On November 20, China Labor Watch released a report on labor conditions at five toy manufacturing companies in China. The nonprofit sent undercover representatives to a variety of factories. The toy companies investigated in the report are suppliers to both Hasbro and Mattel, two of the largest and most successful toy distributors in the world. While Mattel’s alleged labor violations should take center stage, the story has been crowded out by Mattel’s advertising campaign in preparation for the holiday sales season. Read on for a look at the recent competing stories on Mattel and the concerns over labor conditions at the company.

History of Mattel’s Alleged Violations

Mattel, based in California but with a variety of third-party contractors in China, is the world’s biggest toy company. Mattel is responsible for the design, production and marketing of toys sold to both consumers and larger vendors (such as Toys ‘R’ Us or Target). Besides its incredibly famous Barbie, Mattel is the parent company of Fisher-Price, Hot Wheels, Matchbox, and American Girl. China Labor Watch, a nonprofit which strives to increase transparency and advocate for workers’ rights, has accused Mattel of underpaying and overworking Chinese workers. China Labor Watch’s first formal report on Mattel was published in 2012, yet the nonprofit claims to have seen little change in labor conditions in the intervening years. After embedding numerous representatives in the factories and conducting hundreds of interviews, the nonprofit stated that:

Workers making Mattel toys are forced to stand for 10 to 13 hours, exceeding the nine-hour working-day limit stated in Chinese law. In some factories, fire escapes are blocked and emergency exits are locked, posing fire-safety concerns.

According to an interviewee protected by a pseudonym, workers in Mattel partner factories work up to 13 hours a day in unsafe conditions with no fire escapes. After hours, these workers share overcrowded dorms with no access to proper sanitation. Managers were accused of being abusive and forcing workers to build toys even when they were sick or struggling to reach their quotas. Those who protested risked losing their jobs. After China Labor Watch’s investigation, the French nonprofit Peuples Solidaires established an anti-Mattel petition protesting the labor conditions in the Chinese factories, but it had only minimal success.

Mattel claimed to be taking steps to improve working conditions and address the issues raised by the nonprofit, but the accusations continued to crop up during 2014 and 2015. Despite this constant stream of violations, Mattel has reportedly continued to operate with the same vendors in the same labor conditions.

China Labor Watch’s report could have encouraged a wave of protest against Mattel but instead, two other stories are dominating the media this month: Barbie’s first ad featuring a young boy and the company’s falling share prices as the holiday season approaches. While China Labor Watch’s report appears to have only been covered in depth by Fortune, dozens of web sites and TV shows covered the new Mattel ad and the company’s holiday earnings.

Commercial Attention

Earlier this month, Barbie ran its first ad for the new limited edition Moschino doll, featuring a boy playing with the doll. Mattel received praise for the ad campaign, which was hailed as a move for gender equality. Companies such as Disney have already made similar moves to encourage gender parity with their toys, removing “girls” and “boys” labels from their merchandise. However, major toy commercials have long aimed to incorporate both boys and girls, so Mattel’s doll advertisements are somewhat late to the movement.

Though Mattel was hailed as the architect of the campaign, in reality, it was Jeremy Scott, creative director of Moschino who masterminded the campaign–Scott modeled the young boy in the commercial after his own childhood self. The ad has been described by both Scott and Mattel as a “fauxmercial”–a creative statement not actually designed to be official marketing for the doll. The advertisement, real or not, has drummed up significant sales for the doll–it has already sold out of stores and can now be found Ebay and other resale sites for a massive mark-up. The advertisement went viral online but has not been moved to television.

Mattel’s Black Friday Conundrum

Barbie may be one of the most famous toys in America, but Mattel has been struggling with sales over the past several years. According to Forbes,

Sales of the fashion doll have slumped for the past four years, down 16 per cent in 2014 and showing no signs of improvement. Even American Girl, Mattel’s once-hot line of pricey historical collectibles, has disappointed in recent years. Sales were down 2 per cent in the third quarter of 2015. Starting next year, Barbie will be faced with new competition from rival Hasbro, which won Mattel’s long-held license to sell the hugely popular Disney Princesses line of movie tie-ins, including Frozen heroine Elsa.

As the holiday shopping season opens up, toy companies are counting on the months of November and December to make or break their sales portfolios. Mattel needs an incredibly successful holiday sales season to make up for the lack of growth in past quarters, but at the moment, short interest on Mattel is sitting at an all-time high. In order to impress investors, Mattel must make a major profit during Black Friday super sales but competition from Hasbro may make that difficult. Not only has Hasbro licensed Disney Princess toys, it has also cornered the market on Star Wars merchandise on the eve of the release of the new Star Wars film. The after-effects of Black Friday and holiday season may ultimately decide the fate of both toy companies, but at this moment, Hasbro’s success is virtually locked in.

However, Hasbro was also named in the China Labor Watch report for labor violations in the manufacturing of several of its toys (including the Star Wars line). According to a statement from Hasbro spokeswoman Julie Duffy,

We are aware of the China Labor Watch report and take their allegations very seriously. We require all Hasbro products to be manufactured in accordance with rigorous ethical standards, and that all third party facilities ensure employees have a healthy and safe working environment. Hasbro combines industry best practices, strategic partnerships, and strict auditing standards to respect the safety, well-being, and dignity of workers, and works continuously to ensure compliance with all third party facilities

Mattel also released a statement in the wake of the China Labor Watch report,

We are aware of the China Labor Watch report and take their allegations very seriously. We require all Hasbro products to be manufactured in accordance with rigorous ethical standards, and that all third party facilities ensure employees have a healthy and safe working environment

But all eyes are on both Mattel and Hasbro regarding their sales, so the alleged labor violations appear to have taken a back seat.

Lack of Attention on the Labor Violations

According to the report, Mattel’s third party companies have been consistently violating labor laws for several years. Over the past few weeks, Mattel has been associated with the Moschino ad and the battle over Black Friday sales but the labor violations discussed in China Labor Watch’s report have gone virtually unnoticed. Mattel’s frequent violations of Chinese labor laws could be inspiring outrage, but they are not well publicized enough to be making waves in the public discourse. Hasbro is guilty of the same infractions but it has kept its name largely out of the headlines this month.

Unfortunately, Mattel’s financial suffering only makes it increasingly likely that it will utilize Chinese labor in the future. With production costs soaring and little profit, the company will likely remain reliant on the cheap labor provided in China. Though there has been more scrutiny placed on Chinese labor oversight in recent years, the labor conditions are still, on the whole, deplorable. There may even be an increase in labor law violations as the company adopts a “nothing to lose” attitude to selling its toys at any cost.

There is some hope, however. In July of 2015, workers at the Jingyu Toy Products company in Shenzhen, China went on strike to protest minimal wages and long hours spent building Hasbro and Mattel toys. When the factory was relocated, 100 workers went on strike, asking for severance pay and retirement insurance. The strike was isolated, and did not inspire similar action across China, but it is important to consider how protest and public scrutiny can impact these companies.

Conclusion

Children across the world will spend their holiday unwrapping dolls, toy cars and building blocks that were manufactured in the harshest conditions. Companies that work with third party vendors must be held accountable for the actions of their third party vendors abroad. Mattel received positive coverage during the release of the fauxmercial for the Moschino Barbie that let the company circumnavigate a public discussion of labor violations. But in the coming weeks, it will be interesting to see if we open the dialogue on labor laws rather than just focus on sales during the holiday season.

Resources

Primary

China Labor Watch: The Other Side of Fairy Tales: An Investigation of labor conditions at five Chinese toy factories

Additional

Forbes: With Boy In Barbie Ad, Mattel And Moschino Aim To Bust Gender Stereotypes

Bloomberg: Bearish Bets on Mattel Surge Ahead of Black Friday

The Observers: The Barbie  Blues: Workers Describe Awful Conditions at Mattel Suppliers

IB Times: Labor Law Violations At Chinese Supplier To Hasbro, Mattel, Takara Tomy: Report

Dana C. Nicholas: China’s Labor Enforcement Crisis: International Intervention and Corporate Social Responsiblity

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post A Tale of Two Barbies: Did Mattel’s Labor Law Violations Fly Under the Radar? appeared first on Law Street.

The idea of child labor in the United States sounds absurd. It’s 2015, after all. But the truth is that it’s more common than you may think, especially in the agriculture industry. The U.S. government currently has exemptions in place for the minimum age and maximum work hour requirements for child farmworkers. Hazardous work is prohibited until 18 in other industries, but notable exemptions exist for agricultural companies. Child farmworkers have high rates of injury, are exposed to serious health risks, and often receive few protections, particularly on tobacco farms. Read on to learn more about dangerous, but legal, child labor in the United States.

What is the Current Federal Law?

Loopholes in child labor laws for the agriculture industry stem from the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), last revised in 2007. For all nonagricultural sectors, the FLSA restricts the hours children under 16 can work and prohibits children under 18 from work that is considered dangerous. In those industries, for example, children cannot work more than three hours on school days or more than eight hours on nonschool days.

However, the rules are far more lenient for the agriculture industry. Children under 16 cannot work during school hours, but there are no maximum hour limits beyond that. There is also no limit for working after school or on weekends, and there is essentially no limit for child workers during the summer. Some states place additional hour restrictions on child employment in agriculture.

At age 16, children can perform hazardous work, like operating chainsaws, forklifts, forage harvesters, or power post hole diggers. They can work from a ladder or scaffolding at over 20 feet from the ground and may drive a tractor over 20 PTO horsepower. They can also handle or apply toxic agricultural chemicals and may also handle or use a blasting agent (i.e. dynamite, black powder).

With parental consent, children under 12 can work on farms where workers are exempt from federal minimum wage requirements. Children aged 12 and 13 can be employed with parental consent or on a farm where a parent or guardian is also working. At 14, children can work any agricultural occupation not deemed hazardous by the Secretary of Labor and 16-year-olds can engage in any agricultural occupation, even during school hours. Children of any age may be employed on a farm in any occupation at any time if a parent or guardian owns the business.

Minors do not need working paper or work-permits. Farm workers under 20 years old can be paid $4.25 an hour during the first consecutive 90 calendar days of employment. Lastly, farmworkers of all ages are not subject to the overtime provisions in the FLSA.

Tobacco Farms

In 2014, Human Rights Watch (HRW) conducted a survey, which found that child laborers on tobacco farms face harsh conditions and receive little protections. According to HRW, 90 percent of American tobacco is cultivated in Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee. Although exact numbers remain unknown, thousands of child laborers work on these fields every year. Ohio Rep. Mary Kaptur and several British Members of Parliament toured a North Carolina tobacco farm last year. An article from The Hill summarized the report from their visit noting the “squalid conditions, lack of sanitation, hot water, flushing toilets and basic health services” that tobacco farm workers face. According to the HRW report, child laborers often work 50 to 60 hours a week in bad conditions and extreme heat.

Injury Risks

Machinery poses a real risk to child farmworkers. According to a 2013 study from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the agriculture industry accounts for the largest number of work-related deaths. NIOSH reported that the fatality rate for child farm workers is four times greater than that of any other industry and that two-thirds of farm deaths occurred among children 16 years old and under. According to the study:

Young worker deaths in agriculture are noteworthy. In addition to accounting for the largest number of deaths of any industry, previous research has suggested that the fatality rate is about four times greater than for youth working in other industries [Barkume et. al. 2000, Hard and Myers 2006] and comparable to the risk for young and middle-aged workers in agriculture. Nearly 2/3rds of the deaths in agriculture occurred among youth less than 16 years of age [Windau and Meyer 2005]. Nearly 60% of the deaths of youth in agriculture occurred on family farms. Farm family workers accounted for nearly 25% of all young worker deaths from 1998 to 2002.

Human Rights Watch also reported that more than 1,800 children working on farms in 2012 received non-fatal injuries from  sharp tools and machines. In 2010, two teenagers died trapped in a grain bin. One 16-year-old Tennessee worker, interviewed by Human Rights Watch, remembered an incident saying, “I cut myself with the hatchet.… I probably hit a vein or something because it wouldn’t stop bleeding and I had to go to the hospital…. My foot was all covered in blood.” Another 16-year-old said that he lost two fingers in an accident involving a mower.

Health Risks

Another alarming aspect is the health risks that workers on tobacco fields may encounter. Child laborers under 16 may be free from operating the most dangerous machinery, but they are exposed to toxic pesticides and risk nicotine poisoning. You have to be at least 18 to buy cigarettes, but not to cultivate tobacco. According to Margaret Wurth from Human Rights Watch, “as the school year ends, children are heading into the tobacco fields, where they can’t avoid being exposed to dangerous nicotine, without smoking a single cigarette.”

Child laborers interviewed by Human Rights Watch also reported working while nearby field were sprayed with chemicals. These pesticides can cause cancer, damage to the nervous system, and issues with reproductive health. Public health experts  have linked nicotine exposure in adolescents with mood disorders and permanent cognitive deficits.

A number of the children interviewed by HRW exhibited signs of acute nicotine poisoning, also known as Green Tobacco Sickness. Side effects include nausea, vomiting, dizziness, headaches, loss of appetite, and sleeplessness. Others also reported difficulty breathing, skin rashes, and irritations to the mouth and eyes.

What is being done?

Recent attempts at reform have been futile. Although countries across the globe, like Brazil and India, prohibit children under the age of 18 to work on tobacco fields, the United States does not.

In 2011, during President Obama’s first term, former Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis proposed banning workers under the age of 16 in the tobacco fields–ridding the FLAS of many of its exemptions. Her plan included stricter regulations for “agricultural work with animals, pesticides, timber, manure pits, and storage bins.” It also proposed safety measures for young farmworkers.

However, powerful opposition from farm conglomerates emerged. Montana Representative Denny Rehberg lamented the consequences when “big-city bureaucrats try to craft policies for rural America.” Farmers also complained that it would prevent their children from contributing to chores, even though Solis suggested an exception regarding farmers’ children. State legislators responded by drafting bills asking respective Congressional delegates to oppose the proposed changes to child labor exemptions. The successful lobbying campaign resulted in all the proposals being dropped and the Obama administration promising to abandon the issue indefinitely.

Another legislative attempt to help child laborers is Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard’s Children’s Act for Responsible Employment (CARE Act). Initially introduced in 2001, the CARE Act has been reintroduced in several sessions of Congress over the past decade, most recently in June. The CARE Act standardizes child labor protection in agriculture with every other industry.

Not only would the CARE Act revise current child labor law exemptions, it would increase and establish criminal penalties for child labor violations. The bill currently sits in the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

The Children Don’t Belong on Tobacco Farms Act, co-authored by Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin and Rhode Island Rep. David Cicilline, is the most recent attempt to alter the current laws. Although the bill doesn’t prohibit children from tobacco fields, it limits the type of work that can be performed. Children under eighteen would be banned from direct contact with tobacco plants or dried tobacco leaves. Like other legislation attempting to reform these laws, the bill has not moved past its assigned committee.

Conclusion

The evidence shows that dangerous child labor conditions are not exclusively third world problem– it is prevalent here in the United States. Although multiple attempts at reform have been made, they have either failed or stalled in Congress. Significant progress could also be made without major changes to existing laws. Removing exemptions for the agriculture industry could create uniform standards for the employment of children in all industries. However, such efforts seem unlikely to succeed as powerful interests have managed to block recent efforts.

Resources

Primary

Human Rights Watch: Child Workers in Danger on Tobacco Farms

U.S. Department of Labor: Child Labor Requirements In Agricultural Occupations Under the Fair Labor Standards Act

Trade Union Group: A Smokescreen for Slavery

Additional

The Atlantic: How Common Is Child Labor in the U.S.?

CNS News: Farm State Outrage Intensifies Over Labor Dept. Proposal to Ban Children From Doing Some Chores on Farms 

Congress.gov: CARE Act of 2013

The Hill: Back to School – Or Back to the Fields? 

The Hill: Democrats Want Children Off Tobacco Farms

The Nation: Child Labor in the USA

NCBI: Short- and Long-Term Consequences of Nicotine Exposure during Adolescence for Prefrontal Cortex Neuronal Network Function

NIOSH: Health and Safety of Young Workers

The United States Department of Labor: US Labor Department Proposes Updates to Child Labor Regulations

Editor’s Note: This post has been updated to clarify the history of the CARE Act.

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Do Child Farm Workers Have Enough Protections? appeared first on Law Street.

If you’ve ever worked retail before you should be familiar with “on-call” scheduling. If not, think of it as a kind of shift limbo, where employees are told whether or not to report to work a day or less before the scheduled shift. But according to New York’s attorney general this common staffing practice could be criminal, violating New York Labor laws.

According to the New York Times, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sent letters to retailers Friday including Gap, Target, JC Penney, Abercrombie & Fitch, Sears and several others questioning the practice. In the letters Schneiderman wrote:

If the employee is told that his or her services are not needed, the employee will receive no pay for that day. For many workers, that is too little time to make arrangements for family needs, let alone to find an alternative source of income to compensate for the lost pay.

The on-call system currently allows retailers to adjust their staff depending on the projected volume of customers on a given day. These shifts are used as a cost saving measure in order to eliminate potential over-staffing or under-staffing.

In the letters Schneiderman said that the “on-call” practice could be potentially violating a New York law that says employees who report for a scheduled shift on any day have to be paid for at least four hours at the basic minimum hourly wage.

Reuters contacted some accused of the retailers who all invariably denied the allegations writing:

Target said workers are informed of their schedules 10 days before the start of a work week and it does not employ ‘on-call’ shifts. JC Penney said it has a policy against on-call scheduling. The Gap said it is committed to ‘sustainable scheduling practices’ and is conducting research on the matter.

While the U.S. Labor Department is reportedly looking into the matter, the 13 retailers have until May 4 to provide information on how they schedule employee shifts.

As someone who has worked in retail, I can tell you that the last thing you want is an on-call shift. They’re unpredictable and tie up your schedule. When given one of these shifts you’re forced to keep your schedule open in case you might be needed, but if not your wallet is out of luck, and it’s usually too late to make alternate plans. Requiring retailers to pay a minimum wage for workers slighted by these shifts seems only fair. America is ready for retailers and other big businesses to start showing that they respect their workers, and don’t just take them for granted.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NY Attorney General Questions Legality of On-Call Retail Shifts appeared first on Law Street.