A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill amends the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to strengthen child labor protections, particularly within the agricultural industry. It redefines oppressive child labor and revises age requirements for agricultural employment while repealing certain hand harvest labor waivers. The legislation significantly increases civil penalties for child labor violations and introduces special criminal penalties for aggravated violations causing serious injury, illness, or death. It also mandates federal data collection and annual reporting on work-related injuries to children. Additionally, employers are required to report serious injuries, illnesses, or deaths of child agricultural workers within five days.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +8
Would children be better off under this?
The bill significantly strengthens child labor protections, increases safety standards, and prohibits children under 18 from working as pesticide handlers.
- Scored +5
Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?
Minors and young workers under 18 receive enhanced workplace safety protections and stiffer penalties for employers who violate child labor laws.
- Scored +4
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income and immigrant families heavily reliant on agricultural labor benefit from stronger health and safety protections for their children.
The opposite
- Scored -4
Would business owners be better off under this?
Agricultural employers face stricter regulations, higher civil penalties, new reporting burdens, and criminal liability for violations.
- Scored -4
Would farmers be better off under this?
Farmers face increased regulatory burdens, strict reporting requirements, and heightened financial and criminal penalties for child labor violations.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 5 increases civil penalties for child labor violations, setting fines ranging from $500 to $15,000 per employee for standard violations, and between $15,000 and $60,115 for violations causing serious injury, illness, or death to a minor. This holds employers more accountable and provides a stronger financial deterrent against putting young workers in danger.
-
Section 6 adds criminal penalties of up to five years in prison or fines for employers who repeatedly or willfully violate child labor laws resulting in the death, serious injury, or serious illness of a minor. This provision ensures that reckless officials face severe consequences for harming working children.
-
Section 8 establishes strict employer reporting requirements, forcing employers to notify the Secretary within 5 days of any work-related serious injury, serious illness, or death of a child agricultural employee. This creates transparency and ensures government oversight when young workers are harmed.
-
Section 9 requires the Secretary of Labor to prohibit the employment of any child under 18 from working as a pesticide handler. This protects children from dangerous chemical exposures that are detrimental to their health and well-being.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Section 4 revises age requirements and repeals waiver provisions for hand harvest labor, which removes certain employment opportunities that younger individuals and their families may have previously relied upon for income in agricultural settings.
-
Section 8 imposes new reporting mandates on employers within 5 days of specific incidents, and failure to report can result in civil penalties ranging from $500 to $7,000 per violation. While this protects workers, the administrative burden could create challenges for small or family-run operations if they struggle to meet the strict reporting timelines.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — The bill significantly strengthens child labor protections, increases safety standards, and prohibits children under 18 from working as pesticide handlers. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Minors and young workers under 18 receive enhanced workplace safety protections and stiffer penalties for employers who violate child labor laws. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Hispanic and immigrant communities, which comprise a large portion of the agricultural workforce, benefit from improved protections for child farmworkers. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The legislation provides crucial protections for children of immigrant farmworkers who frequently face hazardous working conditions. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income and immigrant families heavily reliant on agricultural labor benefit from stronger health and safety protections for their children. Would business owners be better off under this? — Agricultural employers face stricter regulations, higher civil penalties, new reporting burdens, and criminal liability for violations. Would farmers be better off under this? — Farmers face increased regulatory burdens, strict reporting requirements, and heightened financial and criminal penalties for child labor violations.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates annual reporting to Congress and publication in the Federal Register regarding work-related injuries, illnesses, and deaths among child agricultural workers. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill increases federal oversight by introducing stricter reporting requirements, mandatory data collection, and higher civil and criminal penalties enforced by the Department of Labor.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — By prohibiting children from working as pesticide handlers and strengthening safety standards, the bill promotes better baseline health protections for young agricultural workers. Does this put more money into medical research? — The legislation mandates data collection and reporting on work-related injuries and illnesses among young agricultural workers to improve safety evaluations.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill enhances worker protections and accountability within agricultural employment.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill establishes strict protections prohibiting minors from working as pesticide handlers, reducing hazardous chemical exposure risks.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The legislation helps protect vulnerable minority and immigrant child farmworkers from hazardous working conditions and exploitation.
- 9/30/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- Introduced in Senate
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.