March 4, 2005

Child Labor Settlement Investigation

Wal-Mart illegally let (or required?) dozens of teenagers use chainsaws and other "hazardous" equipment. The settlement with the Labor Department requires a 15-day notice before a Wage and Hour Division investigation can proceed. Some politicians want more money from WM, and others don't seem to like that a private entity will not be subject to immediate scrutiny at their whims:

WASHINGTON -- Connecticut lawmakers are pressing Labor Secretary Elaine Chao for more details about Wal-Mart's alleged violations of child labor laws, including those at 21 Connecticut stores.

In a letter to Chao Thursday, Democratic Sens. Christopher Dodd and Joe Lieberman also questioned the federal government's recent settlement with the retail chain, which requires the agency give Wal-Mart 15 days' notice before any investigation of any store.

It is news to me that all investigations must be delayed; I thought it was some

I cannot find the full text of the letter, and I should like to see that and all the settlement details. What the politicians don't seem to understand is that private organizations have rights under the law not to be subject to harrassment from them.

However, Labor blog has a screenshot of a DOL email sent to district offices. And one commenter notes the following editorial in the Miami Herald:

Most employers -- and unions -- are given advance notice of an inquiry so that they can assemble the necessary documents and personnel for review.

Even with complaint-driven audits of union finances, for example, it is not unusual for a large union to be given 30 days or more to prepare. This isn't for the benefit of the employer or union but to help our investigators do their work.

Anyone who thinks that Wal-Mart or any other employer or union would use the notice period to sweep evidence under the rug does not understand the law. Companies and unions have no incentive to try to hide the evidence because the penalty for most labor-law violations is a civil fine. Hiding or altering evidence of such misconduct is subject to federal criminal sanctions -- including possible jail time.

Posted by Kevin on March, 4 2005 at 10:09 AM