Child labor in the low end segment

[tchen]

This falls into that muddy middle ground where the kids not actually employees, and thus, the hosting company itself is in no position to dictate or control when they work.  In Robert Clark's case above for example, if his contract was with a legal entity under his dad's name, it would be his dad that would be in violation of child labor laws, not kaniini.

Child workers basically fall into:

A ) contract-less minor

B ) direct contract with minor

C ) contract with employing business

options A ) and B ) are effectively the same.  Liability is effectively zilch if you keep your employee-contractor distance.  In cases of c) though you are exposed to federal child trafficking laws if you knew your suppliers were violating child labor laws.

 

[drmike]

I'd guess 100% of the "child laborers" are kids who would not suffer any measurable hardship if they lost their jobs.  They might lose their free Teamspeak VM but...

I'd guess 100% of them would quit if the work become inconvenient.

I'd guess a pretty big percentage of them would do the work for free because they like to feel like cool milk monitors of the 'net.  Not only do they get real admin power but they also get a free VPS and they get paid and they feel like pimp daddies.

So using words like "exploited" and "enslavement" seems a bit much.

That's pretty much everything wrong with the industry:

1. "Work" but they are a contractor (probably 99% without a legal contract) and not legally able to be a contractor and lacking proper permits and adult/guardian who assumes the legal risk.

2. "Working" for free... There is no such notion here.  In lieu of financials, they are trading goods, services and other often intangibles which in deed have perceived value and are certainly covered by a multitude of state, federal and international laws and case law that say such barter-like schema is not a legal work around to taxation and child labor or even minimum wage at that.

3. Real admin powers - this is the most startling issue.    Near full access to all sorts of things (customer data, finances, personal details) and without any proper risk protection for the CUSTOMER.  Is it any wonder why "hacks" happen and not an exploit can be found?   PERHAPS THAT EXPLOIT WAS THE MINOR SKID YOU "FIRED" in the past? 

Child labor isn't solely about slavery or indentured servitude.  It is about all those other points I was on about earlier.

So from now on, I am beating sketchy providers over the heads at the door, upfront.  If I even get a twitch that minors are running the circus I am doing the dance routine and it doesn't matter if it is here or on any other site.

I am tired of business as usual and folks running all these sites acting like a vetting process takes a PhD to weed the idiots out.

 

[Aldryic C'boas]

That raises interesting legal questions where one of our resident minors is reselling entire /24s on behalf of a company well known for willingly selling to spammers.

 

[kaniini]

I do remember Robert Clarke talking in IRC about how @kaniini paid him to work on building servers over night. This was at like 2-3am his time, which is against child labor laws for somebody under 18 to work that late. 

That was more to keep him from possibly stealing things out of my cages when he found himself stranded in Dallas and had to return to the datacenter.  It certainly isn't the norm for how we operate.  Idle hands are the devil's work and all of that.

 

[GVH-Jon]

I'd guess 100% of the "child laborers" are kids who would not suffer any measurable hardship if they lost their jobs.  They might lose their free Teamspeak VM but...

I'd guess 100% of them would quit if the work become inconvenient.

False.

 

[Aldryic C'boas]

That was more to keep him from possibly stealing things out of my cages when he found himself stranded in Dallas and had to return to the datacenter.  It certainly isn't the norm for how we operate.  Idle hands are the devil's work and all of that.

Far be it for me to tell you how to run your company - but out of curiosity, why even do business with someone you obviously distrust?  Surely it wouldn't be so difficult to have him replaced.

 

[raindog308]

I said: "'d guess 100% of the "child laborers" are kids who would not suffer any measurable hardship if they lost their jobs."

False.

So you are employing children whose standard of living would drop if they were fired? In other words, their families are relying on this income to sustain themselves?

Why shouldn't I be calling the FBI right now?

 

[GVH-Jon]

I said: "'d guess 100% of the "child laborers" are kids who would not suffer any measurable hardship if they lost their jobs."


So you are employing children whose standard of living would drop if they were fired? In other words, their families are relying on this income to sustain themselves?


Why shouldn't I be calling the FBI right now?

I was more referring to your statement that teenagers would quit when their job becomes inconvenient for them.

If that was the case I would have quit a long time ago.

 

[DomainBop]

False.

What isn't false however is that child labor laws in New Hampshire prohibit 16 and 17 year olds from working more than 6 days per week and 30 hours per week during the school year.

VI. No youth 16 or 17 years of age who is duly enrolled in school shall be permitted to work more than 6 consecutive days or more than 30 hours during the school calendar week, which shall be Sunday through Saturday.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XXIII/276-A/276-A-4.htm

$10K fine for each violation (http://www.nh.gov/labor/documents/child-labor-guide.pdf )...I won't even mention the fines for falsely listing employees with titles like "VP" and "Director of... " as contractors. 

 

[GVH-Jon]

What isn't false however is that child labor laws in New Hampshire prohibit 16 and 17 year olds from working more than 6 days per week and 30 hours per week during the school year.

When you're in court you don't make assumptions. You give facts. Assumptions get you nowhere. And you have no facts to give regarding the number of hours or days I work in a week.

 

[kaniini]

Far be it for me to tell you how to run your company - but out of curiosity, why even do business with someone you obviously distrust?  Surely it wouldn't be so difficult to have him replaced.

We wound up removing his access to the floor with the internal cages later on, actually for this reason.  His equipment was moved to the other DC area with the other colocation customers.

 

[Wintereise]

I was more referring to your statement that teenagers would quit when their job becomes inconvenient for them.

If that was the case I would have quit a long time ago.

There are exceptions everywhere, doesn't mean they're frequent enough to re-define the norm.

What @raindog308 said IS the case for 99.999999% 16 year old kids running 'companies.'

 

[MannDude]

The major issue with this, is that child-labor laws were originally put in place because as America became industrialized you had lots of children working in factories, mills, and mines with their families to get by. It was hard, grueling work that posed risks to a developing child and prevented them from obtaining higher education. Ma and Pa need you to work in the mill so the family can afford to eat, so you did.

While I'm sick and tired of these wanna-be teenager CEOs who go around over-exaggerating their importance in the industry and their 'wealth', they're working voluntarily. Often times for non-legitimate, non-tax paying companies. Often times under aliases, but the vast majority of the time under their own will. I don't know of any slave-driver type hosts who force their crew of underpaid teenage workers to respond to tickets or rack servers. Most these kids work for small hosts anyway who'd have a relatively lax work load, I'd imagine, anyhow. No legitimate company would hire a teenager who is unable to legally sign a contract, so that leaves their 'employment' options reduced to unethical providers or working for other kids who they play games with online or whatever.

If you've hired a teenager, then chances are you've done it either because you knew them and trusted them with their (hopefully) limited access or because they're simply cheap hires. Teens don't have a cost of living, they live at home. They don't have bills. They don't have mouths to feed except their own in the lunch line at school, and Ma and Pa probably give them lunch money anyway. They take their modest earnings from you and spend it on their hobbies, on new clothes, on weed, on whatever kids spend money on. I don't know.

But, what do I know? Maybe HostGator has a 14X14 foot room with a locked door that is full of kids answering tech support tickets for 16 hours a day and SoftLayer's servers fancy cabling is only possible by the small, under developed hands of minors. <shrugs>

 

[GVH-Jon]

The major issue with this, is that child-labor laws were originally put in place because as America became industrialized you had lots of children working in factories, mills, and mines with their families to get by. It was hard, grueling work that posed risks to a developing child and prevented them from obtaining higher education. Ma and Pa need you to work in the mill so the family can afford to eat, so you did.

While I'm sick and tired of these wanna-be teenager CEOs who go around over-exaggerating their importance in the industry and their 'wealth', they're working voluntarily. Often times for non-legitimate, non-tax paying companies. Often times under aliases, but the vast majority of the time under their own will. I don't know of any slave-driver type hosts who force their crew of underpaid teenage workers to respond to tickets or rack servers. Most these kids work for small hosts anyway who'd have a relatively lax work load, I'd imagine, anyhow. No legitimate company would hire a teenager who is unable to legally sign a contract, so that leaves their 'employment' options reduced to unethical providers or working for other kids who they play games with online or whatever.

If you've hired a teenager, then chances are you've done it either because you knew them and trusted them with their (hopefully) limited access or because they're simply cheap hires. Teens don't have a cost of living, they live at home. They don't have bills. They don't have mouths to feed except their own in the lunch line at school, and Ma and Pa probably give them lunch money anyway. They take their modest earnings from you and spend it on their hobbies, on new clothes, on weed, on whatever kids spend money on. I don't know.

But, what do I know? Maybe HostGator has a 14X14 foot room with a locked door that is full of kids answering tech support tickets for 16 hours a day and SoftLayer's servers fancy cabling is only possible by the small, under developed hands of minors. <shrugs>

Wow. I'm a bit offended now. <_<

 

[GVH-Jon]

.

 

[Aldryic C'boas]

Wow. I'm a bit offended now. <_<

And now you know how we feel every time you call yourself a provider.

 

[Nett]

2. No legitimate company would hire a teenager who is unable to legally sign a contract,

So GVH is not legitimate

 

[GVH-Jon]

And now you know how we feel every time you call yourself a provider.

Last I checked I'm in the Verified Provider group here.

Anyways, where's Fabozzi when you need him?

 

[Coastercraze]

Where I live, the law is that you must have a workers permit if under the age of 18 yrs old and that you cannot work past 10 PM. (I think that was the curfew rule set)

General rule of thumb is if you're of legal age to sign a contract, you can work. If not, don't bother as I'm sure your parents aren't going to sign off on being responsible for whatever you end up doing.

 

[kaniini]

Last I checked I'm in the Verified Provider group here.

Anyways, where's Fabozzi when you need him?

I don't know, but I am curious as to when you plan to respond to my inquiry on WHT.  Here it is in case you missed it: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?p=9100747#post9100747

Are you chicken?