78
Wisconsin Republicans propose eliminating work permits for 14- and 15-year-olds (apnews.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/wisconsin@midwest.social
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The Wisconsin GOP won't stop until there are mandatory 40hr weeks for 14yr-olds or something.

From the article:

The proposal comes amid a wider push by state lawmakers to roll back child labor laws and despite the efforts of federal investigators to crack down on a surge in child labor violations nationally.

Under current law, 14- and 15-year-olds in Wisconsin are prohibited from working most jobs unless they have permission from a parent or guardian and have verified their age with the state Department of Workforce Development. The department can revoke youth work permits at any time if it believes a child’s safety is being threatened.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -7 points 3 years ago (3 children)

You say this like kids would be forced to work. I'm very liberal, but child labor laws shouldn't exist except to make sure that 1) the kid actually consents to working and 2) the parents can't take the kid's money. I grew up in a household where my very Christian parents used not being able to legally work as a tool to keep me home and indoctrinate me. I was forcibly homeschooled, and work was my only interaction with other beliefs and political views, which couldn't start until age 16 for me. Then when I could work, really short hour limitations kept me from affording a car.

My point is that children should not be forced to work by the parents, government, or economic situation - but they shouldn't be forced to not work either. Especially for cases where the only way to get out of a toxic family situation is to leave at 18 - which isn't always economically feasible because they can't legally work enough.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago

    Very narrow view...

    Policy should not he made based on fringe experiences.

    Generally, relaxing child labour laws results in adverse effect on childrens' development as you can't trust the parents nor the employer to properly administer children.

    Frankly emplpoyers don't treat adults properly either but we accept that as "fuck you peasant" culture.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago*

    You say this like kids would be forced to work.

    You know how, back in the middle of the 20th century, women were allowed to work their own jobs for the first time?

    You know how, today, women are all but required to work their own jobs, and being a stay-at-home mom is no longer financially viable?

    Yes, kids will be forced to work. Capitalism will see to it, and we've got the history to prove it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Or perhaps the answer is to offer more methods for 18 year olds to be able to leave a toxic environment rather than having to try to balance work and school as a child. Homeschooling should be illegal. And put children's protective services should be strengthened. None of your argument actually makes child labor the answer. In reality, what will happen more often than kids pulling themselves up by their bootstraps is parents like yours will put them to work for a trump loving christian place that reports back to the parents. The parents will be handed the money, and the child will be even more trapped due to poor education and more of an abusive system around them. Because jobs that will put 14 year olds to work will not have quality ownership.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I concede. Your plan does seem better with one exception - don't illegalize homeschooling. I had trouble dealing with social interaction (I'm mildly autistic) for the few years I was in a (Christian) school, and struggle with some subjects but excell in others. Public school would never have been an option for me. I also gained a lot from learning to research and educate myself. It's the only reason I caught on to their bullcrap doctrine, learned Nietzschean philosophy ( which helped me make sense of a world without "god"), etc.

    I propose an alternative:

    1. Homeschool curriculums must be state approved, including the individual books - not just the subject branch.

    2. No religious text, textbooks based on religious doctrine, etc, may be included in the curriculum.

    3. The child has the right to reject a curriculum choice, and defer to the subject curriculum used by public schools in their district (this will likely only work for highschool of course, hence state approval also being required)

    How do you think this would work as an alternative?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I think properly funded schools with properly paid special needs instructors would leave far fewer students behind than allowing homeschooling.

    Good special needs instruction includes teaching non neurotypical people like you and me coping mechanisms for situations like social interaction. Allowing homeschooling creates one more situation where people who are typically not trained or prepared are suddenly the sole source of education for a child. And schools are an important safety net for abused children. Homeschooling is abused far more than it is helpful. And in any case that it is helpful that is only due to a failure that should be remedied elsewhere.

    At least that is currently my view and living somewhere that homeschooling is illegal but the schools are better funded has certainly not changed my mind. Evidence to the contrary would though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    I think properly funded schools with properly paid special needs instructors would leave far fewer students behind than allowing homeschooling.

    True, but what if that's not the choice being prevented? What if the choice is between not between individually sought resources and state provided resources, but between individually sought resources and none at all? Should we really deny people without access to decent school systems the right to pursue other options?

    I believe good public schooling is better than home schooling. But the solution isn't to ban homeschooling. It's to make the public schooling better. In many places, public schooling is very very bad, and it isn't going to get any better any time soon.

    And I don't think we should be so quick to deny people their rights just because they believe things that are different from what we believe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent