[nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment

[joe harcz Comcast]

We certainly agree one hundred and fifty percent on that Fred!!
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fred Wurtzel" <f.wurtzel at att.net>
To: "'NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List'" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment


> Hi Joe,
>
> I simply say that the best setting is the one that serves the individual 
> the
> best and is their choice.  No one ought to be denied the simple benefit of 
> a
> minimum wage based solely on their disability or any other characteristic.
>
> Warmest Regards,
>
> Fred
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> On Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 5:39 PM
> To: NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment
>
> We open up a can of worms on residential, non-integrated schools like the
> school for the blind. Let me say this and only this on the issue:
>
> I would prefer quality education in the mainstream for all blind kids. 
> But,
> in so many cases including ones I've seen recently the school for the 
> blind
> has been replaced in this county at least by basically non-integrated sped
> schools, local residential schools that are very ill equipped to meet the
> unique instructional needs of those students.
>
> So, from a practical standpoint, and with all the ills of any residential
> school I would never sacrifice basic core educaional opportunities over 
> the
> ersatz notion of mainstreaming for mainstreaming's sake.
>
> As we know some of our blind kids get the resources and quality educators
> they need and the next school district just screws them and passes them
> along to the kids great detriment.
>
> Tragic.
>
> But, back to the fundamentals and of which you, I and Chris and all agree 
> on
> the sheltered shop issue, whether or not we work more for an integrated
> pplacement we all agree that all who work deserve at least a minimum wage.
> In fact I go a step further and think all who work deserve a living wage
> disabled or not.
>
> Peace,
>
> Joe
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fred Wurtzel" <f.wurtzel at att.net>
> To: "'NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List'" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 5:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think we can objectively break down those attributes of the
>> non-integrated
>> setting that make it most attractive and then attempt to find an
>> integrated
>> setting that provides those same attributes.
>>
>> I, absolutely, disagree that integrated is always preferable over
>> non-integrated settings.  The important attribute, to me, is choice. 
>> Each
>> person ought to have a choice of the facility, school, setting, employer
>> that most closely meets their personal needs.  Such dogmatism around an
>> ideology is counter-productive.  Chris and Joe, I am not accusing either
>> of
>> you of these things.  I have simply seen the School for the blind trashed
>> on
>> the ideological principle of inclusion when, in fact, for many students,
>> the
>> included setting is far more restrictive than the residential choice. 
>> You
>> can get me going on this topic without much provocation.
>>
>> This extends to the whole society.  If blind people Republicans, women,
>> Labrador dogs, ethnic groups, each want to create enclaves for their own
>> improvement, more power to them.  We still have rights of free
>> association,
>> I think, unless homeland Security has limited that, too.
>>
>> There is certainly a possible inconsistency with the 14th Amendment when
>> we
>> think about targeted programs, though society, more or less, has agreed 
>> to
>> programs or services targeted at assisting individuals to gain
>> opportunities.  The Rehab Act, IDEA, Enterprise Zones, the farm bill and
>> tax
>> breaks for all kinds of stuff are examples.
>>
>> Warmest Regards,
>>
>> Fred
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org 
>> [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>> On Behalf Of Christine Boone
>> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 4:48 PM
>> To: NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List
>> Subject: [nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment
>>
>> I certainly applaud  any working and living
>> environment with such community social activities as you describe; and 
>> the
>> means to get to and from those activities on a regular basis.  I will
>> always
>> support an integrated setting over a non-integrated one as long as the
>> resulting work life and social life of the individual are consistent with
>> that individuals abilities, capabilities, interests, aptitudes and
>> informed
>> choice.
>>
>> Integrated is always best.  Perhaps I am wrong, and there is a way truly
>> to
>> be sure that persons with disabilities really can be integrated into the
>> competitive workplace in all situations, with the proper supports.
>> Listen,
>> I may be an old dog...getting older all the time, but I remain willing to
>> learn new tricks!  I can not ever close my mind to the possibility that
>> something that I once thought to be impossible or at least highly
>> unlikely,
>> is indeed a possibility.  I'll tell you this, I would be glad enough to 
>> be
>> wrong in thinking that there will always be folks with significant,
>> multiple
>> disabilities for whom a non-integrated employment setting is indeed most
>> appropriate and most satisfactory.
>>
>> Christine
>>  Jun 16, 2012, at 3:21 PM, joe harcz Comcast wrote:
>>
>>> Oops on the June 16 thing. Guess I was getting ahead of myself...Smile.
>>>
>>> I understand the issues you presented yesterday. I do disagree with 
>>> them.
>> But, as you note that was not germane to the issue at hand. My
>> disagreements
>> with the comments you made are complicated as all these issues are but I
>> do
>> know that they are heartfelt and you've always been honest about them
>> which
>> I highly respect.
>>>
>>> In the future I'll send information out about the segregated environment
>> issue.
>>>
>>> But, let me say this for now:
>>>
>>>
>>> There is nothing wrong with having programs for the socialization of and
>> recreational programs you alluded too yesterday. I support day programs
>> devoid of a pretense of renumerative employment for people with all sorts
>> of
>> disabilities.
>>>
>>> I do not support any longer, personally speaking center based shops over
>> not only the pay issue, but also because they in documented fashion 
>> become
>> dead end lifelong segregated environments.
>>>
>>> By the way I know of plenty of folks even with severe disabilities like
>> say Downs syndrome who get union scale for say bagging groceries in the
>> community and who are simply happy human beings living independently or 
>> at
>> worse in small group homes in their communities. And there are plenty of
>> great evening and other community programs where they can "let their hair
>> down" garner friends and develop other relationships.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christine Boone"
>> <christine_boone at comcast.net>
>>> To: "NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 2:30 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] open letter to cannon
>>>
>>>
>>> Nicely done.
>>> As you may imagine, I was specifically directed to speak on the issue,
>> yesterday.  I chose to speak on a rather tangential issue which is not
>> related in any way to the payment of sub-minimum wages in sheltered
>> employment.  I did not say anything yesterday that was not completely
>> consistent with my own long-held beliefs.  I am sorry that I took 
>> valuable
>> board time speaking off topic.
>>>
>>> I have not ever worked for any organization that paid sub-minimum wages,
>> nor have I ever permitted any customer of mine or a client of any worker
>> whom I happened to supervised, to be placed in an employment setting in
>> which they received less than the federal minimum wage.  .  When I
>> directed
>> the PA Bureau We had the  policy that we did not ever enter into any
>> contractual arrangement or do business of any kind with any agency or
>> organization that paid any worker  piece rate or  sub- minimum wage.
>>>
>>> Thank you for not mentioning my ramblings of yesterday in your letter.
>>>
>>> Christine
>>> PS. It is June 16, not July 16 as your letter indicates.
>>>
>>> On Jun 16, 2012, at 2:15 PM, joe harcz Comcast wrote:
>>>
>>>> Open Letter to Cannon Sub-minimum Wage
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> July 16, 2012
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.
>>>>
>>>> 1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.
>>>>
>>>> Mt. Morris, MI  48458
>>>>
>>>> E-mail: joeharcz at comcast.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To: Patrick D. cannon
>>>>
>>>> Director, Michigan commission for the Blind
>>>>
>>>> (Via e-mail)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear Mr. Cannon,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are fond of denoting your experience with NCASB and quote or
>> summarize their activities in all of your MCB Reports. I denote the
>> official
>> position of NCASB regarding HR 3086 in full after my "cc" lines. Yet, at
>> the
>> Michigan Commission for the Blind board meeting yesterday you and Leemon
>> Jones in particular "pushed back" at the courageous motion by the board 
>> to
>> not contract with CRPs which  pay even one worker sub-minimum wage in its
>> centerred based employment. (And as Commissioner Shuck noted there are 13
>> in
>> this state which MCB plows thousands in to annually for various 
>> services.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> . Jones in particular was arrogent in his whining about the issue 
>>>> before
>> the board. But, regardless you constantly pull NCASB findings or actions
>> that you like even out of context to quote them and then when the rubber
>> meets the road you are insubordinate to your bosses (the MCB Board) and 
>> we
>> the people. Say would you and Jones both making salaries in excess of
>> $100,000 wish to be paid sub-minimum wage because you are blind and
>> clearly
>> not as productive in documented fashion as you should be?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I also denote that aside from the leadership of NFB on this issue there
>> are numerous advocacy organizations of various people with disabilities
>> who
>> support the elimination of sub-minimum wages for any person with any
>> disability. These organizations are clearly denoted here and include by
>> the
>> way the American Council of the Blind. So this is an issue where there is
>> broad consensus amongst not only organizations of the blind, but those
>> representing, again a wide range of disabilities.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The only organizations that do in fact support sub-minimum waivers are
>> the highly profitable and federally funded "sheltered shops" themselves.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regardless, I applaud the actions yesterday of the Michigan Commission
>> for the Blind and decry your open hypocrisy on this issue.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cc: MCB Board
>>>>
>>>> Cc: NFB MI
>>>>
>>>> Cc: MCBVI
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Michigan ADAPT
>>>>
>>>> Cc: MPAS
>>>>
>>>> Cc: several
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Source:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ncsab.org/alert/2011/statement_of_endorsement_.htm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Statement of Endorsement by: Barbara Madrigal
>>>>
>>>> December 9, 2011
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At its monthly teleconference, the NCSAB Executive Committee agreed to
>> support the Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities Act (H. R. 3086). 
>> The
>> NCSAB
>>>>
>>>> had been asked by the National Federation of the Blind to lend our
>> support to H. R. 3086 that would end the payment of sub minimum wages to
>> people with
>>>>
>>>> disabilities. By way of background, following is some historical
>> information.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> H. R. 3086 The Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities Act
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On October 4, 2011, Congressman Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and Congressman 
>>>> Tim
>> Bishop (D-NY) introduced the Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities Act
>> of
>> 2011
>>>>
>>>> (H.R. 3086). The bill would phase out Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor
>> Standards Act (FLSA), which allows employers holding special wage
>> certificates to
>>>>
>>>> pay their workers with disabilities less than the federal minimum wage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The planned phase out of section 14(c) of the FLSA under H.R. 3086, the
>> Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities Act of 2011, follows:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. Phased out after one year for all for profit entities
>>>>
>>>> 2. Phased out after two years for all governmental and public entities
>>>>
>>>> 3. Phased out after three years for all not for profit entities
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> After three years 14(c) would be repealed and all certificates revoked.
>> While very few blind individuals are today being paid subminimum wages,
>> the
>> overall
>>>>
>>>> number of people with disabilities being compensated below the minimum
>> wage is significant. According to data provided by the DOL Wage and Hour
>> Division,
>>>>
>>>> on November 10, 2010 there were approximately 2,552 employers holding
>>>> 14c
>> certificates, employing approximately 368,106 individuals with
>> disabilities.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> History and Background
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In 1938 the Congress adopted the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Act
>> included numerous New Deal reforms; however it is best remembered for
>> establishing the
>>>>
>>>> federal minimum wage. President Roosevelt characterized the Fair Labor
>> Standards Act as "the most far-reaching, far-sighted program for the
>> benefit
>> of
>>>>
>>>> workers ever adopted in this or any other country." But the Act did not
>> extend the guarantee of the minimum wage to all workers. Section 14(c) of
>> the Fair
>>>>
>>>> Labor Standards Act allows blind people and others with disabilities to
>> be paid below the minimum wage under certain prescribed conditions. The
>> employer
>>>>
>>>> must apply for a special wage certificate and must conduct and document
>> that a time study has been made of the productivity of the worker with a
>> disability
>>>>
>>>> to determine his or her wage. The special subminimum wage is known as
>>>> the
>> "Commensurate wage."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Definition of Commensurate Wage (Code of Federal Regulations-29 CFR 
>>>> Part
>> 525)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> i) Commensurate wage is a special minimum wage paid to a worker with a
>> disability which is based on the worker's individual productivity in
>> proportion to
>>>>
>>>> the wage and productivity of experienced nondisabled workers 
>>>> per-forming
>> essentially the same type, quality, and quantity of work in the vicinity
>> in
>> which
>>>>
>>>> the individual under certificate is employed. For example, the
>> commensurate wage of a worker with a disability who is 75% as productive
>> as
>> the average
>>>>
>>>> experienced non-disabled worker, taking into consideration the type,
>> quality, and quantity of work of the disabled worker, would be set at 75%
>> of
>> the wage
>>>>
>>>> paid to the non-disabled worker. For purposes of these regulations, a
>> commensurate wage is always a special minimum wage, i.e., a wage below 
>> the
>> statutory
>>>>
>>>> minimum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The following groups have endorsed and urge the immediate passage of
>>>> H.R.
>> 3086, the Fair Wages for Workers with Disabilities Act of 2011(as of
>> November
>>>>
>>>> 17, 2011):
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ADAPT (formerly known as American Disabled for Attendant Programs 
>>>> Today)
>>>>
>>>> ADAPT Montana
>>>>
>>>> American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD)
>>>>
>>>> American Council of the Blind (ACB)
>>>>
>>>> APSE (formerly known as Association for Persons in Supported 
>>>> Employment)
>>>>
>>>> Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living (APRIL)
>>>>
>>>> Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN)
>>>>
>>>> Autism Society of America (ASA)
>>>>
>>>> Blind Industries and Services of Maryland (BISM)
>>>>
>>>> Center for People with Disabilities (CPWD)
>>>>
>>>> Chicago Lighthouse for People Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired
>>>>
>>>> Collaboration to Promote Self-Determination (CPSD)
>>>>
>>>> Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF)
>>>>
>>>> Hearing Loss Association of America (HLAA)
>>>>
>>>> Houston Center for Independent Living
>>>>
>>>> Little People of America (LPA)
>>>>
>>>> National Association of the Deaf (NAD)
>>>>
>>>> National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery (NCMHR)
>>>>
>>>> National Council on Independent Living (NCIL)
>>>>
>>>> National Disability Leadership Alliance (NDLA)
>>>>
>>>> National Disability Rights Network (NDRN)
>>>>
>>>> National Down Syndrome Society (NDSS)
>>>>
>>>> National Federation of the Blind (NFB)
>>>>
>>>> National Fragile X Foundation (NFXF)
>>>>
>>>> Not Dead Yet (NDY)
>>>>
>>>> Self Advocates Becoming Empowered (SABE)
>>>>
>>>> Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
>>>>
>>>> Texas Association of Centers for Independent Living (TACIL)
>>>>
>>>> United Spinal Association
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you have questions or concerns please do not hesitate to contact me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Barbara J. Madrigal
>>>>
>>>> Barbara.Madrigal at dars.state.tx.us
>>>>
>>>> President NCSAB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>>>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbmi-talk:
>>>>
>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/christine_boone%40co
>> mcast.net
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbmi-talk:
>>>
>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.n
>> et
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbmi-talk:
>>>
>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/christine_boone%40co
>> mcast.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbmi-talk:
>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/f.wurtzel%40att.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbmi-talk mailing list
>> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbmi-talk:
>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.n
> et
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/f.wurtzel%40att.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net