[nfbmi-talk] Fw: this is nfb policy!

[Terry D. Eagle]

One cannot expect persons to appreciate and abide by organizational policies
when the organization's leadership are driven by personalities placed above
principles. 

personalities'-centered driven leadership promotes decisions and actions
ruled by emotions, thus  destroying relationships, relationship building,
promotes distrust, and reluctance to get involved and actively participate,
for fear that one may be also and the next attacked and shunned by
leadership and their like-minded followers, whereas principle-centered
leadership is driven by sound best practices and established policies and
procedures that promote and achieve all-inclusive respect for the rights and
views of the entire organization, thus inspiring involvement and growth of
both individuals and the organization, achieved by the uniqueness and
differences of individuals being acknowledged and valued.  The latter is the
"why" behind the all-important policies, procedures, constitutions, and
by-laws of human organizations.  


-----Original message----
From: nfbmi-talk [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of David
Robinson via nfbmi-talk
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 9:57 AM
To: NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: David Robinson <drob1946 at gmail.com>
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] Fw: this is nfb policy!


----- Original Message ----- 
From: joe harcz Comcast 
To: Larry Posont NFBMI Pres. 
Cc: Michael Powell ; Fred Wurtzel ; J.J. Meddaugh NFB MI ; mary wurtzel ;
Derek Moore ; Lydia Anne Schuck NFB MI 
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 7:50 AM
Subject: this is nfb policy!


All one of the many items that the protestors, including me were attempting
to distribute at the September 17 fiasco was the Ability One reform document
referenced in this NFB letter to the United States Department of Labor.

Our constitution requires that our affiliate abides by NFB policies and that
it doesn't dodge them as the body did yesterday.

Regardless the issues should be understood at very least by our board.

And members should know these issues on our list serve as well as other
media as well.

You are welcome to read and understand these issues and you are welcome for
my gift to you in providing this information.

Warmest Regards,

Joe Harcz
SENT VIA EMAIL 

 October 2, 2015 

 Advisory Committee on Increasing Competitive Integrated Employment for
Individuals with 

Disabilities 

US Department of Labor 

200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Suite S-1303 

Washington, DC 20210 

 Dear Committee Members: 

 The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) was pleased to read the
recommendations in the 

interim report about Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the
AbilityOne® Program. 

The report very clearly states that the practice of paying workers with
disabilities subminimum 

wages is outdated and does not lead to increasing competitive integrated
employment for 

individuals with disabilities. We wanted to take this opportunity to applaud
the committee for 

including these chapters in the interim report and voice our support for
these chapters to remain in 

the final report. 

 The National Federation of the Blind knows that with the proper training,
support, and 

expectations, any person with a disability can obtain competitive integrated
employment. Although 

attitudes are impossible to legislate, any recommendation that the committee
can make that 

reinforces the importance of high expectations for people with disabilities
in the employment 

sphere should and must be made. It is low expectations that keep workers
with disabilities in low-

level positions. Recommending that the practice of paying people with
disabilities subminimum 

wages be eliminated is a logical first step. 

 The first stated goal of the WIOA Advisory Committee on Increasing
Competitive Integrated 

Employment for Individuals with Disabilities is to build on the development
and implementation of 

the innovative strategies that are already being identified by the US
Department of Labor’s office 

of Disability Employment Policy. These strategies have been proven to be
effective in creating 

competitive integrated employment opportunities for individuals with
intellectual or developmental 

disabilities and other individuals with significant disabilities. Another
goal of the committee is to 

advise the Secretary of Labor about ways to improve oversight of the Section
14(c) certificate 

program. Oversight of the Section 14(c) program is not the solution to
providing more competitive 

integrated employment, because Section 14(c) is an assertion that it is the
disability that curtails 

employment opportunities. Research demonstrates it is the lack of effective
training that is the true 

barrier to competitive integrated employment for workers with disabilities.
A greater emphasis 

should be placed on requiring those entities that profess to provide
employment opportunities for 

individuals with significant disabilities to implement the innovative
training and employment 

strategies that are beginning to emerge. 

 Consequently, it makes perfect sense that the committee would recommend
changes to the 

AbilityOne Program, because the intended purpose of this program is to
provide employment 

opportunities for people with disabilities. The National Industries for the
Blind (NIB), the central 

nonprofit agency responsible for the employment of the blind under the
AbilityOne Program, is 

effectively working to phase out the use of special wage certificates by
their associated non-

profits, and they should be encouraged to continue to move in this
direction. However, 

SourceAmerica®, the central nonprofit agency responsible for the employment
of individuals that 

are severely disabled under the AbilityOne Program, has not demonstrated the
same commitment 

to modernizing their associated nonprofits. This is despite the
SourceAmerica Pathways Program, 

which is a demonstration project with proven success in creating competitive
integrated 

employment opportunities for people with significant disabilities. We
support the findings in 

Chapters Six and Seven of the report about the Section 14(c) Program and the
AbilityOne 

Program. 

 Chapter Six: Section 14(c) Program 

 The National Federation of the Blind supports the responsible phase out of
Section 14(c) of the 

Fair Labor Standards Act and specifically would like to see a recommendation
from the advisory 

committee encouraging Congress to pass legislation that will achieve this
goal. One such piece of 

legislation is the Transitioning to Integrated and Meaningful Employment
(TIME) Act. The TIME 

Act will do three things. First, upon passage, it will legislate that the
Department of Labor 

immediately stop issuing new 14(c) certificates. Second, it will responsibly
phase out the use of 

Section 14(c) over a three year period. Third, it will repeal Section 14(c)
after three years. 

 Many of the current recommendations offered in the interim report already
reflect the outcomes 

that would result from passage of the TIME Act. For example, Recommendation
19(c) states that 

the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor should, “cease
accepting new employer 

applications to the certificate program one year after the passage of the
phase-out legislation.” 

The first paragraph of Section 3 of the TIME Act will accomplish this goal
in a slightly more 

ambitious time frame. It states: “Effective on the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of 

Labor shall discontinue issuing special wage certificates under section
14(c) of the Fair Labor 

Standards Act of 1938 to any new entities not currently holding a
certificate.” 

 Additionally, the TIME Act outlines a phase-out of special wage
certificates, which reflects 

Recommendation 9. While Recommendation 9 states: “The Secretary of Labor, in
consultation 

with the RSA and the CMS should propose a time frame for phasing out the
Section 14(c) 

certificate program,” the TIME Act suggests a specific timeline allowing
three years for the phase 

out of Section 14(c). Workers with disabilities who are trapped in
subminimum wage environments 

do not have time to wait. There are many tools, such as the Vermont
Conversion Institute, that 

can assist 14(c)-certificate-holding entities in transitioning their
business model to one that does 

not rely upon paying their workers with disabilities less than the federal
minimum wage. As 

presenters at the various committee meetings have attested, such as SRVS,
transition is truly 

possible and in a short time. Transition does not mean shutting the doors to
an entire service 

provider. It means integrating new innovative strategies that help people
with disabilities reach 

their full vocational potential in integrated and competitive jobs. For
SRVS, this meant closing the 

workshop aspect of their operation down, while keeping and enhancing
programs that did not 

utilize the 14(c) certificate. As SRVS explained, change was difficult, and
they were resistant to 

make the change at first. But once they started down the path of phasing out
the use of their 

subminimum wage certificate, they found that the results were great.
Responsibly phasing out 

Section 14(c) will yield similar results for other 14(c)-certificate-holding
entities. Without the 

incentive to change, entities that do hold 14(c) certificates will continue
in a business-as-usual 

fashion—sheltering people with disabilities from integrated competitive
jobs. 

 While the transition period is going on for all
Section-14(c)-certificate-holding entities, it is 

imperative that the Departments of Labor and Education work concurrently to
develop regulations 

that will ensure that Section 511 of WIOA is enforced. Recommendation 15
reflects this sentiment: 

 “DOL and ED should make enforcement of the law and spirit of Section 511 of
the Rehabilitation 

Act, as amended by WIOA, a priority. The Departments should work with agency
field offices and 

state advocates, including Protection and Advocacy organizations, to
identify enforcement actions 

that will help end the practice of paying people subminimum wages and expand
CIE with full 

wages and benefits.” 

 Section 511 will help reduce the number of youth tracked into subminimum
wage environments. 

But, without regulations that will enforce Section 511,
Section-14(c)-certificate-holding entities will 

take a business-as-usual approach. For example, if there was no threat of a
fine for stealing candy 

bars, everyone would steal candy bars. The same logic applies to
Section-14(c)-certificate-holding 

entities: if there is a law that says individuals with disabilities aged 24
and younger cannot be 

compensated at subminimum wages without first going through certain steps,
but there is no 

penalty for hiring young people with disabilities at subminimum wages,
countless entities are 

going to continue to do so. Recommendation 15 is right on target. 

 Chapter Seven: AbilityOne® Program 

 Throughout the chapter on AbilityOne, the topic of subminimum wages arose
again. Specifically, 

recommendation 3 states: “The President should issue an Executive Order
outlining a plan to 

phase-out expeditiously the use of FLSA Section 14(c) certificates within
the AbilityOne Program. 

As part of this Executive Order all AbilityOne NPAs, who currently employ
workers at subminimum 

wage on AbilityOne contracts, must be required to develop a plan that
addresses the expectation 

to retain those workers at no less hours than they are currently working and
to be paid at least 

federal minimum wage.” This is a superb recommendation because eliminating
the option to pay 

AbilityOne workers subminimum wages will ensure that they are in competitive
employment. 

Additionally, this recommendation reflects the sentiment of President
Obama’s 2014 Executive 

Order which called for all federal contract workers in the service sector,
including workers with 

disabilities, be paid at least $10.10 per hour. 

 Last month, the National Federation of the Blind, along with six other
disability advocacy 

organizations, jointly issued a press release outlining seven reform
principles for the AbilityOne 

Program. In summary, the seven reform principles are: a commitment to
integrated employment, 

the use of Supported Employment and Customized Employment methods, the
elimination of 

conflicts of interest in contract implementation, the payment of prevailing
wages, financial and 

operational transparency, to connect employees with disabilities to
mainstream employers, and to 

award contracts to disability-owned businesses. Many of the recommendations
made by the 

Committee reflect our reform principles. For example, Recommendation 3
reflects reform principle 

four regarding the payment of prevailing wages. The only reform principle
that was not reflected in 

the Committee’s recommendations was number seven. We suggest that the
AbilityOne Program 

award contracts to disability-owned businesses. 

 Our first reform principle, as well as the committee’s first
recommendation, stresses the 

importance of integrated employment. We applaud the committee for stressing
the importance of 

the Olmstead decision and urging Congress to “amend the JWOD Act to ensure
all AbilityOne 

Program contract work is accomplished in fully integrated work settings
where individuals with 

disabilities work, on an individualized basis, alongside of their
non-disabled peers, consistent with 

the goals of the ADA and Olmstead.” When workers with disabilities are in
integrated settings, 

they are more likely to rise to their full potential. Their coworkers act as
positive role models and 

will set high expectations for workers with disabilities. By requiring 75%
of the labor hours 

necessary to complete AbilityOne contracts are done by people who are blind
or have other 

significant disabilities, the AbilityOne Program almost automatically
ensures that workers under 

these contracts will be in segregated settings. In fact, the interim report
cites that: “most AbilityOne 

contracts for products, which employ 28 percent of all individuals working
on AbilityOne contracts, 

continue to be completed in sheltered workshop settings.” In addition, while
many of the service 

contracts are completed outside of sheltered workshops, oftentimes the
workers on these 

contracts are clustered together in groups called enclaves. This may be a
small step above 

working in the physical sheltered workshops, but it is a far cry from
integrated employment. More 

often than not, the individuals in the enclaves have very little contact
with the day-to-day workers 

at the enclave sites. Reforming the AbilityOne Program to ensure the
employment opportunities 

for AbilityOne workers are integrated is essential. 

 Recommendation 1(e)(2) states: “Congress should amend the JWOD Act to
establish new criteria 

for who is eligible to work on AbilityOne contracts, with changes made to
ensure that NPAs are 

not given discretion to determine who is and is not qualified to work on
AbilityOne contracts.” The 

National Federation of the Blind also agrees with this recommendation. It
reflects our third 

proposed reform principle which calls for the elimination of conflicts of
interest within the 

AbilityOne Program. When qualified nonprofit agencies determine who is
eligible to work under 

AbilityOne contracts, they are declaring that these individuals have a
disability that “prevents the 

individual from currently engaging in normal competitive employment.” This
criterion reflects the 

low expectations recruiters of the AbilityOne Program are forced to have
towards workers with 

disabilities. If an AbilityOne recruiter declares that an individual is
incapable of “normal competitive 

employment” from day one, then it seems very unlikely that the recruiters
will ever help those 

individuals who are labeled as incapable find competitive integrated
employment. The National 

Federation of the Blind supports recommendation 1(e)(i): the practice of
labeling individuals with 

disabilities incapable of competitive work before they are permitted
participation in the AbilityOne 

Program should be eliminated. 

 The National Federation of the Blind has some suggestions regarding
recommendation 2, which is 

rather vague in the interim report but promises to be more specific in the
final report, regarding the 

make-up, structure and role of the AbilityOne Commission. Currently, the
make-up of the 

Commission reflects the attitude that the AbilityOne program is a
procurement program rather 

than an employment program for people with disabilities. As a result, eleven
of the fifteen 

positions are granted to government agencies which include US Departments of
Agriculture, Air 

Force, Army, Commerce, Defense, Education, Justice, Labor, Navy, and
Veterans Affairs, as well 

as the General Services Administration. The other four positions are granted
to two individuals 

who are conversant with the problems incident to the employment of the blind
or severely disabled 

and two who represent blind or severely disabled individuals employed in
qualified nonprofit 

agencies. To ensure that the AbilityOne Program is promoting competitive
integrated employment, 

the make-up of the committee should be filled with experts on employing
workers with disabilities. 

We would recommend that at least 51 percent of the Commission be made up of
people with 

disabilities, and that agencies like the Department of Health and Human
Services and Centers for 

Medicare & Medicaid Services be represented on the Commission. 

 Instead of procuring contracts, the main role of the Commission should be
to foster employment 

opportunities for people with disabilities in competitive and integrated
settings. One way to 

accomplish this goal would be to support businesses that are owned and
operated by people with 

disabilities. Reform principle number seven states: “Prioritizing awarding
of contracts available 

through the procurement process to disability-owned businesses, including
self-employed 

individuals with disabilities: rather than all contracts going to the
nonprofit organizations currently 

involved in the program, individuals with disabilities should be encouraged
to compete for service 

contracts.” Not only will implementing this suggestion ensure that people
with disabilities 

participating in the AbilityOne Program will be in competitive, integrated
employment, but people 

with disabilities who are already employed will be supported and their
businesses will be able to 

strive. 

 Conclusion 

 Thank you to the Committee for working hard to ensure that more individuals
with disabilities are 

able to obtain competitive integrated employment. Responsibly phasing out
Section 14(c) of the 

Fair Labor Standards Act is an imperative step to achieving competitive
employment for workers 

with disabilities. Also, reforming the AbilityOne Program is overdue. When
reformed, this program 

holds the promise to ensure that more workers with disabilities are employed
in competitive and 

integrated settings. The National Federation of the Blind looks forward to
working with you as your 

work continues. We hope that the final report will look similar to the
interim report. Should you 

have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to me. 

 Sincerely, 

  John G. Pare, Jr. SignatureJohn G. Paré, Jr. 

Executive Director of Advocacy and Policy 

National Federation of the Blind 

 Enclosure 

 JGP/rs 

 TASH LogoNational Federation of the Blind logo Leading Organizations of
Americans with Disabilities Call for Reform of AbilityOne 

Program 

 Organizations Set Forth Seven Reform Principles 

 Seven leading organizations comprised of Americans with disabilities
announced today that they 

are calling for reform of the AbilityOne Program and set forth seven
principles for overhaul of the 

program, which affects hundreds of thousands of American workers with
disabilities. The 

announcement was made by the National Federation of the Blind (NFB), TASH,
the National 

Council for Independent Living (NCIL), the National Disability Rights
Network (NDRN), the 

Association of People Supporting Employment First (APSE), the Autistic Self
Advocacy Network 

(ASAN), and the United Spinal Association. The seven principles for reform
put forward by the 

organizations are as follows: 

 1. Commitment to the expressed integration mandate set forth by the Supreme
Court of the 

United States in the case of Olmstead v. L.C.: Segregation of people with
disabilities in work 

sites, such as sheltered workshops and enclaves, is inconsistent with Title
II of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act. People with disabilities must be supported to lead
fully integrated lives in 

their communities, including throughout their workday. 

 2. Implementation and development of best practices for employment of
people with significant 

disabilities: People employed by contracts negotiated through the AbilityOne
procurement 

process must have their employment goals supported by providers implementing
recognized 

best practices, such as Supported Employment and Customized Employment, that
result in 

good jobs in the community. 

 3. Elimination of conflicts of interest that contribute to exploitation,
fraud, and abuse: Conflicts of 

interest in AbilityOne contract implementation are rampant, and must be
identified and 

prohibited. These include determination of employee eligibility by community
rehabilitation 

programs (CRPs) implementing contracts, as well as the use of contract funds
for lobbying and 

other purposes. 

 4. Payment of prevailing wages and the elimination of subminimum-wage
payments: Payment of 

subminimum wages to people with disabilities is intolerable in the United
States. People with 

disabilities should be paid the prevailing wage for the task they are
performing. 

 5. Ensuring financial and operational transparency and accountability:
AbilityOne contract use of 

funds must be transparent and readily available (online) to the public at
every level, including 

the purpose and amount of funds used by the Central Nonprofit Agencies,
executive 

compensation packages of nonprofits involved in the program, worker wage
ranges, and 

purposes of funds used. 

 6. Relationship with employer: The ultimate objective of a
federally-sanctioned special 

procurement program should be to connect employees with mainstream
employers, as 

opposed to having people with disabilities working for nonprofit entities
under specialized, set-

aside contracts. 

 7. Prioritizing awarding of contracts available through the procurement
process to disability-

owned businesses, including self-employed individuals with disabilities:
Rather than all 

contracts going to the non-profit organizations currently involved in the
program, individuals 

with disabilities should be encouraged to compete for service contracts. 

 The AbilityOne Program must be brought up to contemporary standards of
practice for supporting 

people with disabilities to access competitive integrated employment. When
these reforms are 

adopted, an inspector general should be appointed to provide rigorous
oversight to ensure that the 

days of exploitation and fraud are brought to an end. 

 
_______________________________________________
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/terrydeagle%40yahoo.
com