When Discipline Follows Safety Complaints – Lessons From A Recent Labor Department ARB Decision

June 25, 2026

What's New

A recent DOL Administrative Review Board (ARB) decision underscores that safety complaints do not insulate employees from discipline for independent misconduct. The Board upheld the termination of a truck driver who later reported fatigue, finding that the employer acted based on documented safety violations and had reached its decision before the protected activity was reported.

What It Means

The decision turned on timing and documentation. The ARB credited evidence that the termination recommendation was already underway before the driver reported that he had stopped driving because of fatigue and that the employer consistently tied the decision to unsafe conduct, not to the fatigue-related safety concern.

This matters because protected activity must have some connection to the adverse action. Even under the relatively low “contributing factor” standard, a complaint must play some role in the decision. Clear contemporaneous records showing what was known, when it was known, and why action was taken can help separate legitimate safety-based discipline from later claims of retaliation.

What You Should Do

Employers should:

• Make reporting channels clear: Ensure employees know how to raise safety concerns and supervisors know when a concern may be protected;
• Document decisions as they develop: Record what was known, when it was known, and why action was taken;
• Distinguish the complaint from misconduct: Be clear whether discipline is based on unsafe conduct, insubordination, policy violations, or another legitimate reason—not the safety concern itself; and
• Apply policies consistently: Preserve evidence of comparable treatment in similar situations.

RELATED CONTENT

Subscribe to CWC's Updates and Events

CLICK TO SIGN UP