Republicans in Florida are reportedly working on a way to loosen the state's child labor laws.
The Orlando Sentinel reported that the proposed Republican bill to loosen child labor laws in Florida "is part of a national trend aimed at repealing or weakening workplace protections for young people that have been in place for more than 100 years."
The proposed changes could also be a way to replace some immigrant labor amid a crack down on undocumented workers, the outlet noted.
POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office?
"The bill could worsen graduation rates and hurt lower-income families, experts said," the article states.
“Are we willing to return to a world where we accept that children of the poorest families are working more than full-time jobs under hazardous conditions?” said Jennifer Sherer, director of the Economic Analysis and Research Network at the nonprofit Economic Policy Institute, according to the article.
The piece continues:
"State Rep. Linda Chaney, though, said in a statement that her bill 'intends to provide teenagers with the flexibility to work whatever hours they deem fits best with their schedule and financial goals.'"
Further, according to the article, there is a potentially "nefarious" change surrounding younger kids.
"Where the current law states 14- and 15-year-olds 'shall not' work before 7 a.m. or after 7 p.m. for more than 15 hours a week during the school year, or more than three hours per day on school days, the bill would replace 'shall not' with 'may not,'" it states. "Sherer said it was unclear whether the proposed language revision was meant to make work standards for younger teens 'optional' rather than mandated."
Terri Gerstein, a fellow at the Center for Labor and a Just Economy at Harvard Law School who testified before Congress earlier this year about child labor, told the outlet that she "couldn’t see any other reason to change it."
“To me, as a normal human being, ‘shall not’ and ‘may not’ sound like the same thing, right?” Gerstein said. But, she added, “‘shall’ is obligatory and ‘may’ is optional. … I can only infer that there’s something nefarious [going on], because otherwise, why would you change the language? It makes no sense.”
