[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 132 (Monday, September 28, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H9124-H9127]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     DRIVE FOR TEEN EMPLOYMENT ACT

  Mr. FAWELL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 2327) to provide for a change in the exemption from the 
child labor provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 for 
minors between 16 and 18 years of age who engage in the operation of 
automobiles and trucks, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2327

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Drive for Teen Employment 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORITY FOR MINORS TO OPERATE MOTOR VEHICLES.

       (a) Amendment.--Section 13(c) of the Fair Labor Standards 
     Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(c)) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(6) In the administration and enforcement of the child 
     labor provisions of this Act, employees who are under 17 
     years of age may not drive automobiles or trucks on public 
     roadways. Employees who are 17 years of age may drive 
     automobiles or trucks on public roadways only if--
       ``(A) such driving is restricted to daylight hours;
       ``(B) the employee holds a State license valid for the type 
     of driving involved in the job performed and has no records 
     of any moving violation at the time of hire;
       ``(C) the employee has successfully completed a State 
     approved driver education course;

[[Page H9125]]

       ``(D) the automobile or truck is equipped with a seat belt 
     for the driver and any passengers and the employee's employer 
     has instructed the employee that the seat belts must be used 
     when driving the automobile or truck;
       ``(E) the automobile or truck does not exceed 6,000 pounds 
     of gross vehicle weight;
       ``(F) such driving does not involve--
       ``(i) the towing of vehicles;
       ``(ii) route deliveries or route sales;
       ``(iii) the transportation for hire of property, goods, or 
     passengers;
       ``(iv) urgent, time-sensitive deliveries;
       ``(v) more than 2 trips away from the primary place of 
     employment in any single day for the purpose of delivering 
     goods of the employee's employer to a customer (other than 
     urgent, time-sensitive deliveries);
       ``(vi) more than 2 trips away from the primary place of 
     employment in any single day for the purpose of transporting 
     passengers (other than employees of the employer);
       ``(vii) transporting more than 3 passengers (including 
     employees of the employer); or
       ``(vii) driving beyond a 30 mile radius from the employee's 
     place of employment; and
       ``(G) such driving is only occasional and incidental to the 
     employee's employment.

     For purposes of subparagraph (G), the term `occasional and 
     incidental' is no more than one-third of an employee's 
     worktime in any workday and no more than 20 percent of an 
     employee's worktime in any workweek.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     defining the term ``occasional and incidental'' shall apply 
     to all pending cases, actions, or citations in which a final 
     judgment has not been entered, except that it shall not apply 
     to any case, action, or citation involving property damage or 
     personal injury.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Fawell) and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Fawell).
  Mr. FAWELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2327, the Drive for Teen 
Employment Act. This is a bipartisan bill introduced by the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) and 
my colleague on the Committee on Education and Workforce, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Martinez).
  Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the bill is to modify the Department of 
Labor's overly restrictive interpretation of its own regulation which 
essentially prohibits 16 and 17 year old employees from driving on 
public roads while they are employed. This current interpretation, 
which is not required by the regulation itself, was announced in the 
context of enforcement actions against certain employers who had no 
advance notice of the department's narrow interpretation of the child 
labor laws.
  While the Department of Labor's regulations allow ``occasional and 
incidental'' driving by 16 and 17 year olds, the department has in 
recent years claimed that this regulation prohibits those under 18 from 
any driving during employment except perhaps in ``rare and emergency'' 
situations.
  Not only is the department's current interpretation not consistent 
with the regulation itself, but it has had the effect of denying 
important job opportunities for teenagers without any demonstrated 
increase in safety. As a result, innocent small business owners have 
been fined by the Department of Labor on the basis of an interpretation 
of a regulation of which they did not even have notice.
  As introduced and passed by the Committee on Education and Workforce, 
H.R. 2327 put into law a new test with regard to the amount of time 
that teenage employees could drive to allow them to drive up to one-
third of the workday, one-fifth of the workweek, and 50 miles from the 
place of employment.
  The bill also retained all of the other conditions on teenage drivers 
that are part of the current regulation: The vehicle must weigh less 
than 6,000 pounds, the driving is restricted to daylight hours, the 
minor holds a state driver's license, the vehicle is equipped with a 
seat belt or similar restraining device for the driver and for each 
helper, and the employer has instructed each minor that seat belts must 
be used. That the driving does not involve the towing of other vehicles 
is also a requirement, and the driving must be ``occasional and 
incidental'' through the minor's employment.
  Subsequent to the committee's markup of the bill, the sponsors of the 
bill had lengthy negotiations with the Department of Labor and other 
interested members of the committee. These talks have resulted in the 
development of the bipartisan substitute amendment which we are 
considering today.
  Under the substitute, only 17 year olds are permitted to drive during 
employment. In addition, there is a limitation on the number of trips 
per day that a 17 year old may drive for the purpose of delivering 
packages or transporting other persons.
  This substitute amendment would not decrease safety on the road or 
endanger young people. It simply provides a reasonable and practical 
solution to an overly restrictive and unfairly enforced interpretation 
by the Department of Labor, which has denied job opportunities to young 
people without increasing safety.
  These new restrictions will make driving on the job by teens safer, 
and employers will still have every incentive to ensure that their 
teenage employees drive safely.
  I would like to commend my colleagues, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Martinez) for their persistence and hard work and a lot 
of negotiating to bring this substitute amendment to the floor, and I 
would urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2327, the Drive for Teen 
Employment Act, as amended. I want to begin by thanking the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Combest), the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) 
and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), as well as my friend the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Fawell), for all of their hard work and 
persistence in drafting this substitute amendment and for addressing 
many of the legitimate concerns raised by the Department of Labor, 
child labor advocacy groups, and many Democrats on the Committee on 
Education and Workforce. Because of their efforts, we are able to have 
a bipartisan bill before us today.
  As the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Fawell) so eloquently stated, 
under current law teenagers age 16 and 17 are significantly restricted 
in driving as part of their job responsibilities. In particular, teens 
may not spend more than 20 percent of their workday driving, and may 
not spend more than 5 percent of their workweek driving.
  The substitute amendment that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Fawell) is offering today would prohibit 16 year olds from driving and 
would permit 17 year olds with certain existing and new restrictions to 
drive as part of their job responsibilities for up to one-third of the 
workday and up to one-fifth of the workweek.
  In short, H.R. 2327 will allow thousands of teenagers, including 
those participating in the school-to-work programs, the ability to 
pursue a broader range of work opportunities, even including those 
involving driving.
  Although this legislation is a step forward, I and many of my 
colleagues had some concerns. Specifically, a high accident rate 
amongst teenagers, the fact that teens are young and inexperienced 
drivers, and our responsibility to protect teenagers from the dangers 
and perils in the workplace as we do other workers.
  According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the death 
rate for 16 year olds has been on an upward trend, increasing from 19 
per every 100,000 deaths in 1975, to 35 per 100,000 in 1996. 
Conversely, the death rate among older teens has declined slightly.
  In an effort total address these real concerns, H.R. 2327 provides 
greater protection than even current regulations in circumstances that 
are most likely to result in injury or even death to the minor and to 
others. Before a 17 year old may be employed to drive, the minor must 
have a valid license, must have completed an approved driver education 
course and must have a clean driving record at the time of hire.
  The vehicle the minor is driving must be limited in size and must be 
equipped with seat belts for all passengers. The minor must be 
instructed by the employer regarding the required use of seat belts.

[[Page H9126]]

  Driving is restricted to a 30 mile radius from a teenager's place of 
employment. Minors are prohibited from driving that involves the towing 
of vehicles, route sales or deliveries, transportation for hire of 
property, goods or passengers or urgent time sensitive deliveries.
  Finally, this legislation will ensure that driving only occurs 
occasionally by placing a limit of two trips per day on the number of 
times a minor may drive to deliver goods to a customer or transport 
non-employee passengers.
  The legislation would leave intact current requirements that 
encourage safe driving by teens and require them to be in compliance 
with all state laws governing driving. Although the intent and effect 
of this legislation is to increase the time a 17 year old is allowed to 
drive while working, it does so in a manner that is fully cognizant of 
the health and safety risks that come with driving.

  I do not wish to mislead my colleagues, however. As in any situation 
where one seeks to reconcile conflicting interests, the reconciliation 
will not please everyone. Some of my colleagues may continue to have 
concerns about this legislation and some child labor advocacy groups 
may still oppose H.R. 2327. However, like the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Fawell), I strongly believe that this legislation strikes a 
sensible balance, for it allows 17 year olds the ability and 
opportunity for more work opportunities and the ability to be more 
efficient and productive employees. It also improves upon existing 
safety and health protections for minors and the for public.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of H.R. 2327.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Tennessee for 
yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, and I thank the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Green) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) of the 
committee for their outstanding work, and thank the chairman of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Fawell), for bringing 
this to the floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely not in favor of any watering down or 
weakening of the child labor laws and protections of this country. 
Decades ago people fought very hard to achieve those laws, and I do not 
want to see them weakened in any way.
  I believe that this is not a weakening of child labor laws, with all 
due respect to those who raise objections. I think there are three 
important safeguards in this bill that continue to protect child labor.
  Safeguard Number 1 is the requirement that the minor who is involved 
have a valid state driver's license in effect at the time he or she is 
working. That is very important, because a state is not going to give a 
young person a driver's license who is not worthy or permit that 
driver's license to stay in effect if the driver is unsafe.
  The second important check are the many limitations in this bill that 
both the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford) and the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Fawell) describe, limitations on the number of hours the 
young person may drive, limitations on the miles the young person may 
drive, limitations on the weight of the vehicle, no authority for 
towing another vehicle and proper instruction on proper safety uses of 
the vehicle.
  The final check I think is one that comes from common sense. We 
certainly know that there are some reckless teenage drivers. There are 
some reckless drivers of every age. I think the best check against 
reckless teenage drivers are the auto dealers who are responsible for 
the vehicles. The last thing in the world that a responsible auto 
dealer wants to do is to have an employee of that dealership take the 
vehicle out on the road and drive it recklessly, because they are 
either going to be liable to the owner of the car, if it is being 
repaired, or the factory, if the car has not yet been sold.

                              {time}  1530

  Common sense tells us that the employers are not likely to entrust 
the operation of these cars to highly irresponsible drivers.
  Finally, let me say that I think that this is a bill that is really a 
youth employment bill. There are many young people, male and female, 
who have gotten their start working part-time at an auto dealership. 
Frankly, if the young person is not permitted to drive on occasion, his 
or her value to the auto dealer as an employer is rather diminished.
  We are challenged in this country and in this Congress with coming up 
with ways that private sector employers can reach out and employ young 
people who are trying to help support their families or earn money for 
their education. I can think of no better way than the elimination of 
arbitrary and capricious rules. I believe that this legislation, 
supported by both Democrats and Republicans, is an example of 
legislation that removes such arbitrary and capricious rules. I am 
pleased to support it. I thank my friend, the gentleman from Tennessee 
(Mr. Ford), for his leadership in this effort.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey. We are 
blessed to have two erudite Members on this side, Mr. Speaker; first, 
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), and secondly, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and 
for the vocabulary lesson. I do not know whether to have that taken 
down or not, but I am going back and check.
  I have been following this legislation carefully, and I marvel at the 
hard work of the committee for bringing it forward. In 1994, the 
Department of Labor did, in fact, adopt a new interpretation of the 
Federal Child Labor regulations that effectively eliminated occasional 
and incidental driving by teenage employees of auto dealers.
  In my community in the Pacific Northwest, this interpretation that 
was adopted without notice or rulemaking led to the imposition of over 
$200,000 in fines against more than 60 auto dealers in the Pacific 
Northwest, people who in my experience are pretty straight-ahead folks, 
good public citizens and easy to work with.
  The process by which the new rule was adopted I think was bad; the 
fines were worse. I am pleased that we are taking steps here to 
eliminate the most severe consequence, which was the decision on the 
part of many auto dealers to no longer hire teenagers for after-school 
and summer service for porters and lot attendants. These were jobs that 
gave young people the opportunity to earn money and gain career-
building experience.
  I personally benefited in my formative years with employment 
opportunities that were auto-related, and frankly, I do identify with 
the comments of my friend from New Jersey that in fact probably these 
young people were as safe and perhaps safer, because one is not going 
to entrust valuable property to people one thinks are irresponsible. 
Bear in mind these are some of the same young drivers that some would 
have us protect, who are out driving large machines without 
supervision, without the experience at times that they would have in 
the employment situation.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we are taking steps to remedy this. I 
am sorry that it took so long. I do think that the job limits that have 
been adopted, the protections, the restrictions, are more than 
adequate. Some may argue that it goes a little further than necessary, 
particularly at a time when there are some in this body who are calling 
for the imposition of adult criminal sanctions against teenagers.
  I think what the committee has done, coming forward to provide 
employment opportunities, is sensible. It will remove the concerns that 
auto dealers and many business owners have for hiring teenagers for 
jobs that require limited driving, and it does give the Department of 
Labor clear and fair guidelines to enforce.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the work that has been done.
  Mr. GREEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2327, the 
Drive for Teen Employment Act. I have been working on this bill for 
three years and believe we have reached the right balance between 
safety and common-sense. I would like to express my appreciation to my 
colleague from Texas, Mr. Combest, as well as the Democratic Members of

[[Page H9127]]

the Education and Workforce Committee, for the opportunity to address 
my safety concerns. This bill will help increase employment 
opportunities for 17-year-olds, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  H.R. 2327 addresses the ability of licensed 17-year-olds to drive 
limited amounts on the job. Under current law, minors are permitted to 
drive on the job within certain limits. However, the Department of 
Labor has narrowly defined these restrictions to the point that minors 
would be prohibited from driving on the job under most circumstances. 
Fines have been levied against automobile dealerships and other 
businesses for having teens complete such tasks as moving cars after 
they are washed or returning vehicles from the gasoline station.
  The Drive for Teen Employment Act merely established a clear 
definition for limited driving, while maintaining injury-prevention 
measures on the job. This bill will allow limited driving by a 17-year-
old in low risk and supervised settings and provides numerous 
safeguards, including: work-related driving is restricted to daylight 
hours; towing is prohibited; the driver must hold a state driver's 
license and must have completed a state approved driver education 
course; the driving is capped at 20 percent of the work week; minors 
must not have any record of moving violations at the time of hire; 
driving distance is limited to a 30-mile radius; route deliveries and 
route sales are prohibited; and urgent, time-sensitive deliveries are 
prohibited.
  By establishing safety precautions and clear guidelines for 
employers, we can encourage much-needed employment for teenagers, while 
maintaining safety measures on the job. I encourage my colleagues to 
support this bill.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I have had a long interest in reforming 
regulations that do not pass what I call ``The Stupid Test.'' I believe 
the teen driver regulation is a poster child for failing ``The Stupid 
Test.''
  In 1993, the Department of Labor made a major regulatory change in 
the working definition of what incidental and occasional meant for 
licensed 16 and 17 year olds driving in the workplace. The change 
limits those under age 18 from driving more than one incident a week. 
The Department did this with no formal rule making and without 
informing any small businesses. Businesses first learned of the change 
when they received fines for non-compliance.
  One such incident involved a 17 year-old student working in a high 
school sponsored co-op program at a local bank in Milan, Illinois. This 
young lady was in the bookkeeping department and would occasionally 
make trips to a branch bank four miles away. The bank was fined $500 
because of her occasional driving. Does it make any sense that these 
teens can drive an unlimited amount when they are not working, but 
while under supervised protection at work, they are completely 
prohibited from driving?
  In Washington State alone, it is estimated that this regulation 
resulted in the loss of at least 1,000 job opportunities for teens. The 
irony is that while the Department of Labor is spending upwards of $900 
million annually on summer jobs programs, their own regulations is 
restricting the hiring of teens.
  My co-authoris Gene Green and Marty Martinez have helped negotiate a 
good bill that, while not going as far as the bill reported out of the 
House Education and Workforce Committee, it at least establishes some 
reasonable definition for what driving activities 17 year olds can 
perform. We reluctantly agreed to preclude 16 year olds from the bill 
after opposition from the Department of Labor.
  Under the bill driving is allowed as long as it does not exceed one-
third of an employee's worktime in any workday and no more than 20 
percent of an employees worktime in any work week. The bill limits the 
daily delivery of goods to two trips, although under the bill an 
employers vehicle is not considered a good.
  This legislation has been endorsed by the National Small Business 
United, National Automobile Dealers Association, National Community 
Pharmacists Association and the National Association of Minority 
Automobile Dealers.
  We simply seek to bring a clearer, more reasonable standard for 
workers and business and hope you will support passage of H.R. 2327.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2327, the 
Drive for Teen Employment Act.
  Under current law, minors are permitted to drive on the job under 
occasional and incidental circumstances, and until 1994, automobile 
dealerships across the country regularly employed minors to wash and 
detail cars, move cars on the lots, and occasionally drive an 
automobile to a nearby lot or gas station. These jobs provided 
employment for thousands of young people.
  However, in 1994, the Department of Labor, without any rulemaking, 
decided to define occasional and incidental so narrowly as to prohibit 
minors from driving on the job under almost all circumstances. The 
Department then fined 60 Seattle area auto dealers nearly $200,000 for 
alleged child labor law violations and caused nearly 1,000 16 and 17 
year olds to become unemployed.
  To address this problem, my colleague from Texas, Mr. Combest, 
introduced H.R. 2327. H.R. 2327, as passed by the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce, included provisions to permit 16 and 17 
year olds to drive during daylight hours for no more than one-third of 
the day and no more than 20 percent of the work week. It also 
prohibited minors from towing or driving outside of a 50 mile radius 
from the job site.
  Since the bill was reported by the Committee, several of my 
colleagues and I have worked with Mr. Combest to further restrict the 
provisions of the bill and make it even better. The bill before you 
today pertains only to 17 year olds, requires that the minor have a 
clean driving record, and limits driving to a 30-mile radius.
  This bill merely removes the concerns small business owners have 
about hiring teenagers for jobs that require limited driving and 
establishes clear guidelines to assist the Department in enforcing a 
regulation under its jurisdiction.
  At a time when, according to Secretary of Labor Alexis Herman, 
``despite the strong economy, young people living in high-poverty areas 
don't have jobs,'' H.R. 2327 makes good sense.
  I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FAWELL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Fawell) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2327, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to provide for a change 
in the exemption from the child labor provisions of the Fair Labor 
Standards Act of 1938 for minors who are 17 years of age and who engage 
in the operation of automobiles and trucks.''
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________