A reader points me to the following from the Progressive Policy Institute:
The ILO's 'core' labor standard on child labor is set out in ILO Convention #138 on Minimum Working Age. Dating to 1973, the Convention reads as follows:
"The minimum age ... shall not be less than the age of completion of compulsory schooling and, in any case, shall not be less than 15 years. ... The provisions of [this] Convention shall be applicable as a minimum to the following: mining and quarrying, manufacturing; construction; electricity, gas and water; sanitary services; transport, storage and communications; and plantations and other agricultural undertakings mainly producing for commercial purposes, but excluding family and small-scale holdings producing for local consumption and not regularly employing hired workers."
With the ILO standard as context (though the United States has not ratified the Convention) some state child labor laws make startling reading. According to the Department of Labor's online summary of 35 state agricultural child labor codes, at least 27 states are at least close to the ILO standard, with a minimum age of 16 or higher in the school year. But the summaries nonetheless find Illinois with a minimum agricultural age of 12 (and 10 outside the school year); Hawaii with a minimum age of 10 for coffee-picking and Oregon a nine-year minimum age for berry-picking (though both are outside the school year and Oregon's requires parental consent); and Vermont exempting youth agricultural work from working-hour limits. North Dakota's guide to child labor law says bluntly that child labor law is not meant for agriculture: "Work on a farm (doing agricultural work) -- exempt from all child labor provisions."
This leads to some questions for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who have argued for including international labor standards in trade agreements: Would the ILO Convention at issue be included in future trade agreements? And if so, will U.S. state laws be changed to conform to ILO rules?
