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
2026-02-19T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyWork ZonesIn-Depth ArticleUSAEnglishFocus AreaWork Zones
Equal threat, opposite direction: Reversing hazards in work zones
Speeding through work zones is deadly, and distracted driving only intensifies the risk. But the danger does not end there: even slow-moving vehicles or those reversing at low speeds can be just as lethal, a fact underscored by two worker fatalities that occurred only days apart despite being hundreds of miles away.
Starting the year in the wrong direction
On January 10, 2026, a Michigan tow truck helper who was standing at the rear of their truck cab became pinned between the rollback flatbed carriage and the cab, suffering a fatal head injury. Preliminary findings show that after unloading a vehicle, the flatbed was being returned to its original position when unexpected resistance was encountered. Later, the helper was found on the ground and was pronounced deceased at the scene.
Six short days later in New Hampshire, a pickup truck operator struck a worker while reversing their vehicle on a worksite. Life-saving measures were attempted by emergency responders; however, the struck worker died because of injuries suffered in the incident.
While investigations into both fatalities are still underway, they serve as sobering reminders that workplace tragedies can occur regardless of vehicle direction or speed, underscoring the importance of maintaining rigorous work zone safety practices.
Reversing fatal facts
According to the National Work Zone Safety Information Clearinghouse, fatal highway worker injuries involving workers on foot struck by vehicles have increased by 10.7 percent since 2021. From 2021 to 2023, these incidents accounted for an average of 53.5 percent of all fatal highway worker deaths. In 2023 alone, more than 800 people were killed in work zone crashes, and over 37,000 were injured.
The data drives home the concept that work zone safety is moving in the wrong direction, making it critical for organizations to strengthen controls, improve visibility, and reinforce safe work practices. While work zone incidents remain a serious challenge, employers can reduce risk by applying data‑driven practices, proven countermeasures, and structured hierarchical control strategies, including:
- Prioritizing worker participation in identifying hazards and evaluating/implementing control options;
- Analyzing crash and trend data to target safety strategies and guide interventions;
- Addressing commonly cited OSHA violations to close work zone safety gaps before injuries or fatalities occur;
- Implementing safety countermeasures such as speed management tools, enhanced roadway delineation, improved lighting, pedestrian protections, and median barriers;
- Coordinating with engineers, traffic control companies, equipment manufacturers, and law enforcement to establish effective communication and staging strategies;
- Maintaining a written hazard control plan that includes emergency and non-routine operations;
- Evaluating the effectiveness of controls and adjusting when needed.
Key to remember: Work zone injuries are increasing; therefore, every vehicle movement, no matter the direction, must be controlled using engineering controls, data-informed decisions, worker participation, and consistent hazard management.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-02-19T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsEnforcement and Audits - OSHAOSHA InspectionsSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyAgriculture SafetyMaritime SafetyCalifornia Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA), DILCaliforniaEnglishFocus Area
Cal/OSHA proposes to adopt federal ‘worker walkaround’ rule
In April 2024, federal OSHA issued a final rule addressing the workplace inspection process at 29 CFR 1903.8. California proposes to adopt the federal rule and add further provisions. The proposal would:
- Allow both a representative of the employer and a representative authorized by employees to accompany the Cal/OSHA inspector during the worksite inspection. The inspector is authorized to allow multiple representatives for employer and employee and to resolve any disputes as to who the representatives are.
- Establish who may be designated as the representative authorized by employees for purposes of accompanying the inspection;
- Establish the inspector’s authority to lead the inspection and ensure the conduct of the representatives who participate does not interfere with the effectiveness of the workplace inspection; and
- Allow the employer to protect trade secrets by requiring that any employee representative in an area containing trade secrets be an employee of the company. If this requirement results in excluding the only available employee representative, then the inspector will be required to interview employees who work in the area as part of the inspection.
A public hearing is scheduled for April 1, 2026, via Zoom; this is also the deadline for submitting comments on the proposal.
2026-02-19T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsFederal Motor Carrier Safety RegulationsFleet SafetyFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleEnglishTransportationBusiness planning - Motor CarrierUSA
FMCSA finalizes 12 deregulatory changes
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has finalized a broad array of deregulatory changes affecting vehicle standards, inspection requirements, emergency equipment, licensing rules, and more.
Published February 19, 2026, the rule changes have limited impact but they represent the FMCSA’s first salvo at providing regulatory relief under the Trump administration. More rule changes are expected in the near future.
What’s changing
Motor carriers should review the changes now to determine how they might impact their operations. Except as noted, the new rules take effect on March 23, 2026:
- Bumper labels: Motor carriers will no longer need to ensure that their vehicles’ rear-impact guards have a permanent certification label from the manufacturer. These labels often fall off or become unreadable over time, resulting in citations even when guards meet the safety standard.
- License-plate lamps: Tractors will no longer need a working rear license-plate lamp while pulling a trailer. If there’s no trailer, the light will need to be operational.
- Spare fuses (effective April 20, 2026): Drivers will no longer be required to carry spare fuses for powering required equipment. The FMCSA says today’s vehicles don’t commonly suffer from blown fuses, making the requirement unnecessary.
- eDVIRs: Though already allowed under 49 CFR 390.32, the vehicle inspection rules in Part 396 will explicitly allow drivers and motor carriers to use electronic drivers’ vehicle inspection reports (DVIRs).
- Auxiliary fuel pumps: Motor carriers will be able to use gravity- or siphon-fed auxiliary fuel pumps with tanks up to 5 gallons, mounted on the trailer and used only when the vehicle is not in motion. The rule revises 393.65(d) to reflect modern small-capacity auxiliary systems used for trailer-mounted equipment. capacity auxiliary systems used for trailer-mounted equipment.
- Fuel tank fill limit: It will no longer be a violation to use fuel tanks that can be filled beyond 95 percent of their capacity. Modern liquid-fuel tanks have vented caps that can safely accommodate a 100-percent fill, the FMCSA says.
- Liquid-burning flares: The FMCSA has removed the option to use liquid-burning flares as emergency warning devices. Drivers must use reflective triangles or solid-fuel flares instead.
- CDLs for military techs: Dual-status military technicians (as defined in 10 U.S.C. 10216) are now explicitly included in the commercial driver’s license (CDL) exemption for military vehicle operations. Previously, only National Guard technicians qualified; Air Force Reserve and Army Reserve technicians were excluded.
- Portable conveyors: Portable conveyors used in the aggregate industry and manufactured before 2010 are now exempt from the “brakes on all wheels” requirement, provided certain weight and speed limits are met.
- Tire markings: The FMCSA has clarified that its rules do not require tire load-rating markings on sidewalls. That requirement falls to manufacturers only, not motor carriers.
- Vision waivers: An obsolete grandfathering provision related to an old vision waiver study program has been removed from the regulations (391.64) in favor of today’s alternative vision standard in 391.44.
- Water carriers: The FMCSA has removed outdated references to “water carriers,” updating parts 365, 370, 379, 386, and 390 to reflect the agency’s lack of jurisdiction over maritime carriers.
More rules on the way?
Additional deregulatory actions proposed last May are still in process but are expected to be finalized soon. This includes rules to:
- Remove the need to carry a user manual for electronic logging devices (ELDs).
- Remove the requirement for drivers to self-report moving violations.
- End the requirement that carriers return completed roadside inspection reports unless requested by the issuing agency.
- Exempt certain buses and hazmat drivers from stopping at railroad crossings equipped with active warning devices (unless the devices are activated).
- Record information about accidents where medical treatment consisted only of imaging or a prescription without actual treatment.
- Delete the outdated requirement to retrofit older trailers with retroreflective tape.
Key to remember: The FMCSA has finalized 12 deregulatory actions among 18 proposed in May 2025. The changes could save time and money for both motor carriers and drivers.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-02-19T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishWork-life balanceHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleEmployee Mental HealthAssociate RelationsWellnessWellnessHR ManagementFocus AreaUSAHuman Resources
Help for workers with well-being woes
Worries about well-being are on the rise, with economic issues topping the list of worker concerns.
In the 2026 Workplace Wellness Survey published in January by the Employee Benefits Research Institute workers rated their level of well-being concern at an average of 5.8 out of 10, up from 5.5 in 2024. Top issues of concern included:
- Inflation (89 percent)
- Health care costs (87 percent)
- Health insurance costs (86 percent)
What helps?
While employers can’t magically make sources of unease disappear, they can provide support to workers to help them cope. When asked which three aspects of their workplace contributed most to their sense of well-being, these were the top worker responses.
- Work-life balance – 53 percent
- Meaningful work/work they enjoy – 42 percent
- Amount of paid time off – 34 percent
- Supportive supervisor - 33 percent
- Personal connections with colleagues – 33 percent
Taking action
Employers can use workplace policies and programs to enhance worker well-being and address anxiety over issues that are chipping away at it. While well-being is affected by things that are beyond an employer’s control, support can be provided through:
Boundaries: To help workers enjoy better work-life balance, place limits on off-hours emails, texts, and phone calls. Don’t make employees responsible for responding to emails or notifications they receive after the workday ends. If 24-hour coverage is required, rotate on-call responsibilities.
Sharing the impact: Understanding how your work benefits others makes it meaningful. Use team meeting announcements, intranet articles, and one-on-one conversations to let workers know how their contributions support customers, coworkers, and the organization as a whole.
Empowerment: Lack of control makes a job more stressful and detracts from meaningful work. Supervisors should listen to suggestions for improvement and, when possible, give workers control over how tasks are done.
Encouraging workers to recharge: Make sure managers know that it’s important for them and their workers to take time off to support their mental health; there should be no shame in asking for paid time off. Establish a simple, consistent process for requests and give employees discretion on when to take time off. Supervisors and managers can model the importance of taking a break from work by taking time off themselves.
Supervisor training: Supervisors are often promoted to their position because they are great at their job, but they may lack experience in managing people. To help them and their teams succeed, offer training that helps supervisors improve people skills such as communication, conflict resolution, and emotional intelligence.
Expressions of thanks: A lack of recognition or acknowledgment from leaders strains job satisfaction. Don’t take workers for granted; thank them for their contributions.
Encouraging connections: Having a friend at work makes employees more engaged with their job. Support workplace connections with activities such as potluck meals, a book club, or after-hours social events. To find ideas that resonate with your workforce, conduct a survey or put together a teambuilding committee. In addition, a mentoring program that pairs less experienced workers with those who have more seniority can encourage a sharing of ideas and build relationships.
Promotion of mental health resources: When concerns escalate and anxiety mounts, professional help can ease the strain. Make sure workers know how to access mental health benefits provided by your company. Use posters, intranet articles, and team meeting announcements to spread the word.
Key to remember: Worker well-being is strained by factors outside of an employer’s control, but encouraging workplace connections, saying thanks, and training managers in effective communication are ways employers can provide support.
Keep reading...Show less
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
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
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.