The autonomy argument also works to expose the contradictions that play
into the regulation of labor. Labor regulation in the United States, for example,
once placed restrictions on female labor in part to protect the "frailty" of
women and the perceived need to maintain traditional gender roles. 91 This
protectionism contrasts starkly with the freedom-of-contract backdrop of
Lochner v. New York, which denounced statutes "limiting the hours in which
grown and intelligent men may labor to earn their living. '"92 The Labor Standards
Act (FLSA) of 1938 similarly covers only a portion of the American
workforce, exempting large categories of "white-collar" work from its coverage.
93 By 1996, this resulted in the exclusion of 35.1% of the workforce from
FLSA regulation.
The blue-collar and white-collar contrast also maps onto debates over immigrant
labor. In this context, some scholars have argued that labor laws have
not done enough for some sectors of the immigrant labor population. These
scholars focused on "blue-collar" examples in advocating for greater protection.
Donna Young, calling for greater regulation of immigrants who work
as "domestics" within private homes, juxtaposes the picture of a Sri Lankan
woman who immigrated to Canada to work as a maid with the story of a
Canadian woman who immigrated to the United States to work as a law
professor.95 Young advocates greater protection for the maid but does not
feel similarly moved to advocate for greater regulations for the law professor.
Under an autonomy perspective, this disjuncture in Young's description
of immigrant labor would reflect an unfair paternalism toward the maid.
The law professor may be subject to long hours and poor working conditions although her work may not be as harmful to her health as the long
hours of her counterparts in corporate law firms-but the law professor is
seen as capable of making her own decision to engage in such work