SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS
Keep up to date on the latest developments affecting OSHA, DOT, EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.
Copyright 2025 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.
FEATURED NEWS
2025-11-12T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleUSAAssociate RelationsWellnessWellnessHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman Resources
How much do your employees know about diabetes risk factors?
An estimated 38 million people in the United States have diabetes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), yet 1 in 5 do not realize they have it.
Diabetes is the most expensive chronic condition in the United States, costing an estimated $413 billion annually, and can bring serious health complications, including kidney failure, heart disease, and blindness.
The prevalence of the condition and its high price tag underscore the importance of awareness and prevention. November is Diabetes Awareness Month and is a great time to provide information that helps employees understand diabetes and its risk factors. The 12 True/False questions listed below can help employees learn more about the condition.
The activity may cause employees to wonder about their risk for diabetes. If they have concerns, they should talk to their health care provider about their risk as well as how to prevent or manage the condition.
True or false? Test your diabetes knowledge
- Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease that is usually diagnosed in children and teenagers; it is not preventable.
- Type 2 diabetes occurs as a result of insulin resistance. It is often preventable.
- When a person has prediabetes, blood sugar levels are higher than normal but not high enough to be diagnosed as diabetes.
- A woman is at greater risk for prediabetes and diabetes if she has had diabetes while pregnant (gestational diabetes).
- A physically active person has a higher risk of having prediabetes and diabetes.
- An individual’s weight has an impact on their risk for prediabetes and diabetes.
- Smoking increases the risk of diabetes complications.
- The risk for prediabetes and diabetes increases if you have a parent or sibling with type 2 diabetes.
- A person with prediabetes will always get type 2 diabetes.
- A person’s risk for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes increases with age.
- If I’m over age 50, it’s too late to reduce my risk for type 2 diabetes.
- Dramatic lifestyle changes are always needed to reduce diabetes risk.
Diabetes Information Answer Key
1. True. Type 1 diabetes, which is not preventable, is an autoimmune disease that is usually diagnosed in children and teenagers.
2. True. Type 2 diabetes, which is often preventable, occurs as a result of insulin resistance. Type 2 diabetes is the most common type of diabetes.
3. True. Prediabetes occurs when blood sugar levels are higher than normal but not high enough to be diagnosed as diabetes.
4. True. A woman is at greater risk for prediabetes and diabetes if she has had gestational diabetes.
5. False. The opposite is true; the less active you are, the greater your risk.
6. True. Being overweight is a risk factor.
7. True. A person who smokes is at greater risk of complications from diabetes.
8. True. A person’s risk for prediabetes and diabetes increases if they have a parent or sibling with type 2 diabetes.
9. False. Eating right, being active, and staying at a healthy weight can bring blood sugar levels back to normal and prevent type 2 diabetes.
10. True. Prediabetes and diabetes risk increases with age.
11. False. It’s never too late to make lifestyle changes that reduce your risk.
12. False. Small, gradual improvements in diet and activity levels can make a difference and lower the risk of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.
Key to remember: Diabetes is a serious condition, but the disease can be managed and complications can be avoided. In addition, type 2 diabetes can usually be prevented. Employees should talk to their health care provider if they have concerns about their risk for diabetes.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2025-11-12T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleEmployee Mental HealthAssociate RelationsWellnessWellnessHR ManagementFocus AreaUSAHuman Resources
Financial wellness benefits boost employee well-being
Financial benefits are about more than dollars and cents; more workers are indicating that they affect their mental health.
The Consumer Benefits and Insights Research survey from Voya Financial found that 63 percent of Americans “strongly agree” or “agree” that financial stability impacts their mental health. This is an increase of 6 percent from 2023.
This trend shouldn’t be ignored, as worries about finances can bring stress and unease that leads to depression and anxiety. Chronic stress often has negative physical impacts as well, including a weaker immune system, high blood pressure, and heart troubles.
In addition, stress can lead to unhealthy choices, such as binge eating, or self-destructive behaviors like alcohol or drug abuse.
These strains on well-being are certainly concerns from a personal standpoint, but they lead to workplace issues as well. They can drag down output and morale and lead to employee absences, impacting productivity.
Offer support all year
To ease the burden of financial worry, employers should be prepared to offer year-round support that helps employees navigate their financial situation and the impact it makes on their mental health. This can include:
Financial education: Employees are looking for education about financial matters and would benefit from information about debt reduction, budgeting, saving, benefits, and making the most of a retirement plan. Understanding their finances can help employees gain control of the situation and get rid of some of the underlying uncertainty that can bring anxiety.
A mixture of education formats: The Voya survey shows that employees value both digital tools and a personal touch. Offer personalized information through your retirement plan provider or an objective financial advisor as well as online financial calculators. The survey found that confidence in making benefit decisions would increase with:
- Personal benefit recommendations – 49 percent
- Interactive calculators – 39 percent
- One-on-one support – 38 percent
Understandable benefits information: Employees want to make the most of their benefits, and to do that they need information they can understand. When open enrollment season arrives, make sure that employees are provided with educational resources, an opportunity to ask questions, and time to make decisions. Voya’s survey found that 77 percent of employed Americans planned to spend more time reviewing benefits during the open enrollment period in 2025 so they could maximize their benefit dollars. This was an 8 percent increase over 2024.
An easy way to save: Most employees have their paycheck automatically deposited into a bank account. Allow them to split the deposit between a checking account and a savings account, so they can save toward a goal or create an emergency savings fund. Seeing the savings fund grow can build confidence in addition to financial stability.
Emergency grants: An unexpected hospital bill, natural disaster, or accident can deplete finances. A company can offer an emergency or hardship grant program to help employees make it through a challenging time. The fund could help them pay for groceries, utilities, childcare, housing, and other costs.
Mental health care: Publicize the mental health resources available to employees, such as an employee assistance program or help from local mental health organizations. Use articles on your intranet or team meeting announcements to remind employees that these resources are available. Make sure supervisors know where to direct employees who have concerns about finances or mental health challenges.
Key to remember: Money concerns can have a significant impact on employee mental health. To ease the burden of financial worries, offer education opportunities as well as support for mental health care.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-11-12T06:00:00Z
NewsFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)LeaveFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Time offHR ManagementEnglishLeaveUSAAssociate Benefits & CompensationIndustry NewsIndustry NewsDiscriminationDiscriminationHR GeneralistAssociate RelationsFocus AreaHuman Resources
Discrimination, disabilities, and drug testing: Employer’s inconsistencies sunk its case
David had a long history with his employer. He also had a spinal condition that caused severe lower back pain. He asked for accommodations, including modified schedules and medical leave, which his employer gave him.
One day, David held a staff meeting where he allegedly sat down, put his feet up on a counter, and mentioned that he had eaten some kind of gummy. Some coworkers claimed that David appeared lethargic and overmedicated during the meeting. They also alleged that David said he needed to take smaller doses of the gummy in the future and that he drew a picture to illustrate how much he should eat.
After the meeting, attendees reported David’s conduct to a company director, then HR. These people then met with David to discuss the situation. During this meeting, David denied ever having used marijuana, but admitted to using cannabidiol (CBD), a natural substance found in marijuana, and agreed to be drug tested.
The employer interpreted the drug test results as having levels of THC, the main psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, and fired David.
The lawsuit
David fired back with a lawsuit, denying being lethargic or over-medicated at the meeting. He claimed the employer fired him because of his disability and for requesting accommodations, violating the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). He pointed to inconsistencies in the employer’s reasoning, that his worsening condition and need for accommodations were the reasons it fired him. He also had evidence that the employer treated other similarly situated employees more leniently.
The employer countered that it fired David based on legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons, including:
- His conduct during the staff meeting,
- A positive drug test, and
- Dishonesty about marijuana use.
It maintained that its fitness-for-duty policy justified its actions.
The outcome
The court found enough issues to let several of David’s claims proceed to trial, particularly those involving discrimination and retaliation. It dismissed, however, the FMLA interference claims.
It said that a reasonable jury could conclude that the employer treated David unusually harshly soon after management noticed his disability worsening and after he began to miss work to attend full-day physical therapy sessions.
The employer testified that it didn’t fire David because of his drug test results, but the termination letter stated that the drug test was a reason for his termination.
The court also pointed to the employer policy, which typically allows employees who test positive for marijuana to return to work under a Last Chance Agreement (LCA). The employer, however, didn’t offer David the opportunity to return under an LCA.
The employer’s shifting arguments resulted in the court denying its request to have the case dismissed.
Rheem v. UPMC Pinnacle Hospitals, Middle District of Pennsylvania, No. 1:23-CV-00075, October 27, 2025.
Key to remember: Employers should tread carefully when dealing with employees who have documented disabilities and accommodation histories. Consistency in policy enforcement and thorough documentation are crucial to avoid legal pitfalls. Treating similar cases differently can raise red flags and lead to costly litigation.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-11-12T06:00:00Z
NewsCommercial drivers license CDLIndustry NewsIndustry NewsDriver qualificationsDriver disqualificationCommercial drivers license CDLDriver qualification and hiringFocus AreaFleet OperationsEnglishTransportationUSA
California moves to revoke non-domiciled CDLs
The California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) has sent notices to 17,000 non-domiciled commercial driver’s license (CDL) holders, informing them that their licenses no longer meet federal requirements and will expire in 60 days.
This action is in response to an ongoing Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) audit that revealed that more than one in four of the non-domiciled CDL records sampled in California failed to comply with federal regulations.
In late September, California was given 30 days to come into compliance. Non-compliance would have resulted in FMCSA withholding nearly $160 million in federal funding.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-11-12T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsToxic Substances Control Act - EPAToxic Subtances Control Act - EPATSCA ComplianceToxic Substances - EPAEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)EnvironmentalIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
Our chemical poses a substantial risk. What do we do?
Working with chemicals can be a risky business. What happens when information reveals that a chemical poses a substantial risk to human or environmental health? Those handling the chemical, including the organization and its employees, have a legal duty to report the risk to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires that anyone who receives information supporting the conclusion that a chemical substance or mixture poses a substantial risk of injury must immediately submit a Substantial Risk Notice (SRN) to EPA. SRNs aren’t uncommon; they can apply to any business that handles chemical substances. EPA announced in October 2025 that it had cleared a backlog of more than 3,000 SRNs!
If your facility handles any chemical substance, you’re subject to TSCA Section 8(e) reporting. Here’s how your facility can meet the SRN requirements based on EPA’s policy and guidance, Statement of Interpretation and Enforcement Policy; Notification of Substantial Risk (SRN guide), in the Federal Register.
Who must report?
TSCA Section 8(e) requirements apply both to organizations and to individual employees engaged in manufacturing (including importing), processing, or distributing in commerce a chemical substance or mixture..
Tip: The statute offers no applicability exemptions for a facility’s size, production or import volumes, or commercial activities.
Those in the company who manage Section 8(e) obligations (“officers”) should ensure that the organization meets the requirements. Officers have personal civil and/or criminal liability to verify that SRNs are submitted.
Facilities may assume responsibility from employees and officials for reporting substantial risk information directly to EPA if they establish and implement internal procedures for employees to submit information to the company. The procedures should include:
- What information must be submitted;
- How submissions are prepared and who in the company receives them;
- The federal penalties for failing to report; and
- How officers and employees receive prompt written notification of whether the report was submitted to EPA (if information isn’t reported, the written notification has to mention the right of officers and employees to report the information directly to EPA).
If a business doesn’t have established SRN procedures, all of its employees and officials are individually responsible and liable for ensuring that substantial risk information is submitted directly to EPA.
Regardless of who submits the SRN to the agency, the report should be made within 30 calendar days of obtaining information about a substantial risk of injury.
What qualifies as a substantial risk?
The SRN guide defines substantial risk as “a risk of considerable concern” due to:
- The seriousness of the effect on human or environmental health (health effect), and
- The fact or probability that it will occur (level of exposure).
The type of health effect determines the weight of importance assigned to both factors. For instance, if the chemical’s health effect is severe (like causing birth defects), less weight is given to the level of exposure.
The types of health effects include:
- Human health effects (such as serious or prolonged incapacitation);
- Environmental effects from nonemergency environmental contamination (like widespread accumulation of a chemical substance in the air or water); and
- Emergency environmental contamination that seriously threatens:
- Humans with cancer, birth defects, mutation, death, or incapacitation; or
- Nonhuman organisms (e.g., fish, algae, etc.) with significant population destruction.
How are SRNs submitted?
You should submit SRNs electronically through the Chemical Information Submission System (CISS), which is accessed via the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) service on EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX).
Tip: Reference EPA’s CDX Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) Registration User Guide for detailed registration instructions.
If your SRN includes confidential business information claims, you’re required to submit the notice electronically.
Key to remember: If your facility obtains information that a chemical you handle poses a substantial risk to human or environmental health, you must report the information to EPA immediately.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-11-11T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsWage and HourWage and HourAssociate Benefits & CompensationHR GeneralistFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)In-Depth ArticleHR ManagementEnglishFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Can using AI risk employees’ exempt status?
Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employers may consider executive, administrative, or professional (EAP) employees to be nonexempt (hourly) unless they can show that the employees:
- • Are paid on a salary basis,
- • Are paid at least $684 every week they work, and
- • Perform certain duties.
The duties are where using artificial intelligence (AI) might put some employees at risk of no longer meeting the exemption. Duties under the EAP exemption generally look like this:
- Executive: The primary duty must be managing the enterprise, or managing a customarily recognized department or subdivision of the enterprise; and having the authority to hire or fire other employees, or the employees’ suggestions and recommendations as to the hiring, firing, advancement, promotion, or any other change of status of other employees must be given particular weight.
- Administrative: The primary duty must be the performance of office or non-manual work directly related to the management or general business operations of the employer or the employer’s customers, and include the exercise of discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance.
- Learned professional: The primary duty is performance of work requiring advanced knowledge, defined as work which is predominantly intellectual in character, and which includes work requiring the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment.
Overall, exempt employees must exercise independent judgment and discretion over matters of significance. AI use could replace or undermine this.
How this might happen
Here’s an example. Joe Employee is a department manager and is classified as exempt. He’s responsible for supervising a team, including hiring and firing, assigning tasks, and employee evaluations, so he meets the executive duties test for the EAP exemption.
If Joe were to begin using AI-powered systems that automatically assign tasks and provide hiring or firing recommendations based on metrics and past job performance, he might no longer exercise independent judgment and discretion. His title alone won’t be enough to maintain the exempt status. If he gives up his authority and discretion to AI and simply monitors what AI provides, he might not be exempt.
If, however, Joe uses AI but does much more than monitor its output, if he uses independent judgment and discretion when reviewing and validating the AI output, his exempt status should remain intact.
What to look for
In light of the AI-use explosion, employers might want to review their exempt employees’ duties to ensure that they still meet the FLSA’s exempt tests. If exempt employees stop using their judgment and discretion and rely heavily on AI, they might risk losing their exemption.
Such a review of duties and job descriptions could be quite an undertaking, but misclassifying employees can be expensive.
A review should consider whether:
- The employee/position still needs the use of judgment and discretion that is real, substantial, and on matters of significance.
- The employee still has the actual authority to interpret, validate, or override AI outputs using judgment and discretion, instead of just monitoring the output.
- Job descriptions need to be updated to accurately reflect the current tasks and authorities.
The rapid pace of AI advancement might require more frequent reviews of these factors for exempt employees. HR professionals might not know specifically how exempt employees are, or will be, using AI.
Key to remember: Employers must ensure that exempt employees meet certain duties tests, which could be undermined by the use of AI. This might mean that audits can be called for.
Keep reading...Show less
Search all news
Did You Know You Can Ask Unlimited Questions to Our Compliance Experts?
Get answers to your most puzzling compliance questions from the industry’s top experts!
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 2025 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.