this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2026
1547 points (99.6% liked)
Work Reform
17329 readers
3710 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A national law against child labor was passed in 1916, but it was overturned by the Supreme Court in 1918. A 1919 law was also overturned. In the 1920s, an effort to pass a constitutional amendment failed, because of opposition from the South and from Catholics. The Fair Labor Standards Act (part of the New Deal) in 1938 finally ended child labor in factories, mines, and other occupations. Child labor has always been a factor in agriculture and that continues into the 21st century. — Wikipedia
Something tells me if we did a complete archive search of NYT (and, for that matter, WSJ), circa 1910-1940, we'd find that it has, indeed, defended child labor in the US.
https://flippedtips.com/plegal/save/clin1910s.html
Under "Stunned Nation Reacts" I guess they argued it should be left up to the states... Which is a defense of it, in the context of the time.
Yeah, states rights tends to come into play when ethical protections are opposed. Slavery abolition, and abortion access come to mind. We may see it again regarding gay marriage.
Curiously, the same players who oppose all these things are not for states rights when it comes to cannabis access.
it's 80 or 90% owned by the same family from that time too.
I can only imagine what voting for a president or such would have been like back then. Voting for a local congress person, okay you might have known them or know someone who might know them. But the president, you were told who they were by what... 1 newspaper? Unless your family was paying for more than one, aka if your family knew to switch somehow
Olde Thimey federal candidates, including presidential candidates, actually traveled on the campaign trail, and would go town-to-town, make stump speeches (often on literal stumps) and gladhand by the hundreds. So the people often got to hear the candidates answer questions relevant to their own districts.
These remote media-only campaigns are unique to the post-radio age.