Prohibition against discrimination

Federal employees are protected from retaliation for reporting work-related injuries or illnesses under the Executive Order counterpart to Section 11(c). The prohibition against discrimination applicable to Federal employers is set out in Section 1-201(f) of Executive Order 12196 and is implemented for federal agencies by 1960.68, with cross-reference to recordkeeping provisions in 1904.36.

• File a complaint if you believe you were retaliated against for reporting a work-related injury, noting that federal employees use the Executive Order protections rather than private-sector Section 11(c).
• The rule ensures employees can report injuries, access records, and participate in OSHA-related processes without fear of adverse action.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36 for the statutory basis and cross-reference.

For federal agencies, Section 11(c) of the OSH Act is applied by using the Executive Order equivalent rather than the private-sector text. Specifically, 1904.36 tells us that for Federal agencies the words “Section 11(c)” shall be read as “Executive Order 12196 Section 1-201(f).”

• This means federal employees are covered by the Executive Order’s anti-discrimination protections even though the OSH Act’s Section 11(c) technically applies only to private employers and the U.S. Postal Service.

Refer to 1904.36 and 1960.68 for the implementing cross-references.

A federal employee who believes they were discriminated against for reporting an OSHA-recordable injury should contact the appropriate agency EEO/administrative office and may also pursue the Executive Order 12196 complaint procedures. 1960.68 implements the prohibition and 1904.36 directs that Section 11(c) protections for private sector are read as Executive Order 12196 for Federal employees.

• Agencies typically have internal procedures (e.g., EEO, Inspector General, or occupational health/safety offices) for handling retaliation complaints under the Executive Order.
• If internal remedies are insufficient, follow your agency’s complaint process for Executive Order 12196 Section 1-201(f).

See 1960.68 and 1904.36 for the legal framework.

No — a federal employer generally cannot discipline an employee for filing injury reports or requesting access to OSHA injury logs when those actions are protected by the Executive Order equivalent of Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements the prohibition against such discrimination for Federal agencies, and 1904.36 clarifies the reading of Section 11(c) as Executive Order 12196 Section 1-201(f).

• Protected activities include reporting injuries/illnesses, participating in OSHA recordkeeping or inspection processes, and requesting access to records required by Part 1904.
• If discipline is taken in retaliation, the employee may file a complaint under agency procedures implementing Executive Order 12196.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — the federal prohibition covers employees who cooperate with OSHA inspections or investigations, and they are protected from retaliation under the Executive Order counterpart to Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements this prohibition for federal agencies and 1904.36 instructs that Section 11(c) references be read as Executive Order 12196 Section 1-201(f) for Federal employees.

• Protected cooperation includes giving statements, providing records (e.g., Form 300/300A equivalents under 1904.29), and participating in interviews.
• Retaliation for such cooperation may be challenged under the agency’s Executive Order procedures.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36 for the protective framework.

Yes — federal employees are protected from discrimination for requesting access to injury and illness records, including OSHA Form 300 or Form 300A equivalents, under the Executive Order counterpart to Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements the prohibition, and 1904.36 directs that Section 11(c) be read as Executive Order 12196 Section 1-201(f) for Federal agencies.

• Under the recordkeeping rules in Part 1904, employees (and former employees or their representatives) have rights to access records, and exercising that right is protected from retaliation.
• Employers must not discipline or otherwise retaliate against employees for exercising access rights.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — the anti-discrimination protection applies to employees who report injuries even if the injury is later determined to be non-recordable under Part 1904. 1960.68 implements the Executive Order prohibition, and 1904.36 aligns Section 11(c) with Executive Order 12196 for federal agencies.

• The protection covers the act of reporting and participating in related processes; it does not depend on the final recordability determination.
• Employers should not retaliate against employees for making good faith reports or seeking medical attention, even if later the case does not meet Part 1904 recording criteria.

Refer to 1960.68 and 1904.36.

It depends on the worker’s employer and the work performed; federal anti-discrimination protections under Executive Order 12196 generally apply to federal agency employees, while contractor employees may be covered depending on contract terms and applicable law. 1960.68 implements Executive Order protections for Federal employers and 1904.36 directs the substitution of the Executive Order for Section 11(c) when dealing with federal agencies.

• Contractor employees are typically employed by private employers and thus may be protected under Section 11(c) of the OSH Act (private-sector) if their employer falls under OSHA jurisdiction.
• Military-unique operations and personnel may be excluded under Executive Order 12196; see agency-specific guidance.

Check 1960.68 and 1904.36 and consult your contract and legal counsel to determine coverage.

No — agencies should not use recordkeeping errors as a pretext to retaliate against employees who reported injuries; the Executive Order-based anti-discrimination protection bars adverse actions taken because an employee engaged in protected activities. 1960.68 implements the prohibition, and 1904.36 aligns Section 11(c) protections with Executive Order 12196 for Federal employees.

• If discipline is alleged to be retaliatory, the agency should investigate the claim under its Executive Order complaint procedures; courts and agencies look for pretext and timing evidence.
• Employers must keep accurate records under Part 1904, but lawful correction of recordkeeping mistakes must not be used to punish reporters.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — federal employees who raise safety concerns or refuse unsafe work in good faith are protected from retaliation under the Executive Order counterpart to Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements this prohibition for federal agencies and 1904.36 instructs substitution of Executive Order 12196 for Section 11(c) when dealing with federal employees.

• Good-faith refusals to perform unsafe work and reporting hazards are recognized protected activities.
• Agencies should not take adverse employment actions for these protected activities; if they do, employees may pursue the agency complaint procedures under the Executive Order.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — the prohibition protects employees who report injuries or hazards whether identified or anonymous, as long as the report is a protected activity under the Executive Order framework; agencies must not retaliate against employees for making reports in good faith. 1960.68 implements the Executive Order-based prohibition and 1904.36 provides the cross-reference to Section 11(c).

• Anonymous reporting may limit the agency’s ability to investigate the source, but it does not strip away anti-retaliation protections for identified employees who later engage in protected activity.
• Agencies should maintain systems that allow reporting and investigate claims without penalizing reporters.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — federal employers should inform employees about their rights and protections under the Executive Order equivalent to Section 11(c), and 1960.68 reflects that prohibition while 1904.36 directs use of Executive Order language for Federal agencies.

• Best practice: include anti-retaliation information in safety training, onboarding, and postings about recordkeeping and reporting policies.
• Clear communication reduces fear of reporting and helps agencies comply with Part 1904 recordkeeping and access obligations.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — a federal agency can require use of specific reporting systems so long as the requirement does not deter reporting or result in retaliation; the anti-discrimination protection in 1960.68 still applies and 1904.36 links the Executive Order protections to recordkeeping.

• Ensure the system is accessible, confidential where appropriate, and does not punish employees for reporting.
• If the system produces electronic equivalents of OSHA forms, follow the guidance in OSHA’s Software-generated OSHA recordkeeping forms letter of interpretation about equivalency to forms under 1904.29.

See 1960.68, 1904.36, and the 2025-04-29 LOI for electronic record considerations.

Yes — employees who request corrections to inaccurate injury/illness records are engaging in protected activity and are protected from retaliation under the Executive Order counterpart to Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements this protection and 1904.36 provides the Executive Order substitution.

• Employers should investigate and correct records when appropriate per Part 1904 requirements, and not use corrections as a basis for discipline.
• If an employee alleges retaliation for seeking corrections, follow agency complaint procedures under Executive Order 12196.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — seeking medical treatment for a work-related injury is a protected activity and federal employees are protected from retaliation under the Executive Order equivalent to Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements the prohibition and 1904.36 provides the Executive Order reading of Section 11(c).

• Employees should not be penalized (e.g., disciplined, demoted, or terminated) for obtaining the medical care required by an injury.
• Recordkeeping rules in Part 1904 govern how those injuries are documented, but protections against retaliation remain in force.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — supervisors who discourage or punish injury reporting can violate the federal prohibition against discrimination under the Executive Order counterpart to Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements the anti-retaliation rule for Federal agencies and 1904.36 specifies the Executive Order substitution.

• Agencies should train supervisors that discouraging reporting or taking adverse actions for reporting is prohibited and may trigger complaints or enforcement.
• Supervisory misconduct can create liability and undermine recordkeeping obligations in Part 1904.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

No — federal agencies should not require employees to waive their anti-retaliation protections under the Executive Order as a condition of employment; such waivers are generally inconsistent with the statutory and Executive Order protections implemented by 1960.68 and the reading of Section 11(c) as set out in 1904.36.

• Any attempt to force employees to relinquish rights to report injuries or file complaints would undermine the protections of Executive Order 12196 Section 1-201(f).
• Consult agency legal counsel before proposing settlement language; agency procedures must comply with the Executive Order protections.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

OSHA’s electronic record submission requirements do not limit anti-retaliation protections; employees remain protected when they report injuries whether reports are maintained on paper or electronically. 1960.68 implements the Executive Order prohibition and OSHA’s enforcement guidance on electronic submissions clarifies recordkeeping obligations under Part 1904.

• Employers may be required to submit Form 300A data electronically per the 2024-04-16 memorandum, but this does not change that reporting or access requests are protected activities.
• If an electronic system is used, agencies should ensure it does not discourage reporting or enable retaliation.

See 1960.68, Part 1904, and the 2024-04-16 memorandum.

OSHA recordkeeping rules help define protected activities and access rights, and those activities are protected from retaliation under the Executive Order counterpart to Section 11(c). 1960.68 implements the anti-discrimination prohibition for Federal agencies and Part 1904 sets out the recordkeeping and access obligations that employees may rely on.

• Examples of protected recordkeeping-related activities include reporting injuries, requesting copies of OSHA logs, and participating in recordkeeping inspections.
• Violations involving failure to submit electronic records (see 2024-04-16 memorandum) may trigger audits that could uncover retaliatory actions.

See 1960.68 and Part 1904.

No — disciplining an employee for disclosing OSHA recordkeeping information to authorized government representatives in the course of an inspection or investigation would violate the anti-retaliation protections implemented by 1960.68 and the access provisions in Part 1904.

• 1904.40 (within Part 1904) requires employers to provide forms for inspection and copying by authorized government representatives; cooperating with such representatives is a protected activity.
• Retaliation for complying with government requests may be challenged under agency procedures implementing Executive Order 12196.

See 1960.68, Part 1904, and 1904.36.

Agencies should promptly investigate allegations and resolve them under the Executive Order complaint procedures because participation in OSHA-related training or safety committees is protected activity. 1960.68 implements the anti-retaliation protection and 1904.36 connects the Executive Order to recordkeeping and related protections.

• Investigate impartially, preserve evidence, and take corrective action if retaliation is found.
• Ensure that safety committee membership or participation is not used as a basis for adverse actions.

See 1960.68 and 1904.36.

Yes — employees are protected from retaliation when reporting work-related illnesses, including contagious illnesses; however, certain specific enforcement guidance may affect recordkeeping and reporting requirements. 1960.68 provides the anti-discrimination framework and 1904.36 directs the Executive Order substitution.

• Note that OSHA issued a temporary enforcement stay concerning certain COVID-19 recordkeeping requirements in the Healthcare ETS in the 2025-02-05 memorandum, but general protections against retaliation for reporting illnesses remain.
• Agencies should follow current OSHA and agency-specific guidance for handling infectious disease reports while protecting employees from retaliation.

See 1960.68, 1904.36, and the 2025-02-05 memorandum.