Policy experts Nina Mast and Reed Shaw are calling on the U.S. Department of Labor to issue new regulations on child labor in order to address higher rates of violations, injuries and school absenteeism, particularly in light of state efforts to roll back protections.
Child labor violations are increasing, and over two dozen states have made moves that are exacerbating the issue, a recent report by Governing for Impact, the Economic Policy Institute and Child Labor Coalition says.
A number of mostly Republican-controlled states have weakened child labor protections in recent years and a second Trump administration would likely escalate the deregulatory push, as per plans laid out in Project 2025, according to a report released Wednesday.
State governments across the US are taking steps to eliminate protections for minors as rates of child labor violations, injuries and chronic school absenteeism rise, according to a report released on Wednesday.
The report by Governing for Impact, the Economic Policy Institute, and Child Labor Coalition proposes actions the Biden-Harris administration can take in response to a recent surge in child labor violations around the country and a trend of some states passing legislation that rolls back state-level child labor protections.
A 150-year-old law governing the U.S. Postal Service could be used by a conservative presidential administration to ban abortion nationwide, and a new study suggests that thousands of Wisconsin women would lose reproductive health care in the process.
The study was released by progressive-leaning policy think tank Governing for Impact and describes how a president could interpret an 1873 anti-vice law known as the Comstock Act to ban abortions.
Regulatory policy group highlights the implications and consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Chevron v. NRDC
WASHINGTON, DC — Governing for Impact Executive Director Rachael Klarman released the following statement:
“The Supreme Court’s decision is the latest in a line of extreme decisions that puts the interests of corporate law breakers, polluters, and anti-labor activists over the interests of the American people. However, the immediate impact of today’s decision may be limited. The Supreme Court has not relied on Chevron in a number of years. As a result, the Court has already dramatically intruded into the policy making process an area once thought to properly belong under the purview of the two democratically elected branches of the federal government and courts around the country have followed their lead, increasingly eschewing Chevron deference. The Biden Administration has also smartly been preparing for Chevron’s formal demise over the last four years and has not relied on the doctrine to defend its rules.
As a result, Loper Bright’s impact will depend on how we respond. Rather than self-limiting, advocates must continue to urge federal agencies to use every legal authority at their disposal to enact strong rules that protect consumers, workers, and the public.”
About Governing for Impact
Governing for Impact (GFI) is a regulatory policy organization dedicated to ensuring the federal government works for working Americans, not corporate lobbyists. The policies we design and the legal insights we develop help increase opportunity for those not historically represented in regulatory policy implementation work: working people. For additional information about GFI, please visit https://governingforimpact.org/.
###
Government agencies should use existing regulations and powers to regulate AI, argues a new report from the Center for American Progress and Governing for Impact shared first with Axios.
A new report warns of “increasingly aggressive tactics” by employers, while calling for greater transparency on anti-union spending.
Advocacy groups offer a road map for how agencies can use existing authority to ban contracts that force workers to pay employers if they leave their job.
Legal memo proposes how DOL can protect healthcare workers and patients from restrictive labor practices
WASHINGTON, DC — Today, Governing for Impact (GFI), Towards Justice (TJ), the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC), and the American Economic Liberties Project (AELP) issued a memo urging the Department of Labor (DOL) to prohibit employers from issuing restrictive employment contracts on their workers that would require them to pay their employer if they resign, are terminated, or attempt to find another job.
Stay-or-pay contracts force workers to pay their employers if they leave – or are fired from – a job within a certain time frame. Used in tandem with, or in lieu of, non-compete clauses, which prohibit employees from obtaining a new position in their given industry, stay-or-pay contracts have been shown to reduce workers’ mobility and stifle competition. The threat of financial penalties upon resignation or termination dissuades workers from speaking up about unsafe working conditions, which, in the healthcare industry, can lead to increased rates of employee burnout, more toxic work environments, higher incidence of medical error, and poorer patient outcomes.
“The healthcare industry’s use of stay-or-pay contracts has led to egregious violations of worker rights and dangerous increases in workplace and patient safety, ” said Reed Shaw, Policy Counsel at Governing for Impact. “The Department of Labor has a responsibility to take immediate steps to protect our nation’s healthcare workers, whether they are trained here or abroad.”
Stay-or-pay contracts are increasingly common among healthcare employers that recruit foreign-educated nurses (FENs) to work in the United States. These exploitative agreements often require FENs to commit to a single employer for 18 months to three years. If the FEN leaves the employer before the time is up, the employer charges a “breach fee,” which can amount to tens of thousands of dollars. This type of employer practice exploits an already vulnerable workforce, as employers also often mislead FENs as to the immigration consequences if they leave their jobs.
Stay-or-pay contracts also have adverse impacts on U.S. nurses, who may be forced to accept lower wages and poor working conditions from employers who know that they can always turn to a vulnerable and captive foreign-born workforce instead.
In the legal memo, GFI and its partner organizations recommend that the DOL uses its authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to update labor certification regulations to prohibit employers from subjecting their workers to stay–or-pay contracts. The DOL has issued several similar regulations in the past, including, for example, prohibiting immigrant workers from paying the costs of their own labor certification.
About Governing for Impact
Governing for Impact (GFI) is a regulatory policy organization dedicated to ensuring the federal government works for working Americans, not corporate lobbyists. The policies we design and the legal insights we develop help increase opportunity for those not historically represented in regulatory policy implementation work: working people. For additional information about GFI, please visit https://governingforimpact.org/.
###