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
2025-11-05T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsDiscriminationDiscriminationTitle VII (The Civil Rights Act of 1964)Religious DiscriminationHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleUSAAssociate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman Resources
Rethinking unpaid leave as a religious accommodation
Out of sight, out of mind might be a useful philosophy if you’re trying to eat less junk food, but it’s not a smart tactic for avoiding a religious discrimination claim.
In September 2025, the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Bilyeu et al. v. UT-Battelle, LLC, looked at unpaid leave as a religious accommodation.
The events in question go back to the pandemic. An employee objected to an employer’s mandatory vaccination policy for religious reasons. Management had the employee:
- Answer questions about his beliefs,
- Sign a statement attesting to those beliefs, and
- Read a list of quotes from religious leaders who supported vaccination.
The employee still refused to be vaccinated, so the company told him to use vacation time and then go on unpaid leave. The company called the leave an accommodation.
A new question
The appeals court didn’t rule that the company’s actions were illegal but rather sent the case back to the circuit court to consider a new question. In its opinion, the appeals court cited the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Muldreow v. City of St. Louis. In that case, the high court said that harm from a discriminatory employment action “need not be significant” to violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII).
So, in Bilyeu, the appeals court decided the lower court should, based on Muldreow, consider whether the unpaid leave caused some (even insignificant) harm to the employee’s terms or conditions of employment because of religion. If it did cause harm, it would be considered religious discrimination under Title VII.
Examples of harm that might be caused by putting an employee on unpaid leave could include:
- Reduced income,
- Interruptions to ongoing projects, and
- Reduced connections with coworkers.
A lesson for employers
While the outcome in this case remains unknown, there is a lesson here. Employers should use caution when suggesting unpaid leave as an accommodation.
When an employee truly cannot work, using unpaid leave can be a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. However, it’s likely not a reasonable accommodation in a religious accommodation situation. In fact, unpaid leave could be viewed as an adverse employment action in a religious accommodation case.
If, for example, an employee asks to switch shifts in order to have Saturdays off to observe the Sabbath, but is instead told to take Saturdays off without pay, that might appear to a court to be an “adverse employment action” because the employee is able to work on other days.
Another example is if a manager sends an employee home without pay because the employee refuses to attend a company-sponsored prayer breakfast that conflicts with the employee’s beliefs, the employee might have grounds for a religious accommodation claim.
When an employee requests an accommodation based on religious beliefs, don’t go to “unpaid time off” as the answer, but rather look for ways for the person to “work differently,” whether that means a different shift or a different activity than the one they object to.
Key to remember: Sending an employee home without pay might cause harm to the employee and should not be the go-to response to a religious accommodation request.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2025-11-05T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHazard ClassificationsSafety & HealthGeneral Industry SafetyIn-Depth ArticleHazard CommunicationEnglishFocus AreaUSA
Classifying and authoring: Basics of HazCom SDS creation
Does your company manufacture, process, formulate, blend, extract, generate, emit, repackage, or import hazardous chemicals? If so, you have to classify the chemical hazards (unless exempted at 1910.1200(b)(6)) and share that information with downstream users. It’s part of OSHA’s Hazard Communication (HazCom) standard at 29 CFR 1910.1200. Hazard classification provides the basis for the information offered in safety data sheets (SDSs).
Distributors and employers also may choose to conduct hazard classifications if they’re concerned about the adequacy of the hazard information received on SDSs for the chemicals they distribute or use.
Hazard classes and categories
OSHA uses the “hazard class” and “hazard category” approach to break down the hazardous effects of chemicals into levels of severity:
- Hazard class — The nature of the physical or health hazards, e.g., flammable solid, carcinogen, oral acute toxicity. Most hazard classes are further sub-divided into categories of hazard. Each hazard or endpoint, such as explosives or carcinogenicity, is a hazard class.
- Hazard category— The division of criteria within each hazard class that compares hazard severity within a hazard class. The lower the category number, the higher the severity within that class (for example, a Category 1 flammable gas is more flammable than a Category 2). There can be up to five categories.
OSHA also added two “defined hazards” into the HazCom standard to address known hazards with no corresponding classification — simple asphyxiants and combustible dusts.
When a chemical has a hazard that doesn’t meet the specified criteria for physical and health hazard classes addressed in Appendices A and B, it’s considered a “hazard not otherwise classified” (HNOC).
Hazard classification
Testing chemicals is not required under HazCom, but a manufacturer or importer may certainly do so. According to OSHA, classification means to:
- Identify the relevant data regarding the hazards of a chemical;
- Review those data to ascertain the hazards associated with the chemical; and
- Decide whether the chemical will be classified as hazardous according to the definition of hazardous chemical at 1910.1200(c), any chemical which is classified as a physical hazard or a health hazard, a simple asphyxiant, combustible dust, or HNOC.
In addition, classification for health and physical hazards includes figuring out the degree of hazard, where appropriate. This involves comparing the data with the criteria for health and physical hazards at Appendix A and B to 1910.1200.
Putting hazard classification into steps, it might go something like this:
- Identify the non-exempted chemical to review.
- Collect studies, reports, and other data about the chemical.
- Review the relevant data to determine the hazards associated with the chemical.
- Determine whether the chemical meets the definition of “hazardous chemical.”
- If it’s not a hazardous chemical by definition, then no further action is required. However, some chemical manufacturers and importers choose to create SDSs and state in Section 2 that the chemical doesn’t meet the definition of “hazardous chemical” in 1910.1200.
- Determine the degree of the hazard, where appropriate, by comparing the data with the criteria for health hazards (Appendix A) and physical hazards (Appendix B).
All of the chemical hazards must be assessed, and the classifier must consider the potential exposures that may occur when the product will be used downstream.
Refer to 1910.1200(d) for OSHA’s classification requirements.
Authoring the SDS
Chemical manufacturers and importers must obtain or develop an SDS for each hazardous chemical they produce or import that is not exempted at 1910.1200(b)(6). A required data sheet must include at least the section numbers and headings and associated information under each heading, in the order listed at 1910.1200(g)(2).
Appendix D to 1910.1200 outlines the mandatory minimum information required on the SDS. While each section of the SDS must contain all of the specified information, preparers of SDSs are not required to present the information in any particular order within each section. If no relevant information is found for any given subheading within a section, the SDS must clearly indicate that no applicable information is available. Note that sections 12 to 15 may be included in the SDS but are not mandatory.
The chemical manufacturer or importer preparing the SDS must ensure that the information provided accurately reflects the scientific evidence used in making the hazard classification. If the preparer later becomes aware of any significant information, or ways to protect against the hazards, this new information must be added to the SDS within three months.
Any party who changes the SDS (for example, changing the name or identity of the chemical) becomes responsible for it under 1910.1200(g) regardless of whether it’s a chemical manufacturer, importer, distributor, or employer.
Key to remember: Chemical manufacturers and importers must classify the hazards of the non-exempt chemicals they produce or import. These hazards must be shared with downstream users of the chemical through SDSs.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-11-05T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHazmat SafetyHazmat TrainingHazmat trainingIn-Depth ArticleFocus AreaEnglishTransportationUSA
You might be a hazmat employee and not even know it
If you think “hazmat employee” only refers to someone in a hazmat suit handling drums of chemicals, think again. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) casts a much wider net, one that includes warehouse workers, packaging designers, truck drivers, and even administrative staff who prepare shipping papers. If your job affects any part of the hazardous materials transportation process, you might be a hazmat employee without even realizing it.
Understanding who qualifies as a hazmat employee isn’t just a matter of semantics; it’s a matter of safety and compliance. Let’s break down what PHMSA means by “hazmat employee,” and why it matters.
Official definition
Under 49 CFR 171.8, a hazmat employee is defined as a person who is:
- Employed on a full-time, part-time, or temporary basis by a hazmat employer and who, in the course of such employment, directly affects hazardous materials transportation safety;
- Self-employed (including an owner-operator of a motor vehicle, vessel, or aircraft) transporting hazardous materials in commerce;
- A railroad signalman; or
- A railroad maintenance-of-way employee.
This term includes individuals who:
- Load, unload, or handle hazardous materials;
- Design, manufacture, inspect, mark, maintain, recondition, repair, or test packaging used for hazardous materials;
- Prepare hazardous materials for transportation;
- Are responsible for the safety of transporting hazardous materials;
- Operate vehicles used to transport hazardous materials.
Basically, if your job directly affects how hazardous materials are packaged, labeled, documented, or transported, you’re likely considered a hazmat employee under PHMSA’s eyes.
Why does it matter
Being classified as a hazmat employee comes with specific responsibilities and legal requirements. PHMSA requires that all hazmat employees receive training to ensure they can safely and effectively perform their duties. This training helps prevent accidents, protect public health, and ensure compliance with federal regulations.
Real-world examples
Let’s say you work in a warehouse and occasionally load pallets of paint onto trucks. Even if you don’t drive the truck or prepare shipping papers, your role affects hazmat transportation safety. You’re a hazmat employee. Here’s another example, maybe you’re a packaging engineer who designs containers for corrosive materials. Even if you never touch the product, your work directly impacts how safely it travels. Again, you would be considered a hazmat employee.
Key to remember: PHMSA’s definition of a hazmat employee is intentionally broad to ensure that everyone involved in the hazmat transportation chain is properly trained and prepared. If your job touches hazmat in any way, it’s worth checking whether you fall under this definition and making sure your training is up to date.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-11-05T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsEnglishAssociate Benefits & CompensationHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)LeaveFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Associate RelationsLeaveHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Employer that fired employee a day before returning to work loses bid to have case dismissed
In September, Yexy told Daniel, her supervisor, that she was pregnant. She told the company's HR department on October 10 saying she would need to take maternity leave, under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), in the spring.
In January, Yexy talked with Daniel and Melissa from HR about her leave and subsequent return to work. Melissa gave Yexy the required paperwork, which Yexy returned in mid-March, requesting leave from May 18 to August 10. The employer approved her leave.
During the leave, the employer divided Yexy’s tasks among other employees.
Around the end of July, Yexy reached out to Melissa to discuss her return to work on August 10. On August 9, however, Yexy received a termination letter, saying her role had been dissolved. Yexy sued, claiming that the employer interfered with her right to be reinstated following her protected leave. In court, Yexy said that the company hadn’t decided to terminate her before she began her maternity leave, and that she was fired for taking leave. She pointed to the termination letter, which said that her job was reviewed while she was on leave and not before, and the company determined that other employees were able to perform Yexy’s tasks in addition to their own regular duties.
Yexy also pointed to the FMLA regulations, which say that when employees return from FMLA leave, they’re supposed to be returned to their job, even if their position was restructured to accommodate their absence (825.214).
The employer countered that, at the time it first learned of Yexy’s pregnancy, it had already decided that, unless work picked up, her job would likely be eliminated due to a work shortage. Yexy’s right to reinstatement wasn’t absolute, and she had no greater right to reinstatement than if she hadn’t taken leave. Her employer argued that the business downturn caused her job to be eliminated.
Yexy countered that the company wouldn’t have terminated her if she hadn’t taken leave; that if she hadn’t been out on leave, the company wouldn’t have determined that other employees could manage her responsibilities. The court held that there were too many issues that needed to be resolved by a jury, so the employer lost its bid to have the case closed. Part of the issue had to do with the timing of events and the contents of the termination letter.
Clear evidence of a downturn in the business and a scheduled layoff could provide a lawful reason not to bring an employee back after FMLA leave. Yexy, however, raised key issues that could lead a jury to conclude that her being on leave contributed to the decision not to reinstate her.
Key to remember: Terminating employees while on FMLA leave often comes with risks. Employers need to look at the whole picture and ensure that they clearly communicate their intentions early.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-10-22T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSafety and Health Programs and TrainingSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetySafety and Health Programs and TrainingIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
Survey Says: Recent study shows what employees really think about workplace safety
A new study is shining a light on how employees really feel about safety at work — and the results might surprise some employers. While most workers say they feel generally safe on the job, many also admit they don’t always feel comfortable speaking up when something seems off.
The findings highlight that workplace safety isn’t just about compliance and checklists anymore — it’s about culture, communication, and trust.
The survey findings
The 2025 Small Business Employee Voice on Workplace Safety Report from Pie Insurance revealed a mix of confidence and concern among employees. Most respondents said their workplaces look safe on paper — there are rules, equipment, and training — but not everyone feels those safety measures translate into day-to-day action.
The survey polled over 1,000 employees from small businesses across a variety of industries that employ between 2-500 employees.
Here are some of the key takeaways from the survey:
- Employees notice leadership’s actions. Many workers said management talks about safety, but they want to see leaders walk the floor, take interest, and follow through when concerns come up.
- Speaking up feels risky. A noticeable number of employees said they hesitate to raise safety concerns because they don’t want to be seen as complainers or cause tension.
- Mental health matters too. Beyond physical hazards, people want to feel respected, heard, and supported when something doesn’t feel right.
- Workload plays a big role. Even with the right gear and training, employees say safety slips when they are short-handed or when deadlines push people to rush.
- Safety equals morale. Workers who feel unsafe or ignored tend to be less engaged and more stressed.
Some additional findings from the survey include:
- 67% of employees currently have safety concerns
- 32% cite mental health as their #1 safety worry
- 36% report workplace stress impacts their personal life
- 58% have witnessed workplace injuries in the past year
- 28% have never received formal workplace safety training
What employers can do
For employers, this study sends a clear message: safety isn’t just a compliance issue — it’s a culture issue. Here’s how companies can turn these insights into action:
- Lead by example. Employees notice when managers stop to check on a concern or thank someone for reporting an issue. Those moments build trust.
- Make it easy to speak up. Create open channels where workers can share feedback without fear of being brushed off. Reward honesty, not silence.
- Bring safety to life every day. Reinforce safety values through small, consistent actions that show employees you mean it. This builds trust and respect.
- Follow up and close the loop. When employees report something, tell them what’s being done about it. Even small updates show their voices matter.
- Prioritize safety even among pressures and deadlines. Make sure teams have enough time and resources to do the job right. A rushed worker is always at risk.
Why it matters
At the end of the day, remember that safety is personal. Employees want to know their company genuinely cares about their wellbeing — not just about meeting OSHA requirements. When workers feel protected and heard, they show up with more focus, more pride, and more energy.
Workplace safety isn’t just about avoiding accidents; it’s about building a culture where everyone feels valued. And according to this study, that’s what employees really want.
Key to remember: Visit Pie Insurance to review the full report on how employees truly feel about workplace safety and whether or not they believe their voice matters.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-10-23T05:00:00Z
NewsEmergency Planning - OSHAIndustry NewsSafety & HealthWeather and Natural DisastersConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
When thunder roars, go indoors!
During the past 30 years, about 50 people, on average, have been killed by lightning strikes every year, and many more suffer permanent disabilities. For construction crews, landscapers, utility workers, and delivery drivers, to name a few, lightning is not just a weather event. It is a serious and life-threatening occupational hazard.
Understanding the risk
Employers, supervisors, and workers should understand lightning risk and precautions to minimize hazards. Lightning is highly unpredictable and can even strike outside the heaviest rainfall areas, up to 10 miles from any rainfall.
While OSHA does not have a specific lightning standard, employers are required under the General Duty Clause (Section 5(a)(1)) to provide a workplace free from recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious harm. Lightning clearly qualifies.
Best practices
A proactive lightning safety plan can be a lifesaver. Consider adding the following to any safety plan:
- Check weather alerts and reports - Before beginning any work outdoors, employers or supervisors should always check weather reports and plan accordingly. Most weather apps are now programmed to send weather and lightning alerts, making it much easier to stay up to date.
- Seek shelter in buildings - When hearing thunder or lightning, employers and supervisors should know and tell workers which buildings to go to after an alert. Seek out fully enclosed buildings and remain in the shelter for at least 30 minutes after hearing the last sound or thunder. Employers should guide workers to hard-topped metal vehicles with rolled-up windows if safe building structures are inaccessible.
- Emergency action plan - Employers should have a written Emergency Action Plan (EAP), as outlined in 29 CFR 1910.38 or 29 CFR 1926.35. The EAP should include a written lightning safety protocol for outdoor workers and should:
- Inform supervisors of actions and expectations when receiving an alert.
- Explain how workers will be notified.
- Identify locations and requirements for shelter in place.
- Determine a plan for when outdoor work should be suspended or resumed.
- Account for the amount of time required to evacuate customers or visitors.
- Post this information at all outdoor work-sites.
- Lightning safety training - Training should be provided for each outdoor worksite so that supervisors and workers know in advance where the worksite’s safe shelters are and how long it takes to reach them. Employers should train supervisors and workers to provide lightning safety warnings in sufficient time for everyone to reach a worksite’s safe shelters and take other appropriate precautions.
- Lightning warning systems - Any emergency action plan should include lightning warning or detection systems, which can provide warning. However, no system can detect the first strike, all lightning strikes, or predict future strikes. Because of this, lightning warning systems should not be a replacement for weather alerts or apps but should be used as an additional tool.
If caught in a thunderstorm
If you find yourself caught outside during a thunderstorm, there may be nothing you can do to prevent being struck by lightning. There is no safe place outside in a thunderstorm. Because of this, it is critical to get to a safe place at the first sight of a thunderstorm. If you are stuck outside, follow these recommendations to prevent being struck:
- Lightning is most likely to strike the tallest object, so you should go to a place where you would not be the tallest. However, you must avoid isolated tall trees, utility poles, and large equipment. Instead, retreat to dense areas of smaller trees surrounded by taller trees or low-lying areas such as valleys or ditches.
- Avoid water and bodies of water. Most people assume water attracts lightning, but it is an excellent conductor of electricity.
- Do not shelter in sheds, pavilions, or covered porches.
Keys to remember: Incorporate a lightning safety policy into your written safety program, assign responsibilities, and rehearse responses like any other emergency plan.
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.