[nabs-l] The Subminimum Wage Issue

Arielle Silverman arielle71 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 3 02:15:24 UTC 2014


Hi Mike,

I might write more about this when I have more time, but the short
answer is: (1) some employees are being paid subminimum wages who are
blind with no other disabilities, and (2) how productive an employee
can be is highly subjective. Many employees with developmental
disabilities are thought to be less productive than they actually can
be, and a lot of what affects productivity depends on the type of job,
the employer's expectations, and the training and support that the
disabled employee gets. It is not at all obvious that disabled
employees cannot be productive enough to justify paying them minimum
wage. Companies may lay off employees if forced to pay them minimum
wage, but only if they have prejudiced attitudes against the disabled
and falsely believe their disabled employees won't be productive
enough.

I would encourage you to read the excellent article Anil Lewis sent
out about how Walgreen's employs a large number of employees with
developmental disabilities on their production lines, at minimum wage
or higher. Their experience has been very positive and they contend
that including the disabled employees as equal-status participants on
their staff has helped the morale and efficiency of their entire team.

Arielle

On 4/2/14, Michael Forzano <michaeldforzano at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've been hearing a lot about the subminimum wage issue that the NFB
> is involved in, and the NFB's position honestly doesn't make sense to
> me.
>
> My understanding is that the people being paid subminimum wages have
> disabilities in addition to blindness that prevent them from doing the
> job as productively as someone being paid minimum wage, such as
> cerebral palsy. If subminimum wages are eliminated, it seems pretty
> clear to me that the employers would lay off the people in question.
> After all, if you suddenly have to pay an employee hundreds of times
> more than you were paying them for the same amount of
> work/productivity, I don't think you'd have much choice.
>
> People being paid suvminimum wage are likely in that situation because
> they have no other choice, that is, their disabilities prevent them
> from working even a minimum wage job. If the NFB succeeds, these
> people will likely have no job at all and be forced to spend their
> lives sitting at home on SSI. How is that helping them? at least right
> now, they have a job, something to keep them busy.
>
> I'm curious to see how the NFB is arguing against this because it
> seems pretty clear to me from a business perspective. As much as the
> employers may want to continue to employ these people it just won't
> make sense.
>
> Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nabs-l:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>




More information about the NABS-L mailing list