New York workplace violence law protects retail workers

CPL rewritten for the 2024 standard

On May 19, 2026, OSHA posted a revised CPL 02-02-079, “Inspection Procedures for the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS 2024),” replacing the July 9, 2015, version. The 132-page document reflects the reconfigured HazCom standard published May 20, 2024, effective on July 19, 2024, along with corrections issued through early 2026.

The agency designed this enforcement playbook to maintain uniform inspections during the transition period and after full implementation. Because of the extensive regulatory changes to definitions, hazard classification, labeling, safety data sheets, and trade secrets, the CPL is not a light refresh.

For those familiar with the rulemaking, the new CPL edits will not be surprising. Still, the directive should provide more clarity than the regulatory text.

Front matter and appendices

Updates to Sections I to IX are typical of a CPL, including:

• Cancellation of the 2015 CPL;
• A modified title and references to the 2024 final rule and corrections;
• Alignment with revisions 7 and 8 of the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS); and
• A new summary of changes, historical background, and compliance dates.

OSHA also modernized appendices for dates, hazard lists, pictogram hazards, SDS review guidance, chemical resources, and related directives.

Reworked inspection guidelines

Section X outlines inspector instructions for paragraphs (b) through (j) of the standard. The latest modifications impact most sections:

• Scope, applicability, and exemptions — The directive offers new examples and expanded explanations, such as:
  • A formaldehyde hazard example for hair smoothing products;
  • An overview of pesticide labeling requirements and exemptions;
  • Discussion of the EPA Agricultural Worker Protection standard preemption; and
  • Greater detail about biological hazards from plants.
• Definitions — The document introduces terms and explains bulk shipment, immediate outer package, physical hazard, released for shipment, and more. It also revisits the terms combustible dust and manufacturer. Lithium-ion batteries are now referenced in the distributor context.
• Hazard classification — The directive instructs OSHA officers to consider the classification of:
  • Hazards associated with a chemical’s intrinsic properties, including changes in physical form and reactions from known or reasonably anticipated uses; and
  • Impurities, additives, and individual constituents.
• Written plan — The directive clarifies:
  • Employers must revise programs by the compliance dates when new information is received from suppliers;
  • The use of computers and third-party administrators of safety data sheets (SDSs); and
  • The written program must describe how employees will be trained in a language and at a literacy level they understand.
• Labeling — The directive broadens the sections on Department of Transportation labeling, bulk shipments, and small container labeling. It incorporates final rule flexibility too:
  • Phased-in compliance dates for labeling;
  • Hazards not otherwise classified (HNOCs) and hazards identified and classified under 1910.1200(d)(1)(ii) don’t need to be addressed on the container;
  • The exclamation mark pictogram is permitted (but not required) for HNOCs, under certain conditions;
  • Minor textual variations for precautionary statements are allowed; and
  • OSHA offers alternatives for chemical containers released for shipment.
• Safety data sheets (SDSs) — Amended text focuses on U.S. jurisdiction and technical provisions, such as:
  • Phased-in compliance dates for SDSs;
  • Importer SDS responsibilities;
  • Using a U.S. address and phone number;
  • The hazard class and category reflecting intrinsic properties;
  • Required Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number or other unique identifiers; and
  • No need to obtain updated SDSs to replace already received SDSs.
• Employee information/training — The directive references a temporary workers bulletin. It also emphasizes:
  • Phased-in compliance dates for necessary training adjustments; and
  • Delivering training in a language employees understand.
• Trade secrets — The instruction aligns with the 2024 rule:
  • Allows the exact percentage, exact concentration range, or CAS number to be withheld if certain criteria are met; and
  • Addresses the use of confidentiality agreements.
• Dates — The directive overhauls compliance timelines and discusses documentation of due diligence and good faith efforts.

In addition, the directive softens citation language with phrases like “should normally cite” instead of “shall cite.” This shift suggests inspectors may have greater discretion based on case-specific circumstances.

Key to remember

While 1910.1200 remains the baseline for employers and chemical manufacturers, importers, and distributors, the revised CPL 02-02-079 provides an enforcement lens. With implementation underway, regulated entities can use the CPL to steer their efforts and conform with how OSHA will inspect them in the field.

Shared chemistry, different lenses

Both programs start with the same substances, such as solvents, metals, acids, and combustion byproducts. IH focuses on what workers breathe in the workplace. It uses exposure limits such as OSHA permissible exposure limits or more protective guidelines from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). Environmental air programs focus on what leaves the property. They regulate criteria pollutants, hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), and toxics using emission limits, control requirements, and reporting rules.

The data tools look similar. IH uses personal and area sampling, direct-reading instruments, and task-based assessments. Environmental programs use emission factors, mass balance, continuous monitoring, and periodic stack testing. Both require documentation, quality control, and records.

Key differences that matter

The point of exposure is the biggest difference. IH evaluates the breathing zone of a worker during a task or shift. Environmental programs measure emissions at a release point, such as a stack, or estimate them across the site.

The time frame also differs. IH often looks at short-term peaks and full-shift averages to protect health during work. Air permits may set hourly, daily, or annual limits, and they may cap total emissions per year. Control strategies follow these goals. IH may rely on local exhaust ventilation, enclosure, or work practice changes. Air permits may require add-on controls such as thermal oxidizers, scrubbers, or filters.

Practical crossover: Using IH to inform permitting

IH data can reveal which tasks generate the highest concentrations and which compounds dominate exposure. That insight can refine emission estimates. For example, if wipe cleaning with a solvent produces the highest worker exposure, the same solvent may drive facility-wide volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. The environmental team can use that knowledge to prioritize accurate emission factors, refine mass balance, or plan stack testing during peak operations.

IH data also helps define realistic operating scenarios for compliance testing. Stack tests that occur only at typical loads may miss worst-case conditions. Pairing test timing with identified peak tasks can provide a more representative test and reduce the risk of later noncompliance.

Practical crossover: Using permits to inform IH

Air permits define regulated compounds, control devices, and operating limits. These details can guide IH planning. If a permit lists specific HAPs or requires a control device for a process, there's a clear signal that exposure to those compounds is possible near the source. IH can target those areas for baseline sampling, validate control performance, and confirm that capture systems are effective where workers are present.

Permit conditions also flag upset and startup modes. These periods can increase emissions. IH can align monitoring during these windows to assess short-term exposures and ensure that work practices and protective measures are adequate.

Aligning controls for dual benefit

Engineering controls can serve both goals when designed as a system. Capture at the source reduces worker exposure and lowers emissions to the stack. Good enclosure and balanced ventilation improve control efficiency and reduce fugitive releases. Preventive maintenance on control devices supports permit limits and keeps workplace air clean.

Administrative controls can align as well. Standard operating procedures can link production rates, control device settings, and ventilation checks. Change management should include both an IH review and an air permitting check to see if a modification triggers a permit update.

Communication and workflows

Successful crossover depends on routine communication. Regular meetings enable safety and environmental staff to share results, plan sampling, and coordinate testing windows. Shared inventories of chemicals and processes reduce duplication and errors. A common data platform, or at least a consistent file structure, makes it easier to compare IH results with emission estimates and permit limits.

Clear triggers help teams act. Examples include a new chemical introduction, a process change, a spike in IH results, or a deviation in control device performance. Each trigger should prompt both an IH review and an environmental compliance check.

Key to remember: When teams connect their data and plans, they gain a clearer picture of risk. The results are stronger compliance, better worker protection, and more efficient operations.

What’s changing and why it matters

Although EPA has been deregulating or loosening some requirements, there are still some standards being tightened across multiple fronts in the coming year:

• Renewable fuel standards (RFS): The EPA proposed higher volume requirements for 2026, including 24.02 billion renewable identification numbers (RINs), up nearly 8% from 2025. This increase pushes stricter expectations on fuel producers and organizations purchasing renewable fuels.
• Stormwater multi-sector general permit (MSGP): A new MSGP set to take effect by February 2026 will require quarterly PFAS indicator monitoring, expanded benchmark sampling, and resiliency measures in stormwater control designs.
• PFAS Reporting under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA): TSCA Section 8(a)(7) mandates PFAS manufacturing and import data collection beginning in April 2026, through October 2026, with extended deadlines for certain small manufacturers.

Failure to prepare could lead to fines, reputational damage, supply chain disruptions, and permit delays. Companies that weave compliance planning into their 2026 strategy will be positioned not just to meet legal deadlines but to sustain operations smoothly.

Key areas of impact

• Renewable fuel standards (RFS) and air emissions The proposed increase in 2026 Renewable Identification Numbers (RIN) volumes, from 24.02 billion to 24.46 billion for 2027, signals tightening air and fuels policy that affects fuel use and emissions accounting.
• Stormwater management The upcoming 2026 MSGP requires expanded quarterly PFAS monitoring, new benchmark triggers, corrective action plans, and integration of climate resilience in design standards.
• PFAS disclosure (TSCA Section 8(a)(7)) Manufacturers and importers of PFAS must submit electronic reporting of usage, volumes, disposal, and exposure data between April and October 2026, with extensions available for smaller operations.

Steps to take now

• Audit compliance programs: Cross-check operations against RIN inventory, stormwater permits, and TSCA reporting duties.
• Upgrade monitoring and recordkeeping: Implement robust electronic systems to track PFAS, stormwater quality, fuel volumes, and emissions.
• Staff training: Educate teams on PFAS obligations, new stormwater protocols, and RFS structures.
• Engage regulators early: Comment on proposed rules, consult during permit drafting, and flag issues during the notice-and-comment period.

Looking ahead

The EPA’s 2026 updates reflect a trend toward increased transparency and environmental accountability. Companies that treat compliance as strategic will not only avoid enforcement but also gain resilience and stakeholder trust.

Key to remember: Start planning now. Early action on EPA rule changes will save time, money, and headaches when enforcement begins.

What are the preconstruction permit requirements?

Under the New Source Review (NSR) regulations (40 CFR Part 51 Subpart I and Part 52 Subpart A), businesses that build a new facility or make major modifications to an existing one have to obtain a preconstruction permit to “begin actual construction.” EPA defines “begin actual construction” as “physical on-site construction activities on an emissions unit which are of a permanent nature.” It covers activities including (but not limited to) installing building supports and foundations, laying underground pipework, and constructing permanent storage structures.

There are three types of preconstruction permits: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits, nonattainment NSR permits, and minor source permits. The permits define:

• What construction is allowed,
• Emissions limits, and
• How the source must be operated (if applicable).

It’s important to note that most preconstruction permits are issued at the state or local levels. The requirements must be at least as stringent as EPA’s.

What’s the case?

A county air quality district in Arizona asked EPA to assess whether it may allow a company to start the first phase of construction on a semiconductor manufacturing facility before obtaining an NSR permit if no emissions units are involved.

EPA answered the request with TSMC Arizona Begin Actual Construction — EPA Response Letter (September 2, 2025) and published the letter as new guidance.

Facts of the case

The company builds its facilities in three phases and doesn’t install the semiconductor manufacturing equipment until all phases are complete.

The first phase of construction consists of building the core and shell of the facility, which includes the foundation, a steel superstructure, and external walls. The building will eventually house emissions units (semiconductor manufacturing equipment). However, the company stated that the first phase of construction doesn’t involve any air pollution control devices, emissions units, or foundations for emissions units.

The county air quality district agreed that if a structure contains no emissions unit, it’s not subject to NSR permitting because it doesn’t emit or have the potential to emit pollutants.

EPA response to the case

In the September 2025 response letter, EPA recognized that the definition of “begin actual construction” prohibits on-site construction of an emissions unit without a permit, but it doesn’t prohibit on-site construction of the parts of a facility that don’t qualify as an emissions unit.

The agency determined that the county air quality district may allow the company to start the first phase of construction (even if it’s of a permanent nature) before it obtains an NSR permit as long as it doesn’t involve construction on an emissions unit.

What are EPA’s regulatory plans?

The agency will conduct rulemaking to clarify what construction activities need an NSR permit and what construction activities can proceed without one. It plans to amend the NSR regulations in 2026 by:

• Revising the definition of “begin actual construction," and
• Establishing how permitting authorities may distinguish parts of a facility that are and aren’t emissions units or parts of emissions units.

Until then, EPA will address preconstruction permitting issues on a case-by-case basis.

How should facilities respond?

If you’re planning to build a new facility or make a major modification to one, consider these tips to help you comply with the NSR regulations:

• Check whether the state and local requirements are the same as or stricter than federal rules. The state environmental department’s website is a good place to start.
• Contact the permit-issuing agency (likely the state or local air pollution control agency) for direct help with your specific project.
• Watch EPA news announcements for updates on rulemaking. You can also track the Federal Register, where the agency publishes proposed and final rules.

Key to remember: EPA plans to conduct rulemaking to help distinguish which construction activities need a preconstruction permit for air emissions and which activities don’t.

Start with written policies that define the trainers’ roles and goals

Every trainer should operate from a clear policy that outlines expectations. This includes the trainer’s responsibility to model compliant behavior, document progress, and coach drivers. Goals should be specific and measurable, such as ensuring learners demonstrate proficiency in pre-trip inspections, hours-of-service (HOS) compliance, backing maneuvers, and defensive driving techniques. When trainer expectations are written and standardized, the carrier reduces inconsistency and ensures every learner receives the same level of instruction.

Build written program guidelines that define how training is delivered

A strong program includes documented procedures for each phase of training. This should cover classroom instruction, yard skills, and on-road driving. Guidelines should define required skills demonstrations, and the sequence in which training occurs. They should also clearly distinguish between observation, supervised practice, and independent performance. This structure ensures that training is not rushed and that drivers build skills progressively rather than being pushed through to fill seats.

Establish clear written criteria for driver certification

Certification should not be based on time alone. It should require demonstrated competency. Written guidelines should define what a driver must do to be released, such as completing a compliant pre-trip inspection without assistance, maintaining lane control and proper following distance, executing safe backing maneuvers, and adhering to company policies. Documentation should support each certification decision, creating a record that the driver met objective standards.

Adapt training as hiring criteria evolve

As hiring standards shift, training must be adjusted accordingly. Less experienced drivers require more foundational instruction, longer training periods, and greater emphasis on basic vehicle control and compliance habits. Experienced hires may need shorter programs focused on company-specific policies and correcting bad habits. A training program will fail if it does not reflect the actual skill level of incoming drivers.

Measure results beyond program completion

Completing training does not equal success. Carriers need a system to evaluate whether training is effective in the real world. This includes tracking key performance indicators such as preventable accidents, roadside inspection violations, HOS compliance errors, and telematics data (speeding, hard braking, lane control). These metrics should be tied back to individual drivers and training to identify trends.

Define what “good” looks like and measure behavior in the field

Drivers need clear expectations. Define “good” in observable terms such as consistent mirror usage, proper following distance, smooth braking, accurate log entries, and thorough inspections. Follow-alongs or ride-alongs can then be used to verify these behaviors in real operating conditions. These evaluations should be structured with scorecards or checklists to ensure consistency and provide objective feedback.

Continuously improve trainers and the program itself

Trainer development is just as important as driver development. Trainer certifications should be reviewed and updated regularly, ensuring trainers stay current on regulations, company policies, and coaching techniques. Additionally, data gathered from driver performance should be fed back into the training program. If certain violations or risky behaviors appear repeatedly, the program should be updated to address those gaps directly.

Key to remember: With written standards, measurable outcomes, and continuous improvement, carriers can move beyond basic compliance and build a program that truly reduces risk and develops professional drivers.

1. Create a strong accident response and investigation

The first step after a crash is getting the right information — fast. After a crash, safety comes first, followed immediately by collecting accurate, unbiased data. Engage legal counsel immediately if the crash severity indicates potential litigation.

Capture photos, vehicle positions, roadway conditions, and witness statements while details are fresh. Preserve electronic data like dash cam footage, electronic logging device (ELD) records, and telematics immediately.

Also, ensure someone qualified gathers scene data—whether that’s the driver, a safety employee, or preferably an insurance adjuster or accident reconstructionist. Without timely evidence, later investigation becomes guesswork.

2. Build a complete evidence file

A defendable carrier backs up its position with documentation. Also, examining all evidence provides a complete picture of potential liability, even if the facts show carrier or driver actions or inaction contributed to the crash.

After the crash, gather:

• Police and inspection reports,
• Dash cam footage from the carrier’s vehicle and other vehicles,
• Traffic or other structure camera footage,
• Driver logs and communication records,
• Maintenance and inspection records,
• Electronic control module data, and
• DOT drug/alcohol test results.

Just as important as collecting the data is protecting it. Maintain secure storage and a clear chain of custody to avoid questions about data integrity. As appropriate, place items like a driver’s cell phone under attorney-client privilege.

3. Focus on avoiding crashes and unsafe or illegal behavior

As an ongoing part of the safety program, reduce unsafe or illegal driver behavior through proactive coaching, retraining, or discipline. At the same time, evaluate company policies, procedures, and operational pressures that may contribute to crashes or unsafe behavior. Make appropriate adjustments to enhance safety management controls.

Consistency in following a progressive discipline and training policies is critical. If a policy says a violation leads to termination, failing to follow through can create major retention risk. Document decisions and follow the established processes. Exceptions to policies weakens a carrier’s defense.

Use data from dash cams and telematics to identify high-risk behaviors like speeding, distraction/cell phone use, lack of seat belt use, or following too closely. Focus coaching on illegal behavior or those most likely to result in crashes or injuries.

Equally important—balance correction with recognition. Reinforcing positive behavior builds driver buy-in and strengthens a carrier's safety culture.

4. Establish clear policies and enforce them

Policies are where you define expectations and prove your commitment to safety.

Strong policies should:

• Define acceptable and unacceptable behaviors,
• Outline training and corrective action processes,
• Ensure consistent enforcement with minimal exceptions, and
• Address privacy and data use (especially with cameras).

Regularly review, update, and document all policy changes and training.

5. Ensure leadership support

A defendable carrier starts with the top leadership who must prioritize safety over productivity and support it with resources, technology, and accountability.

Every department’s leadership—not just the safety director—must share responsibility for safe operations.

Keys to remember: A defendable carrier isn’t defined by whether accidents happen, but by how the company prepares, responds, and improves. Strong processes to collect evidence and demonstrate consistent actions to avoid crashes make all the difference.

Using the wrong placard or using it at the wrong time

One of the most common mistakes I see is using a placard that doesn’t match the material being transported. This usually happens when someone relies on memory instead of verifying the hazard class, or when subsidiary risks get overlooked. Even experienced employees fall into this habit when things start moving too fast.

I also see situations where the placard is technically correct but used at the wrong time. A placard might be left on from a previous load or put on in anticipation of a future shipment. Placards aren’t general warnings. They need to reflect exactly what’s in the vehicle at that moment.

Failing to remove placards

Another issue I run into a lot is failing to remove placards when the hazard is no longer present. This tends to happen when equipment is reused frequently or when operations are trying to keep things moving. It may seem like a small detail, but it creates real risk.

If a placard is displayed, responders are going to assume the hazard is there. That can impact how they respond in an emergency and lead to unnecessary precautions. From a compliance perspective, displaying a placard that doesn’t match the contents of the vehicle is a violation and usually draws unwanted attention during inspections.

Misunderstanding when placards are required

Placarding decisions aren’t always straightforward, especially when packaging types and quantities vary. I usually see teams assume that placards are always required any time hazmat is present. That approach can lead to over-placarding and send the wrong message.

On the other side, I also see required placards get missed because quantities aren’t evaluated correctly. Smaller packages can still trigger placarding when they’re combined. Taking a few extra minutes to verify packaging type and total quantity can make all the difference.

Placement and visibility issues

Even when the right placards are selected, they’re not always displayed properly. Placards need to be clearly visible and in good condition, but this is something I see get overlooked in day-to-day operations. Dirt, damage, and equipment can all block or reduce visibility.

If a placard can’t be easily seen, it’s not doing its job. I always recommend building placement and condition checks into routine inspections, not just focusing on whether the correct placard was chosen. This becomes even more important in environments where equipment sees heavy use.

What this means in the real world

When I look at placarding overall, I don’t see it as just a basic requirement. It’s a real-time communication tool that people rely on to make decisions. Every incorrect, missing, or unnecessary placard sends the wrong message and increases risk.

The good news is that most of these mistakes are preventable. Clear procedures, consistent training, and routine checks go a long way. When teams start treating placarding as an active part of hazard communication instead of just another requirement, I see better decisions and fewer mistakes.

Three key questions

Below are three questions and the answers to which can help avoid citations and out-of-service orders relating to vision requirements.

1. What must a driver do after vision surgery if they no longer require corrective lenses?

Answer: The driver must:

• Take a vision test at the motor vehicle department to have the corrective lenses restriction removed from their license, and
• Contact a certified medical examiner (CME) from the National Registry for an exam to remove the corrective lenses requirement from their medical certification.

The driver may also need to undergo an eye exam from an optometrist or ophthalmologist if requested by the CME.

2. If a medical certification says corrective lenses are required, but the license does not, or vice versa, is this a violation in a roadside inspection?

Answer: Yes. If the driver is not wearing corrective lenses, it is a medical qualification violation per Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Regulations (FMCSRs) §391.11(b)(4), and the driver must be placed out of service.

Alternatively, if the license says corrective lenses are required, and the driver is not wearing them, then the citation is written as a licensing violation (§391.11(b)(5) or §383.21(a)(2)), and the driver must also be placed out of service.

3. Is the discrepancy a violation if the driver wears corrective lenses as specified by their medical certification but not on their license?

Answer: No. The violation only exists if the license or the medical certification requires corrective lenses and the driver is not wearing them.

Some states do not use the same criteria for requiring corrective lenses as are specified in the FMCSRs vision standard in §391.41(b)(10), so there's a difference it's not a violation. In many states, it is possible to have a license without the corrective lens restriction and not be able to pass the federal vision standard.

Drivers are usually licensed for more than five years. Vision can change during periods far longer than the maximum two-year medical certification.

Keep in mind, a medical qualification violation cannot be challenged in the FMCSA's DataQs system because "the driver didn't need corrective lenses anymore." Post-surgery, the medical certification, and license must reflect that no corrective lenses are needed, or the driver will face consequences.

Key to remember: Educate drivers on the requirement to update their license and medical certification after corrective vision surgery to keep them compliant.

Do exempt carriers need to have proof of insurance?

Carriers that haul exempt commodities are required to have the minimum level of financial responsibility required by 49 CFR 387, and their insurance provider must provide the carrier with an MCS-90 endorsement. However, the insurance need not be on file with the FMCSA. Many states have insurance requirements both for the amount required and the need to carry proof of coverage in the vehicle. Federally exempt for-hire carriers are not exempted from any state requirement.

Are exempt for-hire carriers required to name process agents?

Currently, exempt-for hire carriers are not required to name process agents for each state of operation as other for-hire carriers are required to do so on the BOC-3 form. That may change when the FMCSA fully implements their Unified Registration System, or URS. The system was introduced with a final rule in the summer of 2013 and included a provision requiring exempt carriers to have process agents. Much of the rule was suspended at the beginning of 2017. At some point, the agency would like to get the URS ball rolling again.

Are exempt carriers exempt from IFTA, IRP, HVUT, and UCR?

Exempt for-hire carriers are not exempt from the alphabet soup of revenue generating programs of the International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA) allowing for the sharing of fuel tax revenue, the International Registration Plan (IRP) allowing for the sharing of vehicle registration fees, the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) tax for heavy vehicles that weight 55,000 pounds or more, or for the Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) revenue generating program.

Are exempt carriers exempt from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs)?

Exempt carriers are not automatically exempt from the safety regulations such as driver qualifications, drug and alcohol testing, commercial driver licenses, vehicle inspections, or the hours-of-service rules. Although livestock and agriculture commodity carriers may qualify for the hours-of-service agriculture exemption.

Key to remember: “Exempt” commodity haulers are exempt from very little. Primarily they are exempt from needing for-hire authority and designating process agents.

How employers should respond

• Give employees more benefit flexibility. Employers looking to increase retention should move benefit flexibility to the top of their “to-do” list. When employees have choices, they’re more likely to stay at a company. The survey showed that 80 percent of surveyed employees feel that wellness flexibility would mean they’d be more likely to stay.
• Communicate often about benefits. To encourage employees to make use of company benefits before seeking help on their own, employers must keep benefit messaging in the forefront of employees’ minds. This could be done by sending out regular emails, posting information on the company’s intranet, sending text alerts, etc. Top-of-mind awareness is key!
• Roll with the changes. Employees’ lives are in a constant state of flux, and benefit options need to keep up with that pace to support them no matter what they’re juggling in their personal lives.
• Think beyond open enrollment. The survey revealed that only 7 percent of employees said that the open enrollment period made them think about using their benefits. They’re much more likely to think about what benefits they have when they’re at a doctor’s appointment, or an unexpected need pops up. If employers want their employees to engage with company-sponsored benefits, they should make tools easy to use and available when employees need them the most.

Key to remember: If navigating benefit options is too hard, employees are less likely to make use of their company-sponsored offerings, and might spend their own money on easier-to-use tools.

Potential future increases

The bill, The Restoring Overtime Pay Act of 2026 (HR 8868), would increase the federal minimum salary level as follows:

• 2026 — $45,000
• 2027 — $55,000
• 2028 — $65,000
• 2029 — $75,000
• 2030 — 55th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally*, updated annually

*The current 55th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally is $89,440 and could increase to $98,000 by 2030.

The measure would allow the Secretary of Labor to establish a higher salary threshold through notice and comment rulemaking, as long as it can be updated annually.

The bill would also require the following:

• The Secretary of Labor would need to provide annual, automatic updates to the overtime threshold of at least the 55th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers.
• If the Secretary doesn’t establish an increased salary threshold, the 55th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers nationally would take effect, based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) from the second quarter of the preceding calendar year.
• The Secretary would need to publish a notice announcing the revised salary threshold no later than 60 days before the revised threshold takes effect.
• The BLS would need to publicly publish data on its website for each week of each quarter and data on weekly earnings by census region.

The bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. While it has a small chance of being enacted at this time, it does show that some members of Congress are interested in this topic.

Key to remember: Congress members introduced a bill increasing the federal salary threshold level. But for now, employers can use the 2019 federal salary threshold to determine whether they may classify an employee as exempt.

FMLA certification basics

Employers aren’t required to use certifications, but if they do, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has five different certification forms to use for various FMLA leave situations.

The forms are as follows:

1. Certification of Health Care Provider for Employee's Serious Health Condition,
2. Certification of Health Care Provider for Family Member's Serious Health Condition,
3. Certification of Qualifying Exigency for Military Family Leave,
4. Certification for Serious Injury or Illness of a Current Servicemember for Military Family Leave, and
5. Certification for Serious Injury or Illness of a Veteran for Military Family Leave.

Let’s focus on the first two, as these are the most common ones HR administrators use.

Who can fill out an FMLA certification?

The FMLA regulations describe the person who has the authority to fill out a certification as a “health care provider.” The good news is, the regulations include a lengthy list of medical professionals who fit this role.

Under the FMLA, a health care provider includes:

• A doctor of medicine or osteopathy,
• A podiatrist,
• A dentist,
• A clinical psychologist,
• An optometrist,
• A chiropractor (limited to manual manipulation of the spine as demonstrated by X-ray),
• A nurse practitioner,
• A nurse midwife,
• A clinical social worker,
• A physician assistant,
• A Christian Science practitioner, and
• Any health care provider from whom the employer or the employer's group health plan's benefits manager will accept a medical certification to substantiate a claim for benefits.

To be qualified to fill out FMLA forms, medical professionals must be authorized to practice in the state and perform within the scope of their practice. This means that the provider must be authorized to diagnose and treat physical or mental health conditions.

What about doctors in a foreign country?

If an employee or an employee's family member is visiting another country, or a family member resides in another country, and a serious health condition develops, the employer must accept a medical certification from a health care provider who practices in that country. This includes second and third opinions.

If a medical certification from a foreign health care provider is not in English, the employee may be required to provide a written translation of the certification.

Key to remember: The FMLA regulations spell out which medical professionals can fill out certification forms.

Inpatient care explained

Inpatient care is an overnight stay in a health care facility. If the employee or family member had an overnight stay, it’s an FMLA serious health condition regardless of how many days of work the employee missed.

If the employee or family member did not have an overnight stay, employers move on to the continuing treatment part of the definition.

Continuing treatment defined

A serious health condition involving continuing treatment includes the following:

• A period of incapacity of more than three, consecutive, full calendar days, and any subsequent treatment that also involves:
  • Treatment two or more times within 30 days of the first day of incapacity by a health care provider, or
  • Treatment at least once, resulting in a regimen of continuing treatment.
• Any period of incapacity due to pregnancy or for prenatal care.
• Any period of incapacity (or treatment for) a chronic serious health condition requiring treatments at least twice per year and continuing over an extended period of time. These may cause episodic rather than continuing periods of incapacity.
• A period of incapacity for a permanent or long-term condition in which treatment may not be effective.
• Any period of absence to receive multiple treatments (i.e., chemotherapy, radiation, physical therapy, dialysis), for restorative surgery, or for a condition that would likely result in a period of incapacity of more than three consecutive, full, calendar days if treatment isn’t received.

Not all parts of the definition above will apply to a particular situation. The only part of the continuing treatment segment that involves three days, for example, falls under the first bullet. For all the other parts, any period of incapacity would be FMLA leave. An employee doesn’t need to miss three days of work.

Focus on incapacity not absence when applying FMLA leave

The period of more than three days applies to how long the individual is incapacitated, not how many days of work the employee missed. If, for example, an employee who normally works Monday through Friday suffers a serious health condition on Friday evening and is incapacitated until Wednesday, the period of incapacity is more than three days. The employee missed only two days of work, but those two days would be FMLA leave.

Failure to designate an absence as FMLA leave when it is called for risks a claim that the employer interfered with the employee’s FMLA rights.

Key to remember: Employees don’t have to miss three days of work to trigger an employer’s FMLA obligations.

Movement multiplies risk

Material handling means motion, equipment in travel lanes, loads shifting as they move, and workers crossing forklift paths. Every movement adds exposure, and it can escalate fast when tasks overlap or the area gets congested.

Moving pallets, operating forklifts, stacking materials, and stocking shelves are normal tasks, but each one can affect movement, storage, and load stability. OSHA data and enforcement trends continue to show serious injuries and fatalities tied to these types of activities. Material handling risks are more likely when:

• Forklifts and pedestrians share the same travel paths;
• Loads are lifted, carried, or stacked beyond stable limits;
• Visibility is reduced due to product, layout, or speed;
• Aisles become obstructed or narrowed during operations; or
• Tasks overlap without clear coordination of movement.

Stack safe, store smart

Safe storage practices reduce the chance that routine handling turns into a collapse, spill, or struck-by event. A slightly uneven stack, an overloaded pallet, or a rack pushed beyond capacity can fail quickly under normal workplace conditions. Strong storage practices can greatly reduce risk by:

• Maintaining pallet loads that are even, stable, and securely stacked;
• Verifying stacks stay within rack and pallet ratings;
• Keeping materials within designated storage boundaries; and
• Removing damaged pallets or containers from service.

Control, not complacency

Serious incidents are often less about equipment failure and more about familiar work being performed without enough attention to current conditions. Operators rely on experience instead of staying alert to the situation in front of them, pedestrians assume they have been seen, and routine tasks continue even when aisles tighten, loads change, or travel paths become less controlled.

Exposure to risks quickly rise when assumptions replace attention and routine replace active hazard recognition. Real control means staying actively engaged, maintaining awareness, checking conditions, verifying paths, and recognizing when conditions change.

Expect inspections

For both managers and workers, consistent inspections are one of the best ways to catch changing conditions before they lead to injury. Strong inspection practices can include:

• Checking travel paths and pedestrian separation throughout the shift;
• Removing damaged pallets, racks, or equipment from service;
• Identifying congestion points before they disrupt workflow; and
• Reinforcing that inspections support safe operations.

Training smart, work safe

Training for material handling is often centered on equipment operation. However, effective training focuses on recognizing changing conditions, understanding interaction between people and equipment, and reinforcing when to stop, reassess, and adjust.

To minimize the risks from constant movement in material handling environments, employers should implement clear traffic management strategies, such as designated pedestrian walkways and marked forklift lanes. Strong training reinforces decisions such as:

• Identifying when pedestrian separation is no longer maintained,
• Recognizing unstable loads before movement begins,
• Understanding when speed or congestion increases exposure,
• Stopping work when conditions no longer support safe handling, or
• Recognizing when a different method is the safer option.

Key to remember: When loads stay stable, travel paths stay clear, and workers stay alert to changing conditions, routine material handling activities stay productive, controlled, and far less likely to become a serious incident.

Free PPE or Not

OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) has rules requiring employers to give their employees protective gear, like hard hats, gloves, goggles, and safety shoes if needed to keep them safe at work. These rules are in place to prevent injuries and illnesses. However, it's worth noting that not all these rules say that the employer must provide the gear for free.

Right to Use PPE

OSHA's PPE standards do not allow employees to waive their right to use PPE. However, if an employee has a medical condition that would make them eligible for protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the employer would be expected to make reasonable accommodations that do not compromise safety.

OSHA also addresses the refusal to wear PPE due to religious beliefs in a specific directive. There is no indication that OSHA would accept a signed waiver from an employee who refuses to wear necessary PPE or follow other safety rules.

Medical Accommodations

When it comes to accommodating an employee who states they cannot wear personal protective equipment (PPE) due to a medical reason, employers must engage in an interactive process to determine if a reasonable accommodation can be made. The employer should work with the employee and, if necessary, consult with medical professionals to assess the situation.

The goal is to find a solution that allows the employee to perform their job safely while considering their medical condition. However, it's important to note that the accommodation must not pose an undue hardship on the employer or compromise the employee's or others' safety in the workplace. Each situation is unique, so employers should consult with legal counsel or compliance experts to ensure they follow the appropriate guidelines and regulations.

Allergies to PPE

When employees are allergic to the available materials for required personal protective equipment (PPE), employers should take the following steps to address the situation:

1. Assess the Allergy: Employers should gather information about the specific allergy and its severity. This may involve consulting with medical professionals or requesting documentation from the employee's healthcare provider.
2. Explore Alternative Options: Employers should work with the employee to identify alternative materials or PPE types suitable for their allergy. This could involve researching and sourcing different hypoallergenic PPE products or made from materials the employee is not allergic to.
3. Test and Evaluate: Before implementing any alternative PPE, it's important to conduct testing and evaluation to ensure that the new materials do not cause an allergic reaction for the employee. This may involve conducting patch tests or having the employee try out different options under controlled conditions.
4. Document Accommodation: If an alternative PPE solution is found, employers should document the accommodation process, including the steps taken, the alternative PPE selected, and any agreements reached with the employee. This documentation helps demonstrate compliance with regulations and records the accommodation made.
5. Ongoing Monitoring: Employers should regularly monitor the employee's condition and the effectiveness of the alternative PPE. Any issues or changes should be addressed promptly to ensure the employee's safety and well-being.

Employers need to consult with legal counsel or compliance experts to ensure they are following the appropriate guidelines and regulations when accommodating employees with allergies to PPE materials.

Key to Remember

Getting employees to wear PPE continues to be challenging, with over 70% of participants saying they have employee PPE compliance issues. Employers must figure out if, in fact, compliance issues may instead be needs for accommodations or exceptions.