection identifies failures, the problem likely occurred during the previous shift and perhaps could have been reported. Equipment failures more likely occur during operation, not during idle time between shifts. If something goes wrong mid-shift, the operator must remove the truck from service. Make sure operators know how to report problems, send the truck for service, and obtain an alternate vehicle for the remainder of the shift.
Carrying loads too high
Operators should carry loads as low as possible. During inspections, OSHA compliance officers commonly see loads carried too high. This limits both visibility and stability. When the load size restricts visibility and the truck cannot travel in reverse (like going up a ramp), the operator should use a spotter.
Similarly, operators must never raise or lower a load while moving or turning. Doing so increases the risk of accidents from falling loads. Also, driving while watching the load (not the road) can increase the risk of striking pedestrians or objects.
Driving too fast
Employers might communicate speed limits, but most forklifts don’t have speedometers. Therefore, operators should understand what constitutes safe (and unsafe) speeds under various conditions. In locations with pedestrians or limited visibility, this might mean at walking speed, which can seem painfully slow.
OSHA compliance officers can issue citations for excessive speed. Excessive speed increases the risk of spilling a load, striking a pedestrian, and rollover potential.
Not certified for truck type
Forklift operators must receive training that covers the types of vehicles used. An operator trained on a sit-down counterbalanced forklift needs additional training to operate a stand-up model or even a powered pallet jack. A supervisor might be able to explain the controls for a different vehicle type, but that does not constitute “training” and certainly not certification. OSHA commonly issues citations for lacking operator certification.
In addition, employers must evaluate each operator’s performance every three years. Typically, this involves questioning the operator on safety rules and observing the operator performing typical duties. If the evaluation identifies problems, the employer must provide refresher training. Skipping this evaluation could result in a failure to identify violations that contribute to accidents.
An operator who is not certified for the vehicle type may lack understanding of critical handling characteristics or safety precautions, which increases the risk of accidents.
Key to Remember: When forklift operators feel under time pressure, they might focus on speed over safety. Skipping the inspection, driving too fast, raising loads while moving, and other behaviors put the operator and other employees at risk.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-02-17T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishDrug and Alcohol Testing - DOTDrug testing - Motor CarrierIn-Depth ArticleAlcohol testing - Motor CarrierFocus AreaUSA
5 necessities when bringing DOT testing in-house
The headache of finding a clinic or the cost of arranging a test could be reasons why a motor carrier may toy with the idea of bringing DOT testing in-house.
But the plan may be more of an undertaking than you realize when you look at the detailed requirements in 49 CFR Part 40, in addition to potential liabilities.
Consider the following areas if you’re looking into the option of conducting DOT tests internally.
1. Properly trained personnel
Both drug specimen collectors and alcohol testing personnel must receive specific training at least once every 5 years. Training covers basic regulatory information and procedures, step-by-step instructions on conducting a drug or alcohol test, and how to handle problems that may occur during the test. Training is concluded by demonstrating proficiency through error-free mock tests monitored by a qualified collector or technician.
In the event a collector or technician’s mistake causes a drug or alcohol test to be cancelled, the testing personnel must undergo error correction training within 30 days of learning of the mistake. This training is overseen by qualified collectors or technicians who observe error-free mock tests addressing the area that caused the test to be cancelled.
2. No claims of impropriety
To reduce any claims of wrongdoing, many carriers keep testing out of the hands of safety or operations personnel. An on-site facility may be the best option — using a company nurse or doctor with no relationship with drivers. This is especially important for urine collections that require direct observation.
“To avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest,” the drug testing rules limit who may act as a specimen collector, including:
- Anyone related to the employee being tested (e.g., spouse, ex-spouse, relative) or a close friend; and
- The immediate supervisor of the employee, unless no other collector is available and permitted under 49 CFR Part 382.
The alcohol testing rules have a similar stipulation restricting the immediate supervisor of the employee, unless no other technician is available and it’s permitted under Part 382.
When you examine Part 382, there’s one absolute to note in 382.307. The trained supervisor who requests a reasonable suspicion alcohol test can’t conduct the test. But it’s probably best not to allow this supervisor to conduct a drug test either, unless no one else is available.
3. An appropriate space
Both drug and alcohol clinics must be secure and private.
For urine specimen collections:
- The water must be turned off in the bathroom,
- There must be no access to soap or other adulterants, and
- The toilet water must be blue.
Collectors must secure areas and items (e.g., ledges, trash receptacles, paper towel holders, under-sink areas) that appear suitable for concealing contaminants. If this facility is used for other purposes, access to collection materials and specimens must be restricted, and no one is permitted access during the collection.
For alcohol testing, in addition to general privacy and security requirements, the site must have a suitable clean surface for writing, and all testing equipment must be stored in a secure place when not in use.
4. Approved equipment and forms
Only approved drug specimen collection kits can be used for DOT drug tests, along with Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Forms (CCFs). Employers aren’t permitted to use rapid tests or other testing methods (e.g., hair, blood), use a non-DOT (forensic) testing form, or test for drugs or thresholds outside of the DOT drug panel.
For alcohol testing, tests can only be performed using a device on the approved DOT list, along with a DOT alcohol testing form (ATF). If the employer’s site is only equipped with a non-evidential device for screening tests — and they’re unable to perform a confirmation test using an evidential breath testing (EBT) device — the in-house clinic must be prepared to transport the driver to an alternative facility to complete the test.
And just like an off-site alcohol testing facility:
- The employer’s clinic must maintain records on the EBT’s inspection, maintenance, and calibration.
- The technician must report the results to the company’s designated employer representative (DER). If the confirmation test is .02 BAC or greater, they immediately transmit the result directly to the DER in a confidential manner.
5. Analysis of drug testing specimens
The employer-based clinic is required to send drug test specimens for analysis to a certified lab. The results must be reviewed by a medical review officer (MRO) who’ll provide an official result.
This means the in-house facility must securely store the collected specimen until it can be sent via courier to the lab as soon as possible (no later than 24 hours or during the next business day). The collector must send the MRO and DER their respective copies of the CCF within 24 hours and retain the clinic’s copies for at least 30 days.
Key to remember: There are several considerations when deciding whether an in-house DOT drug and alcohol testing facility is a fit for your motor carrier.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-02-17T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHR GeneralistFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleMedical ExaminationsAssociate RelationsEnglishUSAHR ManagementDisabilities and ADADisabilities and ADAHuman Resources
‘What do you mean, I can’t ask employees about their medications?’
Antihistamines, antidepressants, opioids, and drugs to treat anxiety or blood pressure. All these medications (and more) could cause employees to be sleepy, even while at work. Tiredness in certain jobs can be a safety risk for employees and others, yet employers must maintain safe workplaces. So, asking employees about their medications might seem like a step in the right safety direction.
But doing so could risk a discrimination claim. That’s because employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees because of a disability under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
As part of this, employers may ask employees medical questions, such as asking about medications, only when they have a reasonable belief, based on objective evidence (such as witnessing a situation firsthand), that a particular employee is unable to perform the job’s essential functions because of a medical condition. Employers may also ask about medications if they think an employee will pose a direct threat because of a medical condition.
Balancing safety concerns and limits
When employers have safety concerns about an employee, they may ask the employee medical questions, but there are limits.
According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which enforces the employment provisions of the ADA:
- Employers must limit the scope of the inquiry to what is necessary to determine the employee’s ability to perform essential job functions or to assess the need for a reasonable accommodation.
- The employee must authorize any direct communication with their health care provider (think HIPAA).
What is a direct threat?
A direct threat is something that poses a significant risk of substantial harm that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation. To determine whether an employee poses a direct threat in the workplace, employers should consider the following factors:
- The duration of the risk,
- The nature and severity of the potential harm,
- The likelihood that potential harm will occur, and
- The imminence of the potential harm.
If, for example, an employee operating a forklift appears sleepy, the employer may tell the employee to get off the forklift and discuss the situation. The employer could discover that the employee is sleepy because:
- They had a late night out with friends,
- A colicky baby kept them up, or
- A drug or medication (legal or not) made them sleepy.
Employers shouldn’t jump to conclusions, but rather, document all related discussions and actions taken.
No hiding under a blanket
Blanket policies that require all employees to disclose all the medications they’re taking risk violating the ADA, because policies like that don’t focus on a particular employee, as required.
Employers with blanket policies should review them to make sure they aren’t adding risk.
If another federal law, such as the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act and its regulations, requires such medical questions, the ADA doesn’t stand in the way. If the laws don’t require the questions, the ADA steps in.
Key to remember: Unless required by another federal law, asking all employees to disclose the medications they take would risk violating the ADA.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-02-17T06:00:00Z
NewsTrainingSupervisor trainingTrainingTraining & DevelopmentUSAHuman ResourcesHR ManagementEnglishTalent Management & RecruitingAssociate Benefits & CompensationIndustry NewsIndustry NewsHR PoliciesPolicies and ProceduresGovernment contractsGovernment ContractsHR GeneralistFocus AreaAssociate RelationsDisabilities and ADADisabilities and ADAReasonable Accommodations
Remote work ends for federal employees — What this means for private employers
In response to a White House directive that instructs federal department heads to bring employees back to the office “as soon as practicable,” the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) have released a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) that addresses questions about remote work.
The FAQs assist federal agencies by helping them:
- Identify when they must grant or continue remote work;
- Know when they may rescind, modify, or deny remote work; and
- Know how to more effectively structure their processes for remote work accommodations.
Why guidance is needed
On January 20, the White House announced that the heads of all departments and agencies in the executive branch of the federal government must “take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis,” with few exceptions.
In response, on February 12, the EEOC and the OPM released guidance for agencies to help them stay consistent with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (the “Act”).
The Act, which mirrors the standards under the Americans with Disabilities Act, provides equal employment opportunities for covered federal employees with disabilities, including reasonable accommodations, such as remote work.
What about private employers?
Although this directive specifically applies to federal employees, the FAQs illustrate the steps private employers should take with their employees when it comes to remote work accommodations. For example, as with federal employers, private employers must assess requests for remote work due to a disability on a case-by-case basis. In other words, a blanket “no remote work” policy won’t work.
Also, for both federal and private employers, retaliating against an employee who seeks an accommodation — even a remote work one — risks a violation. This means employers should train their frontline leaders to avoid making disparaging remarks or straight-up denying someone who asks to work from home because of a disability. This doesn’t mean employers must always agree to a remote work accommodation; there might be other options that are just as effective.
Key to remember: Federal employees must return to in-person work. Although this doesn’t impact private employers, recent FAQs published by the EEOC help provide guidance on the use of remote work as a workplace accommodation.
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.