SF1229, titled the “Paid Youth Trades Employment Opportunity Act,” would change Minnesota law to allow 16- and 17-year-olds to work in or around construction or building projects. The bill creates a new statutory section in chapter 326B stating that, notwithstanding contrary law, older minors may be employed in these settings so long as they first complete OSHA 10 training.
The bill also directs the commissioner of labor and industry to amend state rules to remove the existing prohibition on 16- and 17-year-olds working in or around construction or building projects, while preserving the ban on workers under age 16 in those settings. It further clarifies that other youth employment rules remain in place, including applicable federal child labor restrictions and other Minnesota rules not specifically changed by the bill.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would modify Minnesota’s youth labor framework by carving out an exception for 16- and 17-year-olds in construction-related work and requiring OSHA 10 safety training as a condition of employment. It would require administrative rule changes to Minnesota Rules parts 5200.0910 and 5200.0920, and would leave intact other age-based restrictions and federal hazardous occupation rules that still apply to minors.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears supportive of expanding paid youth access to construction trades while emphasizing safety training. The bill’s title and structure suggest a policy goal of creating workforce opportunities for older teens in the trades, with the training requirement indicating an effort to balance access with workplace safety.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the safety and appropriateness of allowing minors to work in or around construction sites, especially given existing prohibitions in state rules. Supporters would likely focus on workforce development, paid trade experience, and apprenticeship pathways for 16- and 17-year-olds, while opponents may raise concerns about injury risk, hazardous worksites, and whether OSHA 10 training is sufficient protection. The bill explicitly preserves restrictions for workers under 16 and other existing laws, which suggests an attempt to address those concerns.