The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) changed its rules governing the training, qualification, and oversight of safety-related railroad employees in 2026.
The final rule, published May 15, 2026, and effective July 14, 2026, amends 49 CFR Part 243, the federal regulation that establishes minimum training standards for employees performing safety-related railroad work. The rule also applies to railroad contractors in circumstances covered by Part 243.
This is not an entirely new training system. FRA described the rule primarily as an effort to clarify existing requirements, put previous agency guidance directly into the regulations, remove outdated provisions, and make compliance easier to administer.
But several changes matter to the people actually doing railroad work. The rule addresses refresher training, testing, on-the-job training, contractor responsibilities, qualification records, and oversight responsibilities.
Here is what railroad workers and contractors should know.
What Is FRA’s Part 243 Training Rule?
Part 243 requires covered railroads and railroad contractors to have training programs for employees performing safety-related railroad duties.
These programs ensure employees have the knowledge and skills needed to comply with applicable federal railroad safety laws, regulations, and orders, as well as railroad rules and procedures adopted to implement those federal requirements.
The rule can affect employees working across railroad operations, maintenance-of-way, maintenance-of-equipment, signal and communications, and other safety-related functions. Employers may organize their programs by craft, class, task, or, as the 2026 rule now expressly recognizes, by the federal regulatory requirements applicable to the work.
One thing did not change: employers may permit only employees who are appropriately trained and qualified to perform safety-related service.
Refresher Training Is Now Defined More Clearly
One of the most significant parts of the 2026 rule involves refresher training.
FRA revised its definition to make clear that refresher training is intended to maintain, improve, and update an experienced employee’s skills and knowledge. That can include changed standards, problematic safety issues, new methods or processes, and skills or knowledge that may have deteriorated because they are not used regularly.
In general, refresher training remains required at intervals not exceeding three calendar years from the employee’s last training event unless another FRA requirement requires more frequent training. The rule also extends the implementation deadline for certain employers covered by § 243.201(e)(2) to December 31, 2026.
FRA also clarified what refresher training must address.
If an employee never received formal training on the application of a federal railroad safety requirement that applies to the employee’s work, the refresher program must include formal training on that requirement and relevant railroad rules implementing it.
Employees responsible for inspecting track or railroad equipment must receive refresher training on identifying defective conditions and initiating immediate remedial action for critical defects known to contribute to derailments, accidents, incidents, or injuries.
Employers must also use information such as efficiency testing, periodic oversight, annual reviews, accident and incident data, FRA inspection data, and other performance measures to identify workforce skill gaps that refresher training should address.
That last requirement matters. Refresher training shouldn’t exist only as a recurring box-checking exercise. The regulation specifically connects training content to actual performance and safety problems identified in the workplace.
Employees May Be Offered a “Test Out” Option
The new rule also introduces an important alternative to some refresher training.
An employer may offer an employee a single opportunity to test out of certain refresher-training requirements for an occupational category or subcategory. Passing the test can substitute for the applicable refresher training.
That does not mean every railroad employee has an automatic right to test out.
Employers may offer the option at their discretion, and there are limits. It cannot replace formal refresher training required when an employee previously did not receive the necessary formal training on an applicable federal safety requirement.
The test must evaluate the critical knowledge and skills needed to continue performing the safety-related service. FRA also requires the assessment to meet standards equivalent to testing used with formal training.
The employee gets one attempt. If the employee does not pass, the employer must provide the refresher training rather than repeatedly allowing the employee to retest.
Employers offering the test-out option must also maintain testing records.
FRA Clarified When On-the-Job Training Is Required
The 2026 rule also makes the on-the-job training, or OJT, requirement more explicit.
FRA states that OJT is required when a task requires neuromuscular coordination to learn, unless FRA approves alternative formal training that lets the employee practice the safety-related task and objectively demonstrate proficiency.
In other words, some safety-related railroad work cannot be taught adequately through a computer screen or classroom presentation alone.
For newly hired employees or employees assigned new safety-related duties, the rule allows them to perform tasks during OJT before completing the entire formal training program—but only under direct, on-site observation by a qualified person who understands the circumstances and is capable of intervening if the employee commits an unsafe act or violates an applicable federal safety requirement.
The employee still must demonstrate the required OJT proficiency before being considered qualified.
A Designated Instructor Does Not Have to Work for the Employer
FRA also clarified who can serve as a designated instructor.
The instructor does not have to be an employee of the railroad or contractor providing the training. Employers can use qualified outside instructors.
But using an outside instructor does not eliminate the employer’s responsibility. Employers must ensure that designated instructors have the knowledge, skills, abilities, and experience necessary to provide appropriate coaching, mentoring, guidance, and formal training.
Contractors Have Specific Training and Documentation Responsibilities
The 2026 rule is particularly important for railroad contractors.
A contractor that trains its own safety-related railroad employees must provide the railroad using those employees with documentation showing that its training program was approved by FRA or that the contractor falls within an applicable provision allowing it to maintain a similar program or plan under another FRA requirement. The railroad must retain the required validation when it relies on the contractor’s training to qualify those employees.
That creates a clearer documentary trail between the contractor supplying the workers and the railroad authorizing them to perform safety-related duties.
The rule also clarifies periodic oversight responsibilities.
Generally, both railroads and contractors have oversight responsibilities under Part 243. But a railroad and contractor may now use a written agreement to establish a different arrangement for who will perform the required periodic oversight. FRA said the change was intended to eliminate confusion over which entity is responsible and allow the parties to place oversight with the entity best positioned to perform it.
The key is that the arrangement must be documented. Responsibility cannot simply be assumed or informally shifted from one company to another.
Oversight Can Focus on Tests or Inspections
FRA also revised several periodic-oversight provisions so that covered oversight may involve tests or inspections instead of automatically requiring both.
Oversight information is intended to identify systemic performance gaps and determine whether the employer’s training program needs to change to address them.
That link between oversight and training matters. If testing, inspections, accident data, or FRA findings repeatedly identify a particular problem, the training program should respond to that information.
Some Administrative Requirements Were Streamlined
Several of the other 2026 changes matter more to railroad and contractor compliance departments than to individual workers.
FRA now expressly permits employers to organize training programs around applicable federal regulations, statutes, or orders instead of only traditional occupational categories. The agency reduced the information employers and outside training organizations must submit, clarified that refresher programs must be submitted to FRA for review and approval in the same manner as initial programs, and moved required submissions to FRA’s Part 243 web portal.
The rule also codifies existing guidance providing limited exceptions. For example, Part 243 does not require an employer to adopt a separate training program when an applicable college degree or certification from an accredited training organization or learning institution provides the required qualification training. Employers also are not required under Part 243 to train contractors hired only to perform elective audits or assessments that are not required by federal railroad safety law.
Why the Training Rule Can Matter After a Railroad Injury
Training is not merely a compliance issue when an employee gets hurt.
After a serious railroad injury, questions about qualification and training may help determine why the incident occurred.
Was the employee trained for the specific task being performed? Was required OJT completed? Who determined that the employee was qualified? Was the worker performing a new safety-related task? Were supervisors aware of recurring performance problems? Did previous accidents, inspections, or efficiency testing identify a skill gap? Did the railroad or contractor change its training in response?
Training programs, qualification records, OJT documentation, testing records, oversight results, and refresher-training materials can all become relevant evidence depending on the circumstances.
Under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), a railroad employee generally must show that railroad negligence contributed, at least in part, to the injury. Inadequate training or supervision can be relevant to that analysis. Violating a specific FRA requirement may also matter, but the legal effect depends on the regulation and the facts of the case. A Part 243 issue does not automatically establish a valid FELA claim.
There is another important distinction for contractors: being covered by Part 243 training requirements does not automatically mean a contractor employee is covered by FELA. FELA generally applies to employees of covered railroads, although particular employment relationships—including some borrowed-servant or dual-employment situations—can require a closer legal analysis.
Injured While Performing Railroad Work? Preserve the Training Evidence
When a serious injury raises questions about training, qualification, supervision, or an unfamiliar assignment, the relevant evidence can extend well beyond the accident report.
Training histories, qualification records, OJT documents, course materials, supervisor records, efficiency tests, periodic oversight records, safety rules, work assignments, and communications about prior problems may help explain whether the worker was properly prepared for the job and whether the railroad knew about a broader safety issue.
Those records may not remain equally easy to obtain over time.
If you were seriously injured while working for a railroad and believe inadequate training, supervision, qualification, or an unsafe work assignment contributed to what happened, McEldrew Purtell can review the circumstances and discuss your rights under FELA.
Contact McEldrew Purtell’s railroad injury team for a free, confidential consultation about what happened and any evidence that may need to be preserved.