WASHINGTON, D.C. — Concerning new federal child labor regulations set to take effect for agricultural workers, the Michigan Farm Bureau (MFB) says they will be a problem for family farms and do a disservice to young workers.

The regulations were published as a proposed rule last September in the Federal Register. The comment period originally ran to Nov. 1 but was extended to Dec. 1. The new regulations could take effect within a few months, according to Craig Anderson, manager of the Ag Labor and Safety Services department at the MFB.

The proposed rule would toughen regulations against minors working with livestock, pesticides, lumber and in manure pits and storage bins. It would also ban young people under 16 years of age from working with tobacco. It would prevent minors in farm and non-farm jobs from using electronic devices, including communications devices, while operating power-driven equipment.

Non-farm jobs affected by the rule would include the storing, marketing and transporting of farm product raw materials. That would mean minors could no longer work in grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions.

Workers under 16 would be banned from operating almost all power-driven equipment, though there would be limited exceptions for student learners. They could operate some equipment, such as a tractor, as long as they are fitted with the proper safety equipment.

None of the proposed rules would affect minors working on farms owned by their parents. According to Anderson, however, that and other points are a little tricky.

“If you and your dad own part of the farm, your children will be prohibited from working on the farm,” Anderson said. “All devices except those operated by hand or foot will be prohibited. We believe the ban on virtually all powered machinery is inappropriate.

“We recommend that you read the rule and see how it will affect succession planning on your farm. They do need to pull the rule out and see how it will affect the farm. People do need to pay attention.”

Anderson grew up on a farm and believes that the learning experiences young people have on family farms as well as 4-H programs are invaluable. He said the proposed rules “go back to the 1940s and 1950s. Farm machinery is much safer than it used to be.”

He went on to say the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), which proposed the latest rule, didn’t pay much attention to public comments regarding a rule it proposed last year for non-agricultural workers. He said there were 10,219 comments on the latest proposed rule, and only a few of them were positive about all aspects of it.

He said there were 17 areas with requests for additional comments. One of them, for example, asked what effect this proposed rule would have on schools. “Extension or 4-H would no longer be able to provide the certification for the student learner exception,” Anderson said.

He said schools would not be able to make up for this by offering their own programs in Michigan, since schools have no extra money these days.

The DOL justifies its new regulations with the claim that work in agriculture for young people is dangerous. It says agriculture, forestry and fishing employed fewer than 2 percent of the U.S. workforce between 1996-2001, yet accounted for 13 percent of all fatal workplace injuries. During the 1990s, only 4 percent of youth were employed in agriculture, yet they experienced more than 40 percent of all the fatal injuries.

But Anderson disputes these statistics.

“They say there are only 58,000 youth working in ag nationwide,” he said. “They make it clear they can’t back up these numbers. The industry strongly supports safety on the farm.”