While New York politicians scratch their heads over how to create jobs, one solution is obvious: Get out of the way. Lawmakers could start by killing licensing requirements that have nothing to do with public health or safety.
Too many people pounding the pavement in search of work findthat acing an interview isn’t enough. In more and more jobs, you must first get the government’s permission in the form of a license, which often means months (if not years) of mandated schooling and training, as well as paying fees and passing exams.
In the 1950s, only one in 20 Americans needed the government’s permission to work. Today, it’s nearly one in three.
Does it really make sense that a cosmetologist or massage therapist must have 233 days of education and experience to get the state’s blessing to work?
How about a veterinary technologist needing two years of schooling — not to be a veterinarian, mind you, but someone who assists a veterinarian?
Emergency medical technicians in New York — who literally hold human lives in their hands — are only required to have 35 days of training to do their job.
The takeaway here is not that New York needs tougher licensing requirements for EMTs but that it should lower the heavier licensing burdens it places on the 13 other occupations.
A recent report by the Institute for Justice, License to Work, ranks New York the 19th-worst state when it comes to licensure burdens. Imagine how difficult it is to meet these requirements while working another job; imagine an unemployed person trying to live off savings or family members as he or she jumps through these government-mandated hoops.
Wouldn’t you be better off working all that time, rather than working to get permission to work?
Research provides little evidence that licensing protects public health and safety or improves products and services. Instead, it increases consumer costs and reduces opportunities for workers.
For example, would-be barbers in New York must suffer through 884 days of training and three exams. Are men’s haircuts here so much better than those in New Hampshire or Wyoming, which requires less than a quarter of the training for barbers?
The Empire State even forces would-be manicurists to get 58 days of training and pass two exams to win a license; Alaska demands only about three days, Iowa about nine. Face it. There’s no epidemic of hazardous manicurists outside New York.
So why do requirements like these exist? Well, trade groups often lobby the Legislature for laws to protect themselves from competition, keeping newcomers out and prices high.
But entrenched special interests and their legislative cronies shouldn’t be the ones who decide who gets a job. Consumers and the workers themselves — not the government — are in the best position to decide who can pursue and succeed in an honest occupation.
Instead of bickering over whether to raise the minimum wage — which would likely eliminate jobs — the Legislature should enact some real change by deregulating occupations it now needlessly licenses.
Erica Smith is an attorney with the Institute for Justice and a New York native.