Regulatory Compliance News & Updates
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
2026-03-11T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyDefensive drivingCMV drivingFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleFleet OperationsEnglishTransportationUSA
Smart driving in severe conditions
Spring marks the start of severe weather season. For the professional driver, maintaining a high level of awareness and being prepared can go a long way in ensuring safety while on the road.
Thunderstorms
Severe thunderstorms can develop quickly. The following actions can help ensure safety if approaching or already in a storm.
- Turn on the vehicle’s headlights, slow down, and allow extra braking distance.
- Pull off the road and find a safe area to park, avoiding trees, poles, or any other items that could fall on the vehicle.
- Stay in the vehicle as it provides better protection against lightning than being in the open.
- If able to safely park before the storm strikes, seek shelter in a sturdy building, staying away from windows.
Once the storm has let up and travel has continued, watch for downed power lines, trees, and other debris that may have blown onto the road.
Tornados
Tornados are considered nature’s most violent storms. A tornado’s winds can reach 300 miles per hour and can create a path of damage in excess of one mile wide and 50 miles long.
If in an area where a tornado warning is issued, safely park and seek shelter immediately, preferably a basement or the interior of the lowest floor of a sturdy building or storm shelter.
If outside with no shelter, lie flat in a nearby ditch or depression and cover your head with your hands. Also be aware of the potential for flooding, as heavy rain can cause low spots to quickly flood. Do not seek shelter under a highway overpass. Winds blow stronger under an overpass due to the wind-tunnel effect.
Watch for flying debris. Most tornado-related deaths and injuries are caused by flying debris. And never try to outrun a tornado.
Watches and warnings
The National Weather Service issues severe weather watches and warnings. Understanding the following terms can assist in identifying weather hazards.
Watch. A watch is issued when the risk of hazardous weather has increased significantly, but its occurrence, location, and/or timing is uncertain. Watches are normally issued well in advance of the occurrence of severe weather to provide lead time so the public can be prepared.
A severe thunderstorm watch is issued when conditions are favorable for the development of severe thunderstorms in and close to the watch area.
A tornado watch is issued when conditions are favorable for the development of tornados in and close to the watch area.
Warning. A warning is issued when hazardous weather is occurring, imminent, or has a high probability of occurring. Warnings are used for conditions posing a threat to life or property.
A severe thunderstorm warning is issued when a severe thunderstorm is indicated by radar or spotter reports. A severe thunderstorm includes hail that is one inch in diameter or larger and/or winds of at least 58 miles per hour.
A tornado warning is issued when a tornado is indicated by radar or sighted by spotters. The warning will include where the tornado is located and what communities are in its path.
Key to remember: Spring weather can be unpredictable, but informed drivers who remain alert and take appropriate precautions are far better equipped to handle what Mother Nature delivers.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-03-11T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthMiningSpecialized IndustriesEnglishMine SafetyFocus AreaUSA
MSHA warns of freeze-thaw hazards in recent safety alert
The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) recently issued a safety alert cautioning miners about the dangers posed by freeze-thaw cycles. These cycles can cause highwalls to become unstable and create slippery ground conditions, raising the risk of slips, trips, and incidents involving equipment.
Due to freeze-thaw cycle risks, MSHA recommends that miners closely inspect highwalls, banks, slopes, and roadways after major temperature shifts, and check equipment for safe operation. Miners should also:
- Scale hazardous material from a safe location.
- Barricade and post unsafe areas until hazards are corrected.
- Maintain clean catch benches and rockfall areas.
- Update and follow all Ground Control Plan procedures.
The full alert can be found at msha.gov.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-03-11T05:00:00Z
NewsEmployment ContractsIndependent ContractorsContingent WorkforceFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishHuman ResourcesTalent Management & RecruitingAssociate Benefits & CompensationIndustry NewsIndustry NewsContingent WorkforceHR GeneralistAssociate RelationsFocus AreaUSA
DOL’s independent contractor proposed rule syncs employee FMLA definition
On Friday, February 27, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published a proposed rule to determine whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. The current proposed rule harkens back to the 2021 version, but stretches its application beyond the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
The reason behind the addition
The DOL claimed that the FMLA regulation’s guidance for assessing employee or independent contractor status could be unclear if it didn’t make confirming edits.
The FMLA regulation defines “Employee” as having the same meaning as that term has under the FLSA and notes that it takes the “definition of ‘employ’ from the [FLSA].” Reference 29 CFR 825.102 and 825.105(a).
The FMLA regulation doesn’t, however, mention the factors used to distinguish between employees and independent contractors under the FLSA or advise how employers should weigh the factors. These factors have changed over the years.
Instead, the regulation explains generally that “courts have said that there is no definition that solves all problems as to the limitations of the employer-employee relationship.”
It further advises that “an employee, as distinguished from an independent contractor who is engaged in a business of his/her own, is one who ‘follows the usual path of an employee’ and is dependent on the business which he/ she serves.”
Although accurate in describing the overall analysis, employers could misinterpret it as suggesting that — unlike the FLSA — there is no set of factors for distinguishing between employees and independent contractors in FMLA cases.
The DOL didn’t intend to create or imply any discrepancy between the FMLA and FLSA when it added the language in the FMLA. It believes that adding cross-references to the FLSA would address this concern and provide useful guidance when determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor under the FMLA.
If the proposed rule is finalized, employers would benefit from the simplicity and certainty of having a single uniform standard for determining employee or independent contractor status under both laws that use the same relevant statutory definitions.
Key to remember: While employers wouldn’t see a major change, they would need to apply the FLSA’s employee or independent contractor analysis to the FMLA under a new proposed rule.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-03-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsAccident Investigation - OSHAAccident Root Cause DeterminationSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
Preparing to interview accident witnesses
Since witness interviews are critical to any incident investigation, employers should obtain witness statements as soon as possible. Conduct interviews before witnesses talk with each other and while the details are still fresh in their minds. If they talk to one another about the event, that could inadvertently affect each person’s recall, or even create new versions.
Interviews should focus on the facts, including what happened before and after the incident, and should avoid opinions and assumptions. Ultimately, the investigator needs to know who was involved, what they were doing, what was happening at the time, and when and where the incident occurred.
Choose interviewers
Conduct interviews privately with no more than two interviewers present. By keeping the interviews small and away from others, you have a much better chance of having a factual and productive conversation. The person conducting the interview should be neutral and trusted by employees.
It may be tempting to let management sit in, but a supervisor’s presence may cause an employee to clam up. Keeping this conversation informal can help employees relax and talk more freely. Simply ask what happened and let the witnesses tell the story in their own words. Remind them that the goal of this conversation is to identify hazards, not to get anyone in trouble.
Asking questions
Ask open-ended questions like “describe what happened leading up to the incident” and “what happened next?” Avoid leading questions that might cause someone to make things up in an attempt to answer. Along the same lines, avoid questions that suggest an accusation, such as “do you think he wasn't paying attention?”
Witnesses might give their opinions, and you can make notes, but distinguish between the facts and their opinions. Repeat their conclusions back to them to confirm your understanding.
Keep in mind that memories or viewpoints might differ. Statements from multiple witnesses might be contradictory such that both statements cannot possibly be factual. This doesn't mean either worker is lying. It could just be how they remember the events, or they saw things from a different angle. Of course, some witnesses might describe an incident with the goal of avoiding blame.
As necessary, go back to previously interviewed witnesses for additional information or clarification.
Example situation
Suppose a near-miss incident involved a forklift operator who stopped suddenly, causing the load he was carrying to slide off the tines, nearly striking a pedestrian. You might hear statements like, “I didn't see the forklift” or “the pedestrian came out of nowhere.” Now, that may be how witnesses remember things. But there's probably something else going on.
Follow-up questions might be along the lines of, “what were you focused on at the time of the accident?” Maybe the pedestrian was reading a document or computer pad and didn't see or hear the forklift approaching. Or perhaps the forklift operator was going too fast or failed to stop and sound the horn at an intersection. There could be several contributing factors, and you'll want to identify all of them.
Witness interviews provide valuable information in determining what happened before, during, and after an incident. As an interviewer, your goal is to gather key information while keeping the witnesses comfortable. Remind them the goal of investigating is to help prevent future incidents and injuries, not to blame employees.
Key to remember: Conducting effective interviews requires skill and consideration that goes beyond simply asking, “Tell me what happened.”
Keep reading...Show less
2026-03-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsDiseases and illnessesHR GeneralistFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleMedical ExaminationsAssociate RelationsEnglishUSAHR ManagementDisabilities and ADADisabilities and ADAHuman Resources
Court: Employers may ask employees about their vaccinations
The federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) restricts when employers may ask employees medical questions or require medical exams. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this came to light as employers often wanted to know if their employees were vaccinated to help protect others in the workplace. In the midst of one of the worst influenza (flu) outbreaks this season, employers might wonder about their employees’ current flu vaccination status.
An employer recently learned that they may ask employees about their vaccination status.
The story
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, an employer implemented a company-wide vaccine mandate. It notified employees that they could seek a religious or medical exemption, but that it would terminate those who didn’t comply.
Jennifer and Katherine, two remote employees, requested religious exemptions.
The employer denied both requests and eventually fired them.
Both employees sued, bringing disability discrimination claims under the ADA. They argued that their employer made:
- Unlawful medical examinations or inquiries, and
- Regarded them as having a disability.
The employees stated that their employer had no valid business reason to inquire into their vaccination status, especially because they were remote employees.
The employees also argued that the employer regarded them as disabled because they were unvaccinated and then fired them for that reason.
The ruling
The ADA defines a disability as a “physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the individual’s major life activities.” The court said that whether a person is vaccinated or not has no bearing on their ability to engage in major life activities.
The court also said that the employees’ medical exam or inquiry argument was also fatally flawed because an employer’s inquiry into an employee’s vaccination status isn’t disability related.
Finally, a person is “regarded as” having a disability if they’re “subjected to an action prohibited under [the ADA] because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment, whether or not the impairment limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity.”
Once again, being unvaccinated isn’t a physical or mental impairment. Being unvaccinated, therefore, doesn’t support a “regarded as” claim.
The court ruled that the employer didn’t violate the ADA when it asked about the employees’ vaccination status or when it fired them for being unvaccinated.
Finn v. Humane Society of the United States, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 4-1416, November 20, 2025.
Key to remember: According to at least one court, employers don’t violate the ADA if they ask employees about their vaccination status.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-03-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndependent ContractorsContingent WorkforceUSAHR ManagementEnglishDriver recruiting and retentionDriver recruiting and retentionTalent Management & RecruitingAssociate Benefits & CompensationIndustry NewsIndustry NewsRecruiting and hiringWage and HourContingent WorkforceWage and HourRecruiting and hiringTipsHR GeneralistFair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction (FACT Act)Temporary EmployeesApplications/ApplicantsAssociate RelationsOnboardingFocus AreaHuman Resources
Pay deception costs employer $100 million in gig drivers settlement
A nationwide employer agreed to a $100 million judgment to settle allegations from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and 11 states claiming that the company caused delivery drivers to lose tens of millions of dollars’ worth of earnings by deceiving them about the base pay, incentive pay, and tips they could earn.
The employer uses a driver service, where gig workers use an app to decide whether to accept “offers” to deliver goods to customers. They base their decisions on the employer’s statements about the base pay and tips that drivers could expect if they complete the work.
Employer’s deceptive practices
The complaint alleged that the employer engaged in several deceptive practices:
- Tips not guaranteed: The employer allegedly deceived drivers about the amount of tips they would receive from an order. The company failed to notify drivers that, unlike the payment for the goods being delivered, the payment for the advertised tip amount hadn’t been preauthorized, and therefore drivers wouldn’t receive that amount if the customer was unable to cover the cost of the tip or if the charge otherwise failed. The company also failed to tell drivers that it would split tips when a customer’s delivery was split across multiple drivers.
- Base pay varied: The employer wasn’t forthcoming to drivers about the amount of base pay and tips they would receive when the employer modified “batched” offers (delivering goods to multiple customers during one trip). The company failed to tell drivers that it would reduce their base pay and/or tips when it removed orders from batched orders. In many instances, the employer either failed to notify drivers at all about the change in base pay (and tips) or only notified them of the change in their earnings after they completed the delivery.
- Incentive pay falsified: The employer misrepresented the incentive pay drivers could earn in exchange for completing certain tasks. The company failed to disclose all the conditions drivers had to meet to earn it and denied the promised earnings on the basis that drivers failed to meet all the conditions. For example, the employer offered to give drivers a referral incentive when they referred new drivers, yet failed to adequately disclose that it would pay the incentive only if the newly recruited driver performed deliveries in a particular zone or for a particular store. Even when drivers met the incentive conditions, the employer sometimes failed to provide the promised pay.
- Customers deceived: The employer allegedly deceived its customers by claiming that “100 percent of tips go to the driver.” Despite this promise, the employer, on multiple occasions, failed to give the tips to drivers and didn’t refund the tips to customers.
The FTC alleged that these deceptive business practices violated the FTC Act and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act by obtaining drivers’ bank and other financial information while deceiving them about the amount of base pay and tips they would earn from deliveries.
As part of the proposed order, the employer is:
- Required to implement an earnings verification program to ensure it pays drivers promised earnings and tips;
- Prohibited from modifying an offer for base and incentive pay or tips after the initial offer except under limited circumstances, such as when the driver fails to provide the required service or the customer cancels an order; and
- Banned from misrepresenting the earnings and other information included in the delivery offers it makes to drivers.
Key to remember: Employers must not only comply with the federal Fair Labor Standards Act in relation to employee pay; they must also comply with the FTC.
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.