Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 103.65 (2026)

General standards for employment of minors

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

103.65103.65 General standards for employment of minors.

103.65(1)(1) A minor shall not be employed or permitted to work at any employment or in any place of employment dangerous or prejudicial to the life, health, safety, or welfare of the minor or where the employment of the minor may be dangerous or prejudicial to the life, health, safety or welfare of other employees or frequenters.

103.65(2)(2) No minor under 16 years of age may be employed or permitted to work at any employment for such hours of the day or week, for such days of the week, or at such periods of the day as may be dangerous or prejudicial to the life, health, safety, or welfare of the minor.

103.65 HistoryHistory: 1971 c. 271; 2011 a. 32.

103.65 AnnotationThe plaintiff was in a class protected by a rule promulgated under this section; the court did not err in giving a “negligence per se” instruction. McGarrity v. Welch Plumbing Co., 104 Wis. 2d 414, 312 N.W.2d 37 (1981).

103.65 AnnotationThe trial court erred in failing to hold as a matter of law that the employer’s violation of child labor laws caused injury and that the defense of the child’s contributory negligence was inapplicable to the case. D.L. v. Huebner, 110 Wis. 2d 581, 329 N.W.2d 890 (1983).

103.65 AnnotationAn employer violating a child labor law is absolutely liable for resulting injuries to the minor, other employees, or frequenters of a place of employment. A driver on a public street may be a frequenter when the employment is in a street trade. Beard v. Lee Enterprises, Inc., 225 Wis. 2d 1, 591 N.W.2d 156 (1999), 96-3393.

103.65 AnnotationAn occupation must be listed as a prohibited employment in rules adopted by the Department of Workforce Development under s. 103.66 for there to be absolute liability. Perra v. Menomonee Mutual Insurance Co., 2000 WI App 215, 239 Wis. 2d 26, 619 N.W.2d 123, 00-0184.

103.65 AnnotationA minor who paid an entry fee to participate in a featured truck race at a raceway was not an employee of the raceway. Olson v. Auto Sport, Inc., 2002 WI App 206, 257 Wis. 2d. 298, 651 N.W.2d 328, 01-2938.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1981–2002 · leading case: Beard v. Lee Enter., Inc., 591 N.W.2d 156 (Wis. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Beard v. Lee Enter., Inc., 591 N.W.2d 156 (Wis. 1999). · cites it 8× “21 (1), The Tribune had an employer/employee relationship with Anthony.”

Fire Ins. Exch. v. Cincinnati Ins., 2000 WI App 82 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 12× “02 (1993-94), 2 and (3) liability of RCHS, pursuant to the child labor laws, Wis. Stat. § 103.65 . 3 RCHS denied the claims and, as an affirmative defense, it asserted that Kuchelmeister's mother waived any claim he might have had by the Volunteer Workers Agreement and Release…”

Perra v. Menomonee Mut. Ins., 2000 WI App 215 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 20× “The circuit court held that a minor cannot maintain a cause of action under Wis. Stat. § 103.65 (1997-98) 1 for absolute liability when the Department of Workforce Development (DWD) has not listed the minor's employment at the time of injury as a prohibited employment pursuant…”

D.L. Ex Rel. Friederichs v. Huebner, 329 N.W.2d 890 (Wis. 1983). “This holding comports with the public policy of this state of protecting children against employment dangerous or prejudicial to their life, health, safety, or welfare, sec. 103.65(1), Stats. 1979-80, and is in accord with the prior decisions of this court.”

McGarrity v. Welch Plumbing Co., 312 N.W.2d 37 (Wis. 1981). “” 4 Sec. 103.65, Stats. 1969, provides as follows: *421 “103.”

Olson v. Auto Sport, Inc., 2002 WI App 206 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 22× “His parents, James and Connie Olson, commenced this wrongful death action against Auto *301 Sport, contending that Auto Sport had illegally employed James or otherwise permitted James to work within the meaning of and in violation of Wisconsin's child labor laws, Wis. Stat. §…”

— Wis. Stat. § 103.65(1) — 3 cases

Fire Ins. Exch. v. Cincinnati Ins., 2000 WI App 82 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000). “02 (1993-94), 2 and (3) liability of RCHS, pursuant to the child labor laws, Wis. Stat. § 103.65 . 3 RCHS denied the claims and, as an affirmative defense, it asserted that Kuchelmeister's mother waived any claim he might have had by the Volunteer Workers Agreement and Release…”

Olson v. Auto Sport, Inc., 2002 WI App 206 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “His parents, James and Connie Olson, commenced this wrongful death action against Auto *301 Sport, contending that Auto Sport had illegally employed James or otherwise permitted James to work within the meaning of and in violation of Wisconsin's child labor laws, Wis. Stat. §…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.