[nfbwatlk] SUB MINIMUM WAGE

Mon Aug 13 15:37:01 UTC 2012

Here, here-my friend.

Dan

From: Carl Jarvis [mailto:carjar82 at gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 11:06 AM
To: Frye, Daniel; NFB of Washington Talk Mailing List
Cc: alewis at nfb.org; Feder, Emily
Subject: Re: [nfbwatlk] SUB MINIMUM WAGE

Dan,
Well stated.  Of course it speaks to human nature not just to us blind people.
We are quick to cry out when our own rights are trampled, and we can expand our outrage to include those of our own immediate circle, but we become indifferent and insensitive when others are treated in the same manner.
I am reminded of the words of pastor Martin Niemöller:
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

If each of us fails to stand up and defend the human dignity of all people, who will stand up for us when the heavy boot of discrimination is on our own neck?

Are we really so shallow that we place productivity ahead of human dignity?  Why does a person have to produce so many widgets an hour in order to deserve a basic living standard?
What is it in our nature that allows us to see the cold, harsh discrimination placed upon us blind people, and then turn about and do exactly the same to others who we have lumped into a category called, "The Less Fortunate".
Do we no longer believe that a government of the people should care for all of its people?  When did we turn on our own people and hitch our wagon to the coat tails of the wealthy, pretending that we might one day be like them?
Are we honestly willing to abandon our brothers and sisters in the hope that we will receive a pat on the head by the Master?
Pretending that we are better than some of our own members is not going to change how the public sees us as blind people.  The very brightest and most accomplished of us are measured by the same Universal Blind Stereotype as is the most unaccomplished, unskilled member of our blind community.  It makes no difference to the World if I am the most remarkable blind man or a blind man burdened by multiple disabilities.  Blind trumps all in the minds of the general population.
If we cut loose from some of our members, it will not put us in a more favorable light in the eye of the public, it will simply make us fewer in number.
And how dare we proclaim our right to defend our equal status in the world, when we can't defend our own brothers and sisters?  What lesson are we passing along to future blind people?  Are we saying, "You must be blind by our standards if you are to have our support"?
If, by demanding a decent standard of living for our members working in work shops means that some of those programs shut their doors and lay off their underpaid "workers", is that reason enough to fight to keep the programs open?  To allow them to continue to oppress our brothers and sisters?  For what purpose?  At what price?
Would it not be better to fight for funding for the underpaid folks and provide them an environment where they can participate at whatever level they are able, and rejoice in their achievements.

Carl Jarvis

----- Original Message -----
From: Frye, Daniel<mailto:Daniel.Frye at ed.gov>
To: NFB of Washington Talk Mailing List<mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: alewis at nfb.org<mailto:alewis at nfb.org> ; Feder, Emily<mailto:Emily.Feder at ed.gov>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 5:37 AM
Subject: RE: [nfbwatlk] SUB MINIMUM WAGE

Paul and Others In Sympathy With His Perspective:

I could use this note to articulate all of the rationale, statistics, and philosophy to generate arguments for why paying sub-minimum wages to disabled people, while not having the same standard and policy for abled-body folks, is wrong. But I won't do this. Instead, I'll simply observe that I always find myself saddened and perplexed by blind people who can accept as a matter of policy that a general practice that treats our community differently from the majority is acceptable. If the inequity of treating disabled people differently from non-disabled people doesn't intuitively resonate with one, I hardly know what arguments I can advance that will get such people to see reason and fairness. And then I just wilt in resignation when these same "accomplished" blind folks, who justify discriminatory treatment by lamenting the hardship to business caused by those who are not productive, run on with a sense of self-righteous arrogance about their competence and capacity. How about transferring some of that skill that you've developed, no doubt all on your own, to demonstrating  some compassion towards those who may not be as successful as you. In all likelihood, you'll still get to feel superior to these poor, unfortunate creatures. They'll likely never earn $50,000 per year, so your worth will still stand unquestioned. We're advocating for a basic minimum that everybody shares in common; this is not a campaign for something as reasonable as an actual living wage or decent standard of living. Smile! Numbers and nuanced arguments notwithstanding, this is simply a matter of basic fairness and decency. So long as a minimum wage exists in law, let it apply to us all. So long as every non-disabled person is not subject to a productivity standard, let this practice apply universally. And, finally, if these folks who are exempt from receiving the minimum wage would not otherwise qualify as being employees, let's be honest, allow them to do the same thing, and call their program what it is--education, recreation, or some other euphemism to make people feel good about themselves.

Dan Frye

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org<mailto:nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org> [mailto:nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Freeman
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 5:50 PM
To: 'NFB of Washington Talk Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [nfbwatlk] SUB MINIMUM WAGE

Paul:

(1) NO two workers have the same productivity. Yet (at least in industry) workers doing a given job are supposed to be paid the same wage whether they are powerhouses of productivity or are just barely scraping by. Differences in worker output are usually made up in consequences such as whether workers get bonuses, how quickly and whether they advance or not, etc. Why should disabled workers of whatever talent be treated differently?

(2) Most of the entities who are against paying minimum wages for disabled workers get massive subsidies from either various governmental agencies or from private donations. Presumably, all those who "employ" these workers do so in order to make them feel productive or useful. NO one gainsays such motives although I am often moved to wonder whether those who prattle on about the dignity of work (even at subminimum wages) would themselves deign to accept that reasoning as an excuse to be paid less than the Federal minimum wage. All that might even be OK except that these governmental and private agencies who "employ" these workers go on to sell the products of their labor, thus benefiting twice from that labor without compensatory benefits to the workers. And few of these agencies really train disabled workers to go out into private industry. Think about it: if you're a business, you *keep* your most productive workers. If you train people, you
*place* your most productive workers. You can't have it both ways. Agencies can't have it both ways -- profiting from workers while paying them a pittance. That's little more than slavery IMO.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org<mailto:nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org> [mailto:nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of PUBLIC RADIO 113
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 12:16 PM
To: nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org<mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org>
Subject: [nfbwatlk] SUB MINIMUM WAGE

Would you hire a driver who only drove 20 miles/hour on the freeway?  If any of you reading this ever ran a business of your own you would realize that you cannot afford to hire workers who are less productive.  When I began my medical transcription career in Chicago I earned far less than minimum wage because I was paid on the basis of the work I could turn out in an 8-hour day.  It took a while for me to get my typing speed up to 120 words/minute, but I did.  After 30 years of being an MT I retired in June.
 I made $50,000 last year WITH BENEFITS.  People who are so disabled that they cannot compete can always use SSDI, low-cost housing, food stamps, etc.,  to supplement their income.  It should not be up to the employer to
provide a subsidy for disabled workers.   Let's pay congress what they're
worth.

--
Paul Van Dyck

www.publicradio113.weebly.com<http://www.publicradio113.weebly.com>

OR

www.kboo.fm/soundsofawareness<http://www.kboo.fm/soundsofawareness>
_______________________________________________
nfbwatlk mailing list
nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org<mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbwatlk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbwatlk_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com

_______________________________________________
nfbwatlk mailing list
nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org<mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbwatlk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbwatlk_nfbnet.org/daniel.frye%40ed.gov