<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23543">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV align=center><B>Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:<BR>Priorities for
the 113th Congress, SECOND Session<BR></B> <BR></DIV>
<DIV> <BR>The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) is the oldest and
largest nationwide organization of blind people. As the voice of the nation’s
blind, we represent the collective views of the 1.3 million blind people
throughout the United States. All of our leaders and the vast majority of our
members are blind, but anyone can participate in our movement.
<BR> <BR> <BR><B>The NFB’s three legislative initiatives for 2014 are:
<BR></B> <BR>· <B>The Fair Wages
for Workers with Disabilities Act (HR 831)<BR></B>Section 14(c) of the Fair
Labor Standards Act allows employers to pay workers with disabilities less than
the minimum wage because of the false assumption that they are less productive
than non-disabled workers. This antiquated provision breeds low expectations and
discourages disabled Americans from reaching their full potential. HR 831
responsibly phases out the use of the 14(c) Special Wage Certificates, ending
the era of segregated, subminimum wage
work.<BR>· <B>The Technology,
Education and Accessibility in College and Higher Education Act (TEACH) (HR
3505)<BR></B>Electronic instructional materials have replaced traditional
methods of learning in postsecondary education, but the overwhelming majority of
e-books, courseware, web content, and other technology are inaccessible to
students with print disabilities. The law mandates equal access in the
classroom, but fails to provide a prescription to schools for how that applies
to technology. The TEACH Act creates accessibility guidelines for electronic
instructional materials that will guide the market, give clarity to schools, and
protect blind students’ rights to critical course material.
<BR>· <B>The Air Carrier Technology
Accessibility Act (ACTA)<BR></B>Passenger interaction with technology is a
central component of air travel. The Air Carrier Access Act prohibits
discrimination on the basis of disability by airlines, but it was written before
the emergence of web sites, kiosks, and mobile apps. These tools are all
inaccessible to blind travelers despite readily-available solutions, resulting
in segregation and substandard service. ACTA calls for all technology-based air
travel services to be accessible to blind passengers.
<BR> <BR> <BR>The real problem of blindness is not the loss of
eyesight; it is the misunderstanding and lack of information that exist. Given
the proper training and opportunity, blindness can be reduced to a physical
nuisance. Americans have a strong philosophy of equality, but there are profound
flaws in the application of our doctrine as it applies to people with
disabilities. These bills help close the gaps. We urge Congress to protect our
rights in the workplace, classroom, and air travel by supporting these
legislative initiatives. <BR> <BR></DIV>
<DIV align=center><B><BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>The Fair Wages
for Workers with Disabilities Act of 2013 (HR
831)<BR> <BR> <BR>Current labor laws unjustly prohibit workers with
disabilities <BR>from reaching their full vocational and socioeconomic
potential.<BR></DIV>
<DIV> <BR>Written in 1938, Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) discriminates against people with disabilities.</B> The provision allows
the Secretary of Labor to grant Special Wage Certificates to employers,
permitting them to pay workers with disabilities less than the minimum wage.
This is based on the false assumption that disabled workers are less productive
than nondisabled workers, but successful employment models have emerged in the
last seventy-five years to assist people with significant disabilities in
acquiring the job skills needed for competitive work. Section 14(c) sustains
segregated subminimum wage workshops that exploit disabled workers, paying some
only pennies an hour for mundane, repetitive tasks. <BR> <BR><B>This
discriminatory policy is not necessary for the successful operation of a
disability-training program.</B> In reality, the overwhelming majority of
Goodwill Industries Affiliates, and all but one of the National Industries for
the Blind (NIB) affiliates, operates successfully without paying subminimum
wages. Countless entities have successfully transitioned their subminimum wage
business model of low expectations to an innovative model of competitive
integrated training and employment, meeting the growing needs of mainstream
employers with the proven talents of employees with disabilities. Only outdated
workshops argue they will be unable to manage worthwhile programs without the
use of the Special Wage Certificate. <BR> <BR><B>The subminimum wage model
fails to provide adequate training or employment to disabled workers. </B>Data
shows that less<B> </B>than five percent of the 400,000 workers with
disabilities in segregated subminimum wage workshops will transition into
competitive integrated work. Moreover, research shows that the subminimum wage
model costs more but actually produces less! In fact, workers must unlearn the
useless skills they acquire in order to obtain meaningful employment. It is poor
policy to reward such failed programs with wage exemptions, preferential federal
contracts, and public and charitable contributions.<BR> <BR><B>After 75
years of demonstrated failure, it is time to invest in proven, effective models
for employment. </B>This discriminatory model sustains the same segregated
subminimum wage environments that existed in 1938. Section 14(c) has proven to
be extremely ineffective and offers no incentive for mainstream employers to
hire people with disabilities. The Employment First Movement promotes new
concepts such as “supported” or “customized” employment that are successful at
producing competitive integrated employment outcomes for individuals with
significant disabilities that were previously thought to be
unemployable.<BR><B>The Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities Act of 2013:
<BR></B> <BR><B>Discontinues the issuance of new Special Wage
Certificates.</B> The Secretary of Labor will no longer issue Special Wage
Certificates to new applicants. <BR> <BR><B>Phases out the use of Special
Wage Certificates over a three-year period.</B> Using the following schedule,
entities will be able to transition to the proven-model of competitive
integrated employment: <BR><A
name=OLE_LINK6></A>· Private
for-profit entities will have one year <A name=OLE_LINK5></A>to transition;
<BR>· Public or governmental entities
will have two years to transition; and
<BR>· Nonprofit entities will have
three years to transition. (These entities make up ninety-five percent of the
Special Wage Certificate holders.)<BR> <BR><B>Repeals Section 14(c) of the
FLSA. </B>Three years after the law is enacted, this practice of paying disabled
workers subminimum wages will be officially abolished. This will result in the
elimination of segregated, subminimum wage workshops and in the development of
integrated environments that encourage people with disabilities to reach their
full vocational and socioeconomic potential.
<BR> <BR> <BR><B> <BR></DIV>
<DIV align=center>PROTECT EQUALITY IN THE WORKPLACE<BR> <BR>Cosponsor HR
831: Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities
Act.<BR></B> <BR><B> <BR>For more information
contact:<BR> <BR></B>National Federation of the Blind<BR>Anil Lewis,
Director of Advocacy and Policy <BR>Phone: (410) 659-9314, Extension 2374.
Email: <A href="mailto:alewis@nfb.org">alewis@nfb.org</A><BR>Rose Sloan,
Government Affairs Specialist<BR>Phone: (410) 659-9314, Extension 2441. Email:
<A href="mailto:rsloan@nfb.org">rsloan@nfb.org</A> <BR> <BR><B>To
co-sponsor contact:<BR><BR></B>Scot Malvaney, Legislative
Director<BR>Congressman Gregg Harper (R-MS)<BR>Phone:
(202)-225-5031. Email: <A
href="mailto:scot.malvaney@mail.house.gov">scot.malvaney@mail.house.gov</A>
<BR> <BR> <BR><I><A name=_GoBack></A>HR831 is supported by over sixty
organizations of people with disabilities and employers of workers with
disabilities. For more information visit: <A name=_GoBack></A><A
href="http://www.nfb.org/fair-wages" eudora="autourl">www.nfb.or</A> <A
href="http://www.nfb.org/fair-wages" eudora="autourl">g/fair-wages</A>
<BR><BR></I></DIV>
<DIV> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR></DIV>
<DIV align=center><B>Technology, Education, and Accessibility in College and
Higher Education Act (TEACH Act) H.R. 3505<BR> <BR> <BR>Colleges and
universities need an education about accessibility.<BR>Students with
disabilities need accessibility to get an education.<BR></DIV>
<DIV> <BR>Technology has fundamentally changed the education system.
</B>The scope of instructional materials used to facilitate the teaching and
learning process at institutions of higher education has expanded. Curricular
content comes in the form of digital books, PDFs, webpages, etc.; and most of
this content is delivered through digital databases, learning management
systems, and applications. Traditional print materials are inherently
inaccessible to disabled students, but technology creates opportunities to
expand the circle of participation. These opportunities are missed when the
majority of these materials are inaccessible to students with disabilities.
<BR><B> <BR>The use of inaccessible technology by institutions of higher
education is a violation of law. </B>Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and
Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibit discrimination
on the basis of disability, but these laws were written before technology
permeated the classroom. In 2010, the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education
issued guidance to institutions of higher education clarifying that the use of
inaccessible technology is a form of discrimination. In the four years since,
several of the country’s leading institutions have faced legal action for
continuing to use inaccessible technology. <BR><B> <BR>Accessibility
solutions are widely available, but schools and manufacturers are resisting.
</B>A 2009 Congressionally-authorized study found that, despite innovations in
text-to-speech, refreshable Braille, and other accessibility features that
create promise for equal access, there is still persistent unmet need.
Developers claim there is not enough demand to justify making accessible
products, and schools claim to have limited options and a lack of knowledge
about accessibility to properly guide procurement. Because of this blame-game,
developers are moving too slowly and schools are openly violating the
law.<BR><B> <BR>Guidelines are sorely needed to guide the market and lift
burdens off of disabled students. </B>While schools and manufacturers are
waiting for the other to take action,<B> </B>blind students are facing
insurmountable barriers to their education. No student can be expected to
succeed in college if he or she is denied access to course material, and yet the
solutions available to remedy this discrimination are ignored!
Universally-accepted accessibility guidelines will give direction to
manufacturers, clarity to schools about how to meet their legal obligations
regarding technology, and long-overdue equal access for disabled
students.<BR><B>Technology, Education, and Accessibility in College and Higher
Education Act: <BR></B> <BR><B>Develops accessibility guidelines for
instructional materials and related information technology.</B> The Access Board
will consult experts and stakeholders to develop functional performance criteria
for electronic instructional materials and related information technologies so
that those materials are usable by individuals with disabilities. The guidelines
will serve as a flexible prescription for accessibility for both developers and
institutions of higher education.<BR> <BR><B>Provides incentive for
institutions of higher education to follow the guidelines. </B>Institutions of
higher education that use technology that conforms with the guidelines will be
deemed in compliance with the provisions of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act and Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act that pertain to
schools’ use of technology.<BR><B>Establishes a minimum usability standard for
all technology in the classroom. </B>Institutions of higher education may only
use materials that do not conform to the guidelines if that material allows
disabled students to enjoy the same educational benefits in an equally
integrated and equally effective manner, with substantially equivalent ease of
use as nondisabled students. <BR><B> <BR></B> <BR></DIV>
<DIV align=center><BR><B>PROTECT EQUALITY IN THE
CLASSROOM.<BR> <BR>Cosponsor the Technology, Education, and
Accessibility<BR> in College and Higher Education Act (TEACH Act) HR
3505.<BR></DIV>
<DIV> <BR></DIV></B>
<DIV align=center><BR><B> <BR>For more information contact:<BR></B>Lauren
McLarney, Government Affairs Specialist, National Federation of the
Blind<BR>Phone: (410) 659-9314, Extension 2207. Email: <A
href="mailto:lmclarney@nfb.org">lmclarney@nfb.org</A><BR> <BR><B>To
cosponsor contact:<BR></B> <BR>Kevin James, Legislative Assistant,
Congressman Tom Petri (R-WI)<BR>Phone: (202) 225-2476. Email: <A
href="mailto:kevin.james@mail.house.gov">kevin.james@mail.house.gov</A>
<BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR><I>The TEACH Act
is the result of collaboration between the NFB and the Association of American
Publishers, the leading trade association of the U.S. publishing industry.
<BR><BR></I></DIV>
<DIV> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR></DIV>
<DIV align=center><B>Air Carrier Technology Accessibility
Act<BR> <BR> <BR>To allow blind and low vision individuals equal
access <BR>to technology used in all phases of air travel.<BR></DIV>
<DIV> <BR> <BR>Despite anti-discrimination laws, airlines continue to
deny access to blind passengers. </B>In 1986 Congress passed the Air Carrier
Access Act (ACAA) to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability during
all phases of air travel, including purchasing a ticket, checking-in, boarding
and deplaning, receiving in-flight services, and assistance getting around the
airport. Air travel has changed significantly since 1986, and most services now
require interaction with technology; however airlines have failed to honor the
ACAA by ensuring that those services are usable by blind travelers. The
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) also prohibits discrimination on the basis
of disability in public transportation, but because of unique security issues in
air travel, airlines were explicitly excluded from the law, compounding the
problems facing blind air travelers. Technology creates opportunity to expand
the circle of participation, so the law needs to be updated to capture the
prospect and ensure equal access.<BR><B> <BR>Passenger interaction with
technology is a fundamental requirement of air travel. </B>Passengers have
multiple options of accessing flight information that replace endless phone
calls and check-in lines. For booking and accessing boarding passes, flyers use
web sites, mobile apps, or kiosks. Mobile apps provide real-time updates on
departure and arrival information, and even make it possible to scan a digital
boarding pass at security check points. On board, passengers can make in-flight
purchases of movies, drinks, or Wi-Fi by using consoles on the seatback in front
of them. Technology enhances the flying experience, and who knows what
innovative tools might emerge in the future? Blind passengers pay the same price
to fly the friendly skies as everyone else, and yet cannot use any of these
services. <BR> <BR><B>Airlines should stop this discrimination by embracing
readily available solutions. </B>Technical criteria for accessible web content
and best practices for mobile apps were released back in 2008, and accessibility
standards for ATMs and usable kiosks have been on the market for years. Rather
than utilize these options and deploy accessible technology, airlines “meet the
needs” of their disabled passengers by offering internet rates over the phone to
those who self-identify as blind and giving priority access to blind flyers in
line. Technology can meet the unfulfilled promise of equal access, yet airlines
choose to use an ineffective method of “access” that relegates blind passengers
to antiquated methods of service. <BR><B> <BR> <BR>The Air Carrier
Technology Accessibility Act:<BR> <BR>Provides equal access throughout the
air travel process by requiring that all methods of booking flights,
checking-in, obtaining boarding passes and making in-flight purchases are
accessible to blind passengers.</B> All newly-created or purchased web content,
airport kiosks, mobile apps and other technology-based services operated by air
carriers will be usable by the blind. <BR><B>Establishes a complaint mechanism
to resolve issues of non-compliance with the Air Carrier Technology
Accessibility Act.<BR></B> <BR></DIV>
<DIV align=center><BR><B>PROTECT EQUALITY IN AIR TRAVEL <BR> <BR>Sponsor
the Air Carrier Technology Accessibility Act <BR></DIV>
<DIV> <BR></DIV></B>
<DIV align=center><BR><B> <BR>For more information contact:<BR></B>Jesse
Hartle<BR>Government Affairs Specialist<BR>National Federation of the
Blind<BR>Phone: (410) 659-9314, Extension 2233. E-mail: <A
href="mailto:jhartle@nfb.org">jhartle@nfb.org</A> <BR> <BR> </DIV>
<P>
<DIV>Sincerely,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Kenneth Chrane</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>