The War On Child Labor Laws: Maine Republicans Want Longer Hours, Lower Pay For Kids

[PokerPacker]

For a 15 year old?

15 year olds are people, too, and should be equally protected under the law.

[IONTOP]

This title should be called: The war on companies exploiting the common worker: Maine Republicans Want Shorter Hours, Higher Pay for Working Adults Comparatively...

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

For a 15 year old?

You think there aren't 15 year olds helping their families buy food and pay the bills? 15 year olds who want to save up for a car bedause their parents can't afford one? Buy school clothes? Save up college? There are a lot of us out here who weren't handed everything as kids and actually had to help out our parents.

[Hubbs]

15 year olds are people, too, and should be equally protected under the law.

Thank God we've cleared that up. Okay, everyone who was saying that 15-year-olds should have their equal protection rights violated, get out of the thread now. All of you! The many, many people who had been saying such things!

...anyway, what was actually said was that a 15-year-old working a cash register has to worry about grocery bills, utility bills, and so on. Naturally, I responded by saying that 15-year-olds are a subhuman species who probably should be shackled to cold stone walls in various underground dungeons whenever the sun goes down. At least I think it was that. Theoretically, it also could have been a slightly more verbose way of saying, "Um, really? Wouldn't that be better fixed with the adult laws?" But I'm pretty sure it was the shackles thing.

[Conn]

For a 15 year old?

When I was 15, I was working "under the table" at two different jobs during the school year, saving money. 3 different jobs, during the summer. Because I knew that my parents couldn't afford to buy me a car, to pay for my college, or the food/clothes/etc. I would need there...never mind if I actually wanted to go out and have fun with friends once in a while. I wasn't getting an allowance or money for chores, or anything. If it wasn't Christmas or my birthday, I wasn't getting anything except maybe some clothes for school, which weren't from the popular places like Hollister, etc. until I bought them myself starting at some point in high school. When I graduated high school, at my graduation party I got a crisp $100.00 bill from my Dad, and a hug, and an "I'm proud of you, etc. etc. I wish I could help you with school." That's it.

So forgive those of us who weren't spoiled little snots at that age for not wanting an entire segment of the population basically punished because there are many that ARE like that. A 15 year old should make the same amount of money that a 25 year old does, if they're doing the same job. Which of course, will almost certainly be unskilled labor.

[Hubbs]

You think there aren't 15 year olds helping their families buy food and pay the bills? 15 year olds who want to save up for a car bedause their parents can't afford one? Buy school clothes? Save up college? There are a lot of us out here who weren't handed everything as kids and actually had to help out our parents.

Now re-presenting what I wrote two whole posts above what you quoted:

Orrrrr - and I'm just spitballing here - there are people under the age of 20 who want to not have a limit on the number of days they can make money when we're in the middle of an economic nightmare and family financial support simply isn't there anymore for them.

The minimum wage thing, you know the actual argument. Given the nature of this forum, before I even make the point I probably have to say that as a self-proclaimed libertarian, this is one of the conservative economic arguments that I'm quite skeptical of. There, now that I've said that, the argument is that the unemployment rate for young people is at a post-WWII high. Being paid $5.25 an hour is better than being paid $0.00 an hour. That's the idea, anyway.

---------- Post added April-1st-2011 at 01:43 AM ----------

When I was 15, I was working "under the table" at two different jobs during the school year, saving money. 3 different jobs, during the summer.

Why were you working under the table?

I knew that my parents couldn't afford to buy me a car, to pay for my college, or the food/clothes/etc. I would need there...never mind if I actually wanted to go out and have fun with friends once in a while. I wasn't getting an allowance or money for chores, or anything. If it wasn't Christmas or my birthday, I wasn't getting anything except maybe some clothes for school, which weren't from the popular places like Hollister, etc. until I bought them myself starting at some point in high school. When I graduated high school, at my graduation party I got a crisp $100.00 bill from my Dad, and a hug, and an "I'm proud of you, etc. etc. I wish I could help you with school." That's it.

So forgive those of us who weren't spoiled little snots at that age for not wanting an entire segment of the population basically punished because there are many that ARE like that. A 15 year old should make the same amount of money that a 25 year old does, if they're doing the same job. Which of course, will almost certainly be unskilled labor.

I largely agree with you. Now please, go back to look at what I was actually responding to when I said "For a 15 year old?" versus what you just wrote.

[Burgold]

So, are you arguing Hubbs that a fifteen year old who works the same number of hours, has the same responsibilities, is employed by the same company, and was hired on the same day should be paid significantly less because he is younger? That doesn't make sense to me. If an usher at a movie theater or a guy stocking shelves at a store does the same work at the same rate I would think that they would earn the same starting pay. That kid doesn't deserve to be shortchanged just because of his age. He ought to get the market rate.

I don't mind a waiver if the child and his parents want/need them to work more hours. There are some families that require everybody to pitch in. When it comes to wages, the kid ought to at least make the minimum and we shouldn't seek to take advantage of them just because their a kid unless their responsibilities and duties are somehow less than minimum.

[Conn]

Why were you working under the table?

Most places in CT don't hire 15-year olds. Hell, when I was 17 in high school and started working at Kohl's, I found out that they could only have a very low number of 17-year olds on the payroll at once, and that I had been lucky to get an interview at the right time.

CT also has strict restrictions on what types of jobs you can have even at 16, from what I remember. Never mind 15. But things could have changed a bit in the last 6 or 7 years.

[PokerPacker]

Thank God we've cleared that up. Okay, everyone who was saying that 15-year-olds should have their equal protection rights violated, get out of the thread now. All of you! The many, many people who had been saying such things!

...anyway, what was actually said was that a 15-year-old working a cash register has to worry about grocery bills, utility bills, and so on. Naturally, I responded by saying that 15-year-olds are a subhuman species who probably should be shackled to cold stone walls in various underground dungeons whenever the sun goes down. At least I think it was that. Theoretically, it also could have been a slightly more verbose way of saying, "Um, really? Wouldn't that be better fixed with the adult laws?" But I'm pretty sure it was the shackles thing.

woah, there, hubbs, I have more respect for you than you give me credit for. Perhaps I misunderstood your reasoning for the post.

[Hubbs]

So, are you arguing Hubbs that a fifteen year old who works the same number of hours, has the same responsibilities, is employed by the same company, and was hired on the same day should be paid significantly less because he is younger? That doesn't make sense to me. If an usher at a movie theater or a guy stocking shelves at a store does the same work at the same rate I would think that they would earn the same starting pay. That kid doesn't deserve to be shortchanged just because of his age. He ought to get the market rate.

No, I specifically said that I don't subscribe to the traditional right-wing stance on the minimum wage. However, as I said earlier, over-the-top political hyperbole tweaks me, so I wanted to see if I could get rid of some of the references to robber barons and sweatshops. In the middle of that, I apparently made the error of taking a comment about 15-year-olds too literally, and you can see how that's turned out.

[MSJHWT]

Just to throw in a few cents, I manage a place that is staffed by mostly 17-22 y/os, I've had 15-16 y/o siblings of current employees want to work but have been unable to hire them since we close at 8:30 on school nights and 10:00 on weekends, which is too late by law for that age. Most of the other parts about the time is OK although I have had the no more than 12 hours per day for school and work come close a few times. But just a flip side of the argument, that as a place that follows the law we've had to turn away kids and limit the shifts of others who wanted to work for a decent wage + tips because of the laws.

When the minimum wage went from $6.15 to $7.25 we also just ended up cutting about 25/hrs of work spread out among all employees. There may be an argument that the money/time is still better this way as they're paid more for the time they're there, but things like overlapping with previous shifts, slower shifts that could handle a reduction in staff, etc were just cut so it ends up being a very similar amount of money per week.

[aREDSKIN]

If one actually reads the bill and not one CLEARLY totally biased website here's what the bills' intent is. The agenda of many here in the tailgate is breathtaking. People need jobs and anything that increases access to jobs IS A GOOD THING.

HP0987, LD 1346, item 1, 125th Maine State Legislature

An Act To Enhance Access to the Workplace for Minors

SUMMARY

This bill amends the laws governing employment practices in the following ways:

1. It establishes a training wage for trainees or secondary students under 20 years of age at $5.25

per hour for their first 180 days of employment;

2. It eliminates the maximum number of hours a minor 16 years of age or older can work during

school days;

3. It allows a minor under 16 years of age to work up to 4 hours on a school day during hours when

school is not in session;

4. It allows a home-schooled student to work during regular public school hours, but not during

regularly scheduled home school hours;

5. It exempts a minor under 16 years of age who is enrolled in school from the maximum hour

requirements to work in an agricultural setting as long as the minor has written permission from the

minor’s parent or guardian; and

6. It allows a parent or guardian of a minor who is home schooled to sign a work permit instead of

the superintendent of the school administrative unit where the homeschooled minor lives.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You are turning into Larry I can only use an argument which is composed of GOP, Republican, and bull****. Have a thought. Please state an opinion without making a political "look at me" post.

Fine, GOP is pro business and the GOP will screw the worker every chance they get as long as it gives businesses more profits even at the expense of safety, healthcare, and pay for the workers. Prove me wrong chipwhich.

Get a college education, work your ass off, show some initiative to become a business owner.....and have a political party working for you to insure that you will never have to treat your employees like human beings

You forgot to add the following.

---------- Post added April-1st-2011 at 07:39 AM ----------

15 year olds are people, too, and should be equally protected under the law.

What's this equal protection under the law crap you keep talking about, don't you know that only applies to businesses? It's like some people never even read the Constitution any more....

[Burgold]

If one actually reads the bill and not one CLEARLY totally biased website here's what the bills' intent is. The agenda of many here in the tailgate is breathtaking. People need jobs and anything that increases access to jobs IS A GOOD THING.

HP0987, LD 1346, item 1, 125th Maine State Legislature

An Act To Enhance Access to the Workplace for Minors

SUMMARY

This bill amends the laws governing employment practices in the following ways:

1. It establishes a training wage for trainees or secondary students under 20 years of age at $5.25

per hour for their first 180 days of employment;

If this was really a good idea it would be good for all. You wouldn't have to reduce the "training wage" for children. Besides, 180 days is six months. What 16 year old needs half a year to learn to tear tickets or sweep up popcorn in a movie theater aisle? In reality, most jobs kids get at that age don't last much longer than six months. How long did you stay at your first job? I was a salesman at Montgomery Wards and I think I lasted about four months before I found a more fun gig (now, the job hopping might be a reason to give lower pay, but not training) Summer jobs? What a wonderful way to screw a kid trying to make a few bucks during the Summer.

[aREDSKIN]

If this was really a good idea it would be good for all. You wouldn't have to reduce the "training wage" for children. Besides, 180 days is six months. What 16 year old needs half a year to learn to tear tickets or sweep up popcorn in a movie theater aisle? In reality, most jobs kids get at that age don't last much longer than six months. How long did you stay at your first job? I was a salesman at Montgomery Wards and I think I lasted about four months before I found a more fun gig (now, the job hopping might be a reason to give lower pay, but not training) Summer jobs? What a wonderful way to screw a kid trying to make a few bucks during the Summer.

In total it appear that this bill is a jobs access incentives for minors. Too bad you're against that. ANYTHING that can provide more access for job seekers is a GOOD thing. The assumptive part by you is that they will actually pay the lower training wage for "TRAINEES". THE LOCAL MARKETS WILL DICTATE THAT.

[Burgold]

In total it appear that this bill is a jobs access incentives for minors. Too bad you're against that. ANYTHING that can provide more access for job seekers is a GOOD thing. The assumptive part by you is that they will actually pay the lower training wage for "TRAINEES". THE LOCAL MARKETS WILL DICTATE THAT.

As long as we're throwing out disparaging broad generalities... It's too bad you are for willful discrimination of American citizens.

[aREDSKIN]

As long as we're throwing out disparaging broad generalities... It's too bad you are for willful discrimination of American citizens.

LOL Where in this bill does it say anything about citizens??

At this point people need jobs and not sanctimonious political grandstanding. Since the job market is so tight right now let the job seeker decide if the wage offered is fair or not and lets enable businesses the ability to offer this TEMPORARY wage for those who deem it acceptable. You know a CHOICE. You're not against CHOICE are you?

[Burgold]

So, you are pro-discrimination.

Look, if they wanted to pass this and make it a law that all employees have to wrestle with I'd be fine with it, but the reality is that this is picking on a group... and they're being picked on because they're mostly defenseless, they can't vote, and their jobs are considered for the most part "unskilled"

Truth is, it would also pick on adults because if you were that young man just out of college and desperate for a paycheck and the employer had to choose between you and some kid, but could pay the kid 3 bucks less an hour... why would he choose you to scoop his ice cream or stock his shelves?

[aREDSKIN]

So, you are pro-discrimination.

Look, if they wanted to pass this and make it a law that all employees have to wrestle with I'd be fine with it, but the reality is that this is picking on a group... and they're being picked on because they're mostly defenseless, they can't vote, and their jobs are considered for the most part "unskilled"

Truth is, it would also pick on adults because if you were that young man just out of college and desperate for a paycheck and the employer had to choose between you and some kid, but could pay the kid 3 bucks less an hour... why would he choose you to scoop his ice cream or stock his shelves?

Desperate for a paycheck is exactly why this bill makes sense, especially for those unskilled and inexperienced "minor" workers. Job(s) ACCESS is the driver here. I'd venture to say there will be more total "workers" given this bill than less and that's a good thing for EVERYONE.

[Madison Redskin]

Meh, I don't have a big problem with the law. However, people who complain about illegal immigrants pushing down wages should. This law is going to encourage workers to hire kids who don't need the money, effectively depress wages, and take away jobs from adults who need the work.

[mardi gras skin]

When I was 15, I didn't expect that I should make as much money per hour of my time as a 30 year old working beside me.

Maybe I was just brianwashed into thinking my time and work experience was less valuable than theirs.

[DRSmith]

Get a college education, work your ass off, show some initiative to become a business owner?

College?

We all know those are nothing but liberal indoctrination centers

---------- Post added April-1st-2011 at 09:08 AM ----------

When I was 15, I didn't expect that I should make as much money per hour of my time as a 30 year old working beside me.

Maybe I was just brianwashed into thinking my time and work experience was less valuable than theirs.

If the person beside you was making minimum wage then yes you deserved to make what you legally could

[aREDSKIN]

Meh, I don't have a big problem with the law. However, people who complain about illegal immigrants pushing down wages should. This law is going to encourage workers to hire kids who don't need the money, effectively depress wages, and take away jobs from adults who need the work.

Help me out here. Who are the "kids who don't need the money" going to work for $5.50 an hour?? Not many at all IMO. Doesn't make sense.

[Larry]

HP0987, LD 1346, item 1, 125th Maine State Legislature

An Act To Enhance Access to the Workplace for Minors

SUMMARY

This bill amends the laws governing employment practices in the following ways:

1. It establishes a training wage for trainees or secondary students under 20 years of age at $5.25

per hour for their first 180 days of employment;

2. It eliminates the maximum number of hours a minor 16 years of age or older can work during

school days;

3. It allows a minor under 16 years of age to work up to 4 hours on a school day during hours when

school is not in session;

4. It allows a home-schooled student to work during regular public school hours, but not during

regularly scheduled home school hours;

5. It exempts a minor under 16 years of age who is enrolled in school from the maximum hour

requirements to work in an agricultural setting as long as the minor has written permission from the

minor’s parent or guardian; and

6. It allows a parent or guardian of a minor who is home schooled to sign a work permit instead of

the superintendent of the school administrative unit where the homeschooled minor lives.

Actually making some observations and responses to the bill, itself, and to several arguments posted in the thread. But I thought I'd quote this post because I applaud the idea of actually discussing the law, rather than the way it's painted. (Although I'll point out that what this is, is simply the way that the bill's author wants to paint it.)

Problem I see with these measures is that what the bill is doing is that it's creating incentives for doing things that I'm not certain we should be encouraging.

As long as there's only one minimum wage for the whole state, then a 25 year old and a 19 year old can compete for the same job at McDonald's, on an equal footing. And, in fact, it's to McDonald's advantage to retain existing employees, long term. (Granted, if there is turnover, it doesn't exactly take months to train a replacement. But still, the training period isn't zero.)

But under this law, McDonald's can cut their labor costs by 1/3. All they have to do is to get rid of every adult, long term employee they have, and replace them with 18 and 19 year olds, who they fire every six months.

That's one heck of an incentive.

I don't automatically have a problem with the rest of the laws, except for the impression that these changes, also, are going to come at the expense of older workers.

At least as I was taught, child labor laws were originally passed because businesses were hiring children, and turning away unemployed adults.

And, frankly, I suspect that Maine, right now, doesn't exactly have 100% employment for adults, right now. The reason why the state should be encouraging business to hire children when adults are unemployed is . . . ?

[Tweedr01]

Thank God we've cleared that up. Okay, everyone who was saying that 15-year-olds should have their equal protection rights violated, get out of the thread now. All of you! The many, many people who had been saying such things!

...anyway, what was actually said was that a 15-year-old working a cash register has to worry about grocery bills, utility bills, and so on. Naturally, I responded by saying that 15-year-olds are a subhuman species who probably should be shackled to cold stone walls in various underground dungeons whenever the sun goes down. At least I think it was that. Theoretically, it also could have been a slightly more verbose way of saying, "Um, really? Wouldn't that be better fixed with the adult laws?" But I'm pretty sure it was the shackles thing.

I am only to this post so far in the thread, but Hubbs, PLEASE STOP, my coworkers are wondering what the heck I am hacking up over here as I am trying to contain my laughter in a small office setting...I'm loud as it is but this is freakin HILARIOUS, haha...oh and just for internet standards, no sarcasm, I am literally laughing my butt off