[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CHILD LABOR ENFORCEMENT: ARE WE ADEQUATELY PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN?
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION AND LABOR
U.S. House of Representatives
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
__________
Serial No. 110-111
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor
Available on the Internet:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
44-562 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan, Vice Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,
Chairman California,
Donald M. Payne, New Jersey Senior Republican Member
Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin
Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, Virginia Peter Hoekstra, Michigan
Lynn C. Woolsey, California Michael N. Castle, Delaware
Ruben Hinojosa, Texas Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Carolyn McCarthy, New York Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan
John F. Tierney, Massachusetts Judy Biggert, Illinois
Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania
David Wu, Oregon Ric Keller, Florida
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey Joe Wilson, South Carolina
Susan A. Davis, California John Kline, Minnesota
Danny K. Davis, Illinois Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington
Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona Kenny Marchant, Texas
Timothy H. Bishop, New York Tom Price, Georgia
Linda T. Sanchez, California Luis G. Fortuno, Puerto Rico
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Charles W. Boustany, Jr.,
Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania Louisiana
David Loebsack, Iowa Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
Mazie Hirono, Hawaii John R. ``Randy'' Kuhl, Jr., New
Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania York
John A. Yarmuth, Kentucky Rob Bishop, Utah
Phil Hare, Illinois David Davis, Tennessee
Yvette D. Clarke, New York Timothy Walberg, Michigan
Joe Courtney, Connecticut [Vacancy]
Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
Mark Zuckerman, Staff Director
Sally Stroup, Republican Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE PROTECTIONS
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California, Chairwoman
Donald M. Payne, New Jersey Joe Wilson, South Carolina,
Timothy H. Bishop, New York Ranking Minority Member
Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire Tom Price, Georgia
Phil Hare, Illinois John Kline, Minnesota
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on September 23, 2008............................... 1
Statement of Members:
Roybal-Allard, Hon. Lucille, a Representative in Congress
from the State of California, prepared statement of........ 33
Wilson, Hon. Joe, ranking minority member, Subcommittee on
Workforce Protections...................................... 4
Prepared statement of.................................... 5
Woolsey, Hon. Lynn C., Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Workforce
Protections................................................ 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 3
Statement of Witnesses:
Flores, Norma, former child worker........................... 21
Prepared statement of.................................... 23
Greenberg, Sally, executive director, National Comsumers
League..................................................... 16
Prepared statement of.................................... 18
Additional submissions:
``Protecting Working Children in the United States,''
June 2005.......................................... 21
``The Government's Striking Decline in Child Labor
Enforcement Activities,'' September 2006........... 21
Passantino, Alexander J., Acting Administrator, Wage and Hour
Division, U.S. Department of Labor......................... 6
Prepared statement of.................................... 8
Strauss, David A., executive director, Association of
Farmworker Opportunity Programs............................ 24
Prepared statement of.................................... 26
Additional submission:
``Children in the Fields,'' May 2007................. 27
CHILD LABOR ENFORCEMENT: ARE WE ADEQUATELY PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN?
----------
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Workforce Protections
Committee on Education and Labor
Washington, DC
----------
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:05 a.m., in
Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lynn Woolsey
[chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Woolsey, Bishop, Shea-Porter,
Hare, Wilson, and Kline.
Staff Present: Aaron Albright, Press Secretary; Tylease
Alli, Hearing Clerk; Tico Almeida, Labor Policy Advisor; Jody
Calemine, Labor Policy Deputy Director; Lynn Dondis, Senior
Policy Advisor, Subcommittee on Workforce Protections; David
Hartzler, Systems Administrator; Brian Kennedy, General
Counsel; Sara Lonardo, Junior Legislative Associate, Labor; Joe
Novotny, Chief Clerk; Robert Borden, Minority General Counsel;
Cameron Coursen, Minority Assistant Communications Director;
Rob Gregg, Minority Senior Legislative Assistant; Jim Paretti,
Minority Workforce Policy Counsel; Chris Perry, Minority
Legislative Assistant; Molly McLaughlin Salmi, Minority Deputy
Director of Workforce Policy; Linda Stevens, Minority Chief
Clerk/ Assistant to the General Counsel; and Loren Sweatt,
Minority Professional Staff Member.
Chairwoman Woolsey. A quorum is present. The hearing of the
Subcommittee on Workforce Protections will come to order.
I will present my opening statement, and then Ranking
Member Wilson will present his.
Good morning. I want to welcome all of you today for the
hearing on, ``Child Labor Enforcement: Are We Adequately
Protecting our Children?''
What a question that we have to ask in the United States of
America.
While we will primarily examine the current state of
enforcement of our Federal child labor laws by the Department
of Labor, I am hoping that our witnesses will also address how
the Fair Labor Standard Act treats children who work in
agriculture differently than those who work in other
industries. The fact is that children who work on a farm are
allowed to work at a younger age, for longer hours, and in more
hazardous conditions than kids who work at a grocery store.
This is unacceptable. This difference is a throwback, a
throwback to another era, when one-quarter of Americans lived
on family farms, and a majority of agriculture work was
performed by family members, and children did their part,
believe me. So while times have changed, and less than 2
percent of Americans live on farms today, our laws have not.
As a result of technical advances in the growth of large-
scale agriculture, most children working in the fields are
hired as laborers on large commercial farms. This is not the
family farm, and we must be aware of that, and we must deal
with it to protect kids in a better way.
Representative Roybal-Allard, Lucille Roybal-Allard, from
California, has legislation called the CARE Act, and her
legislation would correct this imbalance by raising protections
for child farm workers to the same level of children working in
other industries. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this
legislation, and we are going to give it serious attention in
the next Congress.
Representative Bruce Braley has just introduced a bill to
increase criminal sanctions on employers who exploit children.
Last year, I introduced a bipartisan bill, with DOL
cooperation, called the Child Care Protection Act, which
increases penalties and establishes a civil penalty for a
violation which causes the death or serious injury of a child
laborer. My good friend, Ranking Member Wilson, is an original
cosponsor of that bill.
The provisions of the bill were signed into law this year
as part of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. Well,
this is progress. It is moving it along. However, as I said
when the child labor penalty bill was passed, this is a first
good step, but additional enforcement measures are needed to
adequately protect our kids.
Unfortunately, all the legislation in the world won't help
if we are not able to adequately enforce our child labor laws.
It is clear that this administration doesn't seem to be focused
on enforcing the laws already on the books.
Let me give you an example. The Wage and Hour Division has
730, 730 inspectors, for the entire United States of America.
That is down from 945 in 2001. These inspectors are charged
with enforcing every aspect of FLSA which, in addition to child
labor, includes minimum wage and overtime protections. It
appears from the numbers that the Wage and Hour Division spends
very little time investigating child labor complaints, as
opposed to other violations. In 2005, for example, the division
devoted less than 5 percent of its total investigatory time on
child labor matters, and only a small fraction of this time was
devoted to investigating agriculture issues.
In fiscal year 2007, the DOL uncovered 4,672 children who
were working in violation of Federal child safety laws. We know
that that was just the tip of the iceberg. Four years earlier,
DOL found double that number. I find it almost impossible to
believe that child labor violations have decreased by half over
the same time period.
There are serious violations of child labor laws that need
DOL attention. For example, on September 9th, the State of Iowa
filed over 9,000 counts of State child labor law violations at
Agriprocessors, a meatpacking plant in Pottsville, Iowa. You
are probably all familiar with Agriprocessors in Iowa. It was
the site of one of the largest workplace immigration raids in
U.S. history just recently.
The State alleges that 32 children, seven of whom were
under the age of 16, were employed at the plant, in violation
of the prohibition against children working in meatpacking
facilities. In addition, these children were exposed to
dangerous chemicals, and children under 16 were found to be
illegally operating power machinery, working during prohibited
hours, and in excess of the hours allowed by law.
These allegations also appear to be violations of Federal
law. But while the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE,
was out in droves, DOL has been missing in action. So it is
hard to claim adequate enforcement with that kind of a record.
I am looking forward to hearing Mr. Passantino today, and
other witnesses, on this issue. Actually, I am really looking
forward to all of you.
With that, I defer to Ranking Member Joe Wilson for his
opening statement.
[The statement of Ms. Woolsey follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Lynn C. Woolsey, Chairwoman,
Subcommittee on Workforce Protections
I want to welcome you all today for a hearing on ``Child Labor
Enforcement: Are We Adequately Protecting Our Children?''
While we will primarily examine the current state of enforcement of
our federal child labor laws by the Department of Labor, I hope that
our witnesses will also address how the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
treats children who work in agriculture differently than those who work
in other industries.
The fact is that children who work on a farm are allowed to work at
a younger age, for longer hours and in more hazardous conditions than
kids who work at a grocery store.
This is unacceptable.
This difference is a throwback to another era when one-quarter of
Americans still lived on family farms and a majority of the
agricultural work performed by children was done on behalf of their
family.
While times have changed and less than 2% of Americans live on
farms today, our laws have not.
As a result of technical advances and the growth of large-scale
agriculture, most children working in the fields are hired as laborers
on large commercial farms. This is a far cry from the family farm.
Representative Roybal-Allard's CARE Act, would correct this
imbalance by raising protections for child farmworkers to the same
level of children working in other industries.
I am proud to be a cosponsor of this legislation, which we will
give serious attention to next year.
Representative Bruce Braley has just introduced a bill to increase
criminal sanctions on employers who exploit children.
Last year I introduced a bi-partisan bill, the Child Care
Protection Act, which increases penalties and establishes a ($50,000)
civil penalty for a violation which causes the death or serious injury
of a child laborer.
And my good friend, Ranking Member Wilson is an original co-sponsor
of the bill. The provisions of the bill were signed into law this year as part
of the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act.
This is progress.
However, as I said when the child labor penalty bill was passed,
this is a first good step, but additional enforcement measures are
needed to adequately protect our children.
Unfortunately, all the legislation in the world won't help if we
are not able to adequately enforce our child labor laws.
And it is clear that this Administration does not appear to be
focused on enforcing the laws already on the books.
Let me give you a few examples:
The Wage and Hour Division has 730 inspectors for the entire
country, down from 945 in 2001.
These inspectors are charged with enforcing all aspects of the
FLSA, which in addition to child labor, include minimum wage and
overtime protections.
And it appears from the numbers that the Wage and Hour Division
spends little time investigating child labor complaints as opposed to
other violations.
In 2005, for example, the Division devoted less than 5 percent of
its total investigatory time on child labor matters.
And only a small fraction of this time is devoted to investigations
in the agricultural sector.
In FY2007, the DOL uncovered 4,672 children who were working in
violation of federal child safety laws.
Four years earlier, DOL found double that number.
I find it hard to believe that child labor violations have
decreased by half over that time period.
There are serious violations of child labor laws that need DOL's
attention.
For example, on September 9, the State of Iowa filed over 9,000
counts of state child labor law violations at Agriprocessors, a
meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa.
You are all undoubtedly familiar with Agriprocessors, which was the
site of the one of the largest workplace immigration raids in U.S.
history.
The State alleges that 32 children, seven of whom were under the
age of 16, were employed at the plant in violation of the prohibition
against children working in meatpacking facilities.
In addition, these children were exposed to dangerous chemicals,
and children under 16 were found to be illegally operating power
machinery, working during prohibited hours, and in excess of the hours
allowed by law.
These allegations also appear to be violations of federal law, but
while the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was out in droves,
DOL has been missing in action.
It is hard to claim adequate enforcement with that kind of a
record, but I look forward to hearing from Mr. Passantino and our other
witness on this issue.
With that, I defer to the ranking member, Joe Wilson, for his
opening statement.
______
Mr. Wilson. Thank you for yielding, Madam Chair, and I join
you in welcoming our witnesses here today.
Every year, millions of teens work in part-time or summer
jobs that can provide valuable work experiences and
opportunities for teens to learn important work skills. I know
firsthand by distributing newspapers and working in a service
station. That work is not completely without risk, however, and
unfortunately, each year there are young workers who are either
injured or killed on the job. But even one injury is too many.
The Department of Labor has an important role in helping to
ensure that young workers have safe and appropriate work
experiences. While the employment of young workers is essential
to helping instill a solid work ethic and in teaching the value
of a dollar, their collective safety must be the highest
priority.
I look forward to hearing from the Department today about
their enforcement initiatives and compliance efforts which help
to educate teens, parents, and employers about the hours of
work and types of jobs that young people can perform.
Youth employment has been an ongoing focus for the
Department, and I commend the administration for its work in
this area. Last year, the Department submitted a legislative
proposal to Congress to strengthen the Department's ability to
impose significant civil penalties for child labor violations
that result in the death or of serious injury of a child,
particularly where the violation is repeated or willful.
I thank the Chairwoman for her important work on that
proposal which she introduced in the House. I was pleased to
join a senior Republican member of the full committee, Mr. Buck
McKeon of California, as an original cosponsor of her bill, the
provisions of which were enacted into law in May of this year.
That has provided the Department with an additional tool to
address serious child labor violations, decrease repeat
occurrences, and to strengthen the overall enforcement of
critical child labor laws.
I look forward to hearing the testimony from all of our
witnesses here today, and I thank the chairwoman for holding
this hearing.
I yield back the balance of my time.
[The statement of Mr. Wilson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Joe Wilson, Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Workforce Protections
Thank you for yielding Madam Chair, and I join you in welcoming our
witnesses here today.
Every year, millions of teens work in part-time or summer jobs that
can provide valuable work experiences and opportunities for teens to
learn important work skills. That work is not completely without risk,
however, and unfortunately each year there are young workers who are
either injured or killed on the job.
Because even one injury is too many, the Department of Labor has an
important role in helping to ensure that young workers have safe and
appropriate work experiences. While the employment of young workers is
essential to helping instill a solid work ethic and in teaching the
value of a dollar, their collective safety must be the highest
priority.
I look forward to hearing from the Department today about their
enforcement initiatives and compliance efforts, which help to educate
teens, parents, and employers about the hours of work and types of jobs
that young people can perform. Youth employment has been an ongoing
focus for the Department and I commend the Administration for its work
in this area.
Last year, the Department submitted a legislative proposal to
Congress to strengthen the Department's ability to impose significant
civil penalties for child labor violations that result in the death of
or serious injury of a child, particularly where the violation is
repeated or willful. I thank the Chairwoman for her important work on
that proposal, which she introduced in the House. I was pleased to join
the Senior Republican Member of the Full Committee, Mr. McKeon, as an
original cosponsor of her bill, the provisions of which were enacted
into law in May of this year. This has provided the Department with an
additional tool to address serious child labor violations, decrease
repeat occurrences, and to strengthen the overall enforcement of
critical child labor laws.
I look forward to hearing the testimony from all of our witnesses
here today, and I thank the Chairwoman for holding this hearing. I
yield back the balance of my time.
______
Chairwoman Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
Now I have the honor on of introducing our witnesses. I
will introduce them in the order that they will present.
Let me talk first a little bit about the lighting system.
We have a five-minute rule here. So when you start speaking,
the green light goes on in front of you. When it gets to
yellow, you have a minute left. And when it is red, the floor
opens and your chair disappears. No, it doesn't. But it means
it is time for you to tie it up. If you have more to say add
that in to your responses when we ask questions.
We only get five minutes also. So if we sit up here and
give you a speech and don't ask our question, we have lost our
five-minute time.
First, I would like to introduce Alex Passantino, who is
the acting wage and hour administrator for the Department of
Labor. Alex has been with DOL since November, 2005. He
previously served as the senior policy advisor to the assistant
secretary for the Employment Standards Administration and as
the deputy administrator for wage and hour.
Mr. Passantino received his BA from Emery University and
his JD from the University of Georgia School of Law.
Sally Greenberg is executive director of the National
Consumers League and co-chair of the Child Labor Coalition. She
previously worked at Consumers Union, the nonprofit
organization that is perhaps best known for publishing Consumer
Reports. Prior to that, Ms. Greenberg worked at the Justice
Department's Foreign Claims Settlement Commission. She earned
her BA from Antioch College and her JD from the Catholic
University School of Law.
Norma Flores grew up as a migrant child farm worker,
traveling over 3,000 miles every year. She began to work full
time in the fields at 12 years old, working 70 hours a week.
Because of this, Ms. Flores started school late, had to leave
before the school year was over, and switched schools often.
With the help of migrant programs, she was able to graduate
from high school. She went on to college and received her BA
from the University of Texas Pan American.
David Strauss is executive director of the Association of
Farm Worker Opportunity Programs. He is on the steering
committee of the Child Labor Coalition and the National Farm
Worker Alliance and is a member of the Board of Directors of
the East Coast Migrant Head Start Project.
Mr. Strauss has a masters of arts in Public Administration
and a BA in political science.
All right. Mr. Passantino.
STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER J. PASSANTINO, ACTING WAGE AND HOUR
ADMINISTRATOR, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mr. Passantino. Chairwoman Woolsey, Ranking Member Wilson,
and distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for
the opportunity to discuss the Wage and Hour Division efforts
to promote compliance with the Fair Labor Standard Act's child
labor provisions. As is detailed in my written testimony, the
Wage and Hour Division staff's dedication to ensuring that the
Nation's youth work safely and legally is second to none.
Increasing compliance with the child labor provisions of
the FLSA is a cornerstone of the agency's annual performance
plan. Every onsite investigation, complaint, or directive, has
a child labor component. Every low-wage initiative requires
that investigators examine child labor compliance, regardless
of whether the case is designated as a child labor case.
Indeed, last year, 47 percent of the cases in which we found
child labor violations were not set up as child labor cases.
Child labor complaints are given the highest priority
within the agency, and every Wage and Hour investigator is
trained to look for child labor violations.
We employ a number of tools to fulfill our mission of
ensuring compliance. We conduct investigations in industries in
which young workers are likely to be injured or killed on the
job. We provide compliance assistance to raise awareness of
child labor requirements, and we participate in partnerships
with numerous Federal and State agencies.
Our local offices undertake targeted child labor
investigations in grocery stores, shopping malls, theaters,
restaurants. We conduct low-wage initiatives in other
industries, such as construction and agriculture. Each of those
investigations requires the district offices to examine an
employer's compliance with the FLSA child labor provisions.
As a result of our enforcement efforts, Wage and Hour has
levied fines against employers found in violation of the law.
These fines are proportionate to the severity of the violations
and exceeded $5,300 a case in the last fiscal year. In
addition, we have secured future corporate-wide compliance and
cooperative public awareness campaigns by many of the
investigated employers.
With over 7 million covered worksites in the United States,
our efforts cannot be limited to enforcement. Rather, voluntary
compliance with the child labor laws must be encouraged and
supported. We have an active and effective compliance
assistance program. Our managers and investigators speak
regularly to employer-employee community and advocacy groups.
We address student groups and work directly with school and
work-permitting officials to educate issuing authorities on how
to screen potential violations before the work actually begins.
The centerpiece of our public awareness efforts is the
YouthRules! Campaign. Since its inception in 2002, our Web site
has received over 3 million views, and our PSAs have reached 27
million radio listeners in 39 States, and generated 252
newspaper articles with a readership of approximately 15
million. We have had YouthRules! rallies in Philadelphia, New
Jersey, Houston, and San Antonio.
These efforts continue a longstanding Wage and Hour
tradition of promoting safe and positive work experiences by
educating teens, employers, educators and the public about the
rules concerning young workers. Our goal is to increase
compliance and prevent violations from occurring in the first
instance, thereby safeguarding the lives and future of young
workers.
We employ the same tools to ensure compliance with the
youth employment rules in agriculture. The nature of
agricultural employment, its short duration, the remote
locations, and the mobility of the work, pose particular
enforcement challenges. As you all know, the standards for
youth employment in agriculture have historically differed from
nonagricultural employment.
Wage and Hour is committed to providing the safe employment
of youth in the agriculture industry. Our investigators who
conduct investigations in agriculture are instructed to examine
compliance with the provisions of all applicable statutes
providing protections, including the child labor provisions.
We have developed compliance assistance materials
emphasizing occupational safety and health, disseminated public
service announcements, and collaborated with other entities to
educate parents and teens of age-appropriate task standards.
Ensuring that young workers in this country have safe and
appropriate early work experience has been, and continues to
be, a high priority for Wage and Hour. As you mentioned, we
were proud to have included in the President's budget for
several years the Child Labor Penalty Enhancement, and we thank
you for your support. The President signed that bill into law
increasing the CMPs for serious injury or death to $50,000.
We also continue to address youth employment through
regulation and plan to send to OMB shortly a final rule
updating the Youth Employment Provisions for the 21st century.
Ensuring compliance in the Youth Employment Provisions is
an integral part of every investigation. We believe that we
have demonstrated success in these efforts but, as in every
program, we look for opportunities to improve. Last year, we
began working with an independent evaluator to assess our
strategies and their effectiveness in increasing compliance
with the FLSA child labor provisions. That study is ongoing,
and we look forward to any recommended opportunities for
improvement that may come.
Although our measures of compliance are encouraging, the
declines in workplace injuries and fatalities are the most
significant indicators of improved working conditions for young
workers in this country. According to NIOSH-provided
statistics, in 2008, 38 youth under the age of 18 died from
work-related injuries, a significant drop from the average of
61 youth who were killed on the job during the years 1998 to
2002. Injuries to young workers have also declined in recent
years.
These injury and fatality results demonstrate significant
progress in addressing child labor violations. The actions and
activities of many parties have contributed to these declining
statistics, but many minors continued to be injured while
working, and even one death of a working teen is one too many.
The challenge of protecting the welfare of young workers is
a shared responsibility. It rests with Federal and State
officials, parents, educators, community-based and advocacy
organizations, employers, and the young workers themselves.
Wage and Hour remains committed to this challenge and will
continue to promote legal employment opportunities for young
men and women that are safe, positive, and do not distract from
or interfere with their education.
Thank you again for this opportunity to discuss this
important issue. This concludes my prepared statement. I will
be glad to answer any questions the committee may have.
[The statement of Mr. Passantino follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alexander J. Passantino, Acting Administrator of
the Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor
Chairwoman Woolsey, Ranking Member Wilson, and distinguished
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss
the efforts taken by the Department of Labor's (Department) Wage and
Hour Division (WHD) to promote compliance with the Fair Labor Standard
Act's (FLSA) child labor provisions. Let me begin by saying that WHD is
committed to full and fair enforcement of all the laws under WHD's
jurisdiction, but WHD staff's dedication to ensuring that youth in this
country work safely and legally is second to none. As I will highlight,
our accomplishments in strengthening child labor laws, raising public
awareness of child labor requirements, and targeting industries in
which young workers are likely to be injured or killed on the job have
contributed to safer workplaces for young workers.
Like all regulatory enforcement agencies, WHD employs a variety of
tools and activities to enforce the law and achieve compliance. The
agency's mission is to promote and achieve compliance--not just to
identify violations after they occur, but particularly in instances in
which the health and safety of workers are concerned, to prevent
violations in the first instance. The agency's child labor activities
and initiatives are far too numerous to list individually, so I will
point out our key efforts and accomplishments over the past several
years.
WHD Enforcement Priorities In Improving Child Labor Compliance
WHD has prioritized its statutory enforcement responsibilities to
maximize protections for the greatest number of workers, including
those most vulnerable in the workforce--low-wage workers, immigrants,
and young workers. The absence of a private right of action to address
oppressive child labor underscores the importance of this agency's role
in safeguarding young workers. For this reason, increasing compliance
with the child labor provisions of the FLSA is a cornerstone of the
agency's annual performance plan. Every on-site investigation--
complaint or directed--has a child labor component. Every low wage
initiative--targeted for child labor compliance or targeted for other
compliance reasons--requires that investigators examine child labor
compliance. Child labor complaints, although not numerous, are given
the highest priority within the agency. Every WHD investigator is
trained early in his or her career to look for child labor violations.
With each national child labor initiative, investigators gain both a
renewed focus and specialized training.
Each year, WHD regional and local offices plan and undertake child
labor compliance initiatives in a variety of industries and businesses,
such as grocery stores, shopping malls, theaters, and restaurants.
These industries are among those in which the agency has historically
found high levels of non-compliance with the child labor Hazardous
Occupations Orders (HOs) and in which large numbers of young workers
are traditionally employed. The agency's low-wage initiatives in other
industries, such as construction and agriculture, also require district
offices to examine an employer's compliance with the FLSA child labor
provisions in conjunction with a minimum wage or overtime investigation
or concomitant with the labor standards statutes that apply to
agricultural workers.
In recent fiscal years, WHD regional and district offices have
developed child labor compliance initiatives in industries or
establishments that had a history of child labor HO violations or that
have a high likelihood that a young employee might suffer a work-
related injury or fatality. In fiscal year 2006, for example, WHD
offices nationwide investigated discount department store operations to
determine the level of compliance with the child labor provisions, in
particular to determine their compliance with HOs that regulate paper
balers, forklifts, and teen driving. In fiscal year 2007, district and
regional offices continued their emphasis on reducing injuries and
deaths to young workers by stressing compliance with the HOs. This
year, the agency placed a particular emphasis on increasing compliance
with HO No. 12, which regulates the loading and operating paper balers
and compactors--a common and particularly hazardous piece of equipment
found in many retail establishments and increasingly used in nursing
homes, schools, and restaurants. The focus on HO No. 12 compliance will
continue in fiscal year 2009 as offices develop their child labor
initiatives for the upcoming fiscal year.
Several key statistics support the agency's continued emphasis on
child labor enforcement. First, the number of enforcement hours charged
to child labor compliance has averaged 57,900 over the last seven years
(from fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 2007). This is not
significantly different than the 58,080 average child labor enforcement
hours recorded during the preceding seven years (from fiscal year 1994
through fiscal year 2000).
Second, as noted above, WHD investigators examine child labor
compliance in all on-site investigations. In the last three years,
approximately 47 percent of the investigations in which a child labor
violation was identified occurred in an on-site investigation initiated
under another statute or program area enforced by WHD--primarily in
investigations initiated to determine FLSA minimum wage and overtime
compliance.
Third, the percentage of child labor cases in which a child labor
violation is found has increased steadily over the last three years.
Thirty-seven percent of child labor investigations in fiscal year 2005
found child labor violations. By the end of fiscal year 2007, the
percentage had increased to 40 percent, which suggests improvements in
targeting establishments and industries with likely child labor
violations.
Fourth, WHD civil money penalty assessments per investigation have
increased from $4,558 assessed per case in fiscal year 2003 to $5,303
assessed per case in fiscal year 2007. The agency has not hesitated to
levy fines against employers found in violation of the child labor
laws--proportionate to the severity of the violations. Although we have
been successful in collecting civil money penalties, as established in
the examples below, the more significant and long-term results have
been demonstrated in our ability to secure future corporate-wide
compliance and cooperative public awareness campaigns by many of the
investigated companies. Recent investigations include the following
examples:
In August 2008, American Multi-Cinema, Inc., (AMC
Theatres), headquartered in Kansas City, Missouri, paid $141,570 in
child labor civil money penalties to resolve violations found in AMC
theaters in several states. As part of the resolution, AMC Theaters
produced a child labor public service announcement (PSA) on hazards
associated with compactors and balers. The PSA is being shown in
theatres nationwide as part of the company's First Look pre-feature
entertainment program, and the expected audience is 8 million theater-
goers.
In January 2008, the Department obtained a permanent
injunction in U.S. district court against Paragon Contractors Corp., a
Hildale, Utah, contractor, for repeated violations of federal youth
employment laws. The most recent investigation uncovered a 16-year-old
working in roofing operations in violation of HO No. 16. The assessed
civil money penalty of $5,280 was paid by the company.
In December 2007, Connecticut-based CVS Pharmacy Inc.
agreed to pay $226,598 in child labor civil money penalties after a
2007 investigation of CVS stores in New England and the Mid-Atlantic
states found 78 minors illegally loading, unloading, or operating
cardboard compactors and seven minors employed in violation of the FLSA
time standards. CVS Pharmacy Inc. also agreed to ensure compliance with
the FLSA at its more than 6,000 stores nationwide.
In July 2007, Pretzel King LLC, doing business as an
Auntie Anne's franchisee in San Bernardino, Downey, Arcadia, Glendale,
Northridge and Bakersfield, California, paid $51,500 in civil monetary
penalties for allowing eleven 14- and 15-year-olds to work beyond the
hours permitted by law and nine youths to be involved in prohibited
baking activities. The stores also allowed 60 minors to operate freight
elevators, dough mixers, and trash compactors, which are prohibited
hazardous occupations for anyone under 18 years of age.
In 2007, Jim Barnes Enterprises Inc., a McDonald's
franchisee, paid $86,500 in penalties after WHD determined that the
firm allowed minors to perform hazardous duties, e.g., operating a
trash compactor and frying, at a Mobile, Alabama, restaurant. In
addition, a Piggly Wiggly franchisee, SCVS Inc., paid $30,000 in
penalties after an investigation found 20 minors operating paper balers
at two stores. These violations were uncovered as part of the WHD's
Gulf Coast District Office local child labor initiative to increase
compliance in grocery stores and restaurants.
In the summer of 2007, Caesars Utah LLC, doing business as
Little Caesars Pizza in Sandy, Utah, paid a $110,800 civil monetary
penalty for allowing minors to operate dough mixers and bake, among
other activities in violation of the child labor provisions. The
company also agreed to educate the public at large by creating a
statewide public service campaign called Stop, Look and Listen.
In April 2006, Target Corporation paid $92,400 in civil
money penalties for exposing young workers to hazardous machinery in
violation of the FLSA child labor provisions. Twenty-nine minors in
seven New York/New Jersey-area stores were found to have operated
either power-driven hoisting apparatus or power-driven scrap paper
balers, or in some cases, both. The company provided WHD with an
outline of the steps it planned to take to ensure full compliance with
all child labor regulations in the future.
WHD believes its continued emphasis on child labor compliance has
resulted in fewer child labor violations. The total number of
investigations in which child labor violations were found is lower
today than the total number in 2001, and the trend appears to be
continuing. The number of minors found illegally employed last fiscal
year (4,672) is nearly half of the number found illegally employed in
fiscal year 2001 (8,818). The average number of minors found illegally
employed per investigation has also declined from 4.2 in fiscal year
2001 to 3.7 in fiscal year 2007. More importantly, the number of minors
found employed in violation of a hazardous occupations order in fiscal
year 2007 (1,000) was a reduction of more than half the number found
working in a hazardous situation in fiscal year 2001 (2,040). While
these statistics can be attributed in part to the overall drop in the
number of teens in the workplace, these declining trends should also be
taken as an encouraging sign that fewer young workers are employed in
violation of the law.
Children who work in agriculture are among the most vulnerable of
the country's workers. The nature of agricultural employment, i.e., its
short duration, the remote locations, and mobility of the work, pose
particular enforcement challenges. Agricultural work is difficult and
dangerous. For youth, the hazards are significant. The fatality rate
for young workers in agriculture is nearly six times the rate in other
industries. Nearly 60 percent of the youth fatalities in agriculture
during 1998--2002 occurred to youths who worked on the family farms.
The deaths of young family farm workers accounted for nearly a quarter
of all of the young worker deaths that occurred in all industries
during the same period.
The standards for youth employment in agriculture have historically
differed from nonagricultural employment. Under the FLSA, the child of
a farmer can do any job, at any age, at any time, on a farm owned or
operated by the parent of that child. The minimum age for employment is
lower than for nonagricultural work. There is no minimum age for
employment on small farms that the Act exempts from minimum wage
requirements. The agricultural HOs prohibit only those youth under the
age of 16, who are not working on his or her own family farm, from
performing those tasks that the Secretary has found to be particularly
hazardous for youth, as opposed to nonagricultural HOs, which apply to
youth under the age of 18. Because youth are permitted to work in
agriculture at a younger age, WHD is committed to promoting their safe
employment in the industry. WHD investigators who conduct
investigations in the agricultural industry are instructed to examine
compliance with the provisions of all applicable statutes providing
protections for agricultural workers, particularly wages, housing, and
transportation, field worker safety and child labor provisions. WHD
investigated four occupational fatalities that occurred in fiscal years
2007 and 2008 involving teens under the age of 16 working in
agriculture. Of those four cases, WHD found that only one involved a
violation of the FLSA child labor provisions. The employer was assessed
$11,962 in civil money penalties--the maximum allowable penalty at the
time. In the remaining three instances, there was no employment
relationship.
Even in situations in which young workers are not subject to the
FLSA child labor provisions, WHD has looked to methods other than
enforcement to help young farm workers on family farms enjoy safe and
positive work experiences. As I will discuss later, WHD has developed
compliance assistance materials emphasizing occupational safety and
health, disseminated public service announcements, and collaborated
with other entities to educate parents and teens of ``age-appropriate''
task standards that parents can use to measure the capabilities of
their children in performing agricultural work.
Compliance Assistance And Public Awareness Campaigns Affect Compliance
Compliance assistance activities, which include providing clear and
easy-to-access information on how to comply with federal employment
laws, are key strategies in promoting voluntary compliance and should
not be discounted. Parents, educators, employers, and young workers who
are aware of the federal and state child labor requirements can make
more informed decisions on when and where young people should work.
Compliance assistance and educational activities are communicated in
many ways, whether through speeches and presentations given to school
groups or by PSAs. WHD uses every available means to provide compliance
information to the public. WHD staff speak regularly to employer,
employee, community, and advocacy groups. Local offices distribute
self-audit materials and compliance guides to help employers evaluate
their employment practices against the child labor laws. WHD
investigators and managers work directly with school and work-permit
officials to educate issuing authorities on how to screen potential
violations before the work actually begins. With over 7 million covered
worksites in the U.S., voluntary compliance with the child labor laws
must be encouraged and supported.
In May 2002, the Department launched the YouthRules! public
awareness campaign, which quickly became the centerpiece of WHD's child
labor compliance and public awareness efforts. The YouthRules!
initiative is designed to increase public awareness of both federal and
state rules concerning young workers; since its implementation, the
initiative has provided an easily recognizable vehicle by which the
public can obtain compliance materials. The web page,
www.youthrules.dol.gov, provides a gateway to child labor compliance
information on the internet. The site gets approximately 500,000 views
a year in part because some 75 partners, associations, and governmental
entities have linked or agreed to link their web site to the
YouthRules! site. Most recently, Major League Baseball established an
internet link from its web site to the agency's YouthRules! page.
As part of this public awareness effort, WHD published and
distributed a YouthRules! bookmarks and a YouthRules! Employer Pocket
Guide in both English and Spanish. Similar publications were developed
to educate employers and the public about the rules for youth
employment in agriculture. Each year, WHD augments these printed and
on-line YouthRules! materials with new fact sheets, guides, and other
aides for compliance. WHD developed and posted self-assessment tools
for restaurants, grocery stores, and other non-agricultural industries
to help employers assess their compliance with the child labor laws.
WHD designed posters with bold attention-getting colors and graphics to
attract young readers. Agency field personnel developed a child labor
compliance PowerPoint presentation geared towards a teenaged audience.
The YouthRules! web site contains stickers that employers may place on
dangerous equipment to warn teens and others that young workers are not
permitted to operate certain equipment, such as forklifts and paper
balers. Wage and Hour regularly updates this website to inform the
public of new developments, such as the publication of new regulations.
The Department also developed and disseminated a YouthRules! PSA in
fiscal year 2004. That first year, over 6,000 radio stations received a
taped PSA, and 10,000 newspapers received a YouthRules! news article,
including ethnic media and newspapers. That year, the radio PSA played
over 340 times on 197 radio stations with an audience of 27 million
listeners in 39 states. The print article generated 252 newspaper
articles in 20 states with a readership of approximately 15 million.
In fiscal years 2005 and 2006, WHD's summer public awareness
campaign focused on youth employed in construction, because of
increasing numbers of young workers--primarily Hispanic--employed in
that industry. As part of the campaign, WHD launched a new electronic
seminar, ``Youth Working in Construction,'' which is available on CD-
ROM and on the YouthRules! web site. The seminar discusses the
requirements for youth working in construction and concentrates on
identifying the prohibited occupations in construction. A radio PSA and
print article were issued to highlight the new seminar.
WHD's first YouthRules! rally was held in 2003. The event, at a
Philadelphia mall, was highly successful, so WHD expanded the concept
in 2004 to include additional rallies in Houston and New Jersey. The
rallies are now annual events in Houston and San Antonio. Participation
in the events numbers in the thousands.
In the last fiscal year, WHD updated the child labor PSAs and
distributed them to more than 1,900 radio stations, including all 600
Spanish radio stations in the U.S. and Puerto Rico. The new PSAs
focused on youth in agriculture--the industry with the highest youth
fatality rate. WHD continued public dissemination of the PSAs as part
of this year's annual YouthRules! campaign.
These diverse public awareness and compliance assistance activities
continue a longstanding WHD tradition of promoting positive and safe
work experiences by educating parents, teens, employers, educators, and
the public at large about the federal and state rules concerning young
workers. The goal, as stated earlier, is to increase compliance and
prevent violations from occurring in the first instance and through
those efforts, safeguard the lives and futures of young workers.
Partnerships Promote Child Labor Compliance
Strategic partnerships provide opportunities and avenues to
encourage compliance in communities and among employers. Business
associations, unions, state governments, federal agencies, community
groups, academia, and others have collaborated with WHD to promote
public awareness and undertake compliance assistance activities. The
added support of our partners enhances the scope and effect of both
enforcement and compliance assistance. WHD's national partnership
activities include (but are certainly not limited to) collaboration
with the following organizations.
Federal Network for Young Worker Safety and Health (FedNet)
The Department is a founding member of FedNet, a partnership of 14
federal agencies that share ideas, resources, and opportunities to keep
young workers safe. This program strives to:
Increase awareness of young worker occupational safety and
health among key community players and young workers as they enter the
workforce;
Foster education, training, and outreach to promote young
worker safety and health;
Enhance federal initiatives that create relationships with
small businesses, trade associations, and other organizations that
employ young workers; and
Promote resources that enhance employer compliance and
knowledge of federal and state regulations related to young workers.
FedNet accomplishments include safe summer job kick-offs,
brochures, and safety tips. The collaboration available through FedNet
enhances opportunities for WHD to disseminate materials and
information.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) and the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA)
WHD has a longstanding partnership with NIOSH in the areas of
improving workplace safety for young workers and in the collection and
interpretation of injury and fatality data, especially as it related to
rulemaking efforts. In 1998, WHD provided funding to NIOSH to conduct a
comprehensive review of scientific literature and available data in
order to assess current workplace hazards and the adequacy of the
current child labor HOs. The report, entitled(NIOSH report), was issued
in July 2002. The NIOSH report, which makes 35 recommendations
concerning the existing non-agricultural HOs and recommends the
creation of 17 new HOs, was the impetus for the Department's April 2007
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) Recommendations to the U.S. Department of
Labor for Changes to Hazardous Orders
In addition, WHD and OSHA have, for many years, been active members
of the NIOSH-sponsored Federal Interagency Work Group on Preventing
Childhood Agricultural Injury. This group, whose membership includes
representatives of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), works to
reduce young farm-worker deaths and injuries.
Finally, WHD works with NIOSH and OSHA in a ``rapid response''
young worker fatality notification system that keeps all three agencies
advised of youth workplace deaths.
Young Workers Health and Safety Network (YWN)
WHD has also worked for many years with the YWN, a subcommittee of
the Occupational Health and Safety Section of the American Public
Health Association, to promote compliance with the child labor
provisions and to reduce occupational injuries to and workplace deaths
of minors. The YWN--which describes itself as an informal network of
public health professionals, advocates, and government agency staff--
includes individuals from academia, public health, labor law
enforcement, health and safety consultation and enforcement, and labor
organizations.
Interstate Labor Standards Association (ILSA)
WHD has an active collaborative relationship with ILSA, an
organization of state labor department officials. As part of this
ongoing coordination, WHD officials at the national, regional, and
local organizations levels communicate with State labor departments on
various child labor activities.
U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Given the higher fatality rates among young workers in the
agricultural industry, WHD works with USDA on many issues. WHD's most
recent collaboration with USDA involves the reinvention and
streamlining of the tractor certification program. Under the child
labor agricultural HOs, 14- and 15-year-olds may operate certain
otherwise prohibited farm equipment after being properly trained and
certified in the safe operation of the equipment. In most cases,
agricultural extension service agents or agricultural vocational school
instructors perform the training, testing, and certification based on
requirements established by regulation. These requirements have become
outdated, many of the training materials are no longer in print, and
because of funding reallocations, not all states now provide the
training or certification. The interagency agricultural HO Steering
Committee has overseen the identification of the required skill sets,
the development of a modern curriculum with multiple methods of
delivery, the engineering of an electronic system that will register
teachers, administer examinations, issue certificates, and monitor the
operation of the entire process. WHD continues to work with USDA to
ensure the completion of this important project.
National Children's Center for Rural and Agricultural
Health and Safety (NCCRAHS)
NCCRAHS, based in Marshfield, Wisconsin, strives to enhance the
health and safety of all children exposed to hazards associated with
agricultural work and rural environments. NCCRAHS receives funding from
NIOSH. WHD staff have served on the NCCRAHS steering committee and have
helped develop and disseminate the North American Guidelines for
Children's Agricultural Tasks (NAGCAT). NAGCAT is a collection of
guidelines designed to assist parents and others in assigning age-
appropriate tasks for children ages 7 to 16 that live or work on farms
and ranches across North America. The guidelines are based on an
understanding of childhood growth and development, agricultural
practices, principles of childhood injury, and agricultural and
occupational safety. Voluntary use of the guidelines can help parents
and others make informed decisions about appropriate tasks for youth.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
WHD works with EEOC to ensure that young workers experience a
workplace free from discrimination and sexual harassment. WHD and EEOC
jointly provide compliance assistance to employers of workers with
disabilities--many of whom are under the age of 18.
Regulatory And Legislative Initiatives Have Strengthened Child Labor
Laws
Because of changes in the workplace, the introduction of new
processes and technologies, the emergence of new types of businesses in
which young workers may find employment opportunities, the existence of
differing federal and state standards, and divergent views on how best
to balance scholastic requirements and work experiences, the Department
has for many years been conducting an ongoing review of the criteria
for permissible child labor employment. Some of the most significant
accomplishments towards protecting working young men and women in this
country are reflected in the recent revisions to the child labor
regulations.
On December 16, 2004, the Department published a final rule that
amended the child labor regulations to implement statutory amendments
to two existing HOs: the Compactors and Balers Safety Standards
Modernization Act, affecting paper balers and compactors (HO No. 12);
and the Teen Drive for Employment Act, affecting teenagers whose jobs
may include driving on public roads (HO 2). The regulations also
updated the types of cooking activities allowed for 14- and 15-year-
olds; revised the ``roofing'' HO to ban all work on or about roofs by
youths under age 18; updated the definition of ``explosives'' in HO 1;
and reduced paperwork in processing age certificates.
As previously noted, the NIOSH report made recommendations
concerning the existing non-agricultural HOs and recommended the
creation of 17 new HOs. Upon receiving the NIOSH report, WHD conducted
a detailed review and met with various stakeholders to evaluate and
prioritize each recommendation for possible regulatory action
consistent with the established national policy of balancing the
benefits of employment opportunities for youth with the necessary and
appropriate safety protections. The 2004 final rule addressed six of
the NIOSH recommendations.
In April 2007, the Department published an NPRM and an Advance
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) as part of its continuing efforts
to update the youth employment regulations for the 21st Century. The
current proposals would represent the most significant revisions to the
child labor regulations in 30 years. The proposals would strengthen
youth employment regulations to protect against workplace hazards,
expand youth workplace opportunities that have been judged safe and
permissible, update regulations to better reflect the modern workplace,
and address many of the remaining recommendations from the NIOSH
report. WHD is in the process of drafting a final rule based on the
comments it received in response to the NPRM, and anticipates
transmitting that rule to the Office of Management and Budget shortly.
WHD continues to review the comments received in response to the ANPRM,
and the remaining NIOSH recommendations, for potential future
rulemaking.
For the last several years, the President's budget has included a
legislative proposal to increase the amount of civil money penalties
that could be assessed for child labor violations that cause the
serious injury or death of a young worker. On May 21 of this year,
President Bush signed into law the Genetic Information
Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). Among other things, GINA amends
the FLSA by increasing the civil money penalties that may be imposed
for child labor violations resulting in death or serious injury. The
legislation raised the maximum penalty to $50,000 for each violation
resulting in the death of or serious injury to working youth. In cases
where the employer's violation is repeated or willful, the maximum
penalty was raised to $100,000. This new authority provides WHD with an
important tool in securing compliance with the child labor provisions.
Improvements In Child Labor Compliance--A Continuing Priority For WHD
As we have demonstrated, ensuring that young workers in this
country have safe and appropriate early work experiences has been and
continues to be a high priority for this agency. It is an integral part
of every investigation, and WHD personnel nationwide are committed to
this agency goal. WHD has used and continues to use every tool
available--enforcement, compliance assistance, public awareness,
partnership, regulation, and legislation--to promote compliance with
the Nation's child labor laws. We believe that we have demonstrated
success in these efforts, but as in every program, we look for
opportunities to improve. Last year, the Department began working with
an independent evaluator to assess our strategies and their
effectiveness in increasing compliance with the FLSA child labor
provisions. That study is ongoing, and we look forward to any
recommended opportunities for improvements that may come. In examining
our activities and accomplishments, however, we can cite several
measures of success.
WHD has conducted two national, statistically valid, investigation-
based compliance surveys of youth employed in the grocery store and
restaurant industries. These are two industries that employ a high
percentage of young workers. The first baseline survey was conducted in
2000 to gauge the level of child labor compliance in full-service
restaurants, quick-service restaurants, and grocery stores. A second
investigation-based survey was conducted in 2004 to determine if the
levels of compliance had changed. These two surveys were full on-site
investigations that not only included interviews of the young workers,
but also included interviews with their co-workers and employers. The
investigation-based surveys allowed WHD investigators to establish
coverage under the FLSA, review payroll records, and make conclusive
determinations on whether the teens were employed in violation of
applicable federal law.
The 2004 investigation-based survey showed continued high levels of
child labor compliance in the full-service restaurant and grocery store
industries, similar to the levels found in 2000. The 2004 survey also
demonstrated improvements in child labor compliance in quick-service
restaurants in comparison to the 2000 survey results. WHD found
significant reductions in the percentage of employers with repeat
violations in all three industries. The 2004 survey investigations
found that 91 percent of quick-service restaurants were in compliance
with the FLSA child labor provisions and that 99 percent of youth
employed in this industry were employed in compliance. The survey also
found 73 percent of full-service restaurants were in compliance and 88
percent of youth workers were employed in compliance. Finally, 80
percent of grocery stores were in compliance and 95 percent of youth
were employed in compliance in this industry. Ninety-six (96) percent
of full- and quick-service restaurants and 88 percent of grocery stores
were in compliance with the child labor HO provisions. The high
percentage of youth employed in compliance and the increase in
compliance among prior violators can be attributed to the compliance
activities of the agency during the intervening year between the
surveys. Those efforts continue today.
The 2004 survey results are not the only indicators of improved
compliance. In FY 2007, WHD completed an investigation-based compliance
survey, i.e., the Youth Employment Survey (YES), to determine child
labor compliance in four large national retail chains, Sears, Roebuck
and Company (Sears); K-Mart; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Wal-Mart); and
Target Corporation (Target). All four companies had a history of child
labor violations. Following the prior investigations, Sears and Wal-
Mart had entered into settlement agreements with WHD to promote future
child labor compliance.
Of the 67 establishments investigated, WHD found 82 percent (55 of
67) in full compliance with the child labor provisions. All
establishments, but one, were in compliance with the child labor hours
standards. Eight-four (84) percent of the establishments were in
compliance with the child labor HOs. In total, 40 child labor
violations were found involving 36 minors; one child labor hours
violation and 39 HO violations. Of the 39 HO violations cited, 38
involved violations of HO No. 12 (balers). One HO No. 7 (forklift)
violation was found. The findings in this initiative contributed, in
part, to WHD's decision to place an emphasis on increasing compliance
with HO No. 12 as part of its fiscal year 2008 performance plan.
Sears was fully in compliance, with no child labor violations
found. One Wal-Mart establishment was found in violation with a single
HO No. 12 violation. Three Target establishments accounted for 14
violations involving 11 minors. K-Mart has the highest rate of non-
compliance, with 7 stores having 24 violations involving 23 minors.
These large corporate enterprises, that employ minors nationwide, have
far fewer child labor violations and are far more aware of their
obligations as a result of WHD's continued presence.
While these measures of compliance are encouraging, the declines in
workplace injuries and fatalities are the most significant indicators
of improved working conditions for young workers in this country.
According to NIOSH-provided statistics, 38 youth under the age of 18
died from work-related injuries in 2007--a significant drop from the
average of 61 youth aged 17 and under who were killed on the job during
the years 1998 to 2002. Equally encouraging is the corresponding
decline in youth fatality rates from a high of more than 3.5 per
100,000 FTE in 1999 to approximately 2 per 100,000 FTE in 2006.
Injuries to young workers have also declined in recent years, although
not as sharply as fatalities. In 1999, NIOSH estimated that over 70,000
14-to 17-year-olds were injured on the job seriously enough to warrant
a trip to a hospital emergency room. By 2006, the estimate had dropped
to 52,600.
The agency believes these injury and fatality results demonstrate
significant progress in addressing child labor violations. The actions
and activities of many parties have contributed to these declining
statistics, but clearly too many minors continue to be injured while
working, and even one death of a working teen is one too many. The
challenge of protecting the welfare of young workers is a shared
responsibility. It rests with federal and state officials, parents,
educators, community-based and advocacy organizations, employers, and
the young workers themselves. WHD remains committed to this challenge
and will continue to promote legal employment opportunities for young
men and women that are safe, positive, and do not distract from or
interfere with their education.
Thank you again for this opportunity to discuss this important
issue. This concludes my prepared statement. I would be glad to answer
any questions.
______
Chairwoman Woolsey. Ms. Greenberg.
STATEMENT OF SALLY GREENBERG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
CONSUMERS LEAGUE, AND CO-CHAIR, CHILD LABOR COALITION
Ms. Greenberg. Thank you, Madam Chair, for inviting me to
testify here today.
My name is Sally Greenberg, and I am executive director of
the National Consumers League. We very much appreciate the
subcommittee holding this hearing and asking this very
important question, ``Child Labor Enforcement: Are We
Adequately Protecting Our Children?''
The National Consumers League believes that the answer to
the question that the subcommittee is posing is, no, and that
much more can and must be done to protect our young people from
hazards and dangers they confront from the workplace. Every 10
days in America, a young person is killed at work. Every day,
more than 100 youth workers under the age of 19 are seriously
injured or become ill from their jobs.
My testimony focuses today on the Department of Labor's
enforcement of the Federal child labor laws. I plan to make
recommendations about reforms that I would like to see at DOL
to strengthen protections for youth workers. I will also make
recommendations for legislative reforms that we believe
Congress should consider to help protect young people from
hazardous work conditions.
The National Consumers League is America's oldest consumer
group, and our mission is to protect economic justice for
consumers and workers. We are also co-chair of the Child Labor
Coalition, or the CLC, which was established in 1989 and is a
group of more than 30 organizations representing consumers,
labor unions, educators, human rights and labor groups, child
advocacy, religious and women's groups. The CLC's mission is
simply to protect working youth here and abroad.
Let me start by saying that NCL very much supports the
notion that young people can learn and grow by working, as long
as they are placed in jobs that are appropriate and safe.
Much of my testimony is going to be based on findings of
two reports on DOL's child labor enforcement that were released
by the CLC and published by the National Consumers League, one
in June 2005 and the other, September 2006.
What these reports make clear is that enforcement of the
child labor laws is no longer a high priority for DOL. Why do
we say this? First, what many believe is the definitive
document in upgrading and updating Federal child labor laws and
enforcement, this is the NIOSH, or National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, report from 2002. It was issued
now over six years ago. NIOSH recommended that 38 hazardous
occupation orders, or HOs, and HOs prohibit children from
working in jobs that are particularly dangerous; they
recommended in the NIOSH report that 38 of those HOs be
revised. It took DOL five years to respond. And when they did,
they proposed revising only five existing nonagricultural
hazardous orders of the total of 38 that were recommended. They
recommended no changes whatsoever in HOs for agriculture, the
most dangerous work environment for children.
Six years of inaction while children are maimed and injured
on the job, we believe, is six years too many. DOL's refusal to
protect working children by appropriately revising those
hazardous orders is inexcusable, in our view.
Secondly, the number of child labor investigations by DOL
has declined drastically. For example, there was a 48 percent
decline from 2004 to 2006. There were 2,606 child labor
investigations in 2004, but only 1,344 in 2006. If we look back
more than two years, the story is even worse. The number of
child labor investigations conducted in 2006, 1,344. It was the
lowest in the last 10 years.
The second issue we have is that the time spent
investigating child labor has declined, from 58,000 hours in
2004 to 48,000 hours and change in 2006. If we look back more
than two years, the story is even worse. From 2001, when Wage
and Hour spent 73,000-plus hours doing child investigations, to
2006, the time devoted to child labor investigations plummeted
by 35 percent.
There are an estimated 3.2 million working children in the
United States. In other words, what our figures tell us is that
there are only 28 DOL child labor investigators looking out for
the children of this country, which number well over 3 million.
Third, the penalties that DOL imposes, we believe, are far
too low to provide sufficient deterrent to companies hiring
underage workers. We are pleased to see that the GINA bill did
increase penalties to $50,000 for each violation. We don't know
whether the Department of Labor has imposed penalties with GINA
in mind, but we believe the penalties at this point have been
historically way too low.
Fourth, DOL has almost no child labor enforcement in
agriculture, and I believe my colleagues are going to address
those issues, so I am going to quickly move to a couple of
recommendations.
And I do want to mention that we believe that DOL needs to
focus on a couple of industries, including agriculture and
meatpacking. We are particularly concerned about,
Congresswoman, you mentioned the Pottsville, Iowa, case with
Agriprocessors. We went out there to take a look around and
talk to some of the workers, and Reed Mackey, who is here with
me today, actually met with and interviewed a young man who had
worked at the plant when he was 16, and he unrolled his sleeve
and he showed him a stab wound that he had gotten while working
on the job in the Agriprocessors plant. And the young worker
said he was routinely cheated out of wages each week. He said
he believed the plant supervisors knew that he was too young to
work in the plant but looked the other way.
We believe that there are probably a lot more of these
kinds of violations going on, and we would like the Department
of Labor to take a look at that.
I will make further recommendations during the Q & A.
[The statement of Ms. Greenberg follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sally Greenberg, Executive Director, National
Comsumers League
Thank you for inviting me to testify today. My name is Sally
Greenberg, and I serve as Executive Director of the National Consumers
League. We very much appreciate the Subcommittee on Workforce
Protections holding a hearing that asks, ``Child Labor Enforcement: Are
We Adequately Protecting our Children?'' The National Consumers League
believes that that answer to the question this Subcommittee hearing
poses is ``No,'' and that much more can and must be done to better
protect our young people from hazards and dangers they confront in the
workplace.\1\
Every 10 days in America, a young person is killed at work. Every
day, more than 100 young workers under the age of 19 are seriously
injured or become ill from their jobs.
My testimony today focuses on the U.S. Department of Labor, or
DOL's poor enforcement of the federal child labor laws and I will make
recommendations about reforms I would like to see at DOL to strengthen
protections for working children. I will also make recommendations for
legislative reforms that we believe Congress should consider to help to
protect our young people from hazardous work conditions.
The National Consumers League, or ``NCL,'' is a private, non-profit
advocacy group representing consumers on marketplace and workplace
issues. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic
justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. We
are the nation's oldest consumer organization. The NCL is the cochair,
along with the American Federation of Teachers, of the Child Labor
Coalition, or ``CLC.'' The CLC, established in 1989, is a group of more
than 30 organizations, representing consumers, labor unions, educators,
human rights and labor rights groups, child advocacy groups, and
religious and women's groups. The CLC's mission is to protect working
youth and to promote legislation, programs, and initiatives to end
child labor exploitation in the United States and abroad.
Let me start by saying that the NCL very much supports the notion
young people can learn and grow by working, as long as they are placed
in a jobs that are appropriate and safe. We wish to focus, however, on
workplace settings and jobs that are risky or dangerous for young
people and what can be done to correct the loopholes in the law that
expose youngsters to these workplace hazards.
Much of my testimony is based on the findings of two reports on
DOL's child labor enforcement released by the Child Labor Coalition and
published by the National Consumers League, one in June 2005 and the
other in September 2006, as well as more recent data on the same topic.
I have provided copies of the two reports to the Subcommittee, and I
ask that they be included in the record.
What these reports make clear is that enforcement of the child
labor law is no longer a high priority for DOL.
Here is a quick overview that shows why this is so.
First, the number of child labor investigations by DOL has
declined drastically. For example, there was a 48 percent decline from
2004 to 2006--2,606 child labor investigations in 2004, but only 1,344
in 2006.2 If we look back more than two years, the story is even worse.
The number of child labor investigations conducted in 2006--1,344--was
the lowest in the last ten years for which we have data, and may be the
lowest in many decades.
Second, the time spent investigating child labor also
declined: 58,220 hours in 2004, but only 48,005 hours in 2006. If we
look back more than two years, the story is even worse. For example,
from 2001, when the Wage-Hour division spent 73,736 hours doing child
labor investigations, to 2006, the time devoted to child labor
investigations plummeted by 35 percent. The 48,005 hours spent by DOL
in 2006 investigating child labor violations may sound like a lot of
time, but based on our calculations, this is roughly the equivalent of
28 full-time employees doing child labor investigations exclusively.3
There are an estimated 3.2 million working children in the United
States, according to the federal government.4 In other words, each of
these 28 DOL child labor investigators is in effect responsible for
assuring a safe and healthy work environment for about 115,000 youth
workers.
Third, the penalties that DOL imposes are too low to
provide sufficient deterrent to companies hiring underage workers.
While the law imposes a maximum penalty of $11,000 for each violation,5
the average penalty in 2004 was only $718, less than 7 percent of the
maximum penalty permitted. Two years later, in 2006, the average
penalty was only $939, less than 9 percent of the maximum penalty.
Here's a concrete example of low child labor penalties. In 2006 DOL
found 29 children in six Target Corporation retail stores in New York's
Hudson River Valley who had been working in jobs prohibited for
children under age 18 because the work is so hazardous--operating
power-driver scrap paper balers and operating power-driven hoisting
equipment, like forklifts.6 DOL imposed a penalty of $92,400, or an
average of $3,166 per child, not a lot for a multibillion dollar
corporation. Another example dates from 2005. Wal-Mart committed child
labor violations affecting 85 children in 24 stores, many involving
youth who did jobs that DOL has determined to be particularly
dangerous, such as operating chain saws, cardboard balers, and
forklifts.7 DOL imposed $135,540 in penalties, or an average of $1,595
per child. Given that Wal-Mart had $285 billion in annual sales, the
$135,540 total penalty is a negligible amount--the equivalent of fining
someone with an average salary a tiny fraction of a penny. The law says
that the size of any child labor penalty that DOL imposes must take
account of ``the size of the business of the person charged and the
gravity of the violation,''8 but it is hard to see how DOL has done
that in its investigations, given the very low amount of the average
penalty imposed.
Fourth, DOL has almost no child labor enforcement in
agriculture. Hundreds of thousands of children work in agriculture,
yet, in 2006, just 28 of DOL's 1,344 child labor investigations--2
percent--were in agriculture. In 2005 the number of child labor
investigations in agriculture was even lower--just 25. These numbers
contrast sharply with earlier years. In 1999, for example, DOL
conducted more than five times as many investigations in agriculture--
142. What is particularly troubling about this poor enforcement record
is that the risks of injury, illness, and death are greater for
children working in agriculture than in any other jobs. For example,
children age 15 to 17 working in agriculture have over four times the
risk of fatal injury of children working in other industries.9
Children under age 15 working on farms account for about three-
fourths of all work-related deaths for that age group.10 As for
nonfatal injuries, hospital emergency room and workers' compensation
data have suggested that youth injuries in agriculture tend to be more
severe than injuries in other employments.11 What can DOL do to assure
greater protections to working children? There are several key steps
DOL should take.
First, DOL needs to devote more time and effort to
investigating potential child labor violations. The equivalent of 28
full-time child labor investigators for the entire United States is
simply indefensible. The child labor provisions of the FLSA are unique
in that only DOL can enforce them, whereas the FLSA's minimum wage and
overtime pay provisions can be enforced not only by DOL, but also by
aggrieved employees represented by lawyers in court. In other words, if
DOL places less emphasis on enforcing the minimum wage and overtime pay
provisions, employees have another route to address the problem--a
private right of action. In 2006, for example, DOL filed only 3
percent--143 of 4,207--FLSA lawsuits in federal court. But if DOL does
not enforce the FLSA's child labor provisions, then no one else can.
Second, DOL needs to impose much higher penalties than in
the past. Average penalties of less than $1,000 do not provide
sufficient deterrent effect. There is no deterrent effect when a large
company faces a nominal penalty after permitting underage youth to
perform work forbidden under DOL regulations. DOL could easily change
its regulations, or even just revise its internal procedures for
calculating penalties, to achieve this result. Moreover, DOL should
take employers who commit repeat child labor violations to court to get
an injunction barring future violations, as the FLSA authorizes DOL to
do. Any employer that violates such an injunction can be held in
contempt of court and be required to pay DOL's costs of investigating
and prosecuting to prove to the court that the employer has violated
the injunction.
Third, DOL needs to update and strengthen its regulations
that list jobs that are so hazardous that no child under age 18 (or in
agriculture, under age 16) can do them. The government's premier job
safety agency--the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health, or ``NIOSH''--issued a lengthy report over six years ago
recommending that more than half of these existing regulations be
revised and that 17 new regulations be added, but DOL has acted on a
paltry number of these recommendations, and adopted no changes
whatsoever for agriculture, the most dangerous work environment for
children. Six years of inaction, while children are maimed and injured
on the job, are six years too many. DOL's refusal to protect working
children by appropriately revising the hazardous orders is inexcusable.
Fourth, DOL needs to conduct targeted investigations of
two industries in which child laborers may be most vulnerable to death
or injury: agriculture and meatpacking. It has been nearly a decade
since the Department of Labor's targeted Salad Bowl investigation found
dozens of children, including many under the age of 10, helping harvest
the nation's fruits and vegetables. And in the area of slaughterhouses,
the recent investigation by the State of Iowa of the Agriprocessors
plant in Postville, Iowa found dozens of minors working illegally in
what is often considered to be one of the worst and most dangerous jobs
in America. In August, NCL spoke to an Agriprocessors child laborer who
had stabbed himself in the arm while on the cutting line and had been
bandaged up and told to go back to work. The young worker said he was
routinely cheated out of hours of wages each week. He also said that he
believed his plant supervisors knew he was too young to work in the
plant but looked the other way. Given that meat processing plants tend
to attract an impoverished, mostly immigrant work force, the
possibility that child laborers may be employed in slaughterhouse
around the nation should be investigated by U.S. DOL with vigor.
Fifth, DOL needs to publicize its child labor enforcement
activities much more aggressively. The most that DOL does typically is
to issue an innocuous press release, and in many instances no publicity
at all is given to child labor penalty cases. This approach needs to be
changed drastically to make both employers and employees much more
aware of the child labor laws, and the penalties that can result for
violating those laws.
Sixth, DOL needs to revive the Child Labor Task Force that
coordinated child labor enforcement efforts between state and federal
inspectors. Increased coordination and communication between state and
federal inspectors should increase the efficacy of enforcement efforts.
What can this Committee and Congress do to strengthen the child
labor law? We have several recommendations:
First, Congress must increase funding for DOL Wage and
Hour inspectors. One of the primary reasons for the lack of child labor
enforcement: Wage and Hour is grossly understaffed. Less than 750
investigators are available to go out into the field and investigate
labor violations. That translates to one investigator for every 10,000
businesses. Kim Bobo, the executive director of Interfaith Worker
Justice testified in Congress earlier this summer, that if the ratio of
investigators to businesses that existed in 1941 held today, we would
have 34,000 investigators--not less than 1,000. As a first step, NCL
believes the number of inspectors should be doubled and Congress should
mandate that child labor inspections become a greater priority of
enforcement efforts. Congress should require DOL to report on its
enhanced child labor enforcement efforts not less than 18 months after
funding for the additional inspectors is provided.
Second, Congress should eliminate many of the special
exclusions in agriculture that permit children as young as young as 12
years old, and in some cases even younger, to work in the fields. It is
unconscionable to allow 12 year olds to toil in over 100 degree heat
and be exposed to toxic chemicals and pesticides; this gaping loophole
in the law should be changed. By doing so, Congress would ensure that
children working in agriculture would be subject to the same
protections as children working in all other jobs. We are not talking
here about children who work on their own parent's farms (who are not
subject to the child labor law at all), but children who work for hire
on farms, such as migrant and seasonal farmworkers. Rep. Lucille
Roybal-Allard's ``Childrens Act for Responsible Employment,'' also
known as the CARE Act, would close these shameful loopholes, leveling
the playing field for hundreds of thousands of farmworker youth who are
dropping out of high school in high numbers.
Third, because of the great hazards to children working in
agriculture, Congress should strengthen the protections for children
working on farms.
Under existing law, the Secretary of Labor has the authority to
declare which jobs are particularly hazardous for children, and the law
provides a minimum age of 18 for such jobs--except in agriculture,
where the minimum age is 16. For example, a young worker must be 18 to
drive a forklift at a Wal-Mart warehouse, but that young worker could
drive a forklift at a fruit and vegetable packing house at age 16--even
though the dangers are very similar.
Congress should amend the law to raise the minimum age for
doing particularly hazardous work in agriculture to 18, especially in
view of the high incidence of deaths and injuries to children working
in agriculture (as noted above). The CARE Act would remedy this problem
as well. Fourth, Congress should impose minimum penalties for child
labor violations--say at $500--to make employers more likely to comply
with the child labor requirements.
Thank you again, Madam Chair, for calling this hearing on whether
young workers are being properly protected in America's workplace. The
National Consumers League remains ready to work with you and your staff
to see that children in this country are kept safe and are protected
against the many dangers and hazards they may face in the workplace.
endnotes
\1\ [Editor's Note: Not provided.]
\2\ The data we have are based on the federal fiscal year, not the
calendar year. Also, our data go only through 2006, because information
on DOL's child labor enforcement is not on the DOL Web site; the data
are available through a Freedom of Information Act request only--we
have filed a FOIA request but have yet to receive the information.
\3\ A full-time DOL employee with a 40-hour workweek for 52 weeks
is paid for 2,080 hours per year, but with time off for vacations,
holidays, and sick leave for medical appointments and illnesses, actual
working hours in a year are probably closer to 1,700 hours. Thus, the
48,005 child labor investigative hours in 2006 would require the
equivalent of about 28 full-time employees.
\4\ The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH), relying on reports by DOL's Bureau of Labor Statistics and the
Current Population Survey, estimates that 2.78 million 16- and 17-year-
old children were employed in 2000, as well as over 450,000 15-year-
olds, for a total of 3,230,000 youth workers. National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Recommendations to the U.S.
Department of Labor for Changes to Hazardous Orders (May 2002), p. 3
(``NIOSH Report'') (available at www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/
NIOSHRecsDOLHaz/DOL-recomm.pdf). The NIOSH Report has no estimate for
the number of youth workers under age 15. However, many children under
this age do in fact work, as evidenced by DOL's Bureau of Labor
Statistics estimate that 134 children under age 15 were killed on the
job during the period 1992-1998 (see report on the Youth Work Force,
revised November 2000, Chapter 6, p. 60 (Table 6.1), available at
www.bls.gov/opub/rylf/pdf.
\5\ This $11,000 maximum penalty was increased by FLSA child labor
amendments included in the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act,
or ``GINA'' (which took effect on May 21, 2008), with regard to
particularly serious child labor violations. Any child labor violation
that causes death or serious injury now has a maximum penalty of
$50,000, which can be doubled where the violation is a repeated or
willful violation. We don't know whether DOL has begun to impose these
higher penalties, though they took effect over four months ago.
\6\ The information about the Target Corporation child labor
investigation comes from the Daily Labor Report of April 19, 2006,
published by the Bureau of National Affairs in Washington, D.C.
\7\ The information about the Wal-Mart child labor investigation is
based largely on articles in The New York Times on February 12 and 21,
2005.
\8\ FLSA section 16(e), 29 U.S.C. 216(e).
\9\ National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH
Recommendations to the U.S. Department of Labor for Changes in
Hazardous Orders (U.S. Department of Health and Human services, Public
health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, May 2002),
p.12, available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/NIOSHRecsDOLHaz/
default.html.
\10\ Ibid.
\11\ Id. at p. 7.
______
[Additional submissions by Ms. Greenberg follow:]
[``Protecting Working Children in the United States,'' June
2005, may be accessed at the following Internet address:]
http://www.stopchildlabor.org/pressroom/clc%20report.pdf
______
[``The Government's Striking Decline in Child Labor
Enforcement Activities,'' September 2006, may be accessed at
the following Internet address:]
http://www.stopchildlabor.org/pressroom/CLC%20report%20Sept%202006.pdf
______
Chairwoman Woolsey. Thank you. We will ask you for those
recommendations.
Ms. Flores.
STATEMENT OF NORMA FLORES, FORMER CHILD WORKER
Ms. Flores. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity to be able to
share my story.
My name is Norma Flores, and I am just one of the estimated
hundreds of thousands of farm worker children working hard to
feed Americans every day. My four sisters and I began to work
in the farm fields since the age of 12 during our summers and
any other school breaks we had, but we weren't strangers to
farm work at that age. Full-time work now meant 70 hours,
including weekends, for weeks at a time with no days off.
Growing up in a family of many generations of farm workers,
we thought life was supposed to this hard for everyone. Even
though we saw both of our parents work hard year round and
spend every penny carefully, we grew up poor. This taught us to
value all the possessions differently. We knew if we wanted a
nice pair of sneakers or ticket to see a new movie, those would
be things that would have to be earned with a lot of hard hours
of difficult manual labor. But this was life to us.
We weren't informed of what rights we had or educated on
what resources were available to help us. In the six years that
I worked in the fields, I never saw an inspector out in the any
of the fields that I was working in. Had I seen an inspector
out there, I would have pointed out the lack of clean
bathrooms, sometimes half a mile away, and the lack of places
to wash our hands after handling plants covered in pesticides.
I would have pointed out the missing drinking water and the
containers with day-old water that we had to drink from at
times. I would have pointed out the underage children allowed
to work out there during regular school hours.
Working in the cornfields of Indiana or in the asparagus
fields of Michigan, it felt like we were at the mercy of
contractors, with no one to look out for us and no one to turn
to for questions or concerns. One of the most terrifying
moments in my life was when an airplane accidently sprayed
pesticide over the field we were working in. We ran out
frantically across the street and immediately called our
contractor. He simply apologized and asked us to go to another
field to continue our workday. Who were we supposed to contact
in case we got sick from the pesticides? How would we know?
Farm labor is difficult and dangerous work. We are exposed
to many chemicals that can damage our health, and migrant farm
workers don't have benefits like health insurance to help us
with expensive medical treatments.
We are exposed to long hours and hot summer months with
backbreaking labor. We work with sharp tools and heavy
machinery that can cause a lot of damage if not used properly.
Yet, as children, we are trusted to have the ability and
maturity to handle all of these dangers carefully.
I have seen too many times accidents in which children
working beside me have gotten deeply cut and infected with
sharp tools we work with or sick from the chemicals we work
around.
Children at age 12 would not be allowed to work making
copies in air-conditioned office or cleaning floors at a local
store, yet today, in America, children can legally work in
harsh conditions out in the farm field for wages sometimes
below minimum wage.
Like all other Americans across the country, the migrant
community is also concerned about today's economy. We see in
the news how gas prices and the cost of living are on the rise.
Yet what we don't see rising are our wages. Since Cesar Chavez,
no major improvements in the life of migrant farm workers have
been made. They continue to receive the same pay as decades
ago.
Growers claim that wages must be kept low in order for food
prices to stay affordable, but at what price? Is it worth it to
exploit children and hurt their futures so you won't have to
pay cents for your groceries? Even this isn't saving Americans
from the rising food price inflation.
By giving fair wages, migrant families will no longer need
their children to work to supplement their incomes, and these
farm worker children can focus on their studies instead of
worrying about pending family bills.
I was blessed to have parents that put my education as a
top priority and migrant youth programs that helped give the
educational support I needed to get through my education. After
overcoming many educational hardships, included interrupted
school years and different State school systems, I was able to
graduate from one of the Nation's leading high schools and
complete college in 3\1/2\ years. Even though my family
continues to work in fields of Iowa and Texas, I am proudly
working in an international public relations firm in downtown
Chicago.
Other farm worker children aren't so fortunate. I believe
at least two-thirds of migrant farm worker children drop out of
high school before graduation from the pressures of migration,
changing schools, and exhaustion. This dooms most of them to a
life of poverty.
Farm worker children continue to be an ignored injustice
today in the United States, the world's greatest country. The
information is out there, but many choose to look the other
way. Just Google migrant farm worker children and you will get
over 87,000 results. Exploitation of children, regardless if it
is done legally or illegally, needs to stop today. It is more
than doing what is right; it is also about changing the lives
of these children and giving them the opportunity to make a few
for themselves.
[The statement of Ms. Flores follows:]
Prepared Statement of Norma Flores, Former Child Worker
My name is Norma Flores and I am just one of estimated hundreds of
thousands of farmworker children working hard to feed Americans every
day. My four sisters and I began to work in the farm fields since the
age of 12 during our summers and any other school breaks we had, but we
weren't strangers to farm work at that age. Full-time work weeks now
meant 70 hours--including weekends--for weeks at a time with no days
off. Growing up in a family of many generations of farm workers, we
thought life was supposed to be this hard for everyone. Even though we
saw both of our parents work hard year-round and spend every penny
carefully, we grew up poor. This taught us to value all of our
possessions differently. We knew if we wanted a nice pair of sneakers
or a ticket to see a new movie, those would be things that would have
to be earned with a lot of hard hours of difficult manual labor.
But this was life to us. We weren't informed of what rights we had
or educated on what resources were available to help us. In the six
years that I worked in the fields, I never saw an inspector in any of
the fields I was working in. Had I seen an inspector out there, I would
have pointed out the lack of clean bathrooms sometimes half a mile away
and the lack of places to wash our hands after handling plants covered
in pesticides. I would have pointed out the missing drinking water and
the containers with day-old water we had to drink from at times. I
would have pointed out the under-age children allowed to work during
regular school hours. Working in the corn fields of Indiana or in the
asparagus fields of Michigan, it felt like we were at the mercy of the
contractors with no one to look out for us and no one to turn to for
questions or concerns. One of the most terrifying moments of my life
was when an airplane accidently sprayed pesticides over the field my
family and I were working in. We ran out frantically across the street
and immediately called our contractor. He simply apologized and asked
us to go to another field to continue our work day. Who were we
supposed to contact in case we got sick from the pesticides? How would
we know?
Farm labor is difficult and dangerous work. We are exposed to many
chemicals that can damage our health and migrant farmworkers don't have
benefits like health insurance to help us with expensive medical
treatments. We are exposed to long hours in hot summer months with
back-breaking labor. We work with sharp tools and heavy machinery that
can cause a lot of damage if not used properly. Yet as children, we are
trusted to have the ability and maturity to handle all of these dangers
carefully. I have seen too many times accidents in which children
working beside me have gotten deeply cut and infected with the sharp
tools we work with or sick from the chemicals we work around. Children
at age 12 would not have been allowed to work making copies in an air-
conditioned office or cleaning floors at a local store, yet today, in
America, children can legally work in harsh conditions out in the farm
fields for wages sometimes below minimum wage.
Like all other Americans across the country, the migrant community
is also concerned about today's economy. We see in the news how gas
prices and the cost of living are on the rise. Yet what we don't see
rising are our wages. Since Cesar Chavez, no major improvements in the
lives of migrant farmworkers have been made. They continue to receive
the same pay as decades ago. Growers claim that wages must be kept low
in order for food prices to stay affordable, but at what price? Is it
worth it to exploit children and hurt their futures so you won't have
to pay cents more for your groceries? Even this isn't saving Americans
from the rising food price inflation. By giving fair wages, migrant
families will no longer need their children to work to supplement their
incomes and these farmworker children can focus on their studies
instead of worrying about the pending family bills.
I was blessed to have parents that put my education as a top
priority and migrant youth programs that helped give the educational
support I needed to get through my education. After overcoming many
educational hardships including interrupted school years and different
state school systems, I was able to graduate from one of the nation's
leading high schools and complete college in three and a half years.
Even though my family continues to work in the fields of Iowa and
Texas, I proudly work in an international public relations firm in
downtown Chicago.
Other farmworker children aren't so fortunate. I believe that at
least two-thirds of migrant farmworker children drop out before high
school graduation from the pressures of migration, changing schools,
and exhaustion. This dooms most of them to a life of poverty.
Farmworker children continue to be an ignored injustice today in
the United States, the world's greatest country. The information is out
there, but many choose to look the other way. Just Google migrant
farmworker children and you'll get over 87,000 results. Exploitation of
children, regardless if it's done legally or illegally, needs to stop
today. It's more than doing what is right. It's also about changing the
lives of these children and giving them the opportunity to make a
future for themselves.
______
Chairwoman Woolsey. Thank you.
Mr. Strauss.
STATEMENT OF DAVID A. STRAUSS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ASSOCIATION
OF FARMWORKER OPPORTUNITY PROGRAMS
Mr. Strauss. Representative Woolsey and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify this morning
on the conditions endured by children who work for wages in the
farms, fields, and orchards of America.
I also want to comment on the lack of enforcement of child
labor laws in agriculture and recommend changes to the law that
will gave the same protections to children working in
agriculture as other children enjoy.
My organization, the Association of Farmworker Opportunity
Programs, is the national federation of organizations that
conduct job training programs for eligible farmworkers
throughout the United States. In the mid-1990s, our members
noticed that in many places young children were preparing and
harvesting crops. As they began looking into this, they
realized that the Fair Labor Standards Act actually permits
children as young as 12 and, in rare instances, as young as 10,
to work in agriculture.
I am not talking about family farms, where sons and
daughters of farmers learn the business firsthand at a young
age. I am talking about farms that employ large numbers of
workers that aren't related to the owners.
There are about 2.5 million people who earn their living,
at least in part, by performing farm work in this country.
Among them, tens of thousands migrate among various States each
year, following the crops and seeking work wherever they can
find it. Often, families travel from Texas or Florida to the
upper Midwest, the Southeast, and the Northeast. In California,
there are many workers that migrate long distances and often
stay within that State.
They are typically paid miserably low wages, receive no
job-related benefits and have no job security. The average
farmworker family earns less than $15,000 per year from all
sources, well below the Federal poverty level.
In these situations, they sometimes require their children,
like Norma, to work to help to bring in more income. While
there are no reliable statistics on children that work in the
fields, our research indicates that there are about 400,000
such young people below the age of 18.
The FLSA requires that they not work during school hours
and when school is in session. That is virtually the only
restriction in Federal law, along with the prohibition against
hazardous employment for children 15 and younger. That means,
as Norma said, that a 12-year-old kid can work 12 or more hours
a day during the summer, on weekends, or during the school
year, as long as those hours are outside of school time.
I have spoken with teenage children of migrant families who
worked after school until midnight during a heavy harvest. That
same child, if he worked in my office, could only work, at
most, three hours during a school day. After school is out, and
no more than 40 hours a week in the summer. And my offices are
air-conditioned and comfortable; the fields are not.
One of my staff recently completed a two-week visit to
North Carolina's blueberry fields and found dozens of children,
some as young as six, working in 105-degree heat all day long
for several weeks at a time. California, though, for example,
has heat illness prevention standards to protect child workers,
but the Secretary of Labor at the Federal level has not issued
a hazardous occupation for excessive heat.
The toll on the children is real. Sometimes their families
take them out of school before the end of the semester and
return after the new school year begins. While in many places
there are federally funded migrant education programs
available, those programs aren't always congruent with those in
the home State school, so children lose the credits they
thought they were earning. They start the year behind and have
to work doubly hard to catch up, even though they may be
working in fields again after school.
The results are predictable. Most migrant children, perhaps
more than 67 percent, drop out of school well before high
school graduation. Without a diploma and without good jobs,
they often end up continuing the cycle of poverty their parents
hoped they could break. It is a tragic waste that we cannot and
should not allow to continue. Most of these children want to
succeed. They know the meaning and value of hard work but are
cut off from accessing the American Dream as soon as they drop
out.
While we believe the law is not sufficiently protective of
child agricultural workers, my staff has observed violation of
current law over and over. For example, the staff member I
mentioned earlier visited 12 farms and on those 12 farms saw 11
instances of the law being broken, where kids were under 12
years old, working. Where were the Wage and Hour people there?
This needs to stop. The Federal Government and the States
need to make a renewed commitment to protecting our youngest
workers. In addition, Congress should equalize the protections
of these children with the rest of America's workforce. We
support the CARE bill.
Finally, we must dramatically increase the Federal
commitment to the development of farmworker children. Legal
protections alone won't assure their progress, so we have to
invest in those actions we know will keep them in school and
allow them to become as successful as Norma has.
The reality is that, under our very noses, this country has
a farm labor sector that resembles similar sectors in third-
world countries. It is a disgrace that the people who prepare
and harvest our food often barely earn enough to purchase the
food that their families need to survive. The least we can do
is protect their children and give them a chance at the
American Dream.
[The statement of Mr. Strauss follows:]
Prepared Statement of David A. Strauss, Executive Director, Association
of Farmworker Opportunity Programs
Representative Woolsey and members of the subcommittee, thank you
for inviting me to testify this morning on the conditions endured by
children who work for wages in the farms, fields and orchards of
America. I also want to comment on the lack of enforcement of child
labor laws in the agriculture industry and recommend changes to the law
that will give the same protections to children working in agricultures
as other children enjoy. The Association of Farmworker Opportunity
Programs is the national federation of nonprofit and public agencies
that conduct job training programs for eligible migrant and seasonal
farmworkers throughout the United States. In the mid-1990s, our members
noticed that in many places young children were preparing and
harvesting crops, often but not always alongside their parents or other
family members. As they began looking into this, they realized that the
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) actually permits children as young as
12 and in rare instances as young as 10 to work in agriculture. I'm not
talking about family farms, where sons and daughters of farmers learn
the business firsthand at a young age. I'm talking about working farms
that employ large numbers of workers who aren't related to the owners.
There are about 2.5 million people who earn their living, at least in
part, by performing farmwork in this country. Among them, tens of
thousands migrate among various states each year, following the crops
and seeking work wherever they can find it. Often, families are
traveling from Texas or Florida to the upper Midwest, Southeast and
Northeast. In California, there are many workers that migrate long
distances often within that state. They are typically paid miserably
low wages, receive no job-related benefits, and have no job security.
The average farmworker family earns less than $15,000 per year from all
sources, well below the federal poverty level. In this situation, they
sometimes require their children to work to help bring in more income.
While there are no reliable statistics on children that work in the
fields, our research indicates that there are about 400,000 such young
people below the age of 18. The FLSA requires that they not work during
school hours when school is in session. That is virtually the only
restriction in federal law, along with a prohibition against hazardous
employment for children 15 and younger That means that a 12 year old
kid can work 12 or more hours a day during the summer, on weekends, or
during the school year as long as those hours are outside of school
time. I have spoken with teenage children of migrant families who
worked after school until midnight during a heavy harvest. That same
child, if he worked in my office, could only work at most three hours
during a school day after school is out, and no more than 40 hours a
week in the summer. And my offices are air conditioned and comfortable.
The fields are not. One of my staff completed a two week visit to North
Carolina's blueberry fields this past June and found dozens of kids,
some as young as 6, working in 105 degree heat all day long for several
weeks at a time. California, for example, has heat illness prevention
standards to protect child workers, but the Federal Secretary of Labor
has not issued a Hazardous Occupation Order for excessive heat.
The toll on the children is real. Sometimes their families take
them out of school before the end of the semester, and return after the
new school year begins. While in many places there are federally funded
migrant education programs available, those programs aren't always
congruent with those in the home state school, so children lose the
credits they thought they were earning. They start the year behind, and
have to work doubly hard to catch up, even while they may be working in
fields again after school. Their parents typically do not have much
formal education and may speak English very poorly, so they aren't in
the same environment of learning as most of their peers, nor can their
parents afford tutors or other special aids. The results are
predictable: most migrant children, perhaps more than 67%, drop out of
school well before high school graduation. Without a diploma, without
good job skills, they often end up continuing the cycle of poverty
their parents hoped they could break. It is a tragic waste that we
cannot allow to continue. Most of these children want to succeed, know
the meaning and value of hard work, but are cut off from accessing the
American Dream as soon as they drop out.
While in my opinion, the law is not sufficiently protective of
child agricultural workers, my staff has observed violation after
violation of FLSA provisions. For example, one staff member saw
children below the age of twelve working for pay with no sign of any
inspector. The law was broken in 11 of the 12 farms she visited; where
were the wage and hour people? This needs to stop. The federal
government and the states need to make a renewed commitment to
protecting our youngest workers.
In addition, Congress should equalize the protections of these
children with the rest of America's workforce. Amend the FLSA to
protect children working in agriculture just the same as we protect
children working in nearly every other industry. Representative Lucille
Roybal-Allard introduced a bill (HR 2674) in June 2007 that would do
just that. Finally, we must dramatically increase the federal
commitment to the development of farmworker children. Legal protections
alone won't assure their progress, so we have to invest in those
actions we know will keep them in school and allow them to become as
successful as Norma has. The reality is that under our very noses, this
country has a farm labor sector that resembles similar sectors in third
world countries. It is a disgrace that the people who prepare and
harvest our food often barely earn enough to purchase the food that
their families need to survive. The least we can do is protect their
children and give them a chance at the American Dream. Thank you for
your time and attention and I'll be glad to answer any questions you
might have.
______
[Additional submission of Mr. Strauss follows:]
[``Children in the Fields,'' May 2007, may be accessed at
the following Internet address:]
http://www.afop.org/CIF%20Report.pdf
______
Chairwoman Woolsey. All right. Thank you.
Now, you have heard the bells ringing. We have five minutes
to get down to the floor to vote. So I am going to take my
first round of questions. I am going to ask Ms. Greenberg to
finish her testimony. Then I will ask my questions on the
second round.
When we come back, Mr. Kline will be the ranking member,
and he will ask the next question, and then the rest of the
committee will ask their questions.
Ms. Greenberg, go ahead. We have to get out of here when we
have one minute left. So you have about 3\1/2\ minutes for me.
Ms. Greenberg. I am overwhelmed with gratitude that no
Member of Congress has ever done that for me. I greatly
appreciate it.
We have a lot to say on this. We have recommendations for
Congress, and that is increasing the funding for the DOL Wage
and Hour inspectors. One of the primary reasons for lack of
child labor enforcement is Wage and Hour is grossly
understaffed, as you pointed out, Congresswoman.
The representative from DOL talked a lot about the
education work and sort of the marketing and going to cities
and towns to talk about Wage and Hour laws, but there is
nothing that can replace strong enforcement. We just have way
too few investigators going out there. The agency has become a
paper tiger, as a result. Employers know that, and so they will
engage in violations of the law because they know the chances
that they are going to get caught are very slim.
Secondly, Congress should eliminate many of the special
exclusions in agriculture. We certainly join Norma Flores and
David Strauss in their very passionate and I think powerful
statements on that. It is unconscionable for 12-year-olds to
toil in 100-degree heat. So we would support your legislation
certainly, and the CARE Act.
Congress should amend the law to raise the minimum age for
doing particularly hazardous work to 18 and close all of those
loopholes.
We also believe there should be a minimum penalty for child
labor violation, say $500, to make employers more likely to
comply with child labor requirements. As I said, I think the
Department's Wage and Hour right now is a paper tiger. It
really needs to be strengthened. Employers need to know that
they mean business when they set these laws.
So that concludes my testimony. I appreciate the time.
Chairwoman Woolsey. All right. It will probably be 20
minutes. So relax. Thank you for waiting for us.
[Recess.]
Chairwoman Woolsey. If everybody can get in their seat, Mr.
Kline.
Mr. Kline. Thank you, Madam Chair. And to our witnesses,
thanks very much for being here today. Thanks for your
patience. I am sure some of you have been here before and those
of you who haven't know how this works. When we get called to
vote, that trumps sort of everything we are doing on Capitol
Hill, so I appreciate your patience.
Mr. Passantino, let me start with you, if I could. Could
you describe, give us a little more amplification on Wage and
Hour's compliance assistance activities? Does Wage and Hour,
for example, educate growers through their associations on the
rules with respect to the employment of child workers? Is that
part of what you do?
Mr. Passantino. Yes. We have an active compliance
assistance program. As I mentioned during my testimony, I guess
the centerpiece for our youth employment compliance assistance
is what is called the Youth Rules program. Through Youth Rules
and through other outreach, including agricultural associations
and parent groups, we speak to students where we are trying to
educate everyone about their rights and responsibilities under
the law so that they are aware, in the case of a teen, whether
they are working in compliance, and to make employers aware of
their obligations under the youth employment provisions.
Mr. Kline. Could you give me some idea of the size of the
effort? You have two people involved in this education thing,
or 20, or how does that work? Give me a sense of the scope
here.
Mr. Passantino. I think it is fair to say that virtually
everyone in the organization does some measure of it. It is
primarily a manager function to provide compliance assistance,
but our investigators provide compliance assistance as well. So
there is not one specific person responsible for providing
compliance assistance.
Mr. Kline. I guess I am not sure about the size of the
office. How many people are we talking about that would be
engaged in this, since it is essentially a manager's function,
you said?
Mr. Passantino. There are about, I think, 200 managers, 730
or so investigators; so somewhere between 200 and a thousand.
Mr. Kline. Thank you. And speaking of investigators, does
the Wage and Hour Division have a staff of investigators
dedicated solely to investigations of child labor violations,
or is there a crossover here? How does that work?
Mr. Passantino. All of our investigators are trained to
enforce all of the laws enforced by the Wage and Hour Division.
That includes the Fair Labor Standards Act, which includes the
child labor provisions, the Family Medical Leave Act, the
Davis-Bacon Act, the Service Contract Act. All of our
investigators are cross-trained in each of those statutes and
enforcement of all of those statutes.
Mr. Kline. Okay. Thank you. I have some familiarity with
the farming sector. I have got an awful lot of farms in my
district. My wife and I have a farm in southeast Minnesota, and
I know it is very complicated in the farming business
sometimes, trying to figure out who is in charge. I know that
we have heard that there is a lack of inspections in the
agricultural industry. We have heard some of that here today.
I also know, though, that there are sometimes duplicative
inspections that occur in the industry and it would appear--and
this is my experience--that there are a number of government
agencies which share oversight of the workplace conditions in
the agriculture industry, including perhaps the State Labor
Office, OSHA, EPA, in addition to the Wage and Hour Division.
Would it be possible for the agencies which have
jurisdiction in this industry, particularly in the areas of
health and safety, to have some formal agreement to come
together and determine who would conduct the inspections and
share information? Has there been some effort to sort of corral
that morass of agencies?
Mr. Passantino. Sure. And we work with State agencies and
we work with OSHA. When OSHA learns of, say, a child labor
fatality, they will make a referral to us so that we can
conduct our investigation. As far as----
Mr. Kline. Excuse me, if I can interrupt. Do you then
conduct an investigation and OSHA is out of it, or how does
that work?
Mr. Passantino. I believe that there are still going to be
joint investigations or parallel investigations, and I suppose
we can explore opportunities for coordinating with various
agencies. But right now it is more of a notification-type
process.
Mr. Kline. It just seems to me that if there is a shortage
of investigators, if you will, that it might be good to get
some synergy out of this and not some duplication.
Madam Chair, I see that my time is about to expire so I
will yield back. Thank you very much.
Chairwoman Woolsey. Thank you very much, Mr. Kline.
Mr. Strauss, you have said it, and we understand that the
Wage and Hour Division's investigations are generally started
as a result of a complaint from someone. In your experience,
are children apt to complain? Do they know how to complain? And
what should be changed to make that more available to them.
Mr. Strauss. My experience is, no, they would not complain.
Frankly, neither would most adult farm workers complain about
conditions. As Norma said, they don't know what their rights
are, and if they did, they wouldn't know who to contact. How to
cure that is a tough one.
That is why we think really more targeted and better
enforcement is needed. I think it is unrealistic to think that
people who are working in the conditions they are working in on
farms are going to say; tonight I think I will be calling a
Wage and Hour inspector. They may not have any phones or they
may have traveled to a place where information is not
available.
For example, when we had our staffers out in the blueberry
fields of North Carolina, we didn't wake up--we weren't born
knowing that that was a problem area. We found out about it. We
believe that they can find out about it even more easily than
we can, and can target those areas of agriculture at the right
times of the year that are likely to have kids working. We
would be glad to help the Department of Labor figure that out,
but that would really make a difference. When the word goes out
that they are on the case, you will see many, many fewer
children under the age of 12 working on these farms.
Chairwoman Woolsey. So that takes me right to you, Mr.
Passantino. You said that there are public service ads running
and telling kids and farm workers where to go and how to
complain. If there is not enough enforcement officers, what
good would that do in the first place? They go, and then what
happens?
Mr. Passantino. First, I guess I would like to clarify that
we understand that there are not as many complaints in child
labor and in agriculture, and that is why we dedicate so much
of our directed enforcement resources into those two program
areas for youth employment and for agriculture.
I will also say, again, that with respect to youth
employment in low-wage industries, when we do a low-wage
targeted initiative in a particular area, part of that
investigation is a determination of whether that employer is in
compliance with the youth employment provisions in addition to
minimum wage, overtime, those sorts of things.
With respect to our staffing levels, the President's fiscal
year 2009 budget request requested an additional 75 FTEs. We
obviously have not gotten that request.
So, yes, we acknowledge that we need additional staff to
conduct investigations, but I don't think it is an accurate
picture to just look at investigations that are coded in our
system as primarily child labor. We look at child labor----
Chairwoman Woolsey. You told us that when a lot of the
complaints are child labor they don't come in as child labor,
right?
Mr. Passantino. I'm sorry?
Chairwoman Woolsey. You said in your testimony that a lot
of complaints are child labor that didn't start out child
labor.
Mr. Passantino. We don't get many complaints at all in
child labor, but a lot of our cases----
Chairwoman Woolsey [continuing]. Turn out to be child
labor.
Mr. Passantino. I think it is around 50 percent. A little
bit less than 50 percent of the violations that we find of
child labor laws take place in cases that did not originally
begin as a child labor case.
Chairwoman Woolsey. So let's take that and go to Ms.
Flores, who absolutely would have benefited had there been some
representation from the Federal Government at the properties
you were working.
Did you have any idea how to complain, or if you could, or
would you have?
Ms. Flores. No. There wasn't any information. When I
started working, we worked mostly in the States of Indiana and
Michigan. We were--there was no break room. There was no common
area for us to work. We were--when we worked out in the field,
that is where we ate our lunch. It was just lunchtime and
everybody just sat around the bus, sat around, trying to find
some sort of shade and just ate out there.
So there was no actual public area for us to be able to
post signs to be able to read any information. There was
nowhere that said call this number for any questions, any
concerns, any problems.
It wasn't until we actually went to Iowa, which were the
last couple of years where I worked at that, I actually saw
some sort of area that had some sort of number. But other than
that, there was nowhere to be able to see--nobody was out there
to educate us to let us know these are your rights, these are
the things. We just went out there and worked, which is why I
say we were basically at the mercy of the contractors, whatever
information they gave to us, whatever they told us.
It is not like when you go to school that you get trained
in your job and you get informed and you know everything that
is going on. You just grow up in working in the fields, and
that is just the way of life. So there was nowhere to go. And
besides, a lot of growers share a lot of the same workers. So
if you are a trouble worker, another grower isn't going to want
to hire you if you are raising questions and raising concerns.
That ends up putting your whole life, your whole family's life
in jeopardy because if you don't have any work and nobody wants
to hire you, then what else can you do?
Chairwoman Woolsey. Right.
Mr. Kline, do you have any other questions? Then I am going
to keep going for just a little bit.
Ms. Greenberg, there is some sense that through DOL, when
they have defended their low penalty rate for child labor
infractions, that actually the company's bad publicity, the bad
publicity of a company or a grower, would be worse than the
penalty. Do you see that as any truth to that? Does that work?
Ms. Greenberg. Well, no company, I suppose, likes bad
publicity. But if you asked the average American consumer which
companies had gotten into trouble for child labor violations, I
think you would get a blank stare back.
So there is no real publicity given--that is one of the
things we say in our testimony. There is no publicity given
to--or effort to publicize that a company has engaged in these
kinds of activities.
We have companies that are involved in multiple violations
of the child labor law. So I don't think that is a very
effective deterrent. It could be if there were more publicity,
but I just don't see it happening.
Chairwoman Woolsey. All right. We aren't going to have any
other members here. We have a very important meeting going on
with our Democratic Caucus at this moment, and Mr. Wilson had
another appointment.
And Mr. Kline, would you like to make a closing statement?
Mr. Kline. Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, I would just like
to thank the witnesses and apologize, I suppose, on behalf of
the institution--that is sort of the way we work here--and we
have a couple of gigantic issues in front of us this week. So
there is a great deal pulling us off to various huddles of two
or three or more as we try to work through how we are going to
deal with this.
So thank you again for your testimony and for your answers
and for your wonderful patience in helping us work through
this. Thank you.
Chairwoman Woolsey. Thank you, Mr. Kline.
Ms. Flores, you laid it out perfectly. I mean, you painted
the picture. Thank you so much and also thank you for getting
through it and getting past the blockades. And you are going to
make a difference in a lot of lives because of who you are.
Thank you.
And Mr. Passantino, your heart is in the right place and I
really--I sound like President Bush; I am connecting with your
heart. I don't mean it that way. You mean well, let me put it
that way. But we need to do much, much more.
But thank you and thank you all for your testifying today.
What you have told us is very informative, and we must have a
renewed commitment to the child labor laws and this
subcommittee will be taking up child labor laws at the very
beginning of the next Congress, I can assure you of that.
With over 3 million children employed in the United States
each year, they must be protected. And I believe that whatever
we do to enhance the DOL and child labor laws, that we bring
the farm worker kids right in with it, that we don't have two
separate kinds of children. How ridiculous. So we will do
better. We will work together and maybe you will all come back
and help us put together the strengthening of DOL laws.
So thank you very much. You have been very, very helpful.
So as previously ordered, members will have 14 days to
submit additional materials for the hearing record. Any member
who wishes to submit follow-up questions in writing to the
witnesses should coordinate with Majority staff within 14 days.
Without objection, the hearing is adjourned.
[The statement of Ms. Roybal-Allard follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard, a Representative in
Congress From the State of California
Madam Chair, thank you for holding this hearing on the U.S.
government's enforcement of child labor laws. The enforcement of our
existing child labor statutes is insufficient at a time when our
nation's youth remain very much at risk of suffering serious and even
fatal injuries on the job. Though accurate data is scarce, estimates
indicate that sixty to seventy children die annually in the
workplace\1\ and another 230,000 are injured.\2\ Yet, the Department's
Wage and Hour Division had thirty-five percent fewer employee hours
dedicated to child labor investigations in 2006 than it did in 2001.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Child Labor Coalition, Protecting Working Children in the
United States: Is the Government's Indifference to the Safety and
Health of Working Children Violating an International Treaty?(June
2005), p 9.
\2\ Child Labor Coalition, Advocacy Group Releases New Information
from States Showing Ongoing Child Labor Enforcement Woes (February 15,
2006).
\3\ According to testimony by Sally Greenberg, Executive Director,
National Consumers League, at the House Workforce Protections
Subcommittee hearing on September 23, 2008, the Wage and Hour Division
(WHD) spent 73,736 hours doing child labor investigations in 2001 and
48,005 hours doing so in 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The need to better protect working children is particularly evident
in the agricultural sector. In fact, children working in agriculture
are six times more likely to die on the job than youth working in non-
agricultural occupations.\4\ Agricultural work is more dangerous for
youth in part because the law affords weaker protections for children
working in this field compared to protections provided to children
working in other industries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ According to the prepared statement of Alexander Passantino,
Acting Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of
Labor, at the House Workforce Protections Subcommittee hearing on
September 23, 2008. According to Human Rights Watch, The Hidden Problem
of Child Farmworkers in America: Facts and Figures (2000), while about
eight percent of employed youth work in agriculture, about forty
percent of workplace deaths and nearly half of workplace injuries
suffered by minors occur in our nation's fields, farms and orchards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), children working
outside of agriculture are not allowed to perform tasks deemed by the
Secretary of Labor to be particularly hazardous. However, that same
statute allows youth aged sixteen- and seventeen-years-old to perform
hazardous tasks in agriculture.
This dangerous double-standard may have made more sense seventy
years ago, when twenty-five percent of Americans lived on farms and
when many of those children working in the fields were doing so on
their families' lands. In 2008, however, only roughly two percent of
Americans live on farms, and farm laborers are often migrant workers
unrelated to the farm's owners. Working in farms and orchards sprayed
with carcinogenic pesticides and groomed by dangerous machinery, child
farmworkers are exposed to serious risk of injury, illness or death.
The FLSA not only fails to ensure the safety of children when they
are working in agriculture, it also fails to guarantee that these
children have the same educational opportunities as children working in
other industries. Other than prohibiting children from working during
school hours, current federal law allows farmworker youth to work
unlimited hours before and after school, and on weekends when school is
in session. By contrast, on school days, fourteen- and fifteen-year-old
children working in non-agricultural jobs are prohibited from working
more than three hours a day or past 7:00 in the evening. Similarly,
these children are prohibited from working a total of more than
eighteen hours a week when school is in session.
The result of this double-standard in federal child labor law is
that non-agriculture child workers have time to complete homework and
get sufficient rest, while child farmworkers do not, therefore often
arriving to class exhausted and unprepared. This unfair and
irresponsible federal approach to agricultural child labor has
contributed to a fifty percent dropout rate among those youth who
regularly perform farm work.
I have introduced the Children's Act for Responsible Employment, or
``CARE Act'', to bring labor standards for youth farmworkers in line
with the standards that govern the employment of youth in industrial,
office and all other settings. This legislation is created to protect
children laboring in America's fields and orchards from needless
threats to their health and educational achievement.
Specifically, the CARE Act raises the standard age for agricultural
work to sixteen, matching the standard set for all other industries. As
in all other industries, under the bill the Secretary of Labor would
issue regulations specifying the conditions under which fourteen- and
fifteen-year-olds can work in agriculture so that their employment does
not interfere with the child's schooling or health and well-being.
The CARE Act also protects our children by strengthening safeguards
against pesticide exposure and requiring increased reporting of
pesticide use and violations. The bill guards against employers turning
a blind eye to children working in their fields by setting a minimum
fine and increasing the maximum penalties for child labor violations.
And because there is currently little information on the challenges
that child agricultural laborers face, the CARE Act will require a
greater level of data collection from employers on injuries, illness
and deaths of these young workers.
Madam Chair, we must do everything in our power here at home to
protect the rights, safety and educational future of all our children.
It is tragic that children who work in agriculture, one of this
country's most dangerous occupations, are less protected under U.S. law
and have fewer educational opportunities than juveniles working in
other safer occupations.
This hearing represents a crucial first step to educating the
public about the need for increased enforcement of our existing child
labor laws and the unacceptable double-standard in our child labor
laws. Thank you for your efforts to protect America's youth.
______
[Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]