[nabs-l] The Subminimum Wage Issue

Arielle Silverman arielle71 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 3 04:11:08 UTC 2014


Mike,
How do we know who's able to do the job and who's not? Walgreens
employees showed they were able to do the job because Walgreens gave
them a chance. Some of them were deemed "unemployable" before
Walgreens gave them a chance. If employees are never given a chance
how can they possibly prove or demonstrate their productivity?

It's possible that Walgreens screens some folks out if they are very
severely disabled. Would such folks be offered subminimum wage jobs?
Maybe. But I would contend that having a subminimum wage job isn't
much better than having a volunteer job, and could perhaps be more
degrading. If someone tries for a minimum-wage job but after a trial
period proves they can't handle the responsibilities, why not offer
them a volunteer unpaid position, or enroll them in an unpaid creative
arts program where they can enjoy themselves and develop a real
interest they may have? If a subminimum wage isn't enough for any kind
of meaningful purchasing or financial independence then what's the
point of getting it?

Arielle

On 4/2/14, Arielle Silverman <arielle71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andy and all,
>
> First, the article you describe about the employees hanging clothes
> referred to Sheila Lieglande and her husband (don't recall his name).
> The article did not mention any disabilities besides blindness. I
> actually know Sheila from another NFB list, and I know that she and
> her blind husband have successfully raised a son on their own. So even
> if they do have additional disabilities, if they are capable of
> parenting a child to adulthood without outside intervention, then I
> would contend they should be capable of attaining minimum-wage or
> higher employment and being supported toward that goal. Sheila's story
> seems to be one example of a high-functioning person who is being paid
> subminimum wage (and many folks with both blindness and CP can be
> quite high-functioning). I suspect the NFB is focusing on all
> disabilities because partnering with other disability groups brings a
> lot more attention to the issue and makes it a much broader one than
> just focusing on the blind.
>
> Second, I could write a novel about the fallacy of those productivity
> tests, but instead of doing that let me try to argue against their use
> as concisely as I can. I would first ask why disabled employees are
> being tested in this manner while non-disabled employees are not? If
> all employees were paid according to their score on productivity
> tests, I suspect that overall wages would decrease and a good chunk of
> our labor force would make less than minimum wage. The very act of
> holding an entire group of people to a different standard because of a
> characteristic they have, like a disability, is the definition of
> prejudice and discrimination. Sometimes discrimination is justified,
> but I don't think there is clear evidence that disabled people, as a
> whole, are less productive than those without disabilities; in fact
> some would argue the opposite. Proponents of subminimum wages seem to
> assume a priori that disabled employees are less productive, but
> without subjecting all employees to productivity tests, we really
> don't know. Moreover, there are a myriad of psychological reasons why
> employees might perform worse on a timed test than they would in a
> real employment situation. Finally, there are probably a lot of
> disabled people who are not very productive in assembly-line kinds of
> jobs, but who would be tremendously productive if they were able to
> find jobs that better fit their particular skills and interests. I
> suspect that if the only job I was encouraged to do was hang clothes
> or tune pianos, I wouldn't be very productive at those things because
> those just aren't things I'm personally good at. There are some other
> things I'm much better at and I'm grateful that I had people in my
> life encouraging me to get an education and develop the skills and
> interests I do have. For people with intellectual and developmental
> disabilities, often their "productivity" is artificially set by
> guardians and others in their lives rather than by their own
> aptitudes. A disabled child might be perfectly capable of walking, but
> if doctors tell  their parents they won't walk and the parents never
> provide the support they need to walk, they won't walk. The same
> process can play out in employment and, tragically, often does.
> Again, please read the article about Walgreens. It shows that a
> company who made the investment to pay its disabled employees equal
> wages did not have to lay off anyone and in fact is expanding its
> model to include more disabled employees after they proved themselves
> and their productivity.
>
> I used to have a more moderate position about subminimum wages, but I
> read a couple of very compelling posts from NABS president Sean Whalen
> that convinced me to take a more extreme stance. Sean was paid $4 per
> hour at a summer job just because he is blind, without other
> disabilities. I have known Sean personally for several years and can
> promise you he was and is perfectly capable of contributing at a level
> equal to his sighted peers. He is now a Harvard law student. I will
> find one of his posts in the archives and forward it along because he
> addresses the economic side of the issue better than I possibly can.
> There are many many people with multiple disabilities who may not be
> as articulate as Sean is but who still deserve the dignity of a
> guaranteed minimum wage that the rest of the public gets. Sadly, in
> many cases their parents and guardians buy into the notion that these
> disabled people cannot be as productive and that subminimum wage is
> their only option for employment. It is long past time to change that.
>
> Arielle
>
> On 4/2/14, Andy <musicproandy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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