[nabs-l] The Subminimum Wage Issue

[Andy]

I thought I'd chime in here.
Arielle, you say:
"Some employees are being paid subminimum wages who are blind with no
other disabilities."
If this is true, I'm baffled as to why NFB is not using this approach
for lobbying.  Every article I've ever seen has discussed multiple
disabilities.  I think the NFB would have a stronger argument if they
could find people with blindness as the only disability, and could
procure evidence that they were, essentially, being exploited.  I read
an article, for instance, about a woman with cerebral palsy and
blindness.  The highest paycheck she earned was somewhere around $18.
I've read many other such articles that detail similar cases.

You also say that productivity is subjective.  I certainly agree.
However, according to various articles, companies have been performing
tests to try and find an acceptable salary based on the capabilities
of the employees at their specific jobs.  I would argue that employers
are doing the best they can with the employees they have working for
them.  In one article I read, for instance, a woman's job was to hang
clothes.  Her salary was adjusted based on how well she did the job -
essentially, her productivity.

Finally, you mention companies having prejudiced attitudes towards the
disabled.  I disagree.  If these certificates were declared unlawful,
then, from a business perspective, the only option is to lay off the
employees.  If an employee makes, say, an average of only a few
pennies per hour, paying that employee the federal (or state) minimum
wage is an exponential increase in their salary.  This is obviously
fantastic news for the employees; however, the business can't possibly
sustain that model.  Thus, the only option is to lay off the
employees.  I'm failing to understand how this helps them in any
significant way; indeed, I would argue that, without a job, they would
surely be hurting.


On 4/2/14, Arielle Silverman <arielle71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/musicproandy%40gmail.com
>