Crackdown on Sales by Children Proposed

As part of a crackdown on firms that exploit children who sell candy door-to-door, the state labor commissioner is proposing rules that would list such sales as hazardous and prohibit them unless there is extensive adult supervision.

The California rules, set for a public hearing in Los Angeles Wednesday, are part of a growing national effort by the U.S. Department of Labor and state labor commissioners across the country to restrict the use of kiddy peddlers by for-profit firms.

Government officials speak of the operations in terms that might be taken from the pages of a Dickens novel. They describe Fagin-like crew leaders who gather up children from poor neighborhoods, drive the youngsters long distances and threaten to leave them far from home if they do not sell enough candy.

These officials say that in some cases the youngsters are taught to misrepresent the purpose of the sales by suggesting that the profits are for charity.

Some Assaults Reported

California officials say that children have been assaulted and molested while making sales and have been cheated by employers who take most of the money paid to the youngsters.

There are those who defend the sales on grounds that door-to-door selling gives youngsters an honest way to make needed money while learning the virtues of hard work.

The U.S. Department of Labor, in a North Carolina test case, is asking the federal court to ban use of youngsters under 14 in door-to-door sales and to force the companies to follow federal wage-and-hour laws for minors.

The state and federal actions would not affect sales by Little Leaguers, Girl Scouts and other youth groups or by newspaper carriers.

The proposed California rule changes are part of a broad revision of state child-labor regulations that would stop youngsters from working under a variety of dangerous circumstances.

Under the proposals, which are partly a response to the 1982 deaths of two youngsters on the set of the movie “Twilight Zone,” children would be banned from working near explosives and dangerous moving machinery, from selling flowers and other products along roadways, and from setting clay targets on firing ranges.

Some Regulations Eased

The regulations would also increase the hours that youngsters could work in the entertainment industry. This is part of an effort to stop film and commercial producers from fleeing to states that have less stringent rules on the education, supervision and working hours of child actors.

The changes designed to stop runaway productions have been welcomed by the entertainment industry as an important first step in bringing business back to California. But studio teachers, who act as educators and also look after the youngsters’ health and welfare, object to dropping existing guidelines that call for the presence of a teacher on the set for 16- and 17-year-olds.

State and federal officials have been particularly concerned about what they see as an increasing use of youngsters in door-to-door sales.

Gerald Winters, a New Jersey businessman who produces candy sold door-to-door in California and other states and who is a key defendant in federal and state court actions, says that the sales are a valuable source of income for youngsters and teach them the virtues of the free enterprise system.

“I can only tell you that when a youngster receives a job, his self-image, his self-worth increases,” Winters said in a written reply to questions submitted to him by The Times.

Winters contends that his distributors are often blamed for the problems created by other, less scrupulous operators. He believes that government officials have singled him out because his companies are the largest producers of candy for door-to-door sales. “All bureaucracies would rather catch a whale than a fish!” he wrote.

In his written statement, Winters complained of harassment by local police, particularly when black youngsters from poor neighborhoods try to sell products in white middle-class neighborhoods. “In California, initially in every labor case that was brought against one of my customers, the individual was black and working with black youngsters,” he said.

Lawyer’s Statement

His lawyer, David Hicks of Emeryville, Calif., said that his client welcomes enforcement of child-labor laws, but objects to discrimination against door-to-door sales in the name of protecting the children.

“If it’s really dangerous, then why can Girl Scouts do it? Why can newspaper boys do it?” Hicks asked. “Kids out working are less at risk than they are at home or than kids involved in sports.”

However, California Labor Commissioner C. Robert Simpson Jr. complained: “These kids should not be turned out in a neighborhood and allowed to wander. . . . They are teaching these kids to beg, training them how to beg and teaching them a pitch.”

In 1983, the state asked an Orange County court to stop Winters and others from using youngsters to sell their products door-to-door in California. The state lost the case, which is now under appeal.

Proposed Regulations

The proposed California regulations would require minors employed in door-to-door sales to work in pairs on the same street; there would have to be one adult supervisor for every 10 youngsters, and the supervisors would have to be available to check on the minors at least once every 15 minutes.

Hicks said that Winters and others named in the California litigation could live with the proposed regulations.

“They ought to punish the guys who do something wrong and leave the others alone,” said Hicks, who added that one youngster was able to earn more per hour selling candy than his mother was making in her government job.

Winters operates several companies that produce and distribute products for door-to-door sale, according to Nashville attorney Gerald A. Smith, who is representing Winters in the federal case. The products come with detailed instructions and advice on how to set up crews and approach customers, Smith said. But he added that each of the local companies is an independent business free to develop its own sales strategy.

Smith acknowledged that there may be cases in which individual crew leaders failed to obtain proper work permits for children, but he said he has seen no proof that children have been threatened, encouraged to beg or abandoned far from their homes.

North Carolina Case

Of particular interest is the federal court case involving a North Carolina distributor who is contesting the government’s jurisdiction over the door-to-door candy-selling operations.

A Labor Department victory in the case could mean a nationwide limit on door-to-door candy sales by the businesses named in the suit and others that operate in a similar manner, said William H. Berger, the attorney representing the Labor Department.

If the federal agency loses, Berger said, it could be prohibited from investigating complaints of child-labor violations in door-to-door sales.

North Carolina officials contend that these sales operations, which use names like Junior Careers Club and Student Aid, flagrantly abused child-labor laws.

“There were many instances where kids were taught to lie by misrepresenting what they are earning money for,” said Taylor McMillan, deputy commissioner of labor in North Carolina. “Clearly it is just a moneymaking operation. (The candy) is sold for $2.50, $3 or $3.50, and the kids get only a small part of it. Most of the money goes to an out-of-state moneymaker.”

20% Commission

The kids typically got 60 cents a box, McMillan said. Attorneys for the door-to-door sellers note that that figure represents a 20% commission, which they contend is more than fair.

The California regulations being proposed to control door-to-door selling also formally spell out for the first time the working hours and supervision of children in the entertainment industry.

The industry has been guided since 1927 by an unofficial set of standards agreed to by producers, the Los Angeles Board of Education and the Studio Teachers Union.

While the standards generally have been adhered to, they have no force of law, according to California Labor Commissioner Simpson.

In some respects the new rules would loosen controls on the use of children by the entertainment industry. The hours that youngsters could work each day would be increased--a change that pleases the industry.

Under the old rules, producers--particularly those hiring youngsters for a day or two to make commercials--were reluctant to hire California children, according to Constance Minnett, counsel for the Screen Actors Guild. In some cases, producers specified that “no California kids need apply,” she said.

“What we have to do is convince our advertising companies to take another look at California, to show them the rules have changed out here,” said Joanne Swanson, president of the Assn. of Independent Commercial Producers.

But the Studio Teachers Union is worried that the new rules will give teachers less control over older children by dropping a requirement that the teachers be present when 16- and 17-year olds are working, said the union local’s business representative, Margaret Jensen. Under the existing guidelines, studio teachers have been able to intervene on behalf of these youngsters when asked to do dangerous stunts or to work close to wild animals.

But Labor Commissioner Simpson said that existing state law does not give him the authority to protect the health and safety of young actors once they have reached the age of 16.