[Ct-nfb] FW: [State-affiliate-leadership-list] Goodwill Asserts: The Federation Refutes

Wed Nov 28 23:04:06 UTC 2012

From: State-affiliate-leadership-list
[mailto:state-affiliate-leadership-list-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
Lewis, Anil
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 3:29 PM
To: Affiliate Presidents (state-affiliate-leadership-list at nfbnet.org); NFB
Chapter Presidents discussion list (chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org)
Subject: [State-affiliate-leadership-list] Goodwill Asserts: The Federation
Refutes

>From the National Association of Blind Students - Fall Slate 2012

http://www.nfb.org/braille-monitor

Goodwill Asserts: The Federation Refutes

By Anil Lewis 

>From the Editor: Anil Louis is the Director of Strategic Communications at
the National Federation of the Blind headquarters in Baltimore. Here he
shares with us why he is so passionate about getting equal pay for workers
with disabilities. 

The members of the National Federation of the Blind have been fighting for
years to repeal Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which
is a legal provision that permits employers to pay workers with disabilities
less than the federal minimum wage. Some workers with disabilities are
receiving subminimum wages as low as 3 cents per hour. With the introduction
of the Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities Act, HR 3086, we are ever
closer to achieving our goal. The key to our success will be in our efforts
to educate the public about this exploitive provision. We have chosen to
highlight Goodwill International's use of the subminimum wage practice
because they are a household name that most people associate with workers
with disabilities, but most are unaware that they pay some of their workers
with disabilities as little as 22 cents per hour. The following description
from Goodwill International asserts their position on the merit of Section
14(c) of the FLSA. 

  _____  

As anyone who has ever known the satisfaction of achieving a professional
goal knows, there is an intrinsic value to working that cannot be denied. We
innately crave purpose, a sense of accomplishment, self-respect fostered by
accomplishment, and acknowledgement for our contributions to life around us.
Yet today, for nearly 80 percent of Americans with disabilities,
opportunities to feel valued and fulfilled through meaningful employment do
not exist. The number of people with disabilities not accessing the
workforce would be greater if not for a provision of the Fair Labor
Standards Act, which allows employers to utilize a Special Minimum Wage
Certificate to hire those with the most severe disabilities. This provision
has led to the creation of jobs for hundreds of thousands of people with
multiple physical and mental disabilities who report to work each day,
flourish in friendships with their supervisors and co-workers, delight in
mastering new tasks and learning new skills, and take pride in their "jobs
well done." Seven thousand of these Americans work at Goodwills across the
country. 

  _____  

So many people read this statement and they are convinced that Goodwill is
the answer to the plight of people with disabilities. We maintain that if
Goodwill's use of the Section 14(c) provision is the answer, someone is not
asking the right questions. Why doesn't Goodwill disclose that they pay many
of their workers with disabilities less than the federal minimum wage? When
did we as Americans get to a point where it is considered compassionate to
set such low expectations for our citizens? How many of us would consider it
compassionate for Goodwill, or any employer, to use this same language to
justify paying nondisabled workers' wages below the federal minimum wage?
How many times must our ignorance allow us to deny rights and privileges to
a population of people based on a characteristic? If employment at
subminimum wages under Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act is the
answer to the unemployment problem of people with disabilities, then why is
it not being touted as the employment solution for the many nondisabled
American citizens unemployed today? Moreover, if it is truly a solution, why
after over seventy years of access to this unreasonable provision, is there
still such a disparity between the employment of the nondisabled as compared
to the disabled? Goodwill's assertions do not support the use of this
unfair, discriminatory, immoral provision. 

Goodwill asserts that the Section 14(c) provision is a tool used to assist
workers with disabilities obtain employment, and Subminimum wage work
affords individuals with significant disabilities an opportunity to gain
work experience that they otherwise may not have. However, the data shows
that subminimum wage employment teaches skills that must be unlearned in
order for a person to obtain competitive employment. Therefore, rather than
preparing a person for competitive integrated employment, subminimum wage
employment perpetuates on-going subminimum wage employment. 

Goodwill asserts that Section 14(c) permits their affiliates to obtain
Special Wage Certificates authorizing the payment of special minimum wages
to workers who have disabilities for the work being performed. The work
performed in these situations revolve around the work the employer needs
performed in order to operate their business, not the work that meets the
employee's unique skills, interests and abilities. If the employer needs
envelopes stuffed, the work is envelope stuffing. If the employer needs
widgets assembled, the work is widget assembly. They promote this work as
job training. If true training is to be provided, trainees should be
performing work that takes advantage of their unique skills and abilities
assisting them to acquire productive job skills and to secure competitive
integrated employment. 

Goodwill asserts that they are in full compliance with federal and state
rules. However, compliance with a discriminatory act is not compliance, it
is complacency. Many people were complacent in their compliance with the
laws of slavery, their compliance with the denial of a woman's right to
vote, and other discriminatory provisions founded in ignorance that have
denied equal rights to individuals based on a characteristic. We, like the
abolitionists and suffragettes, truly represent the population of
disenfranchised citizens with disabilities and we will not stop until we
gain true equality with the rights and responsibilities it entails. 

Goodwill asserts that every person working under a Special Wage Certificate
chooses to do so. There is no real choice when the options are to work at
subminimum wages or to not work at all. Others assert that workers with
disabilities choose to work at subminimum wages in order to maintain their
public benefits. This is a sad commentary on their belief in our capacity
and desire to be fully participating citizens. Provide the proper training
and supports and people with disabilities will demonstrate the capacity for
competitive employment and choose to work at the federal minimum wage or
higher. Eliminate access barriers and Create real opportunities for
competitive employment and people with disabilities will choose to be
beneficial participating members of society rather than beneficiaries. 

Goodwill asserts that the severity of their disability precludes these
workers from pursuing other employment options. This statement has been
proven to be false time and time again. There are many examples of
individuals with significant disabilities that the workshops felt they could
not employ that have gone on to secure competitive employment. However,
hundreds of thousands of other individuals have received similar
unemployable designations from entities lacking the expertise to provide
proper training and support. As long as it is legal and profitable, these
otherwise employable individuals with disabilities will continue to serve as
the cash cows for employers that do not believe in their capacity,
condemning them to a life-time of subminimum wage employment. 

Goodwill asserts that people with disabilities lack the capacity for
competitive employment. They are joined by other service providers that have
learned to profit on this perspective. We assert that any entity that makes
this assertion lacks the expertise to provide quality training and
employment services to people with disabilities. We are joined by other
organizations of people with disabilities that wish to shift to an enlighten
paradigm where all people with disabilities are recognized as competitive
productive employees. 

Goodwill asserts that hundreds of thousands of individuals will lose access
to paid work experience. It is true that there are over 300,000 people
documented as being paid under the Section 14(c) Special Wage Certificate.
However, it is either ridiculous or enlightening to state that the
elimination of the certificate will result in hundreds of thousands of
individuals losing access to paid work experience. People with disabilities
who are being paid pennies per hour do not have jobs. They cannot lose what
they do not have. Effort should be focused on finding them real jobs that
pay real wages, or focused on training them for such jobs. 

Goodwill states that the workers with disabilities are not regular employees
of Goodwill. This is a philosophical statement that is a true reflection of
their opinion of their employees with disabilities. They attempt to justify
it by stating the workers with disabilities are not held to a particular
productivity standard, when in fact, the workers with disabilities are the
only employees that are truly held to a productivity standard. Section 14(c)
requires time studies, productivity assessments, and related documentation
to justify the payment of commensurate wages. It is a flawed process that
places an undue burden on workers with disabilities. It would be interesting
to see how the nondisabled Goodwill employees would fair under the same
standards and what compensation they would receive based on their
productivity. For example, what if Goodwill executives and management were
paid a commensurate wage based on the number of employees they assist in
obtaining competitive intergraded employment. If we take into consideration
the "re-work" of all the individuals they are unable to assist. The managers
and executives would receive subminimum wages. 

Overall, Goodwill asserts that people with disabilities would be
unemployable if not for the Section 14(c) provision. This is simply false.
Many people with all types of disabilities, when provided the proper
training and supports, obtain and maintain competitive integrated employment
every day. If Goodwill feels these individuals are unable to be productive
employees, despite the "quality" employment services Goodwill provides, they
should not be in the business of providing employment services for this
population. Let those organizations who believe in the capacity of people
with disabilities speak for those with disabilities. Let those service
providers that have the talent and expertise to provide quality employment
opportunities for people with disabilities be responsible for providing
quality employment services. 

We refute Goodwill's assertions, and make our own assertion that the
financial benefit to the employer outweighs Goodwill's commitment to workers
with disabilities. Goodwill receives public and philanthropic dollars
because the public believes they do "good work" for people with
disabilities. However, these substantial proceeds are being used to support
a business model where executives are compensated at higher than industry
rates on the backs of workers with disabilities being paid pennies per hour.
In any other context, people raising their standard of life while taking
advantage of others would be considered exploitation. Why, in the case of
workers with disabilities, is this considered an "opportunity to feel valued
and fulfilled through meaningful employment?" If the revenue is generated on
behalf of people with disabilities, then people with disabilities should
benefit. Not through glorified daycare veiled in compassion, but through the
provision of real training and support services that lead to competitive
integrated employment. Let Goodwill refute that. 

Mr. Anil Lewis, M.P.A.
Director of Strategic Communications

"Eliminating Subminimum Wages for People with Disabilities" 

http://www.nfb.org/fairwages

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
200 East Wells Street at Jernigan Place
Baltimore, Maryland   21230

(410) 659-9314 ext. 2374 (Voice)

(410) 685-5653 (FAX)
Email: alewis at nfb.org
Web: www.nfb.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/attachments/20121128/e84dfa0b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00159.txt
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/attachments/20121128/e84dfa0b/attachment.txt>