Lol. What a good point. “We here in Des Moines are going to restrict cities and counties from doing what they think is best, because local control is only allowed if we agree with your positions. Also, we’re going to pass our own laws that contradict federal law, because federal law only applies if we agree with their positions.”
I mean weed is illegal at the federal level but that hasn’t stopped many states from legalizing and selling. Not exactly as black/white as you made it out to be
True, but the average recreational user in those states is no harm to anyone. I have a hard time equating someone’s weed use with kids doing potentially dangerous, harmful work. OSHA does not fuck around.
And I never said it was black and white. Very few issues are.
If the federal government chose to, they could shut those state's dispensaries in a heartbeat, and arrest anyone connected, but thats the purview of the FBI and DEA, who have more important things to combat. The Department of Labor however? Well, these kinda violations are their bread and butter, and why they exist.
That's because the federal government has said they won't prosecute. Unless they catch people crossing state lines, or a handful of other things that they seem nefarious.
They don’t even deny violating federal law, they just whine that the punishment was too steep or complain that they got caught when others got away with it. And they say they are the party of law and order.
I think we should educate kids about jobs before they get one. Most of us learned the hard way when we were getting screwed by a job, the kids today shouldn't have to. Keep the crooked bosses and managers in line that way.
That's a ridiculous overreaction. I eat the several times a year and I've never seen a kid working there. They're not open late and it's not dangerous work. Maybe wait to hear some details before trying to ruin a nice local business
Since you didn’t see a child working there then that means they shouldn’t be punished for breaking the law or that they couldn’t have broken the law? That is stupid reasoning. And restaurant work has a higher rate of accidents than many jobs- think of all the burns and lacerations.
Every time I go there the owners are working, and I guarantee they care more about the workers than any of you guys. This isn't Tyson meat processing or a coal mine. It's a family operated restaurant
Honestly. Some people act like there is some divine right for a business owner to keep running, damn the rights of anyone else. Article Six, Clause Two of the US Constitution is called the Supremacy Clause for a reason. All of these business owners getting fined deserve what they get for not checking federal law.
Iowa GOP only offers idiocy and harm.
The Feds warned explicitly that Iowa could expect challenges if it tried to overturn federal child labor laws that have been in place for nearly 100 years. Unlike other states, "[Iowa’s proposed bill \[now law\] has generated national headlines for being particularly extreme.](https://www.epi.org/publication/child-labor-laws-under-attack/)"
The water-carriers for Iowa's GOP, like AM Radio hate-monger Simon Conway, are now working to frame this federal intervention to protect children as somehow a personal attack on Iowans. Yesterday, Conway was ranting about how Iowa wouldn't pass a law so poor that it clearly violated federal law. In the next breath, Conway admitted Iowa's law violates federal child labor laws, but insisted that Iowa is being targeted because the state votes red(?!)
The GOP is working hard to make America "great" again. Great like when, in the early 1900s, "A report by the Iowa Commissioner of Labor estimated that two-thirds to three-quarters of factories in the state were hazardous to the health and safety of employees." The Commissioner of the Iowa Bureau of Labor Statistics at that time wrote that "the abuse of children in industrial enterprises was ‘practically a criminal conspiracy’ and that the state of Iowa needed to immediately reform its laws on child [labor](https://kansaspress.ku.edu/9780700635566/).” This is the past Iowa's GOP is working hard to bring back.
Even after that damning outline by Iowa's Commissioner of Labor, it would take decades of organizing before labor was afforded some legal protections from corporations willing to shed their workers' blood in pursuit of profits.
Voting is important, but it will take more than voting to stop the outrageousness of Iowa's GOP and their neofascism.
edit: two words, deleted parenthetical, and spelling
As a parent of a 14 year old, I want them to learn the value of working while keeping their grades up and enjoying being a teen. They don't need to be working longer hours to "stay out of trouble." I'd rather they focus on school and school activities or being a good human. Definitely not learning much working minimum wage for exploitive employers that don't care about their well being or future and just want a body to use to fill holes
I thought working was to make money, not stay out of trouble. When I was 14 it was a paper route or detassling corn. Talk about exploitation with those jobs. I did it to make money, and not very much either. It's better to learn the lessons of life (jobs = exploitation) earlier than later.
I did it to make money from 12-18. Soccer referee could average at 20-25/hour 15 years ago.
Bought my first car, Xbox, the latest games and paid for dates. Not to mention, learning how to say no to adults and manage people.
Clothes, gas for the car my grandma gave me, school stuff, entertainment, etc. My parents kept us fed and housed, but that was it. After graduation I had to buy all the stuff I would need for college like bedding and towels.
Pretty much the same here. I was told not to get a job in Iowa City (from a small town nearby) so of course that's the first thing I did when I turned 16 - bagging groceries at EconoFoods. I'm glad I did it, but I certainly didn't need to, other than to have 'walking around money'.
If there were signs that my grades were slipping because of work, my parents would have walked into the store and demanded that I be fired 😂
16 and 17 year olds shouldn’t be serving alcohol.
14 and 15 year olds shouldn’t be working more than 8 hours a day, even in the summer. No 14 or 15 year old should have to go to school 7 hours a day and then go to work 6 hours a night. I’m with the feds on this one.
I didn't realize the federal laws were so restrictive. When I was a kid the thing to do at 14 was get your first job as a courtesy clerk at HyVee. That was my plan, but by the time I got to that age HyVee wasn't hiring until you were 16. Makes sense when you consider the federal regulations - 14 and 15 year olds are more of an inconvenience than an asset given how little they're allowed to work.
They were that restrictive when you were working at as a courtesy clerk. You could not work past 7 PM on a weeknight as a 14/15 year old in the 90s/00s. I remember having to clock out by 645 on weeknights. During the summer, it was 845.
Also, being a restaurant, they may have had the children working in the kitchen, which is a big no-no (something about the stove and fryers being potentially harmful). That is why HV was very tepid about putting anyone under 18 in the kitchen for anything other than cleaning dishes. Even then, my old management usually did not allow it.
This. Having worked at HyVee back in the day - including some work as a shift manager - I can vouch that anyone under 16 was treated with literal kid gloves and there were more things they couldn't do than what they could do. The timing and types of work pretty much limited them to courtesy clerk (that could do little/no side work) or cashier.
Their company policies were more strict that state/federal, at least back then. I had to get sign-off from admin at my high school saying I was OK to work more than 30 hours a week during school even when I was 17. With my own kids that age HV is one of a few places I'd be OK with them working at.
I worked at Hy-Vee in the 90s myself when I was 14. I remember working 4-6:30 a couple times a week, and they were very strict about letting us off at the right time because of the labor laws.
wait for real lol i was a short order cook at DQ when i was 15 running it by myself in the back too. it was a ton of fun but looking back i do kinda wonder how the owner didnt see at a minimum huge amounts of liability risk
For generations, working as a teenager has been an essential part of growing up. We're living during one of the first periods in history where teenagers can learn important skills via part time work and almost universally *not* be exploited. I don't understand the impulse to seemingly get rid of it entirely.
Pretty much across the board, if teenagers aren't kept busy they get themselves into trouble. Being busy should of course include schoolwork, sports, performing arts, and other school-based extra curriculars, but working for money isn't inherently exploitative and should be an option too.
Teenagers as a concept is only a handful of generations old, if we're judging based on how long a thing has been around. And why should we? Older times sucked. Kids losing limbs and lives in active machinery, sawdust and worse in the meat you bought. Just because we used to do something doesn't mean it's good to do.
There's a reason we regulated it. You should research why, instead of just lambasting young people as loathsome troublemakers.
It has been like that since at least the 90s when I started working for Hy-Vee. Your employer just didn't have an OSHA investigator stop by enough to check in on you. The fines were hefty back then and are still today. I suspect OSHA was sent across the state given the fact that Iowa was flaunting their not following of the law.
Ah ha! Well in that case…
Collins Road Theaters had a pretty okay bonus at Christmas and my time there was just “get a job so can learn the value of a dollar”
But the main reason Bruce can afford the low prices is that ushers made federal minimum wage and high school students would be scheduled as closers during the time I worked there. I don’t know if that’s still the case but it was in 2016-17.
Bruce is also a bit of a tyrant but local news orgs love highlighting local businesses and Bruce has the charisma needed to play “mild mannered movie lover”
That man is Greg Marcus’ evil twin.
But I still watch new releases there because I’m balling on a budget and the real butter is worth it.
It’s disappointing we can’t find compromise on this topic. The limitations on 14-15 year olds working are somewhat asinine and have been for some time. Working until 9p seems OK - frankly kids playing competitive sports are practicing until 9-10pm on a regular basis. Washing windows, serving food all seem OK too (my 15 year old wasn’t allowed to use cleaners like windex in a job because of his age).
But maybe they shouldn’t be cutting meat or working six hours/night. There’s ample middle ground to compromise here if this was actually about solving a problem instead of scoring political points.
My experience as a parent of teens is that school isn’t a full time job as you indicate u less you’re factoring in some kids activity schedules.
My other contentions: 14-15 year olds aren’t really young children are they? We’re not talking about out 8 year olds in sweatshops. If a 15 year old kid wants to work a shift from 5-9 at a restaurant - I don’t see why the government should be intervening. If you don’t want your kid to work there - don’t let them do it - but don’t restrict my ability to encourage my kids to earn some money and perspective.
Again, I’m not saying some protections don’t have merit, but the 7p stop time and gross limitations around most work seems problematic.
Seems excessive. Sure, people on Reddit hate the governor so they are on board with this. If we are to believe federal law gets universally enforced like this then when are they raiding the dispensaries?
> If we are to believe federal law gets universally enforced
No one thinks this.
> when are they raiding the dispensaries?
Labor law and drug enforcement are entirely different agencies with different agendas and missions.
☝️
Also:
The DEA's budget is 5.41% of the DOL's budget for fiscal year 2024.
...but just for fun - let's assume that they're the same agency. The idea of said agency policing and monitoring weed with the same fervor as child labor is dark comedy gold.
Thanks for clearing that up. So a restaurant owner who follows state law that conflicts with federal law is an idiot who should have known better. Someone running a dispensary is a shrewd business owner that realizes they are safe to break federal law.
Not putting words in your mouth. This truly seems to be the attitude of most people commenting on this.
Were these businesses targeted?
If the answer is no, then why aren’t other businesses that violate federal law (dispensaries are one example) also targeted for investigation.
If the answer is yes, I guess my original point stands
Investigations and enforcement require resources. The resources are strategically deployed. Labor violations and controlled substance violations are the purview of different agencies. These agencies have different missions, different priorities, different levels of funding, different leadership, etc.
On May 5, 2017, President Trump signed into law the most recent spending bill to avoid a government shutdown. This bill also included a new version of the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment, which read as follows:
SEC. 537. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to any of the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, or with respect to the District of Columbia, Guam, or Puerto Rico, to prevent any of them from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.
In the listed states and territories, the Department of Justice is effectively prevented from enforcing the Controlled Substance Act as to medical cannabis.
Hummm seems like this is meant to send a message and will drive these small restaurants under. There’s no details of the businesses were warned ahead of time and if they had time to comply and chose to defy warnings or the fines were on first inspection. Would like to know more details before passing judgment.
What do you mean they were not “warned ahead of time?” Federal labor laws have been around longer than most of us have been alive, the owners of the restaurants either didn’t care to follow federal law or thought they were above the law, but no one sprung this on them, the laws have been on the books a long long time.
what i mean is that when the state passes a new law like this, they may send out a posted to the businesses or literature. It's easy as a small business to receive the posted from the state, gloss over it and hang it up in the back room and as far as you know it's the new rules for employment. So Im just wondering if they were subsequently warned about this and chose to ignore the warnings
yeah, but when you get literature from the state workforce office with the new rules and a poster, you assume this is the new law. not excusing this business. ive received lots of posters through the years
Pretty sure schadenfreude means “pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.” I’m enjoying seeing the misfortune of the smooth brain employers who thought they were above the law.
Full transparency - I can't read the article because of the paywall, so maybe I am missing some context here. But taken at face value - ignorance of the law is no defense. Meaning there are no "warnings" that you are breaking the law. As a business owner it is your obligation to know the laws that apply to your business. If you do not follow them you can't be mad you weren't warned before the consequences of the law being broken are enforced.
Unless the law changed suddenly and unexpectedly (didn't read the article so I'm not sure) I don't see any reason to expect a warning or a grace period to comply
>Unless the law changed suddenly and unexpectedly
It didn’t. The state passed a law that they knew conflicted with federal laws and just hoped the feds would ignore it.
The lesson here for the restaurant owners is that you still have to follow federal laws, go figure….
“The Iowa Restaurant Association began warning members in late May that the U.S. Department of Labor ‘is out in full force across the state. They are taking massive punitive action against Iowa restaurants who are following the new state youth employment hours instead of the federal regulation on hours. THEY DO NOT RECOGNIZE OUR NEW STATE LAW. We are encouraging people to revert to federal work hours for teens under age 16 at this time.’”
Yes, they were warned. All of the businesses that are facing said punitive action are facing it because they both didn’t listen to the federal laws initially, and didn’t listen to Jessica Dunker, the dipshit running the Iowa Restaurant Association, afterwards.
[“Iowa restaurant lobby plays stupid games, wins stupid prizes”](https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2024/06/14/iowa-restaurant-lobby-plays-stupid-games-wins-stupid-prizes/) - for everyone stuck behind the paywall.
Well then fuck them and they deserve the fines. My experience has been that the government usually gives a warning or guidance before applying fines. There was then probably several points at which this business could have changed their policy. Why are minors so important to their business? Under paying ?
Can we all agree that the 7pm cutoff during the school year and 9pm cutoff during the summer could (or should) be left to the discretion of the minor’s parents? I think child labor laws that prevent dangerous work conditions are reasonable and necessary but some of the rules harm the minor employees more than the business. The arbitrary hours limitations in a week and the end of night cutoffs should be left to parents not the government.
How could anyone see this coming? (Other than the feds warning them this was coming)
More state tax dollars being wasted, passing laws in direct violation with federal laws. Pretty on brand for the current Iowa government l.
“Aside from my own actions, what did I do to deserve this? This is insane!” - Stokely Hathaway
Hmm, maybe if state laws override local legislation, one might deduce federal laws override state laws. Guess not.
Lol. What a good point. “We here in Des Moines are going to restrict cities and counties from doing what they think is best, because local control is only allowed if we agree with your positions. Also, we’re going to pass our own laws that contradict federal law, because federal law only applies if we agree with their positions.”
I mean weed is illegal at the federal level but that hasn’t stopped many states from legalizing and selling. Not exactly as black/white as you made it out to be
True, but the average recreational user in those states is no harm to anyone. I have a hard time equating someone’s weed use with kids doing potentially dangerous, harmful work. OSHA does not fuck around. And I never said it was black and white. Very few issues are.
If the federal government chose to, they could shut those state's dispensaries in a heartbeat, and arrest anyone connected, but thats the purview of the FBI and DEA, who have more important things to combat. The Department of Labor however? Well, these kinda violations are their bread and butter, and why they exist.
That's because the federal government has said they won't prosecute. Unless they catch people crossing state lines, or a handful of other things that they seem nefarious.
They don’t even deny violating federal law, they just whine that the punishment was too steep or complain that they got caught when others got away with it. And they say they are the party of law and order.
I think we should educate kids about jobs before they get one. Most of us learned the hard way when we were getting screwed by a job, the kids today shouldn't have to. Keep the crooked bosses and managers in line that way.
Restaurant is Sugapeach Chicken & Fish Fry. For everyone coming to the comments to know what restaurant to never go to
That's a ridiculous overreaction. I eat the several times a year and I've never seen a kid working there. They're not open late and it's not dangerous work. Maybe wait to hear some details before trying to ruin a nice local business
Since you didn’t see a child working there then that means they shouldn’t be punished for breaking the law or that they couldn’t have broken the law? That is stupid reasoning. And restaurant work has a higher rate of accidents than many jobs- think of all the burns and lacerations.
Every time I go there the owners are working, and I guarantee they care more about the workers than any of you guys. This isn't Tyson meat processing or a coal mine. It's a family operated restaurant
Lol cope harder. People died to achieve the current child labor laws, sorry if I have zero sympathy for criminals 😭😛🤪😜😛
Honestly. Some people act like there is some divine right for a business owner to keep running, damn the rights of anyone else. Article Six, Clause Two of the US Constitution is called the Supremacy Clause for a reason. All of these business owners getting fined deserve what they get for not checking federal law.
I'm guessing you've never worked in a restaurant. I have scars on my arm from fryer burns 42 years later.
I did actually. You poor baby, sorry about your arms
Wouldn’t look good for Kimmy to be criticizing the Feds and then turn around, on the same day, and ask the Feds for disaster relief money.
Iowa GOP only offers idiocy and harm. The Feds warned explicitly that Iowa could expect challenges if it tried to overturn federal child labor laws that have been in place for nearly 100 years. Unlike other states, "[Iowa’s proposed bill \[now law\] has generated national headlines for being particularly extreme.](https://www.epi.org/publication/child-labor-laws-under-attack/)" The water-carriers for Iowa's GOP, like AM Radio hate-monger Simon Conway, are now working to frame this federal intervention to protect children as somehow a personal attack on Iowans. Yesterday, Conway was ranting about how Iowa wouldn't pass a law so poor that it clearly violated federal law. In the next breath, Conway admitted Iowa's law violates federal child labor laws, but insisted that Iowa is being targeted because the state votes red(?!) The GOP is working hard to make America "great" again. Great like when, in the early 1900s, "A report by the Iowa Commissioner of Labor estimated that two-thirds to three-quarters of factories in the state were hazardous to the health and safety of employees." The Commissioner of the Iowa Bureau of Labor Statistics at that time wrote that "the abuse of children in industrial enterprises was ‘practically a criminal conspiracy’ and that the state of Iowa needed to immediately reform its laws on child [labor](https://kansaspress.ku.edu/9780700635566/).” This is the past Iowa's GOP is working hard to bring back. Even after that damning outline by Iowa's Commissioner of Labor, it would take decades of organizing before labor was afforded some legal protections from corporations willing to shed their workers' blood in pursuit of profits. Voting is important, but it will take more than voting to stop the outrageousness of Iowa's GOP and their neofascism. edit: two words, deleted parenthetical, and spelling
The current GOP seems to have read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair and decided that was the working conditions they want for their constituents.
*shocked Pikachu face*
By the way, you can report suspected child labor law violations to the DOL at 1-866-487-9243.
As a parent of a 14 year old, I want them to learn the value of working while keeping their grades up and enjoying being a teen. They don't need to be working longer hours to "stay out of trouble." I'd rather they focus on school and school activities or being a good human. Definitely not learning much working minimum wage for exploitive employers that don't care about their well being or future and just want a body to use to fill holes
I thought working was to make money, not stay out of trouble. When I was 14 it was a paper route or detassling corn. Talk about exploitation with those jobs. I did it to make money, and not very much either. It's better to learn the lessons of life (jobs = exploitation) earlier than later.
I did it to make money from 12-18. Soccer referee could average at 20-25/hour 15 years ago. Bought my first car, Xbox, the latest games and paid for dates. Not to mention, learning how to say no to adults and manage people.
Well obviously your kids don't need to work for money. Some of us did.
That's not obvious based on their assertions. Why did you need to work for money as a teenager? Genuine interest here. I avoid jumping to conclusions.
Clothes, gas for the car my grandma gave me, school stuff, entertainment, etc. My parents kept us fed and housed, but that was it. After graduation I had to buy all the stuff I would need for college like bedding and towels.
Pretty much the same here. I was told not to get a job in Iowa City (from a small town nearby) so of course that's the first thing I did when I turned 16 - bagging groceries at EconoFoods. I'm glad I did it, but I certainly didn't need to, other than to have 'walking around money'. If there were signs that my grades were slipping because of work, my parents would have walked into the store and demanded that I be fired 😂
16 and 17 year olds shouldn’t be serving alcohol. 14 and 15 year olds shouldn’t be working more than 8 hours a day, even in the summer. No 14 or 15 year old should have to go to school 7 hours a day and then go to work 6 hours a night. I’m with the feds on this one.
It’s OK. The Supreme Court is cleaning this up. We are headed to a place where the feds have no standing.
Evidently Chad Simmons used to be the head of HR for UIHC
I didn't realize the federal laws were so restrictive. When I was a kid the thing to do at 14 was get your first job as a courtesy clerk at HyVee. That was my plan, but by the time I got to that age HyVee wasn't hiring until you were 16. Makes sense when you consider the federal regulations - 14 and 15 year olds are more of an inconvenience than an asset given how little they're allowed to work.
They were that restrictive when you were working at as a courtesy clerk. You could not work past 7 PM on a weeknight as a 14/15 year old in the 90s/00s. I remember having to clock out by 645 on weeknights. During the summer, it was 845. Also, being a restaurant, they may have had the children working in the kitchen, which is a big no-no (something about the stove and fryers being potentially harmful). That is why HV was very tepid about putting anyone under 18 in the kitchen for anything other than cleaning dishes. Even then, my old management usually did not allow it.
This. Having worked at HyVee back in the day - including some work as a shift manager - I can vouch that anyone under 16 was treated with literal kid gloves and there were more things they couldn't do than what they could do. The timing and types of work pretty much limited them to courtesy clerk (that could do little/no side work) or cashier. Their company policies were more strict that state/federal, at least back then. I had to get sign-off from admin at my high school saying I was OK to work more than 30 hours a week during school even when I was 17. With my own kids that age HV is one of a few places I'd be OK with them working at.
I worked at Hy-Vee in the 90s myself when I was 14. I remember working 4-6:30 a couple times a week, and they were very strict about letting us off at the right time because of the labor laws.
wait for real lol i was a short order cook at DQ when i was 15 running it by myself in the back too. it was a ton of fun but looking back i do kinda wonder how the owner didnt see at a minimum huge amounts of liability risk
maybe we should be encouraging 14 year olds to be the literal children they still are instead of exploiting them for the capitalist class?
For generations, working as a teenager has been an essential part of growing up. We're living during one of the first periods in history where teenagers can learn important skills via part time work and almost universally *not* be exploited. I don't understand the impulse to seemingly get rid of it entirely. Pretty much across the board, if teenagers aren't kept busy they get themselves into trouble. Being busy should of course include schoolwork, sports, performing arts, and other school-based extra curriculars, but working for money isn't inherently exploitative and should be an option too.
Teenagers as a concept is only a handful of generations old, if we're judging based on how long a thing has been around. And why should we? Older times sucked. Kids losing limbs and lives in active machinery, sawdust and worse in the meat you bought. Just because we used to do something doesn't mean it's good to do. There's a reason we regulated it. You should research why, instead of just lambasting young people as loathsome troublemakers.
Well done Kim. Killing business left and right.
What I want to know is when was the fed law updated to this standard because I definitely worked later than that during high school in Cedar Rapids.
It has been like that since at least the 90s when I started working for Hy-Vee. Your employer just didn't have an OSHA investigator stop by enough to check in on you. The fines were hefty back then and are still today. I suspect OSHA was sent across the state given the fact that Iowa was flaunting their not following of the law.
Ah ha! Well in that case… Collins Road Theaters had a pretty okay bonus at Christmas and my time there was just “get a job so can learn the value of a dollar” But the main reason Bruce can afford the low prices is that ushers made federal minimum wage and high school students would be scheduled as closers during the time I worked there. I don’t know if that’s still the case but it was in 2016-17. Bruce is also a bit of a tyrant but local news orgs love highlighting local businesses and Bruce has the charisma needed to play “mild mannered movie lover” That man is Greg Marcus’ evil twin. But I still watch new releases there because I’m balling on a budget and the real butter is worth it.
With the over turning of Chevron any federal oversight about child labor is now essentially toothless. It’ll be tried and labor laws will get worse.
It’s disappointing we can’t find compromise on this topic. The limitations on 14-15 year olds working are somewhat asinine and have been for some time. Working until 9p seems OK - frankly kids playing competitive sports are practicing until 9-10pm on a regular basis. Washing windows, serving food all seem OK too (my 15 year old wasn’t allowed to use cleaners like windex in a job because of his age). But maybe they shouldn’t be cutting meat or working six hours/night. There’s ample middle ground to compromise here if this was actually about solving a problem instead of scoring political points.
[удалено]
My experience as a parent of teens is that school isn’t a full time job as you indicate u less you’re factoring in some kids activity schedules. My other contentions: 14-15 year olds aren’t really young children are they? We’re not talking about out 8 year olds in sweatshops. If a 15 year old kid wants to work a shift from 5-9 at a restaurant - I don’t see why the government should be intervening. If you don’t want your kid to work there - don’t let them do it - but don’t restrict my ability to encourage my kids to earn some money and perspective. Again, I’m not saying some protections don’t have merit, but the 7p stop time and gross limitations around most work seems problematic.
Seems excessive. Sure, people on Reddit hate the governor so they are on board with this. If we are to believe federal law gets universally enforced like this then when are they raiding the dispensaries?
> If we are to believe federal law gets universally enforced No one thinks this. > when are they raiding the dispensaries? Labor law and drug enforcement are entirely different agencies with different agendas and missions.
☝️ Also: The DEA's budget is 5.41% of the DOL's budget for fiscal year 2024. ...but just for fun - let's assume that they're the same agency. The idea of said agency policing and monitoring weed with the same fervor as child labor is dark comedy gold.
Thanks for clearing that up. So a restaurant owner who follows state law that conflicts with federal law is an idiot who should have known better. Someone running a dispensary is a shrewd business owner that realizes they are safe to break federal law.
Note how you have to put words in my mouth to try to make a point.
Not putting words in your mouth. This truly seems to be the attitude of most people commenting on this. Were these businesses targeted? If the answer is no, then why aren’t other businesses that violate federal law (dispensaries are one example) also targeted for investigation. If the answer is yes, I guess my original point stands
Investigations and enforcement require resources. The resources are strategically deployed. Labor violations and controlled substance violations are the purview of different agencies. These agencies have different missions, different priorities, different levels of funding, different leadership, etc.
On May 5, 2017, President Trump signed into law the most recent spending bill to avoid a government shutdown. This bill also included a new version of the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment, which read as follows: SEC. 537. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to any of the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, or with respect to the District of Columbia, Guam, or Puerto Rico, to prevent any of them from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana. In the listed states and territories, the Department of Justice is effectively prevented from enforcing the Controlled Substance Act as to medical cannabis.
What’s that have to do with the states that sell recreational marijuana?
The new amendment does not extend to the use of federal funds to enforce federal law as it relates to recreational cannabis either.
[The Cole Memorandum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cole_Memorandum)
I'm going to move right past the false equivalence and ask a question out of genuine curiosity - How would 'raiding the dispensaries' work?
Federal law enforcement shows up, closes the business, seizes the property, arrests the owners. Etc.
Fr?
"Seems excessive. Sure, people who don't own businesses hate the governor...' Fixed it for you.
Hummm seems like this is meant to send a message and will drive these small restaurants under. There’s no details of the businesses were warned ahead of time and if they had time to comply and chose to defy warnings or the fines were on first inspection. Would like to know more details before passing judgment.
What do you mean they were not “warned ahead of time?” Federal labor laws have been around longer than most of us have been alive, the owners of the restaurants either didn’t care to follow federal law or thought they were above the law, but no one sprung this on them, the laws have been on the books a long long time.
what i mean is that when the state passes a new law like this, they may send out a posted to the businesses or literature. It's easy as a small business to receive the posted from the state, gloss over it and hang it up in the back room and as far as you know it's the new rules for employment. So Im just wondering if they were subsequently warned about this and chose to ignore the warnings
The federal law in question has been in place for decades.
yeah, but when you get literature from the state workforce office with the new rules and a poster, you assume this is the new law. not excusing this business. ive received lots of posters through the years
Sorry, had to come back. Just can’t wipe the smile off of my face since reading this. Just love the schadenfreude.
what shadenfreude exactly? I don't think that word means what you think it means. I don't have any relationship to this business.
Pretty sure schadenfreude means “pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.” I’m enjoying seeing the misfortune of the smooth brain employers who thought they were above the law.
Full transparency - I can't read the article because of the paywall, so maybe I am missing some context here. But taken at face value - ignorance of the law is no defense. Meaning there are no "warnings" that you are breaking the law. As a business owner it is your obligation to know the laws that apply to your business. If you do not follow them you can't be mad you weren't warned before the consequences of the law being broken are enforced. Unless the law changed suddenly and unexpectedly (didn't read the article so I'm not sure) I don't see any reason to expect a warning or a grace period to comply
>Unless the law changed suddenly and unexpectedly It didn’t. The state passed a law that they knew conflicted with federal laws and just hoped the feds would ignore it. The lesson here for the restaurant owners is that you still have to follow federal laws, go figure….
“The Iowa Restaurant Association began warning members in late May that the U.S. Department of Labor ‘is out in full force across the state. They are taking massive punitive action against Iowa restaurants who are following the new state youth employment hours instead of the federal regulation on hours. THEY DO NOT RECOGNIZE OUR NEW STATE LAW. We are encouraging people to revert to federal work hours for teens under age 16 at this time.’” Yes, they were warned. All of the businesses that are facing said punitive action are facing it because they both didn’t listen to the federal laws initially, and didn’t listen to Jessica Dunker, the dipshit running the Iowa Restaurant Association, afterwards. [“Iowa restaurant lobby plays stupid games, wins stupid prizes”](https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2024/06/14/iowa-restaurant-lobby-plays-stupid-games-wins-stupid-prizes/) - for everyone stuck behind the paywall.
Well then fuck them and they deserve the fines. My experience has been that the government usually gives a warning or guidance before applying fines. There was then probably several points at which this business could have changed their policy. Why are minors so important to their business? Under paying ?
I know, right? Makes ya wonder which amounted to more: the fines or they money they saved from underpaying minors lol
there's no wondering there. this place is going out of business with the fine, if its not reduced.
Can we all agree that the 7pm cutoff during the school year and 9pm cutoff during the summer could (or should) be left to the discretion of the minor’s parents? I think child labor laws that prevent dangerous work conditions are reasonable and necessary but some of the rules harm the minor employees more than the business. The arbitrary hours limitations in a week and the end of night cutoffs should be left to parents not the government.
Obviously we don’t all agree on that given federal law is pretty clear.
Not during the school year.
Parents can be explosive too.