Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • DISCRIMINATION—RACE—9th Cir.: White employee revives hostile work environment claim tied to racial justice training
    • DISCRIMINATION—RELIGIOUS—7th Cir.: Hospital pharmacist, fired after refusing COVID vaccine, failed to show religious discrimination
    • DISCRIMINATION—SEX—N.D. Ga.: Lesbian employee’s challenge to fertility benefits plan failed under Bostock
    • EEOC NEWS—New lawsuits focus on disability discrimination, unlawful medical exams, discriminatory qualification standards
    • EMPLOYEE LEAVE—N.D. Ga.: Employee advances FMLA, but not discrimination, claims where he was fired in RIF during leave
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—Beyond the Band-Aid: California overhauls employers' first aid obligations
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—New California law adds anti-hate speech training requirement for employers: what to know + 4 steps to take now
    • FEDERAL REGULATIONS—USCIS announces final rule revising EB-5 fees, other provisions
    • LOCAL LEGISLATION—CALIFORNIA—Lawmakers pass legislation preventing use of force majeure provision for labor disputes by waste service providers
    • ON THE LABOR FRONT—NLRB preemption challenges to novel state labor laws: How have states fared in rebuffing those challenges?
    • RETALIATION—D.S.C.: Physician’s retaliation suit against Shriners Hospital can proceed
    • RETALIATION—N.D. Ohio: Worker fired after making threats in response to alleged groping advances retaliation claims
    • WAGE-HOUR—EXEMPTIONS—S.D. Ohio: Court denies summary judgment regarding overtime claim as to technical consultants
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, EXPERT INSIGHTS—Beyond the Band-Aid: California overhauls employers' first aid obligations, (Sep 29, 2026)

    Law Firms Mentioned:Seyfarth Shaw
    Organizations Mentioned:Seyfarth Shaw, LLP

    By Ilana Morady and Catherine S. Feldman of Seyfarth Shaw LLP

    Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has approved a much-needed dose of revisions to California's workplace first aid requirements for construction and general industries. For general industry employers, th ...

    By Ilana Morady and Catherine S. Feldman of Seyfarth Shaw LLP

    Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has approved a much-needed dose of revisions to California's workplace first aid requirements for construction and general industries. For general industry employers, the most notable change removes a longstanding pain point that first aid kit contents be approved by a consulting physician. Instead, employers may now comply by providing a first aid kit meeting ANSI/ISEA Z308.1-2021 Class A requirements. The amendments should simplify compliance, but employers should not treat the revised rule as a quick fix. A key obligation remains: employers must evaluate workplace-specific hazards and provide additional first aid supplies wherever reasonably necessary. In other words, a standard kit may stop the bleeding, but it won't always cover every wound. Assuming approval by the Office of Administrative Law, the amendments are expected to take effect on January 1, 2027.

    Background

    The California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has approved long-awaited revisions to California's workplace first aid requirements. For employers the changes are just what the doctor ordered. The amendments to 8 CCR sections 1512 (construction) and 3400 (general industry) modernize California's approach to workplace first aid kits and provide employers with a more flexible path to compliance. The rulemaking now proceeds to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for review. If approved, the amendments are expected to take effect on January 1, 2027.

    Ditching the Doctor's Note For General Industry Employers

    The most significant practical change affects general industry employers. Historically, 8 CCR 3400 required first aid materials to be approved by a consulting physician. Many employers nursed citations because of missing approval letters rather than because their first aid kits were inadequate. The revised regulation offers a simpler remedy. Employers may now either:

    • Provide a first aid kit that complies with ANSI/ISEA Z308.1-2021 Class A workplace first aid kit requirements; or

    • Have the contents determined by an employer-authorized licensed physician or other licensed health care professional (PLHCP).

    It's About More Than What's In The Kit

    A clean bill of health for employers takes more than a well-stocked first aid kit. The amendments also require employers to:

    • Evaluate the number of first aid kits needed based on employee locations and workplace hazards;

    • Ensure first aid kits are readily available;

    • Communicate first aid kit locations to employees;

    • Clearly identify kit locations where practicable; and

    • Inspect and replenish first aid supplies as necessary.

    Employers should treat the amendments as an opportunity for a check-up of their entire first aid program—not just a change to first aid kit contents.

    Hazard Warning: A Standard Kit Isn't Always Enough

    The amended standards require employers to provide additional specialized first aid items when a hazard assessment identifies workplace hazards that are unique, reasonably anticipated, and potentially serious. For example, an ANSI-compliant Class A kit may satisfy the baseline requirements, but it may not be sufficient for every workplace.

    The Board specifically rejected proposals to require items such as naloxone or epinephrine in all workplaces, instead concluding that such needs are best diagnosed through the hazard assessment process. Employers should examine whether their operations involve chemical, electrical, thermal, remote-work, or other unique hazards that warrant additional supplies.

    A Prescription For Workplace Solutions

    Assuming OAL approval, employers should give their first aid programs a check-up before the anticipated January 1, 2027 effective date.

    Key questions include:

    • Do existing first aid kits satisfy ANSI/ISEA Z308.1-2021 Class A requirements?

    • Are first aid kit locations adequately communicated and identified?

    • Is there a process for inspecting and replenishing supplies?

    • Has the employer evaluated whether workplace-specific hazards require additional first aid items?

    Feeling any symptoms of uncertainty about the new requirements? Your favorite Seyfarth attorney, or any member of the Workplace Safety and Environment Team are here to assist with evaluating your first aid program before the anticipated January 1, 2027 effective date.

    Ilana Morady and Catherine S. Feldman

    Seyfarth Shaw LLP

    233 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 8000

    Chicago

    Illinois 60606-6448

    United States

    Tel.: +1 312 4605000

    E-mail: [email protected]

    URL: www.seyfarth.com//

    (c) Mondaq Ltd, 2026 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com

    Attorneys: (Seyfarth Shaw).

    ExpertInsights: ExpertInsights Safety CaliforniaNews PracticeTip

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use