SEARCH
Missouri Senator Wants to Eliminate Child Labor Laws, Really
I have been writing about politics and legislation from a workers’ viewpoint for the better part of three decades. I still get angry and my blood pressure jumps when politicians come after workers and unions with the same old lies and bull crap that we are seeing today in states across the country. Just check out here, here and here what’s happening in Wisconsin.
But there isn’t much that surprises me anymore, let alone shocks me. Well, today, I’m shocked. Missouri State Sen. Jane Cunningham (R) has introduced a bill to minimize child labor laws. I could find all kinds of colorful words and descriptions to show just how crazed and outrageous is S.B. 222.
But let’s just use the official summary of the bill from the Missouri state Senate website and if you don’t believe me, click here and read it yourself.
- This act modifies the child labor laws.
- It eliminates the prohibition on employment of children under age fourteen.
- Restrictions on the number of hours and restrictions on when a child may work during the day are also removed.
- It also repeals the requirement that a child ages fourteen or fifteen obtain a work certificate or work permit in order to be employed.
- Children under sixteen will also be allowed to work in any capacity in a motel, resort or hotel where sleeping accommodations are furnished.
- It also removes the authority of the director of the Division of Labor Standards to inspect employers who employ children and to require them to keep certain records for children they employ.
- It also repeals the presumption that the presence of a child in a workplace is evidence of employment.
This is absolutely insane.
 |
Become a Fan on Facebook |  |
Follow Us on Twitter |  |
Subscribe to YouTube |  |
Subscribe to Blog RSS | ||||
18 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I too have been covering labor for over thirty years, and I’ve seen alot of things. I am not surprised such a proposal would come out of Missouri, and I have no doubt it will fall flat. The righty-wing is feeling its oats these days, and we can expect many more outragous proposals come forward from the fanatics that out starting to clog the political system. Wisconsin’s Gov??? Hey, this is the state Joe MacCarthy came out of, and his attacks on the left – especially the Communist Party – did more damage to organized labor than we can ever imigine today. So don’t sweat the crackpot from Missori. This tide will turn.
I work for the University of Wisconsin and I am very upset with what is happening in Wisconsin. But the idea of making children work makes me physically ill! Instead of making the corporations pay their taxes, republicans feel that all labor laws from the last century need to be abolished to solve deficits and protect the rich.
Missouri has some hell of a leaders when ut comes to kids. remember the one who believes in doing away with school lunches because hunger is a powerful motivator?
The rich should pay 80% in taxes . Corporations should continue to pay 35 % in taxes. That will fix everything.
Yes,sweartogod that sounds about right since most of them have not been paying any taxes at all. And since the rich greedy a—- caused this mess they should be the ones to get us out.
Did the poster or any of the commenters actually read the bill? It seems that the summary of the bill is extremely misleading. The bill itself says that childred under 16 cannot work during the school year without a permit, cannot work more than 3 hours a day on school days / 8 hours on weekends, and those under 14 cannot work at all. Try reading, it worked for LeVar Burton and it will work for you!
AnoNY, the summary is correct: permits are no longer required. You seem to have failed to read this part: EXPLANATION–Matter enclosed in bold-faced brackets [thus] in this bill is not enacted and is intended to be omitted in the law. The bracketed sections are what is being repealed.
.
AnoNY —
Those sections you are referring to are part of what is to be deleted (294.060 covers children under 16 requiring a work permit, for example)
S e ctio n s 29 4 .0 2 1 , 2 9 4 .0 2 2 , 2 9 4 .0 2 4 , 2 9 4 .0 2 7 , 2 9 4 .0 3 0 , 2 9 4 .0 4 0 ,
2 294.045, 294.051, 294.054, 294.060, 294.070, 294.080, 294.090, and 294.100,
3 RS Mo , a re re p e a le d a n d tw o n e w s ectio n s e n a cte d in lie u th e re of, to b e k n o w n a s
4 sections 294.022 and 294.040, to read as follows
I read the bill and indeed, there are a number of guidelines.
However, it remains problematic in that they have removed the restrictions:
“SB 222 – This act modifies the child labor laws. It eliminates the prohibition on employment of children under age fourteen. Restrictions on the number of hours and restrictions on when a child may work during the day are also removed. It also repeals the requirement that a child ages fourteen or fifteen obtain a work certificate or work permit in order to be employed. Children under sixteen will also be allowed to work in any capacity in a motel, resort or hotel where sleeping accommodations are furnished. It also removes the authority of the director of the Division of Labor Standards to inspect employers who employ children and to require them to keep certain records for children they employ. It also repeals the presumption that the presence of a child in a workplace is evidence of employment.”
So, do you know the difference between restrictions and guidelines?
This is carte blanche for businesses to skirt all kinds of labor laws – it is to maximize profit, as any labor arbitrage strategy is designed to do.
I did read the bill, including the part that says:
“EXPLANATION–Matter enclosed in bold-faced brackets [thus] in this bill is not enacted and is intended to be omitted in the law.”
At least one of the sections to which you refer is in brackets:
“[294.030. 1. A child shall not be employed, permitted or
suffered to work at any gainful employment for more than three
hours per day in any school day, more than eight hours in any
nonschool day, more than six days or forty hours in any
week. …”
The way I read it, that’s being cut from the bill.
Unbelievable. Unbelievable. Unbelievable.
AnoNY, notice the top of the bill where it says the proposal would REPEAL those sections you note. The legislation as it currently stands prohibits children under 16 from working, etc., but those are sections Cunningham proposes to eliminate.
When reading “the bill” it is important to realize that the provisions in brackets [ ...] are being proposed to be removed from the existing law. Those directions appear at the bottom of page 1, in case anyone missed it.
Commentators should have a background in legislation before belittling others concerning their understanding of it’s content.
Whereof one knows nothing, thereof one should not speak.
Stay tuned, there is a whole lot more of this type of $hit coming to a newly elected republican majority in a state near you. News @ 11:00!
BRSinIL can you believe these clowns have only been in office since January and we are not even out of February yet? To all of you out there who are asking how these clowns got in office anyway. YOU put them there. If you are a Republican or Independent who voted for them or if you are a Democrat who sat on your lazy a– and did not vote because you said it did not matter who was in office they were all the same. What do you think now? It is terrifying to think most of these Governors have 4 more years in office, most house members have 2 years and Senators have 4 to 6 years. All federal Senators have 6 years. By the time these wacos finish destroying what was left of our country after Ronald Regan and George W. Bush you will see there is a very big difference in the parties. It might very well be too late by that time. When they get on TV and yell from the top of their lungs they want to take their country back just who are they talking about taking it back from? Are they trying to say that anyone who votes Democrat is not an American and doesn’t belong in this country? No I am very sorry to have to inform you this is not your country alone. My mothers family is a native American Indian ( so what if I tell you I want to take my country back from you?) I pay my taxes, have a birth certificate that says I am a ciitzen of the USA(yes so does our President) and my family has fought and died for this country so don’t tell me you are going to take this country back from me. As I said before this country does not belong to YOU ALONE. We are not a dictatorship yet I know George Bush said it would be easier to govern if this was a dictatorship but only if he was the dictator. Well my dear Republicans we are not there yet that is why an election is held in every state. One party or person does not rule.Just because you slithered into office in the mid-term when everyone did not vote (what was it around 40%?) you did not get a mandate to go in to office and act like you received 100% of the vote. It does not mean you were elected by the majority of the people to destroy ALL of our constitutional rights. Maybe you should read it again (even the stuck together pages) and this time try to understand what it really says and means. I don’t think you will find anywhere in the Constitution that is says the USA is a dictatorship to be controlled and ruled by the Republican Party.
Corporate America is on a roll. Look for 10yr olds working in factories and $1/hr. labor coming soon near you.
I, for one, cannot believe this. Very shocked. So shocked that I had to send this Senator an e-mail voicing my concern over this bill. It is just atrocious that someone who is in political office and supposed to be protecting our rights is trying to take away our children’s. If you would like to do the same, you can e-mail State Senator Jane Cunningham here:
http://www.senate.mo.gov/webmail/mail_form.aspx