Fair Labor Standards act was enacted to regulate wages as well as number of hours at the workplace. In the nineteenth century, efforts to limit the minimum working hours started but this was not successful until 1938 when the Congress adopted the Fair Labor Standards Act. The minimum wage and the hours’ law have become common due to their effect to anti-poverty legislation despite receiving suspicion from labor and political leaders. The minimum wage laws started with the introduction of Senator Hugo L. Black’s bill in 1932.
Senator Hugo’s Bill
The bill sought to block out involvement in interstate commercial activities of goods produced under more than thirty hours per week or six hours per day legislation. However, the two Supreme Court Cases namely 1918 Hammer vs. Dagenhart and 1923 Adkins vs. Children’s Hospital seemed to affect the success of this bill negatively. These cases seemed to block such laws. The Supreme Court ruled that the federal child labor regulations that were passed the previous year unconstitutional. In the 1923 Adkins vs. Children’s Hospital the court ruled against the minimum wages for women in the District of Columbia describing such actions as null and void and arbitrary to the Fifth Amendment.
However, Black differentiated his Bill from the law that had been rejected in 1918 Hammer Case. He argued that laws should be inferred to meet existing stipulations when they are being inferred. The Bill was not passed by the House. In the fiscal 1933 the legislature passed National Industrial Recovery Act dubbed NRA with an aim to look into upper limit hours and least amount wages.
The bill was developed by the then administration under the program dubbed “New Deal”. The aim of the act was to do away with anti-trust laws and enable industries implement the policies of fair trade that would ensure increased wages and decreased competition among the industrial players. Roosevelt utilized the NRA to transmit the state head Re-employment accord that would generate job opportunities, elevate earnings hence refurbish trade. More than two million three hundred thousand concords were marked by the managers to cover up sixteen million three hundred thousand employees. The Agreement stipulated 35 to 40 hours of work per week with a weekly minimum wage of $12- $15. Patriots could only buy from employers who had signed the agreement. They were identified by a Blue Eagle which had a motto “We do our part”. Later other codes were developed such as The Cotton Textile code.
On the other hand, in the financial year 1935, the Supreme Court undoubtedly blew down the NRA based on the fact that it was undemocratic and that it surpassed the supremacy of the national command as confirmed by the Clause of Commerce. The following year, the court rejected the New York minimum wage law terming it as unconstitutional. As a result, the court received a lot of criticisms.
In 1937, Roosevelt proposed to send home the nine bench judges but they worked in favor of his constitution by upholding a Washington women and minors’ minimum wage law. Later the court endorsed National Labor Relations Act.
This paved way for wages-hour bill. The bill was coined by Cohen and was based upon the Commerce Clause. The Bill was approved in July 1937 and passed in August by the House Labor Committee. The FLSA as a result set the least total earnings of 25 cents each hour along with a ceiling workweek hours’ equivalent to forty hours. Fair Labor Standards Act stipulated minimum wage boards. At first the bill only had an impact on wages and hours as it was to be sent to the Congress.
Fair Labor Standards Act was introduced in May 1937 to the Senate. In July 8 1937, it was introduced to the senate but was passed in July 31 1937 and was to the House of Representatives. With new amendments, the First House Committee Bill was introduced into the House on 6th August 1937. However it failed to reach the House because the session ended. On 17th December 1937 the Second House Committee Bill was introduced. A substitution of this Bill was made by an AFL Bill that was introduced on 15th December 1937 but it was defeated. Third House Committee Bill was introduced on 21st April 1938 into the House. On 24th May 1938, the House Bill was passed. In June 1938 it passed the House and was approved by the Senate. In similar month, it was marked by the state head and happened to be valuable commencing from the fiscal 1938 (October).
The bill was under the championship of Senator Hugo who called for thirty hours of work per week. William Connery on the other hand developed a legislation to correspond the Bill. It was dubbed the Black-Connery Bill.
The broader legislative history of the federal fair labor standards
Historical overview
The origins of federal fair labor standards act of 1938 can be traced back over several years of the federal government lobbying for the abandonment of the child labor, fair as well as standardized wages for the federal industrial workers. The FFLS is similar to the previously enacted National Industrial Recovery Act that established wages and hourly standards. However, NIRA was invalidated by the supreme courts in subsequent cases thereby preventing the immediate need for the betterment of the workers’ wages and weekly hours. The then administration headed by the president Roosevelt insisted on the need of the labor standards. The intensity of the need of the standardization of labor increased after the declaration of the Supreme Court in 1936 that wages and hours control are not within the jurisdiction of the state as well as the federal governments.
The Democratic Party called for the constitutional amendments that would help do away with the substandard labor conditions including total elimination of the child labor (Waltman 184). This campaign platform propelled the Democratic Party to victory at the polls held at the end of the same year. After their victory, the government intensified their campaign in both the congress and the senate (Hart 234). Though most of the members in the administration wanted immediate constitutional amendments, the president instead, opted for a liberal view and sort for the judicial legislation to provide a room for the democratic function of the government. However, there was a clear indication from the president inner cycles that a bill is being drafted taking cognizance of the court’s decision (Hart 234). There was a closer link between the plans by the administration to reorganize the courts and the federal labor standards legislation.
When time came, that is January 1937, the intensity of the need to have the wage and hour legislation increased (Waltman 184). Different kinds of drafts were being prepared from various government departments and even individuals who hold no responsible positions. The feeling of the new NRA that will cover a broad range of trade practices was in the air contrary to the president opinions (Waltman 154). However, the president held that before the passage of the social legislation on wages, the federal judiciary must be reorganized. In the second of the same fiscal year, Roosevelt pronounced his arrangement to rearrange the centralized courts and bring in the court chart. The president used the necessity for the control of the wages and hours as a weapon to pass the court bill. In fact the, the wages and the hour bill were not submitted to the house without the action on the court bill.
During this period the Supreme Court made momentous decisions that affected both the labor standards legislations and the court bill (Sreenivasan 227). The court upheld various acts such as the railway labor act that was seen an important step towards the enactments of the court bill. Nevertheless no action was taken on this bill and instead the administration went ahead to introduce the wages and the hour bill (Waltman 154). The bill that was introduced in may 1938 to the congress and the senate did not contain the original basic wages and hours standards. In his speech to the congress the president stressed the need to control the maximum hours and minimum wages as well as the need to do away with the child labor. The president further stressed the need to anchor such measures based on the constitution.
When the act was finally signed by the president in June 1938, it went through various amendments. The act that was signed set up a rigid scale of wages and hours for workers in the interstate commerce and the producers of the commodities in those industries. The act set up a minimum of 25cents per hour in the first year and 30 cents minimum wages per hour the following year (Waltman 154). Sections six and seven of the act contained the minimum 40 cent wages. Section seven stated that with the exception of the regular rate pay of 150%, employees who are covered will not work an overtime of 44 hours in the first year, 42 hours in the second year and 40 hours after the second year (Sklar et al. 226). Also, the department of labor under a single administrator would be responsible for the implementation of the act.
Some sections of the act such as section eight have certain exemptions. These exemptions are either absolute or dependent upon the administrative policy. The section also provide for the criminal proceedings against those who have violated the act as well as the double recovery penalty for workers who have caused some damages (Sreenivasan 227). Section sixteen of the act prohibits the child labor or employing those under the age of sixteen. The exemption to the prohibitions in only under certain conditions as ascertained by the chief of the children bureau and sometimes may be removed in certain occupations up to eighteen years of age as specified in section 3 (1) and (12).
Drafting the final bill
Before final enactments of the bill, ten different bills were brought in the floor of the congress each with an amendment from the predecessor (Sreenivasan 227). These amendments completely substituted the predecessor bills and even there was a complete change in the structure of the bill. The original had five sections subdivided into thirty subsections while the final draft had nineteen sections. The final draft was completely different from the original drafts. There were several bills that were drafted but never got a chance to be presented in the floor of the houses (Sklar et al. 226).
The final bill that was enacted is one of the bitterly contested bills in the history of congress. The reason is that the true issues that the bill contained were always shrouded by falsification and propaganda (Negrey 123). However, critically looking at the bills, the born of contention was in three sections. That was the flexibility against the rigid wages and the hour standards, the administration of the act and the methods to be used to enforce the child labor.
The forum statement and the ultimate ratification of the draft
The forum board had to clear up the disparities that subsisted amid the drafts that were conceded by the parliament and the board. There were glitters among the senators from the south that some of the omissions that were in the bill passed by the congress be restored. These regional differences were very important consideration during this time of the committee working on the bill. The then industrial commissioner of New York was very categorical on this issue (Sklar et al. 226).
The differences in the committee created a deadlock within the conferences and it seemed that the legislation would fail. Some senators refused to accept the statutory wage bill that go beyond 30 cents per hour. But the compromises were to be made and flexibility allowed including the regional differentials (Sreenivasan 227). This paved the way for the agreements among the senators that paved the way for the agreement among the senators that led to the rewriting of the bill. The redrafted bill was adopted with comparative little debate by the houses on 13th and 14th June. This bill was the accented by the president on 25th June 1938.
The provisions of the act
As signed by the president, the act provided a rigid control over wages and hours for all workers interstate business or those who are involved in the production of goods used by such businesses. In the act, a statutory 25 cents minimum wage was introduced and it was to take effect on the first year. This minimum wages was to be increased in the year that follows to 30 cents until the 40 cent minimum wages take effect after five years. These were clearly specified in various sections of the act. In section seven for instance, clearly state that with an exception of the normal regular rate of payment of the 150%, no employees who are covered by the act will work beyond the 44 hours in the first year, 42 hours in the second year and 40 hours in the subsequent years (Grossman 27).
Section eight also specifies on the way the act should be administered. According to this section the implementation and administration of this act is the responsibility of the department of labor under a single administration. The administrator appoints the industry committee to recommend the basis in which the minimum wage could be set. Normally the minimum wage is set in excess of the universal rate however could not be more than 40 cents an hour. Section sixteen of the act provides various exemptions more specifically to the child labor. In this section the child labor is prohibited (Sreenivasan 227). The child means any person below the age of sixteen. However, this provision could only be exempted under the conditions set by the bureau of the chief of children. In certain occupations this provision is eliminated until the child attains the required minimum age of eighteen years as specified in other sections.
Fair Labor Standards Act Amendments and Intents
Despite passing the bill into law, there were two areas of contentions that were constantly being amended. The areas were administrative provisions and wages and hour standard.
Administrative provisions
The ten bills that were presented before the congress contained at least five dissimilar ways through which the provisions of the Act could be administered. However, there was a close relation in the way wage and hour provisions could be administered in all the bills presented for discussion in the congress. In the original bill, an independent agency known as the Labor Standards Board consisting of five members to be appointed by the president with a five year term was to administer the provisions of the Act. The main function of the board was to determine the wage order in all the occupations considered under the Act. When the wage order was being made by the Board for a given occupation, an advisory committee was to be appointed if considered appropriate or necessary by the board (Newman 81). This committee was created with the intention of investigating and reporting upon the services fair value that are rendered based on the time considered appropriate for the nature of the assumed task. The committee had only sixty days to report and any failure was bound to result into the appointment of a new committee.
The Education and Labor Senate Committee made a solitary essential amendment to the advisory committee. The Senate Committee made it mandatory that an advisory committee should be appointed by the Board prior to issuing a labor standard order. To the Board, the committee report was however not binding. An important change accrued from the manner in which the board was selected and it appeared in the bill for the First House Committee. This bill had the intent of giving an equal and fair representation. It provided that a member ought to have selected from the Central United States, Southwest, Southeast, Northwest and from Northeast. Besides, amongst the chosen members, one member had to be the employers’ representatives while another member was to be the employees’ representatives. For the decentralization of the administration, the Labor Committee House made a provision that the appointment of the territorial, each state’s and the Colombian District director should be done by Board (Samuel 61).
When the 75th Congress held their first session, the bill’s opponent lamented bureaucracy at any given chance. The Bill’s opponents had the intentions of making a section of the wage and hour administration Act to be set up within the Labor department and the appointment of the administrator to be done by the president. Irrespective of being in the Labor Department, the administrator was deemed independent given that there were no review subjections to his orders by anybody in the executive government branch.
An imperative amendment related to power shifts to the advisory committees from the lineal board descendants and the administrator. The advisory committee was appointed by the administrator and the intent was to have them intervene in areas where workers had been employed at hours and wages considered incoherent with the minimum living standards. Thus, the hour and wages committees were had the duty of recommending the maximum hours and minimum wages for each occupation. The amendment provided that the administrator had the accountability of setting maximum hours and minimum wages after recommendations were tendered by the committee. In spite of having no powers for setting the standards, the administrator had powers for rejecting the recommendations offered by the committee. After rejecting the committee recommendations, the administrator could appoint new committee or send the recommendation back to be looked appropriately.
The department of labor children’s bureau chief and the administrator were granted powers following the labor secretary suggestions. They were to pay and utilize the local officials and state services that were charged with the state labor law administration. This implied that, the AFL hour and wage bill that was introduced during the 75th Congress second session had the easiest provisions for administration. The administrative machinery was in existent because of the rigid standards. The attorney general enforced that Act and could petition in the District court for any injunctions. The Act administration during the third house committee bill was delegated to the Labor Secretary.
Hours and Wage standards
In the hour and labor legislation, bitter fight developed around the rigid and flexible standards. There were difficult constitutional subjects met apart from social, economic and personal viewpoints involved. The proposals made in the original bill had provisions for somehow complicated hour and wage schedule which were more concentrated on the notion of substandard workweek, substandard wage, oppressive workweek and oppressive wage (Lasser 81).
Basically, the oppressive workweek and oppressive wage had to be sealed by the Congress. Variations were apparent in these standards and this could be done by the board for the maintenance of the overall wage standards. The intention was to prevent any decline in the level of efficiency and health of workers. The wage levels and work hours were to be non-oppressive and under section five of the original bill, authority was given to the board to set the possible high standards. Investigations conducted by the board disclosed that below minimum fair wages were paid to employees and amendments were made in the hours and wage standards bill. The following factors were put into consideration:
- Wages that comparable employers paid to workers to willingly uphold the fir occupation wage standards
- Relevant situations and the cost of living which affect the rendered service value.
When the bill was passed to the Committee of Senates, it was amended in areas of hour and wage provisions. Instead of the set and fixed standards proffered by the Congress, who had the due responsibility and powers of raising it only through the order made by the board, the new-fangled bill proffered that one a single set of standards which the board sets. Therefore, the following amendments were eminent (Paulsen 51).
Amendments to the bill before becoming an Act
Small amendments were made to the bill before being enacted into law. These amendments were made in order to make the administrative sections of the bill stronger as well as offer protection to the collective bargaining agreements.
July 8, 1937 amendments
Upon being rejected at the hearings the bill was tabled back to the Senate for amendments. This time, neither statutory maximum working hours nor minimum wages were set up. The board received powers to do so instead. A further lowering of child labor standards was made so that children below 16 years were allowed to work in occupations that were deemed by Chief of the Children’s Bureau not alter their schooling process or pose a danger to their health.
A provision that gave Tariff Commission powers to investigate higher rates of tariff was added. The intent for this provision was to remove fear that there would be an influx of cheap overseas goods due to high costs of production resulting from high wages and few working hours.
July 31 1937 Senate amendments
Before being passed by the Senate, the Wheeler-Johnson child labor amendment was substituted in place of child labor provisions of the Senate Committee Bill. The intent of this amendment was so that the state could lock out all goods that were produced under lower standards than those of the state, which had received a lot of criticisms during the hearings (Lash 56).
Second House Committee bill amendment
This was introduced to the house as an amendment of the First House Committee Bill on December 14 1937 special session. The amendments sought to have a Wage and hour committee whose appointment relied on the administrator set maximum hours and minimum wages. However, this bill was not voted on due to AFL’s dissatisfaction with House Labor Committee’s suggestions.
AFL amendment
AFL’s dissatisfaction with the Second House Committee Bill led to its substitution with the bill that was drafted in Denver Convention. This was sponsored by Griswold and Dockweiler. Its provisions were 40-hour work week and 40 cents minimum wage per hour. This amendment was done with the intent to please AFL
Reorganization Plan
The Reorganization Plan No. 6 of 1950 in its section 4 (a) amended the meaning of the term wage so as to include any reasonable amount as set by the Secretary of Labor.
The 1972 Education Amendments intended to include a preschool
In 1998, The Fair Labor Standards Act amended Section 5 of the Act so that the term employee included any person employed by an interstate governmental agency, State or a political subset of a State apart from a person who is employed in the legislative branch, agency, political subset or legislative body of his state and has not been employed by a legislative library.
Section 4 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1985 added that the term employee did not include any person who volunteered his services for a political subset of a State, interstate governmental agency or a Public agency that is a State. This intended to lock out individuals who were offering free services to these institutions from being termed as employees.
The August 1998 Amendments excluded any person who volunteered his/her services solely from being termed as an employee. This intended to limit the number of people who were volunteering their services on a sole basis.
Works Cited
Grossman, Jonathan, “Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938: Maximum Struggle for a Minimum Wage.” Monthly Labor Review (1978).
Hart, Vivien. Bound by Our Constitution: Women, Workers, and the Minimum Wage, William Street, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994. Print.
Lash, Joseph. Dealers and Dreamers: A New Look at the New Deal, New York: Doubleday, 1988. Print.
Lasser, William. Benjamin V. Cohen: Architect of the New Deal, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002. Print.
Negrey, Cynthia. Gender, Time, and Reduced Work, New York, NY: SUNY Press, 1993. Print.
Newman, Roger. Hugo Black: A Biography, New York: Pantheon, 1994. Print.
Paulsen, George. The legislative history of the Fair Labor Standards Act, Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, 1959. Print.
Samuel, Howard. “Troubled Passage: The Labor Movement and the Fair Labor Standards Act”, Monthly Labor Review (2000).Print.
Sklar, Holly, Mykyta Laryssa and Wefald Susan. Raise the Floor: Wages and Policies That Work for all of us, Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 2001. Print.
Sreenivasan, Jyotsna. Poverty and the Government in America: A Historical Encyclopedia, Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2009. Print.
Waltman, Jerold. The Case for the Living Wage, Baltimore, Maryland: Algora Publishing, 2004. Print.
Waltman, Jerold. The Politics of the Minimum Wage, Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 2000. Print.