Steep fines in Iowa set off state-federal showdown over child labor laws • Stateline

Child Labor Laws in Iowa: A Clash Between State and Federal Standards

Michelle Cox, the owner of a Subway franchise in Maquoketa, Iowa, was shocked when she was informed by a U.S. Department of Labor official that she had violated federal law by employing 14- and 15-year-olds past 7 p.m. on school nights. Cox, who was unaware of the conflict between state and federal labor laws, had adjusted her employees’ work schedules in accordance with the changes made by the state legislature in 2023. However, it turned out that Iowa’s new regulations directly contradicted federal standards, and employers are required to adhere to the stricter standards. Cox promptly rectified the issue by eliminating later work shifts for her youngest employees, but she now faces a hefty $73,000 federal fine. She is just one of several Iowa restaurateurs who are being penalized by federal regulators following the state’s recent legislation.

The Push to Loosen Child Labor Protections

In recent years, many states, including Iowa, have been attempting to relax long-standing child labor protections in response to labor shortages and concerns about outdated safeguards. However, Iowa’s efforts have been particularly extensive, raising questions about how federal authorities will respond to states with more lenient laws. According to the Economic Policy Institute, lawmakers in 31 states have introduced bills since 2021 that would weaken child labor protections. This year, eight red states, including Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and West Virginia, passed bills that undermine these protections. Some of the changes expand eligibility for younger teens to drive to work or relax standards on work permits for the youngest workers, which are not addressed in federal law. However, other changes, such as those enacted in Iowa, directly conflict with federal laws.

1. Iowa’s Republican leaders, including Governor Kim Reynolds, have criticized the “excessive fines” resulting from the enforcement of federal law. Reynolds wrote a letter to federal regulators on July 1, expressing her concerns about fines as high as $180,000 imposed on businesses. She argued that a teenager working past 7 p.m. on a school night does not constitute oppressive child labor. Reynolds pointed out that 25 other states have less restrictive laws than the federal government, and those states have not faced the same level of enforcement and fines as Iowa.
2. The federal Department of Labor has acknowledged receiving Reynolds’ letter and stated that they will respond accordingly. They emphasized their support for enforcing labor laws against businesses that employ youth in dangerous and harmful work environments.
3. Jennifer Sherer, a researcher at the Economic Policy Institute, expressed concern about the recent assault on the consensus to protect the youngest workers. She highlighted the need for federal and state governments to continue safeguarding young workers after eradicating the worst child labor abuses. Sherer emphasized the importance of maintaining strong child labor protections and criticized the recent trend of weakening these protections.

Unequal Enforcement and Fines

Iowa’s restaurant industry has been particularly targeted by federal enforcement. Jessica Dunker, the president and CEO of the Iowa Restaurant Association, which supported last year’s legislation, believes that Iowa is being treated unfairly compared to other states with conflicting laws. Dunker argued that the state law only changed work times for younger teens and did not allow them to perform more dangerous work. She questioned why volunteering at a high school concession stand late at night without pay is considered acceptable, while working at a place like Dairy Queen until 9 p.m. and getting paid is seen as dangerous or harmful.

• Jake Andrejat, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Labor, emphasized that less restrictive state laws do not override more stringent federal rules. Employers are obligated to comply with federal law even if their state laws are less restrictive. Andrejat mentioned that many investigations are initiated based on complaints or tips, but the department also conducts agency-initiated investigations to protect vulnerable workers who may not be aware of their rights or specific employment rules.
• Iowa State Senator Nate Boulton believes that the predicament facing employers could have been avoided. He argued that there were numerous warnings and efforts to draw attention to the conflicts between state and federal laws. Boulton criticized the approach of passing conflicting state laws and putting small businesses at risk of fines to pressure the federal government. He called for changes in federal law and highlighted the outdated nature of the current protections.

Contrasting Approaches in Other States

While some states have been loosening child labor protections, others have taken the opposite approach by strengthening these standards. Lawmakers in Alabama, Colorado, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, Utah, and Virginia have recently enacted legislation to enhance certain child labor standards. Illinois has also passed a similar bill, but it has not been signed by the governor. These states aim to align their laws more closely with federal rules, reducing confusion for employers.

• Utah Democratic State Senator Karen Kwan introduced legislation to bring state law in line with federal rules for the youngest workers. The goal was to prevent employers from being fined by the federal government. The legislation passed with little opposition.
• In Indiana, state Representative Kendell Culp sponsored legislation to align some of the state’s regulations with federal rules. This change was prompted by concerns raised by an owner of a drive-in restaurant who discovered that Indiana did not allow 14- and 15-year-olds to work past 7 p.m. in the summertime. Culp believes that having consistent regulations makes sense from a business-friendly perspective and ensures the protection of teenagers.

Overall, the clash between state and federal child labor laws in Iowa has highlighted the need for clear and consistent standards to protect young workers. While some states have sought to relax these protections, others recognize the importance of maintaining strong safeguards. The enforcement and fines imposed by federal regulators have sparked debate and raised questions about fairness and equal treatment among states. As the issue continues to unfold, it remains crucial to prioritize the well-being and rights of young workers in alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set by the United Nations.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

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

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
• SDG 4: Quality Education

The article discusses child labor laws and the conflict between state and federal regulations. This relates to SDG 8, which aims to promote sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all. It also relates to SDG 4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.

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

• SDG 8.7: Take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labor, end modern slavery and human trafficking, and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor.
• SDG 4.4: By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs, and entrepreneurship.

The article highlights the conflict between state and federal child labor laws, indicating a need to address the issue of child labor and ensure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor (SDG 8.7). It also mentions the importance of relevant skills for employment, which aligns with the target of increasing the number of youth and adults with relevant skills for decent jobs (SDG 4.4).

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

• Number of child labor law violations
• Number of fines imposed on employers for violating child labor laws
• Number of states with conflicting child labor laws
• Number of states with strengthened child labor standards

The article mentions child labor law violations and fines imposed on employers for violating child labor laws, which can be used as indicators to measure progress towards SDG 8.7. The number of states with conflicting child labor laws and the number of states with strengthened child labor standards can also be used as indicators to assess progress towards SDG 8.7 and SDG 4.4.

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: stateline.org