A common thread among those
involved in agriculture is the experiences they had growing up and working on
the farm. For most, it’s a time in their life when they learn not only the
fundamentals of food production, but also the work ethic and responsibility
that influence them throughout their lives.
So when the U.S. Department of
Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division proposed revisions that would have changed
the face of the family farm last September, it prompted a huge response from
the agricultural community. According to Agri-Pulse
coverage of the issue, more than 70 agricultural organizations submitted
comments in opposition to the changes. The National Farmers Union said parts of
the rules needed revision. The American Farm Bureau Federation called the rules
an “over-reach” and a threat to the integrity of family farms.
From a review of the proposed
rules and DOL
news release, it’s not hard to see where these groups would get that
impression. The regulations would have applied to all youth under the age of 16
working in agriculture, and would have made many, if not most, tasks on the
farm off-limits for youth not qualifying for a narrow parental exemption.
Relevant to the hog industry, the
new rules would have banned youth from “engaging, or assisting, in animal
husbandry practices” – specifically outlining breeding, castration, vaccination
and other practices integral to our
industry. More broadly, it would also ban contact with animals in situations
where behavior could be unpredictable. Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure I was
always taught to regard livestock as unpredictable, no matter the setting. These
rules would have also prohibited youth under age 16 from working in or around
manure pits, operating most machinery and working in “extreme temperatures.”
Perhaps what was most unsettling to
me is that these restrictions could have had a serious effect on the ability of
youth to show livestock or work around animals in 4-H projects or FFA
Supervised Agricultural Experiences (SAEs).
In a time when the Obama Agriculture Department, led by Secretary Tom Vilsack,
is making its case for more support for beginning farmers and agriculturists,
it struck me as ironic that the Labor Department was proposing regulations that
would have prevented the next generation from gaining the experiences needed to
help them develop necessary skills and a passion for farming.
Thankfully, the Department of Labor
announced in an April
news release that, after thousands of comments received and pressure from members
of Congress, it would withdraw the regulations and assured that they “would not
be pursued for the duration of the Obama administration.”
That probably has many of you wondering why
I’m writing about this issue after it seems to have been resolved, but there
are some important takeaways. While I don’t believe
regulation is the key to improving farm safety, it’s likely someone in
Washington might, and that means this issue probably isn’t over.
Also, not to be missed in the
aftermath of these rules is the influence agriculture has when it stands united
behind an issue. In part due to the nature of the regulations, the response
from agriculture on this issue was heard loud and clear in Washington. The agriculture
child labor rules represent merely one challenge facing agriculture in our
nation’s capital. What if agriculture showed that kind of grassroots activism
more often? What more can we do to tell our story to regulators and lawmakers
alike?
At the end of the day, I’m pleased
with how the child labor in agriculture issue sorted itself out. However, it was
an important reminder that we need to be vigilant in telling our industry’s
story. If not, we risk the chance that the next generation won’t have the same
opportunities we have all been fortunate to have.
