Reply
Fri 27 Jun, 2003 11:40 am
Does anyone remember when laws were passed, forbidding the practice of allowing women with knitting machines to produce sweaters, scarves, mittens, etc in their own home on a contract basis?
Who fostered the legislation and passed it? When? Thanks.
well, its about damn time.
Beg your pardon?
This was done about 20 years ago and it was a disaster for the women who could stay at home, knit in their pajamas, meet the bus when their kids returned from school, cook good meals and participate in their children's activities, like leading scout troups and volunteering in school libraries and for field trips.
After the law was passed, these women had to take retail or secretarial jobs that paid less, involved longer hours and commuting and then forced them to give up activities involving the children and necessitated the hiring of baby sitters for after school hours.
um, just kidding as I think the entire issue is inane. what the hell does a state legislature care whether or not someone knits in their homes?
The same thing was done with sewing gloves up in Maine. The state said that people that were working from their homes sewing gloves were suffering abuse as laborers since they didn't get scheduled breaks, etc..
Kind of silly since they were there at home by themselves and working from their own homes who knew if they took breaks or not? But anyway, it was termed an "unfair labor practice".
Plainoldme - I think the actiual law is Federal - not State. It's covered under the Fair Labor Standards Act:
Quote:Industrial Homework
The performance of certain types of work in an employee's home is prohibited under the law unless the employer has obtained prior certification from the Department of Labor. Restrictions apply in the manufacture of knitted outerwear, gloves and mittens, buttons and buckles, handkerchiefs, embroideries, and jewelry (where safety and health hazards are not involved). The manufacture of women's apparel (and jewelry under hazardous conditions) is generally prohibited. If you have questions on whether a certain type of work is restricted, or who is eligible for a certificate, or how to obtain a certificate, you may contact the local Wage-Hour office.
http://consumerlawpage.com/brochure/fairact.shtml
This is why I take breaks while making love.
To get some knitting in? lol
Couldnt they still sub contract?
silly.
Actually my grandmother did the knitting thing in Vermont about 15-20 years ago....wont she be surprised to find out ....
kidding...she did it as her own business...thats different...and you bet your bottom she took breaks!!! She also ended up getting free lunches etc when she dropped the stuff off for sale...humm..that was probably wrong too.
fishin' wrote:The same thing was done with sewing gloves up in Maine. The state said that people that were working from their homes sewing gloves were suffering abuse as laborers since they didn't get scheduled breaks, etc..
Kind of silly since they were there at home by themselves and working from their own homes who knew if they took breaks or not? But anyway, it was termed an "unfair labor practice".
Thank God we have our governments to protect us from ourselves.
Some Senator with a knitting industry lobby from his home state no doubt...
Dammit! The Gummint should tend to it's own damn knitting!
This is called the "put out" system. It is very old form of industrial organization and was rife with abuses. Most of the laws outlawing or regulating this system were passed at the turn of the last century, c.1900, to protect textile/apparel workers from dishonest and/or unscrupulous contractors who had people under contract for pennies an hour.There were and are very good reasons for these laws. The problem is that this kind of organization has mostly disappeared from our economy for the past 75 years or so, and people have forgotten how abusive it could be. So the laws seem foolish and unnecessary now. They are not.
Acquiunk
Nice to see you. Thanks kindly for the background history on this matter.
People should have the freedom to enter into whatever contract for their labor they choose, without interference from the nanny-government.
There is no such thing as freedom without choice.
the system of law was originated to protect property rights, liberal modernization of law originated to protect the citizens. or if you will secular humanism is indeed humanity oriented. neither approach as accomplished its goal.
Reread Acquiunk's post.
It explains it all quite well.
fbaezer
Where the hell have you been?! We have been looking all over hell for you. Pubs, opium dens, whore houses, churches....
Actually, I was in Purgatory, not understanding the ladies' fixation with knee high leather laced boots.
I'm glad you got your uniform back. It will certainly make the ladies faint once more.
They'd stopped?! I wish someone would tell me these things. I do NOT understand this stuff.
Now, to get down to business ... about October 10 or so, a whole pack of us are meeting in Texas. You are under strict orders (see RCMP release June 12 "Catching Mexicans") to be there.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace