Connect with us

Personal Finance

Changes to child labor law being proposed across America

Published

on

As child labor violations soar across the country, dozens of states are ramping up efforts to update child labor laws — with widespread efforts to weaken laws, but some to bolster them as well.

The push for changes to those laws arrives as employers — particularly in restaurants and other service-providing industries — have grappled with labor shortages since the beginning of the pandemic, and hired more teenagers, whose wages are typically lower than adults’.

Labor experts attribute the spike in child labor violations — which, a Post analysis shows, have tripled in 10 years — to a tight labor market that has prompted employers to hire more teens, as well as migrant children arriving from Latin America. In 2023, teens ages 16 to 19 were working or looking for work at the highest annual rate since 2009, according to Labor Department data.

That has led to the largest effort in years to change the patchwork of state laws that regulate child labor, with major implications for the country’s youths and the labor market. At least 16 states have one or more bills that would weaken their child labor laws and at least 13 are seeking to strengthen them, according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute and other sources. Among these states, there are 43 bill proposals.

Since 2022, 14 states have passed or enacted new child labor laws.

Federal law forbids all minors from working in jobs deemed hazardous, including those in manufacturing, roofing, meatpacking and demolition. Fourteen- and 15-year-olds are not allowed to work past 7 p.m. on school nights or 9 p.m. on weekends.

Most states have laws that are tougher than federal rules, although an effort is underway, led by Republican lawmakers, to undo those restrictions, which is supported by restaurant associations, liquor associations and home builders associations.

A Florida-based lobbying group, the Foundation for Government Accountability, which has fought to promote conservative interests such as restricting access to anti-poverty programs, drafted or lobbied for recent bills to strip child labor protections in at least six states.

Among them is Indiana’s new law enacted in March, repealing all work-hour restrictions for 16- and 17-year-olds, who previously couldn’t work past 10 p.m. or before 6 a.m. on school days. The law also extends legal work hours for 14- and 15-year-olds.

Indiana legislators sparred over the bill, with state Sen. Mike Gaskill (R) saying at a hearing in March, “Do not for a second think that this is about the evil employers trying to manipulate and take advantage of kids.” But state Sen. Andrea Hunley (D) called the bill an “irresponsible and dystopian” way of “responding to our workforce shortage.”

In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed into law changes that allow 16- and 17-year-olds to work seven days in a row. It also removes all hour restrictions for teens in online school or home-school, effectively permitting them to work overnight shifts.

Some states have reported soaring numbers of child-labor violations over the past year, with investigators uncovering violations in fast-food restaurants, but also in dangerous jobs in meatpacking, manufacturing and construction, where federal law prohibits minors from working. The Labor Department alleged in a lawsuit in February that a sanitation company, Fayette Janitorial Service, employed children as young as 13 to clean head splitters and other kill-floor equipment at slaughterhouses on overnight shifts in Virginia and Iowa.

Despite such findings, an Iowa law signed last year by Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) allows minors in that state to work in jobs previously deemed too hazardous, including in industrial laundries, light manufacturing, demolition, roofing and excavation, but not slaughterhouses. Separately, West Virginia enacted a law this month that allows 16- and 17-year-olds to work some roofing jobs as part of an apprenticeship program.

Six more states are evaluating bills to lift restrictions preventing minors from working jobs considered dangerous. A Georgia bill would allow 14-year-olds to work in landscaping on factory grounds and other prohibited work sites. Florida’s legislature has passed a law, drafted by the state’s construction industry association, that would allow teens to work certain jobs in residential construction. It is awaiting approval from DeSantis.

Carol Bowen, chief lobbyist for the Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida, testified in February that the state “has one of the largest skilled-work shortages in recent history” and that the construction industry needs to identify the “next generation.”

Bowen said the bill limits work for 16- and 17-year-olds to home construction projects, adding that teens wouldn’t be able to work on anything higher than six feet.

In Kentucky, the House has passed a bill that prevents the state from having child labor laws that are stricter than federal protections, in effect removing all limitations on when 16- and 17-year-olds can work.

Meanwhile, Alabama, West Virginia, Missouri and Georgia are considering bills this year that would eliminate work permit requirements for minors, verifying age or parental or school permission to work. Most states require these permits. Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) signed a similar bill into law last year.

Republican lawmakers often say they are trying to increase opportunities or bring requirements in line with federal standards when they push to loosen child labor laws. They say that lowering restrictions helps employers fill labor shortages, while improving teenagers’ work ethic and reducing their screen time. Another common refrain is that permitting later work hours allows high school students opportunities similar to those for varsity athletes whose games often go later than state law allows teens to work.

“These are youth workers that are driving automobiles. They are not children,” said state Rep. Linda Chaney (R), sponsor of the Florida bill expanding work hours for 16- and 17-year-olds, during a hearing in December.

Indiana state Sen. Andy Zay (R), who supported the state’s new law extending work hours for 14- and 15-year-olds, told The Washington Post that as a father of five children, including a son who plays high school basketball, he felt saddened by criticism that teens could be exploited into working later hours under this law.

“I don’t see that, and I don’t feel that. And certainly they would have the freedom to move on,” Zay said.

But the spike in child labor violations and the recent deaths of minors illegally employed in dangerous jobs have also prompted a push by labor advocates to strengthen state laws.

The Virginia legislature unanimously approved a bill in recent weeks that would increase employer penalties for child labor violations from $1,000 to $2,500 for routine violations. Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) approved the measure Wednesday.

The bill’s sponsor, Del. Holly M. Seibold (D-Fairfax), told The Post that she was “shocked and horrified” to read recently about poultry plants in Virginia illegally employing migrant children and wrote legislation to raise the penalties.

Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Nebraska and Colorado also are pushing to raise employer penalties for child labor violations, with lawmakers calling them outdated and not substantial enough to deter employers from breaking the law. For example, Iowa fines employers $2,500 for a serious but nonfatal injury of a minor illegally working in a hazardous industry and $500 if there is no serious injury. The new bill proposes an additional $5,000 penalty for an injury that leads to a workers’ compensation case.

Terri Gerstein, director of the Wagner Labor Initiative at New York University, said that the focus on increasing penalties is “good, but, alone, is not good enough,” given that many states have very minimal resources dedicated to enforcing laws.

This year, Colorado legislators have introduced the strongest package to crack down on employers that break child labor laws. The legislation would raise fines for violations and deposit them into a fund for enforcement. Lawmakers are also seeking to make information on companies that violate child labor laws publicly available; in many states, such information is off-limits to the public. Colorado would also legally protect parents of minors who are employed illegally, as some have faced criminal charges for child abuse.

Colorado state Rep. Sheila Lieder (D), who introduced the bill, told The Post that Colorado’s child labor laws aren’t punitive enough to dissuade employers from violating the laws, with just a $20 penalty per offense.

“The fine in Colorado is like a couple cups of coffee at a brand-name coffee store,” Lieder said. “I was just, like, there’s something more that has to be done.”

Jacqueline Aguilar, a 21-year-old college student in Alamosa, Colo., who supports the bill, worked in the lettuce and potato fields on Colorado’s Eastern Plains from the time she was 13, alongside her immigrant parents, to buy school clothes.

“Laws have to be stricter because a lot of people don’t report” violations, said Aguilar, who worked 12-hour shifts in the fields starting at 4:30 a.m. growing up. She said she had no knowledge of her labor rights at the time. “Once I started getting older and my mom became disabled because of the job, it changed my perspective on children working.”

correction

In Kentucky, the House-passed bill that prevents the state from enacting child labor laws stricter than federal protections but does not also repeal requirements for meal and rest breaks for minors. A previous version said that the bill would repeal breaks for minors.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

How to review your insurance policy

Published

on

PUNTA GORDA – OCTOBER 10: In this aerial view, a person walks through flood waters that inundated a neighborhood after Hurricane Milton came ashore on October 10, 2024, in Punta Gorda, Florida. The storm made landfall as a Category 3 hurricane in the Siesta Key area of Florida, causing damage and flooding throughout Central Florida. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Joe Raedle | Getty Images News | Getty Images

It’s officially hurricane season, and early forecasts indicate it’s poised to be an active one.

Now is the time to take a look at your homeowners insurance policy to ensure you have enough and the right kinds of coverage, experts say — and make any necessary changes if you don’t.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration predicts a 60% chance of “above-normal” Atlantic hurricane activity during this year’s season, which spans from June 1 to November 30.

The agency forecasts 13 to 19 named storms with winds of 39 mph or higher. Six to 10 of those could become hurricanes, including three to five major hurricanes of Category 3, 4, or 5.

You should pay close attention to your insurance policies.

Charles Nyce

risk management and insurance professor at Florida State University

Hurricanes can cost billions of dollars worth of damages. Experts at AccuWeather estimate that last year’s hurricane season cost $500 billion in total property damage and economic loss, making the season “one of the most devastating and expensive ever recorded.”

“Take proactive steps now to make a plan and gather supplies to ensure you’re ready before a storm threatens,” Ken Graham, NOAA’s national weather service director, said in the agency’s report.

Part of your checklist should include reviewing your insurance policies and what coverage you have, according to Charles Nyce, a risk management and insurance professor at Florida State University. 

“Besides being ready physically by having your radio, your batteries, your water … you should pay close attention to your insurance policies,” said Nyce.

More from Personal Finance:
How child tax credit could change as Senate debates Trump’s mega-bill
This map shows where seniors face longest drives
Some Social Security checks to be smaller in June from student loan garnishment

You want to know four key things: the value of property at risk, how much a loss could cost you, whether you’re protected in the event of flooding and if you have enough money set aside in case of emergencies, he said.

Bob Passmore, the department vice president of personal lines at the American Property Casualty Insurance Association, agreed: “It’s really important to review your policy at least annually, and this is a good time to do it.”

Insurers often suspend policy changes and pause issuing new policies when there’s a storm bearing down. So acting now helps ensure you have the right coverage before there’s an urgent need.

Here are three things to consider about your home insurance policy going into hurricane season, according to experts.

1. Review your policy limits

2. Check your deductibles

Take a look at your deductibles, or the amount you have to pay out of pocket upfront if you file a claim, experts say.

For instance, if you have a $1,000 deductible on your policy and submit a claim for $8,000 of storm coverage, your insurer will pay $7,000 toward the cost of repairs, according to a report by NerdWallet. You’re responsible for the remaining $1,000.

A common way to lower your policy premium is by increasing your deductibles, Passmore said. 

Raising your deductible from $1,000 to $2,500 can save you an average 12% on your premium, per NerdWallet’s research.

But if you do that, make sure you have the cash on hand to absorb the cost after a loss, Passmore said.

Why the U.S. has a home insurance crisis

Don’t stop at your standard policy deductible. Look over hazard-specific provisions such as a wind deductible, which is likely to kick in for hurricane damage.

Wind deductibles are an out-of-pocket cost that is usually a percentage of the value of your policy, said Nyce. As a result, they can be more expensive than your standard deductible, he said. 

If a homeowner opted for a 2% deductible on a $500,000 house, their out-of-pocket costs for wind damages can go up to $10,000, he said.

“I would be very cautious about picking larger deductibles for wind,” he said.

3. Assess if you need flood insurance

Floods are usually not covered by a homeowners insurance policy. If you haven’t yet, consider buying a separate flood insurance policy through the National Flood Insurance Program by the Federal Emergency Management Agency or through the private market, experts say. 

It can be worth it whether you live in a flood-prone area or not: Flooding causes 90% of disaster damage every year in the U.S., according to FEMA.

In 2024, Hurricane Helene caused massive flooding in mountainous areas like Asheville in Buncombe County, North Carolina. Less than 1% of households there were covered by the NFIP, according to a recent report by the Swiss Re Institute. 

If you decide to get flood insurance with the NFIP, don’t buy it at the last minute, Nyce said. There’s usually a 30-day waiting period before the new policy goes into effect. 

“You can’t just buy it when you think you’re going to need it like 24, 48 or 72 hours before the storm makes landfall,” Nyce said. “Buy it now before the storms start to form.” 

Make sure you understand what’s protected under the policy. The NFIP typically covers up to $250,000 in damages to a residential property and up to $100,000 on the contents, said Loretta Worters, a spokeswoman for the Insurance Information Institute.

If you expect more severe damage to your house, ask an insurance agent about excess flood insurance, Nyce said.

Such flood insurance policies are written by private insurers that cover losses over and above what’s covered by the NFIP, he said.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Average 401(k) savings rate hits a record high. See if you’re on track

Published

on

Seksan Mongkhonkhamsao | Moment | Getty Images

The average 401(k) plan savings rate recently notched a new record high — and the percentage is nearing a widely-used rule of thumb.

During the first quarter of 2025, the 401(k) savings rate, including employee and company contributions, jumped to 14.3%, according to Fidelity’s quarterly analysis of 25,300 corporate plans with 24.4 million participants.

More from FA Playbook:

Here’s a look at other stories affecting the financial advisor business.

Despite economic uncertainty, “we definitely saw a lot of positive behaviors continue into Q1,” said Mike Shamrell, vice president of thought leadership for Fidelity’s Workplace Investing. 

The report found that employees deferred a milestone 9.5% into 401(k) plans during the first quarter, and companies contributed 4.8%. The combined 14.3% rate is the closest it’s ever been to Fidelity’s recommended 15% savings target.    

Two-thirds of increased employee deferrals during the first quarter came from “auto-escalations,” which automatically boost savings rates over time, usually in tandem with salary increases, Shamrell said.

You should aim to save at least 15% of pre-tax income each year, including company deposits, to maintain your current lifestyle in retirement, according to Fidelity. This assumes you save continuously from ages 25 to 67.

But the exact right percentage for each individual hinges on several things, such as your existing nest egg, planned retirement date, pensions and other factors, experts say.

“There’s no magic rate of savings,” because everyone spends and saves differently, said certified financial planner Larry Luxenberg, founder of Lexington Avenue Capital Management in New City, New York. “That’s the case before and after retirement.”

There’s no magic rate of savings.

Larry Luxenberg

Founder of Lexington Avenue Capital Management

Don’t miss ‘free money’ from your employer

If you can’t reach the 15% retirement savings benchmark, Shamrell suggests deferring at least enough to get your employer’s full 401(k) matching contribution.

Most companies will match a percentage of your 401(k) deferrals up to a certain limit. These deposits could also be subject to a “vesting schedule,” which determines your ownership based on the length of time you’ve been with your employer.

Still, “this probably [is] the closest thing a lot of people are going to get to free money in their life,” he said.

The most popular 401(k) match formula — used by 48% of companies on Fidelity’s platform — is 100% for the first 3% an employee contributes, and 50% for the next 2%.

Department of Labor changes retirement account guardrails

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Average 401(k) balances fall due to market volatility, Fidelity says

Published

on

Trump White House pick clears path for crypto in 401(k)s

A few months of market swings have taken a toll on retirement savers.

The average 401(k) balance fell 3% in the first quarter of 2025 to $127,100, according to a new report by Fidelity Investments, the nation’s largest provider of 401(k) plans.

The average individual retirement account balance also sank 4% from the previous quarter to $121,983, the financial services firm found. Still, both 401(k) and IRA balances were up year over year.

The majority of retirement savers continue to contribute, Fidelity said. The average 401(k) contribution rate, including employer and employee contributions, increased to 14.3%, just shy of Fidelity’s suggested savings rate of 15%.

“Although the first quarter of 2025 posed challenges for retirement savers, it’s encouraging to see people take a continuous savings approach which focuses on their long-term retirement goals,” Sharon Brovelli, president of workplace investing at Fidelity Investments, said in a statement. “This approach will help individuals weather any type of market turmoil and stay on track.”

More from FA Playbook:

Here’s a look at other stories impacting the financial advisor business.

U.S. markets have been under pressure ever since the White House first announced country-specific tariffs on April 2.

Since then, ongoing trade tensions between the U.S. and European Union as well as China, largely due to President Donald Trump‘s on-again, off-again negotiations, caused some of the worst trading days for the S&P 500 since the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic.

However, more recently, markets largely rebounded from earlier losses. As of Wednesday morning, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was roughly flat year-to-date, while the Nasdaq Composite and S&P 500 were up around 1% in 2025.

‘Have a long-term strategy’

“It’s important to not get too unnerved by market swings,” said Mike Shamrell, Fidelity’s vice president of thought leadership.

Even for those nearing retirement age, those savings should have a time horizon of at least 10 to 20 years, he said, which means it’s better to “have a long-term strategy and not a short-term reaction.”

Intervening, or trying to time the market, is almost always a bad idea, said Gil Baumgarten, CEO and founder of Segment Wealth Management in Houston.

“People lose sight of the long-term benefits of investing in volatile assets, they stay focused on short-term market movements, and had they stayed put, the market would have corrected itself,” he said. “The math is so compelling to look past all that and let the stock market work itself out.”

For example, the 10 best trading days by percentage gain for the S&P 500 over the past three decades all occurred during recessions, often in close proximity to the worst days, according to a Wells Fargo analysis published last year.

And, although stocks go up and down, the S&P 500 index has an average annualized return of more than 10% over the past few decades. In fact, since 1950, the S&P has delivered positive returns 77% of the time, according to CNBC’s analysis.

“Really, you should just be betting on equities rising over time,” Baumgarten said.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Continue Reading

Trending