[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 47 (Tuesday, April 26, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: April 26, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
           LABOR DEPARTMENT PUTS HARSH BURDEN ON TEEN DRIVERS

                                 ______


                           HON. MIKE KREIDLER

                             of washington

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, April 26, 1994

  Mr. KREIDLER. Mr. Speaker, along with Congresswomen Jolene Unsoeld 
and Maria Cantwell, and Congressmen Norm Dicks and Al Swift, I am today 
introducing legislation to update an outdated provision in the Fair 
Labor Standards Act of 1938 that is hurting the job market for 
teenagers.
  If it seems strange to you that a 1938 law applies to society in 
1994, consider these three incidents:
  A 17-year-old after school employee at an auto dealership drives a 
new car from the dealership to a nearby gas station, fuels the car, and 
returns to the dealership.
  A 17-year-old part-time lot attendant at an auto dealership drives a 
new car 20 feet from a wash rack to the detail shop, backing, briefly, 
onto public street.
  A 17-year-old student, working to earn money for college, drives a 
car from one portion of the dealership to another, crossing, briefly, a 
public street.
  These incidents occurred in my State, and each are considered illegal 
under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. In my State, 59 auto 
dealers were fined $197,000 for alleged violations by the Department of 
Labor; virtually all are appealing.
  If you look at the law, at 29 CFR 570.52(b)(1) then at the regulation 
supporting this law, you find an undefined regulation permitting 
``incidental and occasional'' driving so long as the driving is 
restricted to an automobile or truck which does not exceed 6,000 pounds 
gross vehicle weight; that the driving is restricted to daylight hours; 
that the driver holds a State license valid for this type of driving 
and has completed a State-approved driver education course; that the 
vehicle is equipped with a seat belt; and that the driving does not 
involve the towing of vehicles.
  Any fair evaluation of the condition at most auto dealerships in 
Washington State today will show that these conditions are carefully 
followed. Typically, lot attendants are responsible for moving cars 
around the lot, and washing and preparing cars for customers. And on 
occasion, these 17-year-old employees also fuel vehicles at nearby gas 
stations.
  Auto dealers have told me that these conditions are common to their 
operation. They've told me that no one from the Department of Labor has 
ever communicated to them an interpretation of ``incidental and 
occasional'' driving that is at odds with this practice. In fact, I 
believe the vast majority of auto dealers in my State have sincerely 
attempted to comply with the law and the regulation as they are 
written. They have reviewed the law and the regulation, and have 
consulted their national and State trade association on compliance 
matters.
  But Mr. Speaker, there is nowhere they can turn to find a definition 
of ``incidental and occasional driving.'' That's because the phrase 
remains undefined in law or in regulation.
  That, however, does not seem to deter the Department of Labor which, 
with unexplained zeal, has pursued cases against auto dealers. To me, 
this is all the more amazing in light of a letter from Maria Echaveste, 
Administrator of the Employment Standards Administration's Wage and 
Hour Division, who on March 15, 1994 wrote:

       Although HO2 (Hazardous Occupation Order No. 2) does 
     contain an exception that would allow minors under certain 
     conditions to perform some occasional and incidental driving, 
     recent investigations have disclosed that what constitutes 
     ``occasional and incidental'' driving may not be clearly 
     understood by auto dealers.

  In the end, these investigations result in needless anxiety, expense 
and litigation, but the real victims are the teenagers. They all have 
valid driver's licenses. Their driving records are screened and they're 
subject to drug testing. They are covered by employer-based insurance. 
They must pass a driver's education class. And now the word is out it's 
safer to fire teenager lot attendants than to risk violating a law even 
the Department of Labor can't define.
  One of my constituents is one of these victims. ``I am 17-years-
old,'' he told me, ``and I lost my job because of the law about driving 
cars. Not only did I lose my job, but I also lost college money I was 
saving, car insurance, and extra spending money that job provided me. I 
hope you would fight this law so I may get my job back, and if it 
doesn't get cleared by the time I turn 18, maybe it will help out 
another kid.''
  Our bill, Mr. Speaker, will allow a teenager to drive up to 50 
percent of the time as long as driving was not the primary duty. This 
is a simple solution which should be rapidly adopted.
  The Seattle Times, on April 14, 1994, added its voice to this 
campaign with a lead editorial, which I would like to submit for the 
Record.

              Labor Department Puts Harsh Burden on Teens

       The job market is tough enough for teenagers without the 
     U.S. Department of Labor shrinking it through inflexible 
     interpretation and enforcement of child-labor laws.
       The Department of Labor has punished--not protected--minors 
     by fining 65 auto dealers from Tacoma to Bellingham $197,000 
     for allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to do minimal driving in 
     their work. For some, it meant moving cars across the street 
     from one lot to another. Most of the dealers are appealing.
       These are teenagers with driver's licenses good anywhere in 
     the United States--but on the job. The upshot of the 
     crackdown is the probable loss of about 500 jobs that usually 
     go to minors with licenses.
       Laws against minors driving on the job go back to 1938 
     passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act. It was intended to 
     prevent children from working long hours in dangerous 
     occupations. But in 1968, an exemption was added that allowed 
     minors to drive in situations deemed ``occasional and 
     incidental.''
       The Department of Labor interprets that to mean minors can 
     drive only in emergencies. Regional officials say if driving 
     a car across a street from one lot to another is part of the 
     job, it's not ``occasional and incidental.''
       Rep. Mike Kreidler, D-Lacey, is drafting a bill that calls 
     for the Department of Labor to review old laws in an effort 
     to determine whether they still make sense. It would apply to 
     other industries as well as auto dealers.
       Government is searching for ways to find more opportunities 
     for unemployed teenagers. Unbending interpretation of 
     regulations runs counter to that. Young people who want to 
     work don't need additional doors slammed in their faces.

                          ____________________