Health and Safety

A Note describing the legal issues related to workplace bullying. This Note addresses a private employer's potential legal vulnerability, including harassment, retaliation, emotional distress, assault and occupational health and safety claims. In addition, this resource addresses best practices for employers, the prevalence and impact of workplace bullying, and responsive legislative initiatives.

A Note describing how to manage an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspection conducted under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act). This Note addresses federal law relevant to employers in every state. State and local statutes and regulations as well as state plans may impose different or additional requirements on employers in this topic area.

A Note explaining employers' obligations to record certain work-related injuries and illnesses under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) and its corresponding safety and health regulations. This Note helps employers comply with their recordkeeping obligations by explaining key injury and illness recordkeeping issues such as covered employers, which injuries and illnesses must be recorded, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recordkeeping forms, maintaining OSHA records, access to OSHA records, OSHA citations for recordkeeping violations, and best practices for injury and illness recordkeeping.

This Note provides an overview of wellness and preventive care programs and the considerations when designing these programs, including changes under health care reform.

A Note describing the legal issues related to workplace violence. This Note addresses a private employer's duty to provide a safe working environment under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act), liability for workplace violence under workers' compensation law and negligence theory, granting medical leave to workplace violence victims, employment references for employees with known violent tendencies and laws to consider when taking steps to minimize workplace violence, including the direct threat defense under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

A policy addressing proper dress and grooming standards for employees in the workplace, including optional clauses for uniform or fragrance-free requirements. This policy can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements, but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

A policy addressing workplace testing for illegal drugs, alcohol and marijuana. It outlines circumstances in which job applicants and employees will be tested, testing procedures and consequences of violating the policy. This policy can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces that are not subject to the federal Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. It is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements, but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

An employee policy on health and safety in the workplace. It helps an employer comply with Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) recordkeeping requirements by setting out the procedure for employees to report workplace injuries, accidents and illness. This policy also encourages employees to be safety conscious and outlines the procedure for reporting safety concerns. It can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is based on federal law. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. 

A policy prohibiting smoking in the workplace and outlining the procedures for reporting a violation of the policy. Employers may implement a smoke-free workplace policy to protect employees from exposure to secondhand smoke. This policy can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

An employee policy on witness and victims of crime leave. It can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. 

A policy prohibiting workplace violence that outlines the procedures for reporting threats or violent acts and prohibits retaliation for complaints. This policy can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is based on federal law. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

A Checklist of issues to consider under the Americans with Disabilities Act when testing applicants or employees for drug and alcohol use and disciplining employees for that use. This Checklist addresses federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A checklist to help manage workers' compensation costs. This ten-point checklist can help employers keep costs down by focusing on long-term objectives.

A Checklist outlining best practices to improve workplace safety for employees and minimize workplace violence. It addresses assessing workplace safety, policies and procedures, training and other practical tips for minimizing workplace violence. This Checklist applies to private employers that do not have a unionized workforce. For information on state law requirements relating to background checks, hiring requirements and drug testing, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right.

A Checklist on Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspections conducted under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act). This Checklist highlights key issues, such as employer and employee OSHA inspection rights, protecting employer interests, opening and closing conferences, document production, employee interviews, walkarounds and citations. This Checklist also highlights best practices for the different aspects of an OSHA inspection. Equivalent state requirements may impose different or additional requirements on employers in this topic area.

This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Drug Testing Laws State Q&A resources. Questions and answers cover state-specific drug testing requirements, circumstances under which drug testing is permitted, the kinds of tests authorized by law, substances for which employers can test, protocols, employer liability, legal protections for employees and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Drug Testing Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Drug Testing Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page.

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Nebraska. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in New Mexico. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in North Carolina.  This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).  

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Rhode Island. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).  

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool).

An expert Q&A with Mary E. Drobka of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on the impact of state laws permitting the recreational and medicinal use of marijuana on employers' workplace policies, hiring practices and disciplinary procedures.

This article examines the legal and commercial consequences of the 2010 BP Gulf of Mexico oil spill and considers how the future of the global oil and gas industry might be shaped as a result.

This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses Texas' newly enacted Texas H.B. 1188 prohibiting most negligent hiring and negligent supervision actions against employers, general contractors and premises owners. With this law, which was signed by Governor Rick Perry on June 14th, Texas aims to increase employment opportunities for applicants with criminal records and ease employer concerns about potential liability for negligent hiring or negligent supervision. Exceptions allow plaintiffs to raise negligent hiring or negligent supervision claims if the employer knew or should have known the employee was convicted of certain offenses. The law becomes effective September 1, 2013.

This Law Firm Publication by Maynard Cooper & Gale PC discusses Alabama Senate Bill 286, which prohibits businesses from restricting the possession and carrying of firearms onto business property under certain circumstances. The new law, which became Act 2013-283, specifies that to completely prohibit firearms, the business must have both continuous posting of guards and a barrier that limits public access. For businesses without a guard or barrier, a person may possess a pistol on the property if he has either a concealed weapons permit or the consent of the owner. Act 2013-283, which becomes effective on August 1, 2013, also prohibits an employer from restricting an employee from keeping a firearm out of sight in a locked vehicle under certain circumstances. Under the law, employers have broad immunity from civil liability that could result from an employee bringing a weapon onto the property.

This Law Firm Publication by Holland & Hart LLP discusses Coats v. Dish Network, LLC, in which the Colorado Court of Appeals held that an employer did not violate Colorado's lawful off-duty activity law when it terminated an employee for his off-duty marijuana use. Although the employee was licensed to use marijuana under Colorado's medical marijuana law, the court held that an activity is lawful in Colorado only if it complies with both state and federal law. The court then reasoned that the employer did not violate the off-duty conduct law because marijuana use is illegal under federal law.

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the Tennessee Supreme Court's ruling in Shannon v. Roane Med. Ctr., in which the court held that an on-call employee injured while driving home from her workplace qualified for an exception to the rule barring workers' compensation for employees injured while going to or from work. For on-call employees, courts will consider the totality of the circumstances to determine whether the employee falls under the exception and is covered by the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act.

Resources to assist employers conducting self-audits and responding to government agency audits.

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the Nebraska Supreme Court's decision in Moyera v. Quality Pork Int'l, in which the court held that the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act applies to undocumented aliens. Persuaded by decisions from other jurisdictions and public policy concerns, the court concluded that these workers are eligible for permanent total disability benefits for work-related injuries under Nebraska's Workers' Compensation Act. Courts in nine other states have similarly found undocumented aliens to be covered by state workers' compensation laws.

The Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a notice clarifying that recent state initiatives legalizing the recreational use of marijuana will not affect the DOT's regulated drug testing program.

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the Rhode Island Department of Health's new requirement that all health care workers who have direct patient contact, including volunteers, receive free seasonal flu vaccines. Health care workers may obtain a medical exemption or refuse to be vaccinated without explanation, and health care facilities may not ask why a worker has refused. However, unvaccinated health care workers face a $100 fine per violation and possible professional sanctions if they fail to wear surgical facemasks when they have direct contact with patients during any declared period of a widespread flu outbreak. 

This Law Firm Publication by Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP discusses the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit's decision in Casias v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., ruling that an employer did not violate the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA) when it terminated an employee with a state-issued medical marijuana registry card for failing a drug test. The court held that the MMMA, which legalized the use of marijuana for certain medical purposes, only regulates action taken by Michigan, not by private employers. Although the Sixth Circuit's decision is binding on federal trial courts, Michigan state courts are not required to follow it.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued its final rule on whistleblower protections under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA), as amended by the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007.

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses a new Connecticut law permitting the palliative use of medical marijuana by qualified individuals with debilitating medical conditions. The law is administered by the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) and takes effect on October 1, 2012. Connecticut is the 17th state to pass a medical marijuana law.  

The US Department of Labor (DOL) has withdrawn a proposed rule that would revise the child labor agricultural hazardous occupations orders.

This Law Firm Publication by Stoel Rives LLP discusses the Utah Court of Appeals' decision in Barron v. Labor Commission, finding that an employee can rebut the presumption of drug use as the major contributor to a workplace injury if controlled substances are found in the employee's system. In Barron, an employee's workers' compensation claim was denied because of a positive drug test. The Utah Labor Commission found that the employee must show that "some other force," rather than drug use, caused the injury to rebut the presumption. The Utah Court of Appeals overturned the decision, clarifying for the first time that evidence of non-impairment at the time of the accident can overcome the presumption that the drug use was the major contributing cause of the injury.

The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) issued a final rule revising its Hazard Communication Standard (HCS), which governs chemical labeling and employee training for hazardous chemical use in the workplace. The revisions adopt the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), which was developed by the United Nations and creates a uniform international classification and labeling system for hazardous chemicals.

The Department of Transportation's (DOT) Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued a final rule, effective January 3, 2012, prohibiting commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers from using hand-held cell phones while operating their vehicles.

This Jackson Lewis LLP memorandum discusses the substantial revisions to the Oklahoma Standards For Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Act (Okla. Stat. §§ 551 - 563). The revisions, which became effective on November 1, 2011, simplify the law and make it more employer-friendly. The revisions include reductions in written policy requirements and in the required notice period, and a replacement of the "reasonable suspicion" test with a "for cause" test based on a "reasonable belief" standard for employers. The revised law also permits testing of independent contractors under certain circumstances.  

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) extended the comment period to October 28, 2011 for a rule initially proposed on June 22, 2011 that would substantially change employer reporting obligations. The proposed rule would require employers to report work-related fatalities, in-patient hospitalizations and amputations within specific time periods, and revise OSHA's list of industries partially exempt from injury and illness recordkeeping requirements.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a directive on its enforcement procedures for investigating and inspecting worksites in response to incidents of workplace violence.

An update on an OSHA letter of interpretation concluding that therapeutic exercise recommended by a health care professional in response to minor work-related pain falls under the definition of medical treatment and must be recorded.