Forums > Model Colloquy > Teenage Models with Benifits

Photographer

JONATHAN RICHARD

Posts: 652

New York, New York, US

NYS takes first baby steps and signs  bill to amend Labor Laws for inclusion of  runway and print modeling  in the definition and regulation of “artistic or creative services” provided by child performers.

A Major Change in the  Labor Law will now  provide Benefits for young Models
This law is intended to increase protections for models under the age of 18 and restrict the use of teenagers during  runways events such as New York Fashion Week,

Under the New York laws (Labor law 150 and Arts & Cultural Affairs Law 35.01), Those who employ models will be required to  provide them with the same support they would receive at school and will have to adhere to more strict compensation rules.
Models are in a unique working environment because they are generally hired as independent contractors and therefore do not get the standard protections of traditional employees.

Runway & Print Models under the age of 18 can be legally employed in NYS if the laws and regulations governing child performers are followed.

Employers who violate these laws face fines starting at $1,000 for the first violation and up to $3,000 for the third. After that, they can lose the privilege to employ child models.

Some of these regulations are as follows:
 
-- “Permits & Certificates. Minor models will be required to obtain a permit. In addition, their employers” would be required to obtain a general certificate of eligibility to employ them.”

--“Working hours. Continued restriction of child models’ work hours based on their age, along with meal periods, rest time, and reasonable space for meals, rest and recreation.”

--“Nurse. Child models would enjoy the legal mandate that a nurse with pediatric experience be provided for them.”


--“ Educational Requirements. Child models would be afforded teachers and dedicated learning space.”


-- “Trust accounts. Child models would enjoy the requisite mandate that a minimum, 15% of the child’s gross earnings be maintained in a separate, restricted banking account.”


--“Recordkeeping. Required maintenance of records including hours worked, wages paid, trust account transfers, copies of permits and certificates, education hours, etc. Failure to comply will result in penalties consisting of $1,000 for the 1st violation, $2,000 for the 2nd, and $3,000 for the 3rd or subsequent violation.”  (D’Avanzo  Morreale 2013)

Oct 25 13 06:43 pm Link

Photographer

John Jebbia

Posts: 27614

Phoenix, Arizona, US

Man.. I really thought this was gonna be a different type of thread. Carry on.

Oct 25 13 06:46 pm Link

Photographer

Garry k

Posts: 27201

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

seems reasonable to me , I hope more jurisdictions adopt this

Oct 25 13 06:49 pm Link

Photographer

David Kirk

Posts: 4501

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Garry k wrote:
seems reasonable to me , I hope more jurisdictions adopt this

Really?  It seems excessive to me.  A nurse?  For what?  My kids don't have a nurse any other place including schools.  If they want to see a nurse they need to show up at a hospital (in which case there better be something wrong or they'll never actually see anyone) or they need to book an appointment with their family physician.

Same with education.  Are they working or going to school?  Many high school students do both and the restaurants and other similar employers need not give their education a second thought.  Kids are free to work as many hours as they like at part-time jobs (as far as I know) without the workplace providing any special benefits.  Can a child actor/model who decides to work (and gain whatever advantages that provides) really expect that it will not have an impact on their education?

Oct 25 13 07:04 pm Link

Photographer

bmiSTUDIO

Posts: 1734

Essex Junction, Vermont, US

David Kirk wrote:

Really?  It seems excessive to me.  A nurse?  For what?  My kids don't have a nurse any other place including schools.  If they want to see a nurse they need to show up at a hospital (in which case there better be something wrong or they'll never actually see anyone) or they need to book an appointment with their family physician.

Same with education.  Are they working or going to school?  Many high school students do both and the restaurants and other similar employers need not give their education a second thought.  Kids are free to work as many hours as they like at part-time jobs (as far as I know) without the workplace providing any special benefits.  Can a child actor/model who decides to work (and gain whatever advantages that provides) really expect that it will not have an impact on their education?

States in the US have differing laws about minors in the workplace. In Pennsylvania students can only work a certain number of hours a week. I think it has to do with age and grades in school. Excessive? Not really when you think of how many adults in the industry take advantage of children and unsuspecting adults. Hollywood has structure that includes work hours, tutors on set, etc. Why would modeling be treated any differently?

Oct 25 13 07:18 pm Link

Photographer

m_s_photo

Posts: 602

Port Moody, British Columbia, Canada

Awww. This isn't at all as exciting as I'd hoped.

Oct 25 13 07:23 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

Rays Fine Art

Posts: 6308

New York, New York, US

Actually, I signed petitions favoring the bill.

The conditions under which child models work are at least potentially as damaging to the model as they are to the child actor, who already enjoys these protections.

As far as the photographer is concerned, the expenses are simple pass-alongs to the client so they don't actually effect his profitability or competitive position.  Granted, I may be somewhat prejudiced because my impression of the fashion industry is that to at least some degree it has raised exploitation to an art form.  There is no reason for children to be modeling adult clothing.  There are plenty of adults ready, willing and able to do the work.  And there are plenty of advertisers ready willing and able to absorb the costs, however grudgingly.

In theater and film we have had laws in place to protect children for almost as long as I've been alive and the producers of both, both large and small, have been able to stay within them quite matter-of-factly.  They are no more difficult or expensive to honor than those for photography permits or building codes; in fact less so in many cases.  While I take exception to some of the child pornography  laws as being well intended but poorly constructed and impossible to fairly and effectively enforce, I don't have the same reservations about this law.  As far as I'm concerned, the photographers, promoters and advertisers who use children will just have to shape up or ship out.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Oct 25 13 08:31 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

Rays Fine Art

Posts: 6308

New York, New York, US

David Kirk wrote:
Really?  It seems excessive to me.  A nurse?  For what?  My kids don't have a nurse any other place including schools.  If they want to see a nurse they need to show up at a hospital (in which case there better be something wrong or they'll never actually see anyone) or they need to book an appointment with their family physician.

Same with education.  Are they working or going to school?  Many high school students do both and the restaurants and other similar employers need not give their education a second thought.  Kids are free to work as many hours as they like at part-time jobs (as far as I know) without the workplace providing any special benefits.  Can a child actor/model who decides to work (and gain whatever advantages that provides) really expect that it will not have an impact on their education?

Actually there are several errors of fact here, depending on the jurisdiction in which the employment takes place.  Generally, however, the number of hours and circumstances in which a child may be employed are tightly restricted.  Most venues do not permit school-aged children to work at all during schools hours.  There are also safety concerns and the more ad hoc the workplace, such as construction sites, runways, motion picture and, yes, photographer's studios the greater the oversight and restrictions must be in order to protect the child.

I worked all through my middle school and high school years, often in shops that skirted or openly flaunted the law, such as some of those industries you mention.  In the process I was hit by bowling balls and golf balls and scalded by large containers of soup and dishwater on catering trucks.  I was delighted when i could get to the relative safety of a radio station, a recording studio or a theater stage, where the protection of the young performers was a given.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Oct 25 13 08:49 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

studio36uk

Posts: 21896

Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna

That will act to protect them from out-and-out exploitation if they work, yes. And it is a good thing.

The underlying effect will be to price the use of kids out of the casual market. And that is a good thing as well.

There is no reason to be using kids simply because they are smaller, cost less and take up less space.

Studio36

Oct 26 13 02:44 am Link

Photographer

udor

Posts: 22378

New York, New York, US

JONATHAN RICHARD wrote:
Under the New York laws (Labor law 150 and Arts & Cultural Affairs Law 35.01), Those who employ models will be required to  provide them with the same support they would receive at school and will have to adhere to more strict compensation rules.
Models are in a unique working environment because they are generally hired as independent contractors and therefore do not get the standard protections of traditional employees.

Runway & Print Models under the age of 18 can be legally employed in NYS if the laws and regulations governing child performers are followed.

I am still shaking my head over some of the requirements.

Of course I am for the protection of children... however, a 17 years old girl is not a child in my eyes (it's a cultural thing I guess)... except for fashion week, which is in fact a week long event, all other shoots are maybe one or two days a few hours.

Providing a nurse for one or two kids, for, let's say a GAP print shoot... and a tutor.... TUTOR???

Shoot is 4 hours... do they have to ad one more hour that has to be paid so that the models can do an extra hour of algebra on the set???

When would they have to do their schoolwork, during the shoot, before, after?

Comparing this to the film industry, where a teen actor/actress might be for weeks or months on the set to a commercial/fashion shoot that lasts a day, but putting those requirements on the shoot...

I really don't know if that was thought through properly.

Oct 26 13 09:19 am Link

Photographer

Marin Photography NYC

Posts: 7248

New York, New York, US

udor wrote:
I am still shaking my head over some of the requirements.

Of course I am for the protection of children... however, a 17 years old girl is not a child in my eyes (it's a cultural thing I guess)... except for fashion week, which is in fact a week long event, all other shoots are maybe one or two days a few hours.

Providing a nurse for one or two kids, for, let's say a GAP print shoot... and a tutor.... TUTOR???

Shoot is 4 hours... do they have to ad one more hour that has to be paid so that the models can do an extra hour of algebra on the set???

When would they have to do their schoolwork, during the shoot, before, after?

Comparing this to the film industry, where a teen actor/actress might be for weeks or months on the set to a commercial/fashion shoot that lasts a day, but putting those requirements on the shoot...

I really don't know if that was thought through properly.

I agree it's a bit of a stretch for a few hours on a shoot, but I'm not sure it works that way either....They will look at it again and adjust it to work eventually, after some backlash.

Oct 26 13 09:29 am Link

Photographer

M Pandolfo Photography

Posts: 12116

Tampa, Florida, US

This might be the worst subject header in the history of MM lol.

On another note...it's "Benefits." Four words were used in the creation of the subject header and one of them is spelled wrong. That's a 25% error rate.

Oct 26 13 09:39 am Link

Photographer

Rebel Lens Photography

Posts: 179

Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

If they can get a Nurse, then I want one to. (especially if she comes with Benefits) wink

Oct 26 13 09:52 am Link

Photographer

JONATHAN RICHARD

Posts: 652

New York, New York, US

udor wrote:
I am still shaking my head over some of the requirements.

Of course I am for the protection of children... however, a 17 years old girl is not a child in my eyes (it's a cultural thing I guess)... except for fashion week, which is in fact a week long event, all other shoots are maybe one or two days a few hours.

Providing a nurse for one or two kids, for, let's say a GAP print shoot... and a tutor.... TUTOR???

Shoot is 4 hours... do they have to ad one more hour that has to be paid so that the models can do an extra hour of algebra on the set???

When would they have to do their schoolwork, during the shoot, before, after?

Comparing this to the film industry, where a teen actor/actress might be for weeks or months on the set to a commercial/fashion shoot that lasts a day, but putting those requirements on the shoot...

I really don't know if that was thought through properly.

I see this as a game changer in regards to casting for the shows considering the restriction on work hours; employers could have restrictions on scheduling these models for fittings after midnight on a school night and will have restrictions in regards to models  on call hours to return work. 
The State DOL will surely need to adapt many of the current regulations in place for employment of child performers to the modeling industry and these adaptations may be extensive.
Employers may be permitted to file for variances to some of the regulations if compliance would show a hardship?, Yet I believe this would drive additional complications when consideration casting a model.  I suspect clients may become more prone in defaulting  to a policy of directing casting directors and agencies to forgo the under 18 model altogether.

Oct 27 13 05:57 pm Link

Photographer

AJ_In_Atlanta

Posts: 12828

Atlanta, Georgia, US

Yes and I suspect they legal papers to already be set for filing, agencies are not employers nor are the clients.  Very specifically they were designd that way, so I suspect thesis just the start.

Granted NYC has its share of stupid laws and mayors so I am not surprised.  For that matter a lot of those laws regarding filming have pushed so much work down here to the right to work states maybe it's a good thing big_smile

Oct 27 13 06:12 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

GPS Studio Services

Posts: 36276

San Francisco, California, US

In California, we've had to deal with the same onerous regulations when video or motion pictures were involved.  They applied whether it was a ten day shoot or a two hour one.  By and large, the industry had dealt with it and supported it.  Applying it to short duration photo shoots though is more problematic.  One of the things it has done is led to a lot of casting calls that read "Legal 18 to play younger."  I once put a casting notice out for an 18 year old to play 13.

While the regulations for still work are less complex here than for video, under aged models are still required to get an "entertainment industry work permit."  We also have to deal with work hour restrictions and other child labor laws.  We don't need, however, to provide a set tutor, etc.

I think, in general, it is a good thing but I expect, over time, the regulations in NY will be tweaked as they gain experience.  As an example, a tutor and a nurse may turn out to be an over-kill for a three hour shoot on a non-school day.

Oct 27 13 08:45 pm Link

Model

Amber Dawn - Colorado

Posts: 6243

Castle Rock, Colorado, US

David Kirk wrote:

Really?  It seems excessive to me.  A nurse?  For what?  My kids don't have a nurse any other place including schools.  If they want to see a nurse they need to show up at a hospital (in which case there better be something wrong or they'll never actually see anyone) or they need to book an appointment with their family physician.

Same with education.  Are they working or going to school?  Many high school students do both and the restaurants and other similar employers need not give their education a second thought.  Kids are free to work as many hours as they like at part-time jobs (as far as I know) without the workplace providing any special benefits.  Can a child actor/model who decides to work (and gain whatever advantages that provides) really expect that it will not have an impact on their education?

Wait! Your child's school doesn't provide a Nurse? what have Schools come to!? That's scary!

Oct 28 13 12:05 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

studio36uk

Posts: 21896

Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna

It seems interesting that no one in this discussion has yet mentioned that any such requirements as are being discussed, teacher, nurse, hours of work, and so forth, actually represent client charges.

If a client wants to shoot with covered talent then the client should be fully prepared to pay for it.

If, on the other hand, a client asks you to do something that actually breaks the law being discussed then you probably don't want them as a client in the first place.

Studio36

Oct 28 13 01:42 pm Link

Photographer

David Kirk

Posts: 4501

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Rays Fine Art wrote:

Actually there are several errors of fact here, depending on the jurisdiction in which the employment takes place.  Generally, however, the number of hours and circumstances in which a child may be employed are tightly restricted.  Most venues do not permit school-aged children to work at all during schools hours.  There are also safety concerns and the more ad hoc the workplace, such as construction sites, runways, motion picture and, yes, photographer's studios the greater the oversight and restrictions must be in order to protect the child.

I worked all through my middle school and high school years, often in shops that skirted or openly flaunted the law, such as some of those industries you mention.  In the process I was hit by bowling balls and golf balls and scalded by large containers of soup and dishwater on catering trucks.  I was delighted when i could get to the relative safety of a radio station, a recording studio or a theater stage, where the protection of the young performers was a given.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Let's not confuse issues.  As I understand it we're not discussing whether it is a good idea to allow child workers to be hit by golf balls or scalded by hot water - we're discussing whether it is reasonable for the employer to have to provide a nurse and tutor for a photo shoot.

As many above have noted this sort of thing makes a lot of sense for TV/movie actors which may be on set for very long hours many days a week for many weeks in a row.  Modeling jobs don't tend to have that sort of longevity or intensity and for that reason I don't think it requires this sort of regulation.

Oct 28 13 01:55 pm Link

Photographer

David Kirk

Posts: 4501

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Colorado Model Amber wrote:

Wait! Your child's school doesn't provide a Nurse? what have Schools come to!? That's scary!

Scary?  Our schools don't provide police, doctors, nurses, lawyers, or any other services.  They are schools - they provide teachers.

Why would a school require a nurse?

Oct 28 13 01:58 pm Link

Model

E X P O S E D

Posts: 53

New York, New York, US

David Kirk wrote:

Scary?  Our schools don't provide police, doctors, nurses, lawyers, or any other services.  They are schools - they provide teachers.

Why would a school require a nurse?

In the USA it is standard to have a school nurse for any number of reasons... A student could get hurt during Physical Education, have a sudden headache/stomach ache/other pains. Also when I was in middle school, I had to take epilepsy medicine every day and would have to go to the nurse to get it (we can't carry prescription medicine ourselves)... Don't know if that's still the case because that was awhile ago but I think you get the idea of why a school nurse is there and needed.

Oct 28 13 02:11 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

studio36uk

Posts: 21896

Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna

E X P O S E D wrote:
In the USA it is standard to have a school nurse for any number of reasons... A student could get hurt during Physical Education, have a sudden headache/stomach ache/other pains. Also when I was in middle school, I had to take epilepsy medicine every day and would have to go to the nurse to get it (we can't carry prescription medicine ourselves)... Don't know if that's still the case because that was awhile ago but I think you get the idea of why a school nurse is there and needed.

From the news reports seen from time to time an American student would be lucky to get away with carrying a Tic-Tac in school. Woe be unto them that even share a piece of hard candy with another student. Zero tolerance and all that!

Looks a bit like DRUGS to me!
http://static.talkingretail.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/11/tic-tac-cherry-passion-now-available-in-100s-pack/tic-tac-Cherry-Passion-T100.jpg

Studio36

Oct 28 13 06:46 pm Link

Photographer

R Byron Johnson

Posts: 767

Norman, Oklahoma, US

studio36uk wrote:
That will act to protect them from out-and-out exploitation if they work, yes. And it is a good thing.

The underlying effect will be to price the use of kids out of the casual market. And that is a good thing as well.

There is no reason to be using kids simply because they are smaller, cost less and take up less space.

Studio36

Agree 100%.

Oct 31 13 07:14 pm Link

Photographer

R Byron Johnson

Posts: 767

Norman, Oklahoma, US

David Kirk wrote:

Scary?  Our schools don't provide police, doctors, nurses, lawyers, or any other services.  They are schools - they provide teachers.

Why would a school require a nurse?

It's been years since I've been in school, but even then we had a nurse and security guards (actual police officers).  No lawyers though.

Oct 31 13 07:15 pm Link

Photographer

Tim Roper

Posts: 146

Palo Alto, California, US

Does this apply to models who are foreign nationals I wonder?  If not, I could see them being used almost exclusively for some types of work to avoid the new law (there's already so many from other countries as it is).

Oct 31 13 07:23 pm Link

Photographer

R Byron Johnson

Posts: 767

Norman, Oklahoma, US

Tim Roper wrote:
Does this apply to models who are foreign nationals I wonder?  If not, I could see them being used almost exclusively for some types of work to avoid the new law (there's already so many from other countries as it is).

Really good point.

Oct 31 13 07:37 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

GPS Studio Services

Posts: 36276

San Francisco, California, US

Tim Roper wrote:
Does this apply to models who are foreign nationals I wonder?  If not, I could see them being used almost exclusively for some types of work to avoid the new law (there's already so many from other countries as it is).

R Byron Johnson wrote:
Really good point.

It will apply to any underaged model in New York working legally in the U.S.  It makes no difference if they are foreign nationals.

In California we have a similar statute for motion picture and video (it doesn't apply to shoots that are still only).  In any case, if a California company does a shoot in another state with an under aged actor, we are still required to comply with California law.  We are subject to it in any location, even out of the country.

I have no idea if New York has the same covenant, but in California, they claim jurisdiction over us no matter where we shoot motion picture or video.

Oct 31 13 10:02 pm Link