[nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment
Fred Wurtzel
f.wurtzel at att.net
Sun Jun 17 20:28:19 UTC 2012
Hello Linda,
Thank you for the kind words. I do get going, sometimes, well maybe, often!
(smile)
my meory for names is somewhat poor. I hope you can come to our state
convention in Detroit the weekend of October 21. We will have lots of
discussions of topics of interest to all of us. I hope you read the Braille
Monitor, as well. This is an excellent source of what NFB is doing. Our
national Convention is coming up the weeek of jJuly 4 and much of it will be
streamed if you can't get to Dallas. Pardon me if you already know all
this. We are all here to help one another.
Warmest Regards,
Fred
-----Original Message-----
From: nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
On Behalf Of Linda Bloodsaw
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2012 2:32 AM
To: NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment
Sometimes rants are informative to people like me who are relatively new to
the blindness community. It gives me a better understanding of what has
been going on. So I would say teachable moments and not rants.
On Jun 16, 2012, at 11:25 PM, "Fred Wurtzel" <f.wurtzel at att.net> wrote:
> Hi Pauline,
>
> Yes, Pauline, and Christine also made this point, yesterday. She
> pointed out that sometimes, maybe even often, integrated employees are
> isolated and demeaned. On the other hand, sheltered work employees
> seldom move up or out and their upward mobility is statistically poorer
than integrated employees.
> unfortunately statistics do not account for individuals who may thrive
> in certain segregated settings like the Business Enterprise Program or
> fail in integrated settings as Christine observed. One of our members
> did very well in medical transcription until technology changed and
> the Commission nor the employer would assist to upgrade her work station
and she struggled.
> Another example is darkroom technicians who were blind. Their
> technology changed and they were not prepared to change.
>
> There is some kind of built-in bias against blind people grouping
> together to afford better opportunities. Remember how the teachers at
> Louis Braille's school burned his books. Look at how sighted people
> have taken over sheltered shops that were originally started by blind
> people and now exploit those same people who they allegedly were
> created to serve. A E R was A A W B which started as an organization
> of blind people. It is now primarily sighted people and they often
> are at odds with our goals. it is a struggle to gain and hold on to
freedom, every day, every place we go.
> Remember that John F. Kennedy, when he was a Senator, sponsored a bill
> that assured the right of blind people to organize. it is difficult
> to imagine that some people denied our right to form the N F B, but,
> it is true and is one of the first lines in our NFB song which says
> "The right of the blind to organize is truly here to stay. . ." .
>
> yesterday, Joe Sibley described us as angry. I suppose there is some
> anger within me. I consider it righteous anger as described in the Bible.
> Mostly, though, it is a vigilance. A constant effort to maintain and
> improve our rights and opportunities for justice and liberty. Our
constant
> effort to maintain a level playing field and hopefully gain toward our
> goal of first-class citizenship.
>
> Actions like the Executive order make me really angry. Part of the
> anger is at myself for not doing a better job educating people like
> Governor Snyder about our needs and explaining why we need a consumer
> driven agency to deliver consumer services. We cannot let our anger
> prevent us from engaging those who can help us do what we need done.
> We need to do all we do out of
> love: love for one another and love for freedom and justice. Our
> willingness to work with others cannot be interpreted as meekness or
> weakness or a willingness to be walked on like so many rugs under the
> feet of sighted bureaucrats. We are willing to work with anyone. We
> are also willing to go toe to toe and head to head with anyone who
> stands in the way of progress for blind people.
>
> my goodness, I can get on a rant, can't I? )smile)
>
> Warmest Regards,
>
> Fred
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
> [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> On Behalf Of Pauline Smith
> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 9:55 PM
> To: NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Integrated employment
>
> Well said Fred in our effort to provide that we have equal rights and
> equal opportunities. We must be careful not to swing for the other
> extreme taking only integrated program, settings and activ... ... Are
> successful ones, people should have the right of choice of what they
> want to participate in... And so forth. (F?) was said, many of the so
> called integrated program have done more to damage. ... and enforce
> the inferior opinion of people with individual differences both among
> general society and within those people themselves, then the
non-integrated programs may have...
>
> Pauline Smith sent you this voice-to-text generated email using Voice
> on the Go.
> To listen, click on the voice message link or open the attachment.
> http://vemail2.whitelabelapp.net:8080/enterprise/Recordings/EqwVzcDC-2
> 012061
> 6-2149.wav
>
>
>> Original Message:
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>> From: Fred Wurtzel <f.wurtzel at att.net>
>> Sent: June 16, 2012 5:25:04 PM
>> To: 'NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List' <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> 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_boo
>> n
>> e%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%40co
>> m
>> cast.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_boo
>> n
>> e%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%40a
>> t
>> t.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/zim1993%40gma
>> i
>> l.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/lbloodsaw2018%
> 40gmail.com
_______________________________________________
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
More information about the NFBMI-Talk
mailing list