Feds protect children from oppressive labor — with oppressive laws

What is “oppressive child labor?” The United States Department of Labor (DOL) can tell you what that includes under federal law.

My longtime friends Teresa Williams and Keith Lacy can tell you what it shouldn’t include.

Shortly after her 18th birthday in the early 1990s, Williams found herself on her own, without any living arrangements or assistance. Certain that she would not be able to afford rent while working part-time around her class schedule at Kirkwood, she seriously considered living in her car.

Lacy stepped in to help. The two friends were also co-workers at a Godfather’s Pizza franchise in Cedar Rapids. Having had two years to observe the strong work ethic and agreeable nature of his bright and responsible friend, Lacy reached out to his parents, Bill and Marlene, who welcomed Williams into their Marion home.

Williams thrived with the Lacys. She continued to work at Godfather’s through college and even stayed on part-time after she finished school, found a permanent job and finally moved into her own place. After three years in the corporate world, she left to return to Godfather’s full-time.

In 2003, Williams and Lacy purchased the local Godfather’s Pizza operation as business partners. Their team of employees included Lacy’s wife, Rita, and their son, Gunnar, who was raised in the pizza kitchen owned by his family — a family of which Williams has remained a permanent part.

For Williams, the path to a happy life and satisfying career began with a part-time after-school job. Thousands of Iowa kids working a part-time job might one day be able to say the same about their own lives and careers.

But not if excessive restrictions get in the way of those opportunities.

In 2023, the state of Iowa enacted legislation that expands some options for youth employment in Iowa. Along with other changes, Senate File 542 amended state labor law to allow 14- and 15-year-olds to work until 9 p.m. during the school year, and until 11 p.m. during the summer.

Federal law continues to prohibit 14- and 15-year-olds from working past 7 p.m. during the school year (regardless of the day of the week) and 9 p.m. in the summer. But despite conflicting laws already on the books in 25 states, federal officials seem to be giving Iowa businesses an especially hard look.

As reported by The Gazette, Iowa Restaurant Association President Jessica Dunker says some restaurant owners are facing penalties ranging from $50,000 to $180,000 for following Iowa’s relaxed work hour restrictions.

The DOL had already announced plans to step up enforcement of child labor violations prior to the passage of SF 542, notably shifting from assessing penalties on a per-child basis to assessing them on a per-violation basis.

Nevertheless, the steep amounts levied on Iowa businesses prompted stern responses from Iowa’s elected officials.

In a letter to Acting Secretary of Labor Julie Su, Reynolds pointed out that South Dakota state law has allowed 14-year-olds to work until 10 p.m. during the school year since 1994. “According to the South Dakota Retailers Association,” Reynolds’ letter stated, “their businesses have never faced the same level of enforcement scrutiny as Iowa in the 30 years since their law was enacted.”

In a separate letter to Su, Iowa’s entire federal delegation inquired about DOL investigative practices, including whether it is “standard practice for the Department to demand non-supervised access to teenage employees without parental consent or knowledge.” The letter also inquired whether similar investigations were taking place in other states with mismatched laws allowing children under 16 to work longer hours, such as Illinois and Minnesota.

The delegation requested answers to their questions by July 9, which was last Tuesday. A spokesperson for Congresswoman Ashley Hinson’s office said Thursday that her office had not received a response.

One can argue all one wants that Iowa’s legislative majority was picking a fight with the feds when they loosened restrictions working hours for some teenage workers in conflict with federal child labor law. It’s a fair point.

But this a fight wasn’t picked on behalf of Industrial Revolution-era robber barons exploiting six-year-olds in textile mills. It’s between Iowa and the feds, but he casualties are the teenage kids who stand to lose a lot more than a measly paycheck — and small business owners who stand to lose everything if the heavy hand of the federal government comes down hard.

Williams and Lacy frequently employed teenagers at Godfather’s, many under the age of 16. Like other business owners, they warn that such steep monetary penalties — $15,138 assessed by the DOL for each “nonserious injury and noninjury” violation — can force a business to instantly close.

But if businesses are so worried about crippling fines, they should just not break the law.

Right?

“Restaurants can’t survive without teenage workers,” said Williams. Neither can some other industries like retail and entertainment. Teens and young adults are more likely to be available during the evening and weekend hours those industries require, and their lack of previous work experience makes them a more appropriate fit for the wages restaurants and other employers with razor-thin profit margins are able to pay.

While all jobs carry the inherent purpose of a paycheck, Williams submits that many entry-level positions in the restaurant industry aren’t designed to be full-time jobs that can fully sustain a living for adults. Unless, she adds, an entry-level employee works their way up to earn management roles and the pay increases that accompany those promotions.

Williams would know. As a young adult, she earned those pay raises and promotions at Godfather’s. Later, as co-owner, she granted them to deserving employees.

She also experienced the strain that work hour and time-of-day restrictions place on both employers and employees. At the age of 15, Williams was let go from her first-ever after-school job when the fast-food establishment she worked at dismissed all of its 14-and 15-year-old employees.

With a finite number of positions available, even the highest-performing employees can only contribute so much when barred from working past 7 p.m. Especially in the food service industry.

Williams and Lacy actually preferred to employ 14- and 15-year-olds whenever possible, finding that they were less likely to have developed any poor working habits at previous employers with lower professional standards.

“When they were working for us as their first job,” said Williams, “we could teach them good work ethic on top of everything else.”

Nevertheless, the 7 p.m. time limit designed to protect against “oppressive child labor” made it difficult to employ those 14- and 15-year-olds. As a result, an applicant’s young age was often the sole determining factor in whether or not they were offered the job.

“It just doesn’t make sense to schedule someone to work if they’re forced to leave while we’re right in middle of the dinner rush,” said Lacy.

Most of Williams’ and Lacy’s employees stayed for a minimum of one year, happy in their roles. Many worked at the restaurant through college.

By the time they prepared to sell Godfather’s in 2022, they had employed hundreds of teenagers over the decades. Those teenagers developed valuable career skills while coming of age in a safe, positive environment where the standards were high, the bosses were cool and the culture was just plain fun.

But to the federal government, allowing those under age 16 to work in that very environment between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. is considered “oppressive child labor.”

Williams and Lacy disagree. So did the vast majority of their 14- and 15-year-old employees, who would have been happy to work those extra two hours on any given night.

So did most of those employees’ parents — and probably not just because they were used to their kids’ other obligations such show choir, marching band and athletic events lasting even later than 9 p.m.

So who are the bad guys, here? Are they the students who want to work longer and collect bigger paychecks? The parents who are more than willing to sign off on their kid working until 9:00 on a school night? The state of Iowa for daring to be more like Illinois, Minnesota and Michigan? Or the federal government for levying huge financial blows through actions not necessarily consistent from state to state?

Lacy can answer that without the slightest hesitation.

“Anytime the federal government gets involved in your business, it’s a problem.”

Comments: 319-398-8266; althea.cole@thegazette.com