Child labor violations on rise, but several states, Ohio included, have looked to relax work laws – Cleveland.com

Report on the Relaxation of Child Labor Laws and its Conflict with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Regression in Child Protection and Sustainable Development

A recent trend across several U.S. states involves the systematic relaxation of child labor laws, a development that directly contravenes multiple United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While proponents cite labor market needs, this legislative shift correlates with a documented rise in labor violations and serious workplace injuries among minors. This report analyzes these changes through the lens of the SDGs, highlighting the conflict with international goals for decent work, quality education, good health, and reduced inequalities.

State-Level Legislative Changes Undermining Child Welfare

Several states have enacted legislation that weakens protections for young workers, primarily by extending working hours or removing verification requirements. These actions represent a significant departure from established norms designed to protect children.

1. Arkansas: The state eliminated the requirement for age verification for 14- and 15-year-old workers. Following this change, child labor violations increased from 460 in 2000 to 1,685 in 2023.
2. Indiana: A 2024 law permits 16- and 17-year-olds to work more than 40 hours a week and past 10 p.m. on school nights without parental consent. This was followed by a nine-year high in child labor violations in 2023.
3. West Virginia: Legislation now allows 14- and 15-year-olds to work until 9 p.m. during the school year, extending their hours beyond previous limits.
4. Ohio: A pending bill (Senate Bill 50) would similarly allow 14- and 15-year-olds to work until 9 p.m. on school nights, a two-hour extension from the current 7 p.m. limit.

Implications for SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

The relaxation of child labor laws is in direct opposition to the principles of SDG 8, which advocates for decent work for all. The trend specifically undermines key targets within this goal.

• Contradiction of Target 8.7: This target calls for the eradication of child labor in all its forms. Loosening regulations on hours and oversight for minors is a regressive step that increases the risk of exploitative child labor, rather than working towards its elimination.
• Violation of Target 8.8: This target aims to protect labor rights and promote safe and secure working environments. A report from the Child Labor Coalition documented 10 cases in 2023-2024 where underage workers were killed or seriously injured, indicating a failure to ensure safe working conditions.
• Erosion of Decent Work Principles: Critics argue the legislative changes are motivated by a desire for “cheap labor.” In Ohio, for instance, 14- and 15-year-olds can be paid a sub-minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, far below the standard minimum wage. This practice institutionalizes wage inequality and undermines the concept of decent pay for decent work.

Wider Repercussions for Sustainable Development

The impact of these legislative changes extends beyond labor rights, negatively affecting other core SDGs.

• SDG 4 (Quality Education): Allowing teenagers to work later on school nights directly interferes with their ability to complete homework, study, and obtain adequate rest, thereby compromising their educational outcomes and jeopardizing the goal of ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education.
• SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being): The documented increase in workplace injuries and fatalities among young workers is a clear threat to their physical well-being. Longer hours and potentially hazardous environments increase both physical and mental health risks for a vulnerable population.
• SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): By creating a legal framework that allows for lower pay for the youngest workers, these laws exacerbate economic inequality. They create a sub-class of labor that can be legally exploited, disproportionately affecting teens from lower-income families.
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The dismantling of protective regulations and the failure to enforce existing laws represent a weakening of the very institutions designed to protect children’s rights and ensure justice. The concurrent push to amend the federal Fair Labor Standards Act further signals an attempt to institutionalize weaker protections at a national level.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on the relaxation of child labor laws and its consequences directly connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that focus on labor rights, health, education, and the protection of vulnerable populations.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: This is the most prominent SDG addressed. The article’s central theme revolves around child labor, working conditions for young people, and economic exploitation, which are core components of SDG 8.
• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article explicitly mentions that “underage workers were either killed or seriously injured on the job.” This directly relates to ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being, as unsafe working conditions pose a significant health risk.
• SDG 4: Quality Education: The new laws allowing teenagers to work longer hours and later on school nights (e.g., until 9 p.m. or 10 p.m.) can negatively impact their ability to focus on their studies, complete homework, and attend school regularly, thereby threatening the goal of quality education.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: This goal includes ending abuse and exploitation of children. Critics in the article frame the relaxation of child labor laws as a form of “exploitation” for “cheap labor,” which undermines the legal and institutional protections designed to safeguard children.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 8.7: Take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour… and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms.
   • The article discusses the relaxation of laws that protect children from labor exploitation. Critics’ claims that these changes are about “corporate greed” and “cheap labor” align with the concerns of this target, as loosening regulations can increase the risk of child labor.
2. Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers… and those in precarious employment.
   • The report cited by the Child Labor Coalition, which “logged 10 cases in 2023 and 2024 where underage workers were either killed or seriously injured on the job,” directly highlights the failure to provide a safe working environment for young workers, a key focus of this target.
3. Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education…
   • Laws passed in Indiana, West Virginia, and proposed in Ohio that extend working hours for teens on school nights create conditions that can interfere with their education. Working late can lead to fatigue, less time for homework, and lower academic performance, jeopardizing the completion of quality secondary education.
4. Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.
   • The article points to the economic exploitation of children. The statement that employers can pay 14- and 15-year-olds a lower wage ($7.25/hour) than the state minimum for older workers ($10.70/hour) is presented as evidence that the new laws are about “cheap labor,” a form of economic exploitation that this target aims to end.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article provides several explicit and implicit indicators that can be used to measure the impact of the changing child labor laws:

• Number of child labor violations: This is a direct indicator for Target 8.7. The article provides specific data, stating that in Arkansas, “violations shot up from 460 in 2000 to 1,685 in 2023,” and in Indiana, “child labor violations hit a nine-year high in 2023.”
• Frequency of occupational injuries and fatalities among young workers: This serves as an indicator for Target 8.8. The article mentions a report logging “10 cases in 2023 and 2024 where underage workers were either killed or seriously injured on the job,” providing a quantifiable measure of workplace safety for children.
• Legal regulations on working hours for students: This is an implied indicator for Target 4.1. The changes in laws, such as allowing 14- and 15-year-olds to work until 9 p.m. or 16- and 17-year-olds to work past 10 p.m. on school nights, are policy-level indicators that can be tracked to assess potential risks to educational outcomes.
• Wage differentials based on age: This is a clear indicator of economic exploitation under Target 16.2. The article specifies the wage gap in Ohio, where teens can be paid “$7.25 an hour, lower than the state’s non-tipped minimum wage for older workers of $10.70.” This difference can be measured and tracked.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: cleveland.com