[nabs-l] The Subminimum Wage Issue

Thu Apr 3 18:14:56 UTC 2014

If you are not disabled, you are going to tend to do a job you are relatively good at.  At the very least, you 
will not likely work in a job to which you are not suited.  You are not expected to perform well in whatever job 
you do.  The minimum wage waiver takes away any incentive to 
find disabled people work that they are good ad.  If john has CP and can't fold as many leaflets in an hour as can 
someone without CP, just pay him less, don't find him a job that is less dependent on physical dextarity.  Maybe 
John with CP has other strengths that are less affected by his 
disability, but this is less likely to be considered since he can be paid less for doing a job he isn't well-
suited.  As a blind person, there are jobs that my lack of vision would make me a poor employee.  That is true of 
any 
disability.  Our disability can have an effect upon what we're good at.  The minimum wage waiver takes away the 
need to try to find jobs that match the persons ability.

In addition, while blind people are less affected by this provision now, it was much more common to pay many blind 
people in sheltered workshops less than the minimum wage not that long ago.  When that practice was more common, 
there were a number of documented instances where time studies were manipulated to cause the individual to earn a 
lower wage than would have otherwise been the case.  Finally, remember that most of the entities that pay less 
than 
the minimum wage get preferential treatment in bidding for government contracts.  Many are charities who also get 
donations and pay fewer taxes.  These advantages were given to them to compensate for the fact that there are some 
workers who are 
going to need extra training.  There is no differentiation between people who are working toward compettitive 
employment and those for whom it has been decided they can't work compettitively.  It could be that in extreme 
cases there will need to be some alternative status, and that's why what we've called for has a three year phase-
out period for nonprofits.  

The law is now too brought, provides too few incentives to increase productivity or to look at how well matched a 
person is with his or her job, and provides too few checks and balances to insure that employees are treated 
fairly.  There are something like fifty or more organizations representing other disabled groups who are in 
support of this legislation so this isn't just us.  There have also been some articles in the past showing how 
certain other 
groups have been mistreated under this provision.  Of course, the fact that this provision doesn't provide real 
incentives to increase a workers productivity doesn't mean that some of the agencies involved are not trying to do 
the right thing.  Still, we need something better, and while many of us are not affected right now, we have been 
in the past and we could be again in the future.

Best regards,

Steve Jacobson

On Wed, 2 Apr 2014 23:10:03 -0400, Andy 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/steve.jacobson%40visi.com