This is incredible reporting. This channel is really stepping up to the plate, this journalism rivals the best traditional news outlets. Great work Defranco team!
I never comment on any of your videos but the story really hit home I have a brother who has special needs and having the opportunity to work is something people will never understand. My parents still need to work and once my brother aged Out of high school someone was going to need to be home to take care of him and programs like this really help not only with my brother but help my parents by knowing their son is in a safe environment doing something save and active, instead of just being at home sitting around all day. Again I do not agree with disabled people getting paid pennies but programs and services like these really play a huge part in helping families with special needs. In a perfect world I wish they could make minimum-wage and still keep programs like these but we all know it all comes down to money...
Thank you. What do these people think will happen when all these places close because everyone is getting minimum wage/ Where do the handicapped go now. Many cannot stay home by themselves, so what do parents who work do, now that you closed all the programs for their family members?
I agree. Both of these can exist where people with disabilities can get paid over minimum wage in a fantastic and inclusive company; but that shouldn’t mandate the closing down of places like you mention. Something is better than nothing. There are bad people doing exploitive practices in nearly every type of business or govt funded enterprise; so perhaps increased surveillance/surveys of these facilities would be all that’s needed.
I agree with you. These facilities gives one, who is unable to be mainstreamed into a regular work enviorment, a sense of accomplishment, a place to be among their peers, gives their parents or guardians the peace of knowing that there's a safe place for their child when they can't be there and also gives the disabled worker the pride of earning a wage.
@@cafe_rae well I think they need to pay them less because they are non profits or because they are less productive? I dunno but it's sad and I feel bad for them😕
This is rough honestly. I see the arguments for both sides. However, i honestly feel that the removal of 14c would outright eliminate a staggering majority if employment oppertunities for people who are disabled to any debilitating extent that impedes their efficiency. Not to mention theres medical and other concerns and things the employer is forced to accomidate vs a non disabled person. As an employer theres no incentive to hire them outside of good PR and feeling good about yourself. In a world of dollars and cents that fuzzy feeling doesnt hold up against that created by profit margines. If you ant to get rid of 14c you need to add an incentive for employers to incorperate that part of the work force and without that incentive you'll collapse that job market by a signifigant amount rapidly.
its so hard to humanly decide which is 100% right. I feel like the only solution is leave 14c and add more people to view the work places to make sure they can work to their full potential.
A compromise could be that they keep 14c but they take away the subminimum wage calculation. So the employer would go through the application process but there would be a set subminimun wage that's, let's say, a dollar less than minimum wage. This way you won't have people working for a penny an hour but you still have that incentive since they are paid less. However, there's still the issue of how are they meant to survive on less than minimum wage and it would be discriminatory to still have a subminimun wage for people with disabilities.
@@starrismith595 i think a dollar less might be too much, unless the original job paid 3 or more times that, the employer will most likely choose who does it faster. It sucks.
Just going along with what you said, Neil Romano at 12:19 mentioned how sub minimum wage wouldn't even be considered with other minority groups, but the analogy doesn't hold up there since racial minorities aren't inherently reduced in productivity due to their differences. In this particular context, the traditionally considered usage of "minority" doesn't fit as well, since the problem isn't appearance and stereotypical bias, but tangible reduction in potential performance. And yes, I acknowledge that minority factually means a smaller group and thus would broadly include disabled people, but my point is that there is no real statistic leverage in including disabilities in this context as it's only really an emotional appeal.
If a person qualifies for a 14c wage certificate they do not have doctor bills. They get disability for life from the government and work only as a means to improve their ability to function in society.
@CFergiee, if they paid a minimum wage to the most disabled of the people who get 14c wages, they would have to pay the staff that wipes butts, wipes faces, cleans up accidents, etc. more money. Because the staff that cares for the disabled people aren’t making more than minimum wage themselves.
@@ethangivens3597 as in independent. He just rehashs what other news outlets report. Instead of getting stories from them he is now the one creating and posting the stories.
I don’t usually comment, but this is absolutely outstanding!! Excellent job really covering all sides of the story on an un-biased way! This truly is a complex issue, and you truly gave us a much deeper understanding of it. Thank you.
One thing I didn't see Phil touch on was how many of these disabled workers are receiving government assistance that they would loose if they made too much money. This assistance includes money, medical, and even food. I am not advocating that anyone should be paid less than what they deserve, but the bigger picture needs to be looked at. I would not be surprised if a sizable portion of those falling under this government code treasure going to work and it would do them a harm to suddenly be told that in order to keep all the benefits they are receiving they can now only go to work a few days out of the month. In the video, you see individuals referring to their work environment as their family. Perhaps better regulation of the system needs to be addressed to ensure no one is being taken advantage of instead of getting rid of the law entirely.
I was waiting on him to say something about it. I live month by month on disability. And as they said in a competitive market its too risky to take on a job that my body may not be able to handle. I have bills that need to be paid and I can't risk losing the assistance I have because my disability got in the way of "being a productive member of the work force"
enfiniti81 i work for a non profit specifically for the disabled, and all of our residents who work fall under that. They would lose benefits if they worked more or got paid more, and they rely on those benefits.
The calculation of efficiency should be done by a third party committee or something not by the employer/company. That way they don't have the opportunity to lie just to pay someone less.
My uncle worked in a “sheltered workshop” at a human services organization for almost 30 years. He has been mentally disabled since birth, is only partially verbal, and is lacking many fine motor skills. That being said, he will never be able to hold a job at a business, for many of the reasons you stated. He LOVED working at the workshop. The work was repetitive and easy - often packing tools in boxes and such - but he loves repetition and routine, so it brought him comfort.When I would go with my grandmother to pick him up, he would beam and proudly exclaim how much money he made that day. I’m not sure what he made hourly, but I’m pretty sure it was below minimum wage. That didn’t matter. Harold didn’t have a job in a sheltered workshop to support himself, he held a job there because, whether he understood it or not, making any form of money made him feel like a productive member of society. I’m not saying this is the right solution for everyone, though. I have heard stories of people being placed in sheltered workshops who could have been placed in higher functioning jobs and felt belittled in the position they were in. Ultimately, his workshop got shut down for two reasons - people complained of injustice at the state level, so funding was cut, and a main supplier to the workshop sent the jobs overseas, where they could get even cheaper labor by the exploitation of women and children in unsafe conditions. I think many can agree that THAT is a greater travesty.
Annie Hebel the travesty is that instead of the government providing funding in order to support your uncle and allow him to be productive they decided to to close it. People should complain, because it IS unfair and things should be better, why are you not mad at the people who decided for the closure instead?
I 100% agree with you. I think this was an awesome video, but I wish they touched more on the fact that for a lot of these people, this is their sense of purpose. This gets them out of the house. And sometimes that house is with a family caregiver, like your uncle, or my brother. And other times it's a home for people who have no one. And I have been to those homes. It can be extremely disheartening, or uplifting. And to give these people any piece of normalcy that makes them identify as not disabled anymore is so important. Of course there are always the companies or people that are taking advantage of the situation, but so many more times they are not. And they are doing what they can for people who are just forgotten about or shoved aside by society.
My uncle is on the autism spectrum, and while he is capable of completing tasks and doing other work, he does not have the faculties to hold an appropriate conversation with a woman. Some people with mental disabilities aren't capable of comfortable social interaction, so for him, working in a work center felt comfortable and rewarding, and not unfamiliar or intimidating. Even with money he couldn't live independently, whatever he earned was his to go to lunch, or buy DVDs.
Annie Herbel You're absolutely correct. If ppl r going to get self righteous on this issue, they might think of all the jobs farmed out to slave labor. When I worked at Sony animation, they sent a LOT of work to Korea so to save a buck. A couple times a year, my boss would visit Korean studios to oversea what was going on over there, and they always came back with the same horror stories. Korean studio was always owned by one person. Was always one large, cheaply made square building with 2-3 floors of animators working elbow to elbow. Extremely humid, no ventilation, smelled like sweat, always hot. Was common to see sleeping animators with heads on desks, covered in newspapers bc they'd been working insane work weeks with ridiculous deadlines. Rather than studio owners hiring a sufficient amount of workers, they hired few as possible, and worked them to death. Some workers said they hadn't been home in a few days. The whole top floor would be the studio owner/boss's opulent office which had air conditioning, windows, expensive decor, etc. Owners were obviously hoarding all the money Sony was paying out for the animation, while employees were making squat. In Korea, it is customary to offer gifts to work associates in these situations, so every time our boss came back from Korea, they had very expensive gifts for everyone working on the show, which was around 50-70 gifts. So while we're receiving these insanely expensive designer scarves, Gucci key chains, etc, the highly talented workers (who haven't been able to see their families in days) deserving of these gifts r being worked to the bone, generating pennies on the dollar. And this is entertainment... I can't begin to imagine what the working conditions are like for factory workers. There r millions of ppl around the world suffering so ppl like Jeff Bezos can become even richer. We have Bill Clinton to thank for this atrocity.
I worked for one of the state supported living centers in Texas for about 5 years. My unit was considered acute medical meaning in addition to mental and developmental disabilities these people also had significant medical limitations. Many of them were unable to move much at all and actually had staff members helping them significantly to complete tasks. Their work was simple tasks such as placing papers in a pile or placing a plastic binder on paperwork. They were not paid much but it gave them a purpose and many of them showed great pride in getting up and getting ready in the morning. It also provided spending money for individuals who did not always have families or excess funding.
@@conkerlive101 No reasonable human being is trying to cut these programs. Just complete idiot SJWs who need the next thing to be outraged about without doing any facts or research whatsoever.
@@fairplay4164 Their room/board/medical expenses were absolutely funded- but it was definitely something they felt they personally accomplished when they got to go on shopping trips and pay with their own money that they received from a check that was collected from payroll just like anyone else.
i work for rem its a group home. i have a client who goes to work makes 25 cents an hour to shred papers and another who is paid 1$ to sweep the front entrance. what these people arent getting is this isnt even a real job no one is going to hire someone at 7.25 to shred papers to sweep 5 square feet for 8 hours. these work places allow my clients with disabilites to be out in the community. they get money through disability they dont pay rent or for their meds at the group home this is just fun for them so theyre not stuck in the house all day. if they get rid of this i will be so sad that my clients will be stuck at home wondering why theyre not good enough to work...
I can get what your saying but issue is there is those jobs that you say no one will pay someone minimum wage to do. Yet they do it here in canada. Not just for disabled people but just normal people. So to say no one will pay for that when they do is completely misleading. I have worked with many mentally disabled people in warehouses and I wouldn't expect them to make a penny less then the minimum wage that I was hired on at the time. There not someone to use for free labor. I mean you want to say that they're going to be cooped up get there are dozens of places in the community then they can usually volunteer at if they wanted to get out but if you're going to give them a paying job thing is a give them a pain way just that simple. Your people don't lose their benefits because they're making minimum wage if you disabled your disabled but if you're working you're still going to get your benefits but they still have to pay you a living wage or not slave labor.
@@The_Duggler25 if I had an employee on payroll already and a disabled person sweeping for a buck a day, I'd just hand the employee a broom and can the disabled guy if they took away my ability to pay only a dollar. It's more of a charity to let them work. I don't get this mentality of them just being the exact same as every "able" person. I've been around many people that literally can not move, eat or crap without an aide and you think they'd get employed if they needed to be paid the same as someone that can do everything themselves? You are in a fantasy if you think every human has the same capacity for work
@@UraniumReaperActual Yah you can that disabled person who already had the job and you're going to court for discrimination. They do get paid the same amount regardless here in Canada, so it doesn't matter what you think 'would happen.' But it doesn't surprise me that the US wouldn't.
@@The_Duggler25 I don't disagree with what you're saying that people should get equal pay, the issue here is the system. In the US the government funded programs set up to help disabled people whether it be financial or medical come with an income cap. My fiance is currently part of these programs when we marry our Monthly medical bills will increase by 1500 dollars because of what I make.
@@frankscrank99 well we aren't talking about Canada. And I'd "can" them in a figurative sense, because I'm pretty sure if the program shut down that the Government isn't going to force a person to then employ someone against their will
I have to agree with Tracy. I used to work for a non profit for a few years in our 'disabled' branch for. This is a controversial topic and I don't know if there is really a right answer. Because it all really depends on the level of disability. There are plenty of people who can work fine even though they have a disability. But where I worked , we had higher risk participants with disabilities. They had to be specially placed within our company and work under a 'guardian' where there was one or two employees watching a group of 3-4 at all times because they can not be out on their own or left alone for long periods of time without fear of injury to themselves, others or elopement. Alot of them couldn't be placed in certain jobs because they could not be around women or children or have violence problems. They would do simple jobs, delivering mail, filing, or cleaning. They would work 4-5 hours a day, some days they would go to work but refuse to do anything because they thought just going to work should be enough get them paid. Some wouldn't come in at all, and some days if they did come, they could go into a state of anger very fast and hurt themselves or their gaurdians and even wreck property. Then they would have to sent home early because they were a danger to the other participants. We had to specially make their work plans. And yes they did get paid lower, and that would raise depending on how often they would regularly come into work. But they also worked within a company that provided, housing, food, medical services for them. That money they got working was for spending on extra 'luxuries' such as video games and special snacks they wanted. You really have to take this payment issue on a case by case basis. What alot of people do not understand, working with a non profit we really need to stick to a strict budget, we almost entirely ran off United Way donation's and kindness. If our company paid our participants, who can not be placed in outside company jobs, more we would not have enough money in our budget for other employees and we would start to turn away people with disabilities because we could not help them properly.
I find your post fascinating thank you so much for sharing. So for me I'm a person that has a severe form of multiple sclerosis because I was beaten unconscious by my ex-boyfriend. This makes me so curious about situations like yours because in my opinion violence is to Loosely dealt with. I personally think that if people have some sort of conduct related disorder or cluster B related disorder that leads to them hurting other people that they should be put in a mental health facility that can help them. I personally think that we need to clean up all of the corruption in our government first. But if we were able to do that, I think it would be a good idea to start a new system of state-run mental institutions that are regulated with human rights laws thought of first. I like to always reorient myself to thinking about living my day in a way that can help contribute to the human race perpetuating and progressing to be here for a million years. I think in order for us to be here longer we have to equalize everybody and protect the masses from violent people that cause traumatic issues for healthy individuals. I think about being as healthy as possible and how I can progress as a human as much as possible because I find that so important mentally to keep pushing myself to deal with this disease. If the corruption could be handled what do you think about putting violent people in such a place. as a person that's been severely hurt by violent people I find myself very scared of them and I would have been scared to work in a facility that tolerated violence. When I say tolerate I mean, the person doesn't immediately go to jail if they strike somebody else.
The place my brother (down syndrome) worked at briefly was a factory for assembly of small bathroom rubber parts. It was just a 2 year pograme and I'm pretty sure it wasn't for profit and they probably lost money, hence charity act. There are days some of them didn't want to work or did only 20% of the days work target. But they still got paid a little for their effort well below minimum wage, and of course levied against what they could achieve in a single work day. They closed down to shift their business model and now my brother has no place to feel productive or pride in doing honest work. I can see where the line of argument is made but sometimes it's the cruelty of opportunists that warp and circumvent the law that makes for these cases.
Much like Megansours V, I also used to work for a non-profit organization that was a part of the Arc system who's focus was on the enrichment and development of special needs. In the program where I worked, you didnt really see many people who were what many label as high functioning mentally. When I asked my supervisor about that, they said it was because those who were functioning well enough mentally often had more opportunities than say someone with down syndrome. This place did partake in 14(c) as well due to many of the participants not wanting to do their jobs with their 1:1 staff member, leaving said employees to do the work for whomever they were assigned to that day. Many of the participants were also getting food, housing, clothes, and transportation for free so the funds they got went to toys, games, movies, and going to amusement parks. First hand, I had a group that I would take to help out at a nearby catholic school in the cafeteria and every time I would go, as well as with my coworkers, we ended up doing most of the work because our participants would become behavioral and we didn't want any school children hurt as a result since there is a system in place that prevents us from acting until it's already happened. The most they get is sent home and they keep their job. Many of my coworkers also felt that it was just a political charity act bc having the participants out in public at that school or at a grocery store got them more funding. A topic like this can't just be generalized. People function at different levels across physical, mental, and emotional status. While I do think public integration is a good thing, I also feel like at the end of the day without 14c you'd see many centers and employers no longer hire because it's just too costly in today's economic situation. At the end of the day, things should be more fair, and I agree with that, but it should be a limit to how low that sub wage goes bc it really varies too greatly.
I worked for a DD group home who sent our clients to "work." Most of the clients would come home with $15 paychecks because they did the activites offered more than the work. However, we had 2(out of 10) that did nothing but work. An 80 year old man and a 70 year old man brought home $75 dollar paychecks. They were paid 1 cent per product they assembled and they deserved to be paid more. Someone from the State Department of Developmental Disabilities should come and observe and if they are doing as much or more than a non disabled employee they should be paid more. It sucks because they love feeling like they are working and contributing but many companies will close or outsource if they are required to pay them a decent wage. It's a very shitty situation.
It is not a one size fits all scenario when it comes to disabilities. A highly functioning autistic person who could stock shelves and other similar task should be paid more. I have a brother who lives lives in a group home. He has the mental capacity of a 7 year old and is severe epileptic so he is not able to do complicated task and his work is in a workshop. Now since he is in a group home he doesn't have to worry about any financial burdens. All of his needs are taken care of. That is different then someone who is high functioning with a disability who may live alone and just has an aide stop in for a couple hours every night to help them cook or clean. So my brother is paid under minimum wage but any money he makes is his to keep. A couple times a year the house till take him shopping to buy random things to keep his savings account under a certain threshold or he is subject to a tax threshold even though he is making under minimum wage. So for my brother the group home allows him to get out of the house and interact for 5 hours a day with other people. Which is great for him and something that may not be available to him otherwise with his challenges. But for those who are higher functioning who do have some financial responsibilities it can be a burden for them. i guess all I want people to understand is this is not a one size fits all type of situation. It is not black and white or clear cut.
@@superkoopatrooper4879 But some are more efficient . We had 2 produce between 5,000 and 7,500 every 2 weeks by themselves. Those people need to be paid at the rate of able bodied peers doing similar work. We need someone not affiliated with the company or client to observe their work to see if they are being taken advantage of. Sometimes "work" is treated like a daycare and gives the caregivers a break. It's a very nuanced situation with a wide scope of disabilities and abilities and there isn't a one size fits all solution.
No joke, do some undercover Boss BS, as awful as it sounds, get someone to pose as a disabled person and have them observe the location to see if those getting paid X are getting paid what they should be paid or way less.
@@superkoopatrooper4879 if they try they are productive, I have autism should I be paid less money because I have a disability? Despite the fact I can function and work well?
Forget the whole productivity thing for a moment - the main issue here is about employment. Many people in these comments are forgetting just *how* difficult it can be to be employed when you're disabled. Even if you have the productivity of a normal worker, it's still far harder to get employed when you are disabled. Even if you have above average intelligence /productivity, ie a person with Aspergers, you can still find it difficult to find/keep a job. I mean, if you find it difficult to make eye contact, you are literally falling at the first hurdle as all the job interview advice is look them in the eye. This relates to a much bigger issue of disability rights and the infantalisation of disabled people
Wading through the comments, I thought I could be persuaded to one side or the other but the more I read, the less I'm able to. I definitely don't want to be the politician in charge of this issue, lol.
But really though, I can understand both sides. I think the best solution would really to have this program re-evaluated and better regulated. I don't think it should go away completely, it has amazing potential - especially at good facilities that also provide support and a safe environment to those who honestly need it.
My brother's work center is amazing. Without it, he would not be able to socialize with others, create friends, and stay active. Without it, he would most likely just stay at home watching TV.
@@thefirsttime7759 oh I agree. It's not about the money at all. He would still go even if they didn't pay anything. They even provide the transportation for him.
That's great for your brother and for the company, but i still don't understand how that stops the company (that's a work center who's porpose is to help disabled people who probably wouldn't be hired in other places) from paying your brother minimum wage for his work.
I live in a town that hosts a facility for the mentally disabled. It is a full time facility and the people there who want to and are able to work are given the chance to do that. They are payed a few dollars per hour, but if you consider the value of the health care and housing they recieve, they would be paid about about 45 per hour. If the state was required to pay a real minimum wage, costs would go up or the level of care would go down, or their jobs would just end reducing their quality of life. The below minimum wage law still has its place but should probably be modified.
And companies paying these wages would likely pull out of these programs because the ratio of pay to productivity would be too low. And that's not to say that these companies are greedy it's that in reality companies need to make a profit.
Do the companies cover the health care or is the state doing that? I never knew this was a thing so I feel like it needs to be looked at a lot closer. I don’t know the answer either so I was just wondering how that works.
Are their employers covering their healthcare and housing, or is the State? If it's the State, then the employer should pay minimum wage. If it's the employer, then this is a good compromise. Having someone work a full day at the best of their ability just to earn a fraction of what everyone is guaranteed to earn at minimum is not empowerment.
In the cases I am talking about the state provides everything and is the employer. These people are disabled enjoy to require full time medical care and what they do for work varies but if they were paid under the program Phil is talking about they would get just a few cents. As for modifying the program there is no win win scenario, but to be more fair I would think making the play reduction less than one for one. For example if you have a play reduction of a dollar right now, then make it 50 cents instead, something like that.
Hey, Phil, great topic. I am a physically disabled person with a background in computer programming, web design, marketing and advertising, and accounting. Being that I am disabled, I am most often passed over for jobs to people with fewer skills and less experience. Then, when I am hired, I am kept on the 2 years that companies can use my wages as a tax right off and then all of a sudden my physical disabilities become a problem. Oh, did I mention that I am often paid less than the able bodied candidate? I had a cousin that was blind as well as having several developmental disabilities, and due to one of these sheltered work programs, she was able to get her own apartment, yes it was subsidized, and gain a measure of independence. I can both see the need for these types of work programs and also am sick and tired of being treated as less because I have a disability.
You should contact the EEOC if you are able to perform the essential functions of your job position with or without a reasonable accommodation for your disability and are still being paid less. Anti-discrimination laws like Title VII and the ADA should protect you
KatieDidIt I this you misunderstood what she was saying, she was comparing her own experience as someone in the workforce with disabilities and her cousin who falls under 14C
@@pareidolias Thanks, Bug, I have actually got something in the words right now in regards to these issues at my job and am actively look for new employment.
Yeah but that's a physical disability, like, maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's actually illegal for them to do. Like, we HAVE systems in place to fight against that. Maybe they don't work that well -- definitely a possibility, with the government sucking at everything & all -- but yeah that's messed up. If your disability has no effect on your productivity, it should have no effect on your pay/employment.
I worked for 10 years with individuals with IDD as part of a residential program. I love you Phil, but this is way more complicated than represented here. You and your team put together a great piece, but there are many important concerns that are unaddressed. For instance, we regularly had to “spend down” our residents. When a resident had too much money in an account, their government aid was jeopardized. I would worry about individuals making more money, losing their government funding, then losing their minimum wage job due to inappropriate work behavior. Further, these programs (when done right) invest a tremendous amount into staffing and aid for these individuals. I’ve worked with people who are subject to uncontrollable emotional and physical outbursts and other major mental/health events. It would be truly naive to think that all people with developmental disorders are able to be a net positive for a business. (Picture individuals who have daily or weekly interactions with police due to violent episodes. This is common.) By definition, these individuals are less able to varying degrees. This is, quite literally, makes this group a group. That would be why we’re not having this conversation about any other groups. My concern is that by eliminating these programs, those who are truly unable to keep up in a more traditional work environment would be left behind. There’s a major problem with finding fulfilling social and work activities for individuals with disabilities. I’m almost glad this issue doesn’t get more attention. I’m worried that empathy paired with a lack of understanding from the general population would result in a worse situation for many... I say that truly believing that the condition many of these individuals find themselves in could be dramatically improved. I encourage people, if they want to help the disabled, to sit and talk with someone with disabilities. Become friends with someone. The root problem for this population is being treated like a project more than as an individual.
@@09BiGDylan More we need a change to most of the programs people with disabilities live on. I have a physical disability and I can tell you from experience that even considering a job is tough because of the rules we live under on programs like Section 8 and Social Security. I can't make more than $200 a month before I start having massive changes to my housing subsidy. People act like these programs are free money but it is a full time job just to stay on the program. And people like myself have no other choice, I spend 90% of my time stuck in bed from my disability.
Completely agree, the piece leaves out that the majority of these individuals receive disability (SSI and Medicaid). This helps pay for the additional intensive services they often need like residential supports, healthcare, and case management. Working actually jeopardizes these benefits. The solution has to take this into consideration.
I hate the 'spend down' problem. This in and of itself could use an entire episode in the problems and issues it creates for the individual, their families, the care facilities, and any legal representation they might have on their behalf. Also, on a separate-but-related note, I'm surprised that Skilcraft wasn't mentioned once in this episode as they're generally highly regarded for payment of workers with disabilities.
I am a person with a disability (totally blind), and it has been my experience that the media does not cover any issues related to disability. There was an attempt to gut the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) a couple of years ago and it slipped under the radar as the MSM had no interest in the subject. People discuss exploitation and discrimination, but do not include the disabled community in these discussions, I wonder why? Regarding the topic of the video, my girlfriend and I discussed this (she is also totally blind and does much more advocacy than I do) and we conclude that the issue is a little nuanced. People with profound intellectual disabilities that reside in homes where all of their basic needs are covered, e.g. housing, food and the like, are not victims of sub minimum wage. On the other hand, people such as myself, who live on our own, should be paid the same as you sighted folks, irrespective of our disabilities. As a side note, Industries for the Blind does not engage in sub minimum wage practices.
If a persons productivity is equal to what an average person is capable of then Yes they deserve the same wage, but otherwise No... I believe there needs to be a better system for governing those companies that use this practice... it Obviously could be easily used for nefarious criminal acts. Everyone should be paid based upon what she/he is worth in the system... that's type of work done and productivity of work done. People aren't equal... their Rights should be. If you forced, legitimate, companies that hire severely disabled people to pay them minimum wage then many of those companies will close or stop hiring disabled people. The system is broken, but, again, I think it's because of a lack of governing and the shortsightedness of those who first instituted the practice. It should be looked at again in this age and worked upon as would be reasonable and fair.
I think a bigger issue is that when they do work those jobs, their ssi money can be taken away. My sister has cerebral palsey, is physically and mentally disabled, and just wants to work rather than stay home all day. She works at a place like the one here in the video and she can make less than $10 one week, and $30-40 the next week depending on which job she does and how much is completed. She has gotten ssi money taken away because she makes "too much" at her job to qualify.. that is where it's complete bullshit. I do think it would be near impossible for her and some of her friends to be able to get a job at all at their disability level if it weren't for that type of program. I had not considered if it was exploitation or not, so I'm glad it's a conversation. I know it would not be a good quality of life for my sister to not work and instead just collect ssi; she needs both. A job to keep her socialized and out of the house, and actual money to support herself.
There are often errors in disability payments and she likely doesn’t make too much for her SSI. My brother has been kicked off dozens of times due to errors. Elderly can make a couple hundred a week without losing theirs, so $30-40/ month shouldn’t be an issue. Also she should qualify for both Medicaid and food stamps. Especially if she has any special dietary requirements.
That's a good point, I knew someone who chose not to work only because she was in danger of losing benefits if she did. It's a real shame. People shouldn't be discouraged from working like that.
"Earned income means money you are paid from working. If you have earned income, the SSA will exclude the first $65 (if you don’t have any unearned income, $85 will be deducted instead), plus half of the remainder amount over $65 that you are paid each month. This reduces your countable income, which will help minimize the effects of your work on your benefit amount. For example, if you make $1,465 per month, the SSA will subtract $65 (to get $1,400) and then half of the amount over $65 (to get $700). That $700 is your countable income from work, and it will be subtracted from your monthly SSI payment (which is $750 without a state supplement). You would still get an SSI payment of $50. In a nutshell, you can make about $1,550 a month before your SSI benefit is reduced to zero." For reference, $1,550 is about $9.68/hr at full time, which means benefits should apply. Of course they take the benefit away if they start making enough money. It shows that they're able enough to work on their own and don't need welfare anymore.
I have such mixed feelings about this. I’ve worked in behavioral health for years, mostly in residential facilities but when I take clients to their work, often they aren’t able to complete their job to it’s fullest capacity on their own. I don’t see how a company would be able to pay them the same amount as their coworkers who are working circles around my clients. That’s not to say that all individuals with disabilities are struggling to work to that capacity but many are and I think it needs to be judged on a case by case basis. Many of these individuals I’ve worked with are also more than happy to just to have something productive to do with their time. Don’t get it twisted, I love my clients and think they can do amazing things and they do their best but I think a policy like this will result in a lot of people with disabilities just flat out not getting hired to begin with
My office is cleaned by a company that hires disabled people for minimum wage or more, some of these people are severely disabled, and would no doubt be qualified for sub minimum wage, the company also hires non disabled people for the same work. We requested three different disabled workers because they clean better, they are friendlier, they are always dressed sharply, they don’t blast music out of their cleaning cart, honestly they deserve more than some of the non disabled workers that come into the office.
How long do they take to clean everything? That's very important, because that's YOUR hours. If you getting paid for those hours, then your boss is screwed, losing on value you could provide to the company.
As a person with a disabled sister, I can appreciate and respect the businesses decision. It's highly admirable. But not every business thinks with their morals first, they have to think with profit in mind because that's the way the cookie crumbles. My sister needs the socialization and time away from home more than she needs the money. If taking away sub minimum wage would take away that job, its just not worth it because its about WAY more than money.
Mordewolt If a disabled person is cleaning better, dressed better and shows a better image to people walking into their office it’s worth the wage that they get. To pay someone simply because they’re non-disabled but must clean again, dresses poorly, and/or presents themselves as rude, belligerent isn’t worth hiring. Any executive will see the importance of hiring people who do the job better regardless of disability.
@@eternalchoppedscrewed If it takes a cleaning person to do his job 2 hours more for the room because he's disabled, the whole room just lost 2 hours of work. That's 2 hours they could be productive.
I’m legally blind, (but highly independent), and in Texas we have the Lighthouse for the Blind that assembles stuff for the military etc, and it’s heartbreaking because sometimes you see people with graduates degrees working there. However, it does provide opportunities. I know if for whatever reason I am unable to find a job, that is something I can fall back on, though for me it is a worst-case scenario. About 80% of visually impaired individuals are unemployed, and contrary to popular belief, you cannot really live on SSI (social security) alone
@@AnimeOtaku2 yeah but still how did shs find the video or the comment section, you cant find that with text to speech, and could she see people with the degreees?? And why does she have glasses
@@Rowjimmyguitar legally blind doesn't mean she can't see, it means that glasses or contacts cannot fix her vision 100% to 20/20. her script has to be -8.00 or above to qualify.
The first thing they should do is change the SSI laws so if a disabled person can actually make a little money they're not going to have their disability cut. The government is basically saying these disabled people should always stay impoverished even if they can make a little more money that would really help them and their needs. Most are being taken care of by their families who are usually also very poor and needy for extra money.
It sounds like the program is an excellent opportunity for some (lower functioning), but not for all (everyone else). Instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, maybe the determinitive criteria and wage calculations needs to be revised. Or, maybe better oversight of the companies making these determinations.
I feel like that's the best solution as well. Sadly another part of the problem is that most people have a singular view of what it means to be disabled. My daugther is on the spectrum and some of the reactions I get from people when I tell them that they act as if her whole life is fucking over. Which anyone who works with people who are disabled know that's not the case. The solution likely requires a lot of regulations and oversight and obviously money which i feel wont be there to create the ideal situation. Which is truly sad.
Isn't this literally the enlightened centrist meme? How can you allow discrimination against someone who is disabled, but argue that discrimination in other regards (skin colour, gender, physical attributes etc.) is immoral? However you try to spin the subminimum wage thing, it still is discrimination against a demographic; your justification is a post-hoc one imo.
Hi Phil! great video. however, could you please put subtitles on your morning videos? This video especially so needs subtitles to make it more accessible to your hard of hearing/deaf audience. As someone who is hard of hearing i thank you for putting subtitles on your PDS videos and would love it if you put them on your morning videos. keep up the great work!
As someone who is 'disabled' (I put that in quotes because I do not collect disability) and unemployed, I agree with both Tracey Brown and Neil Romano. There needs to be places that those with disabilities can go to find employment, but its far too easily exploitable. I am pleased to see that the Cronin's were able to be so successful.
I don't usually comment but I have watched for years at this point and I finally think I found a topic I need to chime in on. I have worked as a residential councilor for years as an aid to people with developmental disabilities. We have workshops for our clients and they choose to be a part of them. It's not really truthful to say that disabled persons are only getting paid "x" amount and it's not enough to live. Most if not all of these workers are apart of nonprofit agencies and live in community homes (where I work) they get government assistance and everything is made sure to be taken care of for our clients (I cant speak for everyone of course). The workshop is a way for them to make a little extra money as well as socialize and feel productive and independent while also learning a skill. The wages being described "25 cents per hour" are exaggerated figures taken from the extreme end of the spectrum. For example they may pay one of our completely disabled persons (who in no way shape or form can really work) a minimum for basically hanging out and not getting much done lets say $5 for an afternoon even though they pretty much just sit in a chair and hang out. The important thing is the fulfillment these people get from being able to do these things, they don't care about the money. My own clients have come to me with worries of not being able to attend their workshops anymore because of the threat of expunging the wage. Agencies like the one I work for pride themselves on providing this community with the most fulfilling and independent lives they can have everyone has the option to work or go to school or even just go on trips with social groups. It's become more than a job , I'm closer to my clients than my own family. Thanks for covering this Phil it's nice to see the disabled community get a little more of a platform.
@Jordan Read Wtf man? Why so negative? I enjoyed the hell out of what TheMrNickP had to say! If you're just gonna sit here and shit on the effort he put into writing all of that, then _you_ oughta go back to not commenting...
You pointed out many things that people are completely missing. Too many are thinking like abled people who work to buy things and pay bills or only thinking of high functioning disabled. The law is for the people like the one's you work with - who just want to belong in some way. The job gives them something to be proud of or like you said, a place to hang out and be with people. Our family friend that was paralyzed with polio held a great full-pay job, as did our bind friends. But my cousin who had the mental level of a 5-yr old benefitted so much from his sub pay job - he was so happy and proud of it, and had no concept of how much he was making, just that he got his "allowance". People seem to trying to lump all disabilities in to one group and not understanding how vast the differences are from one to the next. And thank you for the work you do!! I know it takes a kind heart and boatload of patience and you don't get paid so well either. Thank you!
Statistically speaking you're talking about a vast minority of this group though. You're lucky enough to be working with those who don't need help financially, and are provided with many things that most are not.
I used to be the Network Operations Manager for a group of radio stations, and when I was hired the station already had a disabled (blind) person working there. Every Sunday morning he ran the radio station like a pro. He was, in fact, the most loyal and conscientious employee I had. I am ashamed to admit that I had no idea until now that we were possibly paying him subminimum wage. He was worth more than most other non-disabled radio board operators I had on staff. Had I been in charge of payroll I would've immediately addressed this issue and fought to pay him the same or more than other employees doing a similar job.
There is a chance though that he was paid more than someone who could see. You have to calculate productivity for sub-wages. If your employer actively lied about how well he could do to the government than maybe he was paid less. If he was faster than you and other employees he could have been paid higher.
You probably weren't, you have to get certified to pay someone sub-minimum wage and you have to demonstrate that they are less productive than their non-disabled counterparts. You said he was worth more, so he wouldn't have been paid less.
Being visually impaired is a physical disability - not a developmental or intellectual disability - and his right to be paid an equal wage was likely protected under the human rights code (it would be here in Canada). People w/developmental and intellectual disabilities often fall through the cracks in regards to protections for all types of human rights (incl. in Canada, at least in Northern Ontario where I live).
As a disabled woman, thank you so much for bringing light to this issue. It was pretty disheartening to read some of the comments. Most of the time, it’s the limitations that abled people put on disabled people that actually prevent disabled people from working, not an actual inability derived from the disability. Notice how not a single disabled person was asked about wages. It was abled people speaking for disabled people. Wouldn’t it make sense to...idk get a disabled persons opinion? And not just a video asking them in the warehouse how they like it there. I want a disabled person in a leadership position answering these questions for us. Stop speaking for us, pass us the god damn microphone.
they probably think you'd want to be paid in cookies or something, i think it's difficult to remove the stigma that disabled people are very "innocent".
Not all disabled people affected by this law. "only" disable poeple in which their disabilities affect their work productivity. It is very messed up, I know. Just hoping the government will come up with the solution
With this one the difference is not whether or not a disabled person will make the minimum or less the difference is whether or not their hired in the first place. High Functioning disabled people won’t have their wages cut because their productivity will be the same
There are companies out there and organizations that have helped people get regular minimum-wage jobs. there are businesses out there and that will hire people with disabilities. I I know for a fact
@@darkestsummer2 Some. The amount to support that many downs people probably not. Most of these people just wouldnt do anything. Work programs are mostly daycare for adults that live at home. Whos families need them taken care of during the day while they work.
High functioning is a BS term though, what you mean is low support. Lots of non-disabled workers are very high support through management time, need for over/re-training and lax work attention but you don't cut their pay. While I appreciate there's a difference in ability with some disabilities it is so much BS to say that disabled workers automatically do worse than able bodied workers.
Not really. . As a person who is considered legally blind or by today's standards visually impared, I am able to complete work at the same rate as near everyone else with the exception of driving which I cannot legally do. You will normally find companies will only hire a certain amount of the disabled no matter how functioning they are. Let's just say that despite being a white male, I have been the token of several organizations before starting my own business. Go to any company location that pays minimum wage, you will find no more then one disable person per shift if that. I found in my early years of applying for jobs that if I notified them during the interview process that I was legally blind, I received very few call backs. Every job where I omitted my visual impairment, I was called in for an interview, and normally hired.
I don't think its unreasonable to allow it with more requirements. Places like Wal Mart shouldn't have the option, but places with dedicated programs and appropriate support outside of just employment should have the option of sub-minimum wage. With submitted proof that paying at minimum wage would cause the business to not be profitable or barely profitable to a certain degree, and they would be unable to operate their other services that benefit the disabled person. And I don't think it's preposterous to establish a disabled minimum wage so they can't be paid pennies an hour. Alternatively, if this was repealed, require businesses to pay minimum wage but offer tax credit/cuts to the business! That way the disabled person isn't harmed and the business doesn't have to do a cost/benefit analysis on the productivity of the worker.
Great suggestion CarolinerITM, they give tax cuts to businesses for far less than decreasing the gaping outflow of social security disability money every year. It doesn't seem fair to eliminate it when that will mean no more jobs at all for disabled people, so it shouldn't be eliminated without finding another way to ensure that disabled people are included in the workforce. We need to be encouraging and providing incentive for businesses to hire disabled people who want to work so that the money they live on can be earned and taxed, fair and square, instead of an arbitrary and destructive national expense.
@F said like someone who never even saw someone who was disabled.. there's a difference between 1 and 100%.. I really hope for your sake you'll never lose your job and need help because in the world as you see it you wouldn't survive.
@F If businesses are offered tax incentive to hire disabled people at minimum wage, it wouldn't be smart to hire them for the same duties an able bodied person can perform. In many businesses, the employees just deal with the errant, menial duties of operation tacked on to their main job description. So if businesses have the incentive, they can round up those tack on tasks and make whole positions out of them for the disabled to apply for. Which could also yield increased productivity from the able bodied positions due to decreased distraction from side tasks. When a disabled person is employed, they aren't collecting disability, they're earning their own money and paying taxes like the rest of society. So even if the tax cut is more than the incoming tax from the disabled person's wages, the system is still not losing nearly as much as it does shelling out monthly disability checks. I imagine there are other forms of incentive besides tax cuts to consider as well, but there's got to be something that can be worked out that isn't the drain on the system we have going now.
I guess it comes down to whether or not these disabled people could find jobs after 14c. Wish Phil could have gone a little more into that, because that seems to be the crux of the issue. Great video though, I had no idea this was a thing
I am visually impaired and have been since I was 8 years old. I am now 30. I work as a quality analyst with one of the top three largest companies in the United States. I get paid depending on my cost of living. Therefore where I live I get paid about $14 an hour +5 dollars an hour for healthcare. I have been offered a new job where I’d be making a lot more and on a salary pay. My abilities are phenomenal. But not all people who are visually impaired have my skills. I appreciate you bringing this to light because it is a problem. I also want to point out if it has not been mentioned since I am in the middle of the video, these companies also get a huge tax break. A lot more than they pay us.
First, I am in Canada. What we have here are subsidized workers. So if a company hires an employee that has a severe disability that does affect his performance, the government can subsidize his/her salary. So my son is autistic, he is still a teen so not in the workforce yet. I think he will be able to find a job and be an independent adult, give him a computer and he can work magic. BUT the learning curve in a workspace might be difficult for him. So him having a subsidy might encourage some employers to take him on (referring to his first job type thing). So they pay him less than minimum wage but he gets paid more than that at the end with the subsidy. But then again, we are a "socialist" country...
I’m not completely sure how it all works here and if companies get subsidized but I think it would 100% be the correct way to do things if they don’t. The employee could get at least the minimum wage and they company could get a certain amount back from the government depending on the severity of the disability. It would give more of an incentive to hire disabled workers giving them more of a opportunity while paying them a livable wage.
Your son will be fine, at least by the description you gave, sometimes its just a matter of trying out things until you find something that works, that's why volunteering or short term employment that is subsidized is great. I don't have autism, but I do know there are certain fields where they are actually in higher demand. The feds will bend over backwards for accommodations but you need at least a degree of some sort and the ability to speak french (typically). I had a family member work for them, and was able to get all the equipment/resources needed. Also, if you're in Ontario Ford is being a giant a$$hole and I hope the autism community wins that battle.
Wow, that's actually a really good idea. After finishing I was mulling over the best way our country could approach the issue, and this seems like a great way to do it. Yeah, it might be considered "socialist" here in the US, but the same thing was said about many of the programs brought by the New Deal mentioned in the video. Now these things are taken for granted. Here's hoping we pull our heads out of our collective ass.
The US already subsidizes companies for employing disabled people to a certain extent. They just do that along with paying disabled peoples pennies an hour which let's the companies maximize their profits.
How is this paid for? If the Gov is subsidizing, its through higher taxes. This is forced altruism through taxation. Rob from the abled and give to the disabled. It should be a choice. People should own their means of production.
Wow, Phil, this is absolutely incredible. Thank you so much for educating us on this situation. You have outdone yourselves. Keep up the amazing work. I'm blown away.
I have Cerebral Palsy and I had a sub minimum wage job because people didn't think I could handle a regular job. It was at a work center and one of the worst times of my life. Now I have a great government job making good money.
I had a roommate in college with Cerebral Palsy. Thinking he would be paid less than others while he is capable of doing work pisses me off. I'm fortunate enough to be on the "high functioning" side of autism, formerly known as Asperger's syndrome. I hate the term high functioning because it makes it seem there are levels to value in society. I have known people with physical and mental struggles and know our government does so little for us. Anyway glad you are working in better conditions now
I'm sad learning about it and support the awareness of the subject. I'm from Canada and in my province disabled people are fortunate enough to get good employment insurance to afford basic needs whether we can work or not. I am appalled that this bill exists in any nation. disabled people can't make their disabilities go away and work the same hours and jobs as normal people. I think it is less important to focus on how much they are payed or where they work, but how good a financial support system they have to live a descent quality life in spite of there disabilities.
Neil Romano was just sprouting false equivalency imo. The reason why there is no discussion that “X minority group should be paid Y” is because its a discussion of able bodied workers; he literally missed the core principle of why it was set in place to begin with. Im not advocate for 14c and there probably should be an alternative to it but having a chairman lack such basic critical thinking skills worries me lol
I think Romano knows full well that he's talking out of his backside. Unfortunately, there are far too many activist organizations that are more interested in stirring the pot than actually helping people.
@@kraft.singles I'm sorry, but you are wrong. I volunteered helping severely autistic adults (nonverbal) as a "job coach" essentially supervising them as we sanitized tables at a cafeteria. There was far more work put in to supervising, and arranging the time to help these individuals have a safe space to feel fulfilled, then they got done cleaning tables that would just have to be wiped down again by someone that could do it properly. On the extreme end of the spectrum, the work is only for the benefit of the disabled person, their sense of belonging, integration with society, and fulfillment. It is a service for them.
6 років тому+1
The employer doesn’t just get to set the amount though you didn’t watch at all did you.
There was no mention of disability benefits in this video (that I've caught at least) but I think it has a large influence on the debate around sub-minimum wage. These workers, if they aware of it, can collect SSI or Supplemental Security Income. This is meant to aid those who make little or no income because of their disability. It generates the coverage for basic needs such as food clothing, and shelter. While the amount given varies and I do not have numbers or personal experience collecting SSI, it is not merely just the sub-minimum wage they earn, or at least it shouldn't be. The issue we run into with removing sub-minimum wage is that a) these people would no longer be able to feel productive because they would no longer be able to collect SSI if they were to get a job b) run the high risk of getting fired for not being able to meet the requirements of the position they've been hired for and thus, feel like a failure when they are not. Anyone who has been without a job for longer than 3 months knows very well the depressing feeling that comes along with not being mentally stimulated, social and productive. With sub-minimum wage, it helps greatly with their isolation and depression, which is a big risk in the disabled adult community.
I'm disabled and i think Neil Romano is misleading. He talks about how disabled people as minority group are discriminated against like no other group. He's missing the point, everyone is discriminated against in the work place, if you can't do the work you can't get the job. So if anything his problem is that disabled people ARE treated equal. Any able bodied person wouldn't get hired if they couldn't do the job 100%, same goes for the disabled. He's calling for people to be treated equal while at the same time expecting people to treat disabled people differently. I'm disabled and don't see myself as equal to others, if i'd have to move bricks i'd never be as productive as a normal person so to claim i'm equal just hurts me because now it's not my disability that causes me to be less productive because i'm 'equal' after all so it must be i'm just lazy and slacking.
His argument is an appeal to emotion veiled under legalistic and "logic". I noticed he used terms like "fair" and "equal" without defining what that actually is. It's hoping that the audience thinks completely flat but business is competitive.
People will directly not hire you if they find out you sometimes have a medical condition and if you don't try to push yourself forward by saying "Is this because of my disability?" You will be pushed around in the work place or down and right fired. Tax benefits or not you're a walking lawsuit waiting to happen. I know as I have had disabilities for ten years and every manager I've talked with has told me that. That if you don't put screws to people? You get it yourself.
@@Josh-wm6wf Yeah, that's why his argument felt kind of weak to me. The others are talking about how it allows someone who can't perform to the same level as an able-bodied person to actually work at all. While he only argues that it's not fair while seemingly ignoring the logic behind it. John and his dad seem to have the right idea; though we never saw their workplace, I like to think that they had no reasons to lie or overemphasize the benefits.
I do believe that that should be able to be payed less if they are not capable of the same level of productivity. The problem however is there are most likely, perfectly productive disabled people getting taken advantage of because of this law.
As a disabled American, while yes I am capable of less than someone that has the ability to stand, I won’t even apply for jobs that would even slightly require it.
Living wage is a living wage. Period. It's not a wage based on how efficient you can work. If that was the case the same rational would be applied to normal workers. Every 6 months testing your efficiency and raising your wages. This arguement falls apart rather quickly.
@@VitruvianEngineer Your argument falls apart rather quickly if you consider that if we did hold it to the standard of everyone getting the living wage as you said then why would a company ever hire someone who couldn't perform the job? You want them to be paid equally but have an advantage when it comes to hiring practices? Sounds like a double standard to me.
@@eternalzeero The companies don't have to hire disabled people either. They do it because it's much cheaper labor than having to pay some else like $10 an hour. However, paying anyone pennies an hour shouldn't be allowed. If they are not efficient enough then you fire them. They should really make it where the minimum you can pay a disabled person is above a dollar at the very least. They get tax write off and stuff for doing it already so...Disabled people looking for work usually causes more damage to their income anyway in case you didn't know. Most state will deduct the income from your monthly disabled checks or in some cases lower your monthly disabled checks because you are just working. This happens to people a lot who get into remissions from illnesses, find jobs, and then their symptoms come back and they will try to get back until disability with a struggle and finally a lower monthly check. The system practically punishes people who try to work but are disabled so a lot of them just don't try. What's the point if it's going to hurt you in the long run and you may not even see more money coming in to support yourself?
@@VitruvianEngineer The same rational is applied to normal workers. If you are a crappy employee, are lazy, show up late, etc etc you will not get a raise or as big of one as another person who is more productive. In many cases if its bad enough you will be fired. The only difference is where you start out in pay and if you even get hired to begin with. An employer will not hire someone who is unable to do the job. If they for say hire a disabled person at minimum wage over the years if they underperform they will not get raises or as big of ones because of there productivity and will eventually make less anyways if they even get hired. The idea of a living wage is also not a thing. There is no specific number because its all based on where you live, your specific health issues, life circumstances and if you live within your means. I can make the same as someone else but if I manage my money differently it can seem as if i'm rich over someone else who feels and looks like there barely making it and don't make enough. Companies are also no in the business of making sure there employees make enough money. It seems wrong but they are selling a product or service and if they cant afford to pay more they cant afford to pay more period. Many believe that they should not exist or be in business if you can't pay more but that is absurd. First wages are a contract you make with your employer to work for a job. You are not forced to work for that wage and if you think you can make more you can go somewhere else. If someone is happy to work for a specific pay who are you to control their life and how they live it. Its extremely elitist and authoritarian. It may be nice to have everyone at mcdonalds making $50hr but in order to do that the prices for food would undergo massive inflation, less food would be bought, and in the end less profits made if not net losses causing the company to close. Wages and benefits are the largest expense for most employers. If you can hire 2 people one disabled who would perform worse than the other person for the same wage who will you hire. No matter how good it may make you feel overall you will lose money and hurt your business if you hire unqualified people with or without disabilities.
Thank you so much for this video, Phil. I have degrees in Psychology, Anthropology, and Rehabilitation Services and it always pains me knowing not enough people have been informed about this topic, especially after learning about this years ago when I was in college. There are many more topics like this one that have extremely sad truths behind them when it comes to the lives of those persons around us who do not have the same mental or physical capabilities that we consider "normal". Another part of this that annoys me is how many places don't hold up simple codes when making their stores/businesses accessible to persons with disabilities (even ones that employ these people) but that's a whole different topic. I know there's a bunch of things you hit on with while going through this like the difference in socializing and segregating these works places have or may lack, but thank you for keep on topic. I would love to see ya'll cover these problems as well, but I know each of these topics could take up whole videos themselves.
@@kathleenpresloid557 Not really sure what you're trying to get at here; do you think the only way people can have experience with something is if that thing is in their family? Whether or not a persons background is filled with work, volunteering, studying, or personal life is completely irrelevant because they all provide experience in a subject, and most of the time people are not just experienced in a field or subject through only one thing. On top the the highly flawed logic you seem to be trying to use here the whole point of Phil's community/viewers is to get conversations, information, and feedback thrown out into the world to hopefully make it a better place. I hope you learn to have conversations in the future and learn from those around you, especially if they may have a different background than you.
You are a person with good intentions who does not appear to understand the reality of the intellectually challenged. The road to Hell in paved with good intentions.
I'm surprised there's no discussion about the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plenty of disabled employees can do their jobs just fine once some reasonable accommodations are in place. I should know. I'm autistic and have integrated just fine into the workforce.
AwSam Weston this goes past the ADA. With the ADA employers must accommodate until their productivity is impacted. 14C is for employees who cannot work at a level where productivity will not be impacted.
I am one of those "weirdos" who believes minimum wage is supposed to mean the minimum you can hire someone for. I don't believe in paying waitresses below minimum either! Tips are never guaranteed. It is interesting to note that anytime someone is hired for any amount of time (even a few hours a week) they are counted toward the newly employed thus making the unemployment rate go down and employed go up. So yea... not every employed gets even part time hours.
"An employer of a tipped employee is only required to pay $2.13 an hour in direct wages if that amount plus the tips received equals at least the federal minimum wage (the employee retains all tips and the employee customarily and regularly receives more than $30 a month in tips. If an employee’s tips combined with the employer’s direct wages of at least $2.13 an hour do not equal the federal minimum hourly wage, the employer must make up the difference." - US Department of Labour
@@simplysanatori Legally yes, but wage theft totals to more than all other property crimes (burglary, auto theft, etc.). Personally, I would prefer that we got rid of all tipping altogether and just paid people fairly, but I can't start that movement by not tipping, ya know?
The question I have (which no one seems to be asking) is this - How does working at a sub-minimum wage program affect that person's disability benefits? Are they supplemented the rest of the money it takes to meet the cost of living? I'm on disability and get enough money to live comfortably. If I were to work at one of these facilities, would all that money go away, or just some of it? I actually have a brother who worked at a facility like this years ago (no idea if it was under the same federal program or not); I should ask him to post about it. EDIT - I just asked him about it, and he said that you do get disability benefits to supplement the sub-par wages.
@@Magicandcoffee1993 Alright, that's good to know. I wish that information would have been included in the video, since everyone else seems to think that the sub-minimum wage money is all they get.
I'm on SSDI because I worked my rear end off until I got sick at 36. 10 years after I had to go on disability, I was shoving supplements down my throat like there was no tomorrow and felt like I could try the reintegration back into working for a living program SSDI offers. On SSDI you can make up to $800 per month without losing any benefits. Unfortunately, that added stress on my body just from working part-time finally caused a severe relapse of my CFS/Fibro and I had to stop working again. There were 4 or 5 months where I made over $800 and Social Security will make you pay that back when they get around to it. That is how it works for people who were able to work normally. People who never worked at all receive a seriously non-living income from the government and may have different income guidelines.
I'm disabled. I'm also a highly skilled worker. I would never work for less than the minimum wage. There is a lot of discrimination against disabled people in the workforce. I use a stick, and people take one look at that and write me off. My reasonable requests, like having meetings either on the ground floor or in buildings with a lift, are often met with looks of bewilderment and half the time I end up having to struggle up a couple of flights of stairs to get there. My work is just as valuable as the work of anyone without a disability. Therefore I should get paid the same. It's both degrading and humiliating to be assumed to be worth less because I have a disability. I'd honestly rather not have a job than effectively work as a slave. It's exploitation. It isn't actually helping anyone.
Thank you. I completely agree. It looks like most people who have written these comments have never taken the time to actually to talk to a disabled person. You're disabled. That doesn't mean you're doing less than the other employees and the fact that people automatically assume that really annoys me.
If you are just as effective as anyone else then legally you'd need to be paid the same and this story doesn't apply to you. Let's try to be rational ok?
Yes and like the law says, if your disability does not hinder your productivity than you are legally entitled the same wage that everybody else gets paid. If you don't receive that then your employer can be sued for it. There is no need to change an entire law for it.
@@LemonWedge123 Unless everyone is being paid based on their productivity level, paying disabled people less is discrimination. It's really not that hard to understand. As a disabled person, there are still only 24 hours in a day for me. Hourly wages are paid by the hour. Period.
You completely ignored the fact that people with intellectual disabilities depend on SSI and Medicaid for living wages and insurance. The reason for this subminimum wage is to be sure they won't make too much money and lose their benefits. Getting rid of "subminumum" wage jobs means that individuals who can't hold down a full time job with benefits (many, if not most) will not be able to work at all. It's honestly completely insane to talk about this story and leave this information out.
So the solution is that we should allow welfare to subsidize companies not willing to treat disabled workers as equal to other employees? The solution should be to train these people in specialized trades that they are suited for. Not creating what are little more than sweatshops;
baundiesel He's got a habit of ignoring the important details in favor of attempting to sound like an earnest nice guy. Remember his coverage of the Covington situation?
The solution would be to stop punishing people with disabilities who work and allow them to earn equal pay along with benefits they should qualify for because of their disability. Being disabled means your life is exponentially more expensive to live. Stop punishing people with disabilities who can and are willing to work by disqualifying them from benefits they need just because they earn more than poverty levels. That's right. Earning above the poverty level disqualifies you from disability benefits which is insane. The system is set up to keep you poor.
Before I start, I used to be part of the management team at goodwill, one of the many nonprofits using these laws, and I saw first hand how exploitive the practice is. And its kinda disappointing seeing all the knee jerk comments about how they shouldn't be paid a fair wage simply because their legally disabled and how it's the only way they can even keep a job. Honestly some of the top workers at my store were those "disabled" people you guys are just casually dismissing. Frankly when it comes to entry level work I never gave a shit about what people know. It's about how much you want to be there and actually do the work, and alot of these disabled people are so much more motivated and happy to be there than the average worker. And yeah, might take them a little longer to get them into the swing of things, but they make up for that with enthusiasm that I rarely see now that I've left goodwill. And in the long run that makes for a better work environment overall. So yeah, let's get rid of this antiquated law. But not only that but this stigma that just because they're disabled they aren't capable. When I switched over to safeway they have 2 courtesy clerks that fall into the category, and when I started they weren't performing very well because everyone's first reaction was to just yell at them and overall just ignore them, I took the time to actually communicate with them and whenever they work with me frankly I see much less issues than before. These people are capable of more than what most just presume, and they should be compensated just the same as their peers. Sorry for the rambling I almost never comment but I think most people can get the gist of what I'm saying lol
I had no idea Goodwill used sub-minimum pay with its workers who are disabled (I assumed they received a regular wage). Do you know if they were working there through a work program through a care provider? Or, if they were independent and using the job to cover rent, transportation, food, etc. but with a reduced income due to the law? I'm interested, because I've only ever seen the former, but the latter example should definitely be considered an abuse.
@@nathanvantwisk5729 it varied, some are independent and others went through programs goodwill provided in-house, the latter was particularly depressing to see. Alot of times they made next to nothing and they were treated almost like cattle. Goodwill would work the shit out of them and on days off they would take them on "excursions" to our stores here to buy things. Most of these people could only afford to buy one or two things at a time, mainly just small toys or knickknacks that only cost a couple of dollars. Goodwill likes to use the excuse that they make up for the lower wages because of the cost of taking care of them but frankly it's all bullshit. Goodwill regularly provides monetary bonuses to managers and above if the store/district meets the monthly and yearly sales goals. Which is why practices like these are exploited, cutting costs that can be easily affordable just so all these people can line their pockets. In my state in particular (every state/country is different so I cant say this is a commonly used practice) even alot of the normal workers were exploited as well, my bosses would direct applicants to our state work program, which would get them hired as temporary workers. They work part time hours and their wages would come from the state. After a three month tenure the company would then make a decision about whether the company would like to keep the individual as a regular employee or decline and just wait for the state to send another individual on a temp basis...I don't think I need to say what decisions the higher ups were making...
Thanks Phil for making this video. I learned so much about something I never knew. You told boths with no bias. I can appreciate the points from both side. Thanks so much.
He didn't mention how disabled workers are usually getting government assistance on top of the subminimum wage. Sooo, he didn't really give you the whole picture.
@@farlanghn Thanks for adding on to the topic. That is very important to keep the discussion going. This is just a start, I understand there is always more but I never knew anything about subminimum wage. Awareness is the first step. This is a huge topic just like most things in life.
I mean, I had a great uncle who had down syndrome who lived to be 51 ( for those who don't know, that's pretty old for someone with down syndrome; most don't make it to 60). He lived with his sister and worked at a factory near their home. Like most people with down syndrome, he really didn't need to work. He had family support and government disability benefits that paid for quite a bit of whatever he needed, but he worked because he wanted to and he felt like he was helping. That's obviously not the case for all people in this situation, but it is for most: they're really not doing it for money, more so to either 1) have something to do, or 2) to make them feel like they are helping, which they are a little bit.
I'm a disabled person in Canada it is hard for me to find a job if it wasn't for my community I believe I'll be living on the streets or with my parents this is why when I see the sub pay for the disabled in the United States I'm discussed. One reason why it's so hard for international disabled people to get a job is we do not get diploma only get a certificate just like how people who skip out on school.
Do you not realize that if you had this policy, you could find a company that can pay you a fair wage for your work productivity? But because the minimum wage is above your productivity, companies aren't legally allowed to hire you without losing money? This policy is precisely to provide people like yourself structure and fair compensation.
For people outside of the US who might miss this point I want to mention our government provides people with disabilities with aides like SSD and insurance and foodstamps so they don't have to work in order to support themselves. It's not a perfect system, but we do support our disabled, just in a different way. If did away with subminimum wage, these people who are choosing to work for the joy of getting out and socializing and completing a task would have to either quit or reduce/lose their benefits. The more you make the less you receive, that way people who can support themselves do, and there's more support for the people who really need it
Phil I think the real problem with this video is that it addresses all of disabled people as a collective. For some people with some disabilities, these programs are rather beneficial (although, somewhat exploitable.) Those of us with higher functioning disabilities who are far more employable can either be trapped by this system, or it can lower the employability of disabled workers. I may need some physical concessions at a job, but I can do most computer-based work more efficiently than any of the people I've worked with in my 30 years of life. Individuals all have varying levels of skills, but it's only disabled workers who have a legal precedent for being paid at a sliding scale. I've worked as a contractor, and I'd be happy to have my productivity rated--and to make well over what my employers have paid me--but the pay-fixing that sub-minimum wage enforces is NOT competitive, and does not enable disabled people to become gainfully employed eventually. There's no point during those 6 month reviews where they take you off of the program because you're performing at an able bodied person's presumed level--they come back again in 6 weeks. Meanwhile your able bodied coworkers have legal rights and defenses for when someone catches them slacking on the job--no one's reviewing their productivity every 6 months and adjusting their pay.
Phil, I do have a question that you didn't mention in you deep dive. What about the SSD that most of these employees would be qualified for? Would getting ride of this sub-minimum wage get ride of the SSD that those are bringing in? I know that with SSi elderly people can only work so many hours a week in order to keep it. I don't feel like I am for or against this but I don't think I have enough information to make an informed decision on this. There are to many valuables that are unanswered by either side. But it looks like the employees at the one company were extremely happy working their and maybe that's all they need. They seem to be getting paid to have a social interaction with others. Now mind you they are still working and being productive. Is it really a bad thing to have this program or are people just being outraged because that is what our society has come to?
It seems like everybody, not matter how disabled, likes to feel productive. But if these people are already getting SSD and they could lose it if they work too much or make too much money, it could hurt them because this money is supplementary and probably does help them remain independent.
Thanks for covering this, I am a diversity Employment Specialist in Canada and I work with client's that require me to negotiate positions and job coach along with provide workshops to get clients ready to work in an integrated situation. This can be challenging and although employers mean well when faced with the option of paying a full wage to someone who can multi task and work at a higher capacity compared to a carved position for someone with physical intellectual consideration employers need an incentive. Our government provides wage subsidies for employers who hire employees with recognized disabilities. It's a win win. Allowing a higher wage for the employee and the employer gets subsidized.
The reporting on this topic and the format is top tier. I deeply appreciate the quality of representation for both sides of the issue. I realize it is difficult for some topics to find well spoken and educated people to discuss the topic in a very public format. Great job to the entire PDS staff for all the hard work and effort out into covering this and the many other topics the team had delved into. Thank-you to those participating in interviews to help the PDS anime light on the topic.
Chiming in as an Australian with an intellectually disabled family member. EDIT 2: Just do a quick search and Australia does have similar regulations called Special National Minimum Wage. Neil Ramano's argument comparing disabilities to other minority groups is pure bullshit. There is a BIG difference between someone being of different ethnicity and someone with a disability. Yes, both are minority groups but they are minority groups FOR VERY DIFFERENT REASONS! Minorities such as race are minorities defined by sociopolitical aspects of their identity. Disabilities are minorities defined by medical differences between themselves and others. The actual subminimum wage thing is a tricky thing though. I understand both arguments and motivations. We want people with disabilities to be treated equally but at the same time, many businesses won't take the financial hit of hiring someone that requires additional care while being less proficient. I fully believe someone like my sister, who has an intellectual disability, could work a job quite efficiently but she would also require extra training and I honestly would prefer her working somewhere she doesn't interact with the general public because my family is very afraid of leaving her alone in public because she is the sort of person that would trust anyone. Background on my sister, she turned 23 in January, and since leaving high school has been with a service providing daytime care for young people with disabilities, and they do an amazing job. Last week my sister for the first time ever actually talked about getting a job, she wants to work as a carer for the service that's helping her now. They are an excellent group of people that I have had the joy of hearing about them for years from her, and I can see my sister working as a carer for the group, as compared to others she is very low maintenance in terms of needs. The bottom line is, we need to ensure whatever we do we don't leave disability workers vulnerable. My sister is lucky enough to be in a supportive family that will take care of her emotionally and financially, but others aren't that lucky. I believe that there should be an incentive for businesses to hire disabled workers that don't involve subminimum wage so that disabled workers can continue to be hired without low pay. EDIT: Just some more input from discussing this topic with my mum, she pointed out that here in Australia we have the NDIS, which gives funds to the carers of disabled individuals, especially those with severe physical and intellectual disabilities. The Australian Government is also very dedicated to marketing the idea of hiring disabled workers to businesses, including running promotional videos on tv showing disabled workers doing menial tasks for small businesses. My mum also mentioned that many of the classmates my sister attended school with (She attended a special school entirely for disabled children.) today are doing jobs such as car washing. My mum pointed out is that those are jobs that need to be done, but most people do not see as a long-term career path. So my mum's input was that disabled workers should be paid equal wage due to the fact they are likely to be in that position for a long time, remember one of the disabled girls interviewed at the Las Vegas Employment Resource Centre mentioned working there for 15 years. In these situations, if you are going to have the worker for so long my mum argues you must make ensure that it is financially viable to the worker to remain on the staff.
PEAS Gaming I agree that lumping in all types of Minority was a dishonest move on that guy's part. This is definitely tricky, because equality cuts both ways. If someone wants to be treated fairly in their paycheck, then they need to accept being treated fairly in all other aspects of employment. And, if I have 10 employees, and one of them has 40% the output of the other 9 employees (even after getting *more* training than the other 9 got and with more *ongoing* assistance than the other 9 get), the fair thing to those other 9 is to increase *their* wages accordingly (which just recreates the problem) or to fire the unproductive worker (since that's how any of the other 9 would be treated). "Fairness" is a really complex idea, but advocates of all stripes throw it around as if it isn't.
In the US, companies receive tax breaks if they hire disabled folks (I wanna say $2,000 per person but it's been a while since I read my business textbook). From what I've seen in US businesses, I rarely ever see a worker with an intellectual disability. If there was a disabled worker, they usually have a physical disability. Like the above comment said, it's not good to categorize all disabilities into the same limitations as disability is pretty much a spectrum.
I like what my boss has setup, he hires both "normal" people and people with disabilities. I got my job here because of my disability (high functioning autism) we all get paid basically the same wages, only the management and the forklift drivers make more. We work completely integrated with everyone else.
The key problem here is competition, and its frustrating that they don't just come out and say it clearly. If companies are required to pay them minimum wage, which in turn causes the company to fail to make a profit on their work because the production is too low, they will have to hire someone more productive instead. Unless we supplement organizations hiring severely disabled employees, they will simply not hire them. If a business doesn't make money, it isn't sustainable and everyone loses. It's easy to attack this as being too harsh, but where does the money come from if they can't earn it. Its obviously not an easy solution or it wouldn't be controversial, but being made equally doesn't mean that the work you are able to do is equal. The work you are able to do is essential to capitalism. This competition isn't gentle to those who can't compete, and the current method is essentially an equalizer that enables companies to hire these people and still function in the market. I just hope that their wages are at least supplemented by disability earnings that aren't getting mentioned by the people in these conversations.
I like the idea is subsidizing these individuals work. They are this way through no fault of their own and since we do not have the tech to fix them we should at least help them become productive members of society.
Would you agree to a system, that allows employers to pay as low as 10% of minimum wage based on productivity, and then having the Government split the bill to bridge the gap to minimum wage? So employer's pay a minimum of 10%, and then the Government pays the rest of the percent.
@@MC-ml3cn That exactly what they would be doing, stupid. If someone has a job and is producing, what does that make them? a contributor to society, therefore allowing less disabled people to work, is the exact issue you just cited.
Yeah, that is true, but I feel like there are some jobs where a disabled person can be just as productive as a normal person. I feel like companies deliberately underestimate the value of their disabled employees in order to pay them less. Ideally, there would be enough jobs out there at minimum wage which a disabled person is not disadvantaged in performing, or there would be enough jobs out there at a higher wage for which being disabled does not bring their productivity below what is worth a minimum wage. The other difficulty is perhaps mentally disabled people in particular don't realise they are being exploited, and they could be paid much more then they really are.
@@darrylhamlin7475 Then the business owner would have to do some math. does the "possible" tax breaks and benefits make up for the loss of efficiency/productivity they would get from hiring disabled employees. At the end of the day, businesses are businesses not charities. Remove sub minimum wage and you would either create a law and force businesses to hire token disabled people, or they will be out of jobs.
@@darrylhamlin7475 but is it really worth the slower bagging that someone with one good arm has, or is it worth outfitting your entire business with ramps just so your new employee can get around? to me it's not, unless they have some substantial skill set that i want. for a minimum wage job, it's not worth it. i rather see them in a group home for people with no ability to find work due to their low skills and or lack of intelligence then higher them. at least when they are in that group home i have a reason to pay them, and it doesn't harm me any bit (and i also get a tax break for doing that).
@@darrylhamlin7475 Imagine having to fire a disabled person for the cost of having him outweighs even the tax break they get. Imagine the disabled persons pain of being unemployed and having to apply to jobs again and probably repeat this cycle until one does and the cycle could continue. Conflict of emotions whereas these centers, they wont fire them, there is no disciplinary action that could mentally harm them and they feel at home with a family. Fucking hell, this stupid opposing argument shouldnt exist my god
When it comes down to it it’s more complicated than the equal treatment issue. I work in group homes. I’ve worked direct care and as a house manager. I’ve worked closely with my many individuals day placements and work places. Disability is a very broad term. It means so many different things and every case is very very different. Many individuals living in group homes are high functioning, but will choose not to be productive at work. I’ve worked personally with individuals like this and we continue to work with them and encourage them to do better. These individuals will often go to their day placement program and refuse to do work at all or take many extra breaks. I’ve worked with individuals who go sleep in a meeting room for half their day at their placement. These employers/ day placements also frequently deal with disruptive behaviors and difficult situations. I believe when it comes down to it these day placements are different then an average workplace. They are there to offer a daily place for individuals to go where they have staff who can handle their disabilities and assist them. They are given work opportunities because many of these individuals will never be able to work in the community. If these placement programs paid minimum wage they would not be able to have nearly as many individuals in these programs. Individuals with less income also generally receive more state funds and money for personal needs items. This is a another topic entirely that the state should fund these things better and I won’t get into that. Also individuals can lose their benefits and even their paid services and housing from the state. Some of these individuals if they made over minimum wage would lose all of this and their wages would not make up the difference. Disability is not always the people you see in news articles. It’s not a black and white situation at all. Each individual is different. Each case is different. When it comes down to it these things need to be evaluated for each person and their situation. It’s not just about disabilities and numbers. That needs to be remembered.
Allie Cats When my parents were helping my brother get his state benefits set up at 18 they had to get rid of the savings bonds my grandma got him as a baby. He wasn’t even allowed a measly $500 to his name or it was no benefits at all. It’s a crazy system we have in this country.
I’ve worked in this specific area of social services for a few years. The research has been clear for over 50 years - individualized services. Having this as an option for some people under specific situations is appropriate. There is no one side fits all. The issue is that opinions override data in our society, and we turn an eye to effective programs. If you’re ever interested in a follow up piece I have connections to most of the industry that was involved in researching this area of human life. Would love to help contribute. ❤️❤️❤️ keep it up team Philly D and as always love ya beautiful bastards.
OK, you have to elaborate on that... I'm inclined to say inspecting things on a case by case basis makes tons of sense, but a) I'm not sure if there's a specific plan associated with the phrase "individualized services" (like not trying to be snarky, but that is so broad language) b) laws can't be made so specifically. More money should definitely be put into figuring action plans for individuals, but as a policy decision I have no idea what that means.
Def not snarky! So it’s a matter of process. For example - decision trees based on the values, individual goals, and the current skills that someone has can lead to a large matrix that helps inform what’s necessary. I was a part of a team that was developing this in Nevada actually. It’s still under development but I ventured off into scicomm and UA-cam to figure out how to tell stories so we can get this area of research more well known. I completely agree with you that it can be specifically written into law. What I’m advocating for is that the law not be one way or another - it be contextually fit to the persons situation. They do this to an extent already with the way they measure if you’re meeting the standard rates for “full compensation”. But it’s off, in a few ways, such as how they measure. For example most focus on a percentage measure when there’s decades of research suggesting a rate measure for skills is more accurate and predictable. An overhaul is needed in how and what they measure more than anything else - and that could be translated up into law. The issue I found working in that system is when it’s left to states to interpret it leaves room for less effective methods or “preferred” methods of those in power to impede on the roll out. Down to chat this on a stream or something! It’s such a deep topic!
This is the first time I've ever had real input on a story you've done, Phil. My grandmother was paid by the state of NY to care for three men in their 60's and 70's who had severe developmental disabilities. She lives in a very rural part of the state but they were part of a sub-wage program. All of them had the intelligence, mentally and emotionally, of a child no more than 4. They'd been in the state system thier entire lives. When she moved them into her home, she had to teach them not to wolf down their dinners or hit each other with forks - that's because, starting at a young age they had to fight off others from their plates if they wanted to eat. She had them for more than a decade before they died. Every weekday a bus came to pick them up and take them to, I guess a 'work shelter' place, where they worked on an assembly line. They made maybe 5dollars a day each. They learned how to knit while they were there!! They LOVED to knit and did it all the time. The wage they made went directly to the food my gramma cooked for them and thier medications. I don't know how much the state gave my gramma for being a caretaker, but it let her afford lots of wool for knitting and puzzles for them. My mother works in public school teaching ESE children. It's her dream job and she's done it for 15 years. Her classrooms can have a WIDE range of disabilities - a child who cannot form memories sitting across from a child who acts out because he's really smart and really really bored. I understand that someone with disabilities can see subwage as inhumane, but... there are some people whose disabilities are so severe that without these work programs, they'd never leave the house. They ALREADY are unable to live on their own in any capacity.. it's just a way for them to get out and make friends like them, and especially important: give their caretakers a little break and some much needed support.
It's so ridiculous I cant believe it. I wonder if Phil has a mentally and physically disabled person in their family like my son. If you dont Phil, then SHUT UP!
How this sub-minimum wage is calculated seems logically flawed. The argument is that if you work below the average productivity of 'non-disabled' persons then you should earn X% of how much you meet their productivity rate. So here's the problem. Generally speaking, productivity will be a normally distributed range, i.e. that around 50% of people will below average and 50% above. For those people who are not disabled but have below average productivity, why are they also not penalised? If they aren't also having a reduction in wages then it's simple discrimination. Because the argument is based on productivity. On the flip side, why are more productive people not generally paid more per hour? There is no incentive to work more efficiently if you're all paid the same.
Employers set quotas. If you dont make the quota, you get fired. So there isnt really a 50% below average. There is a predetermined floor. And the 50% above get promoted.
Okamakiri Thats exactly what I was thinking, He's trying to show how the sub-minimum wage discriminates because it classes these people differently but the only reason they need that entire system is because of the problem minimum wage as a whole caused. The real question we need to ask ourselves is. If someone is incapable of generating enough income so that they can live, should they?
@Pusalieth personally I think minimum wage should be a liveable wage. 7.25 per hour for a 40 hour work week seems like it would cause issues. Comparatively minimum wage in NZ is around $12.10 usd per hour. If the problem is that their productivity is so low they get cents per hour and so a business can't afford to burden themselves with disabled persons if they must pay them minimum wage then let the government make up the difference. Either way somebody is going to end up footing the bill and its possibly better to have them working and supervised than alone or in care. There's a big difference between simply being handed money to live and feeling like you earned it.
@@Hombolicious please tell me what you mean by living wage? What can you but in a loving wage bc the kids who I teach are mostly on welfare and they all n have nicer clothing and personal electronics than me.... They seem to be making more than a living wage with government subsidies...
As someone with ASD & Dyspraxia I understand the perception that disabled people find it harder to work so the idea of offering them below minimum wage seems like a low-risk way of getting them into the workforce. However, even with inconsistent social skills, I have always prevailed in jobs that gave normal wages but precipitated that with an initial training period. Paying minimum wage isn't impossible towards disabled people, it just requires slightly more detailed and specialised support & training.
I applaud the effort that you make, it can't be easy and deserves credit for overcoming your issues and continuing to work. But some people have disabilities which mean they will never be able to perform certain tasks, if there is other work that they can do with equal productivity to their co workers then the employer would not be allowed to claim under this legislation (without fraudulent practices). It seems to do a good job of protecting people from abuse whilst affording opportunity to others. The only arguement to be had against this is if someone is profiting from it....that would be akin to slavery and should be routed out.
I have an intellectually disabled brother and I'm so glad that you've talked about this, I always worry about his future and whether or not there will be working opportunity for him. Media bringing light to the issue makes me very hopeful for his future
I feel that you should have also touched on the topic of government assistance and how people with disabilities would be affected if they were to be paid minimum wage. Government assistance makes it difficult for people to become independent and stop relying on government assistance, if you start making a little bit more money you stop qualifying for some assistance which in turn means you have to work more hours which makes you lose even more assistance and into the rabbit hole you go. I think there is a need to re-evaluate benefit programs and do that the people who are working towards independence don’t get cutoff. I don’t see a problem with paying someone with a disability below minimum wage because they require more time to do tasks that someone without a disability would but paying them cents is ridiculous.
The problem is that most people living on Welfare would rather have a fulfilling and good paying job which is not what you get working 40 hours a week for$7.25. In order to make a profit, these workplaces need to pay the worker less than their labor is worth which isn’t right especially when the person has a disability. A universal basic income would allow everyone including those with disabilities to survive. Then if they want to afford luxuries then people would work and be happy doing it.
I am currently working on getting my masters in social work and I am doing an internship where I see only people with disabilities that have left them totally incapacitated. For many of them they receive benefits where if they made a certain amount of money they would potentially lose those benefits and resources which wouldn’t be made up by the minimum wage they’d receive. Perhaps in those cases that’s why people are working in day programs where they are getting sub minimum wage. I am all for fair wages for all workers despite disabilities but my fear for people with severe disabilities is that if these programs are phased out they would have no work opportunities. A lot of the people that I see as part of my work may not get paid a lot of money to do the work they do at their day programs but they love doing it because they have something that gives them pride and fulfillment. I would hate in this move to phase out this program that it did more harm than good and left people with disabilities having less opportunities than they had before.
These tuesday and thursday morning shows are amazing. I look forward to these every week since you've started doing them. I love the topics you choose, especially this one. Such a topic im sure a lot of us didnt know was really an issue. Interviews all across the board, sourced information. Highlighting how its not really a black and white issue. Showing the full spectrum of the topic. THIS is what real news and reporting is about. Thank you and your team for all of this amazing content.
Well, I would be inclined to state that his cost of views also comes from him showing more and more his "leftist" bias and mentality when touching certain subjects or societal buzz as of late.
So I work for a small business and we mail out products to people all around the globe. We only do about 50 orders a week and we use a workshop for our fulfillment. We have been with them for over 4 years now. The way the workshop is run is much like a school, the workers are only there from 8 am until 3 and are picked up and dropped off by shuttle bus. I know a lot of the workers go on to work at real businesses but I also know that some of the people who work there came there because they were fired from real businesses. When you hear about this is can sound really bad, like these people are being taken advantage of, and in some cases they are. But from my experience, the people who work at this workshop are happy. They get to go every day and socialize with other people when they would normally be at home with their caretaker. It also allows for their caretaker to go to work while they are at the shop. They are also exposed to what it is like to work with other people with a variety of disabilities and get opportunities to move on to real jobs. I think if done right it's a great opportunity and a helpful thing for these workers.
*Jobs are more than just a way to earn money* For some people it's the only place they can meat others. It gives your life a structure and some kind of self worth. So the focus should be on creating more jobs while trying to improve the wages. Don't move fast and break things.
Either have disabled workers get paid minimum wage or make it so that sub minimum wage should also apply to non-disabled workers if they aren’t productive. Fairness has to happen either way.
Juice maybe where you work XD everywhere I’ve been there had always been one of these perfectly able people who drags their feet to do anything... no they don’t always get fired.
@@jasminecluney1769 what exactly do u mean by dragging their feet? I'm assuming u mean like complaining or having a shity attitude to work or avoid some work. I promise u tho that those people still get the work done because if they aren't their is no reason the manager wouldn't fire them unless the manager is oblivious or dumb
Tessitura I get where you are coming from, but could you imagine having a bad week cause a family member died then being notified by your employer that your pay is being docked to sub minimum because your productivity hasn't been as high lately? not ideal
My cousin boyfriend makes sub minium wage an he works for a company collecting and doing stuff with cardboard an he is told that its training but seems like hes worked there for a long time for training
I never even knew this was even a thing in our country. Thanks phil for doing these deep dive videos! They are very informative and I believe more people should know about stuff like this and have more discussions on topics like these.
Does America have contract wage? Here in Australia a lot of jobs especially picking or packing fruit are paid by the bin/bag you do. Can start of only getting 50 a day compared to others that have experience can get 500. Surely that pay system is fair for them?
It's not really any different than this system, though. In the American system, disabled employees must be tested every 6 months (at least) to determine their productivity. They are then paid a rate equal to their productivity.
After the explanation of how they get paid relative to their productivity, it seems pretty fair to me. It's a good equation. The only issue that I think could exist is where / how they decide what the average productivity of an employee in a specific job is.
The problem with Neil's stance is that he's comparing all other minority groups to the one that is objectively disabled. Its not a bigoted label to call someone who is mentally disabled, mentally disabled. It's just a fact of their existence. They cannot function on the same level as your normal worker, so it makes sense to pay them less. And there's a distinction to be made here between a worker who ISN'T CAPABLE of being as efficient as a normal worker and a worker who is UNWILLING to be as efficient as a normal worker. I.e the distinction between a disabled worker and a lazy worker. The Lazy worker can do the work at required efficiency if they'd just get their shit together. The disabled worker cannot. The lazy worker can be fired for not being efficient. The disabled worker cannot. And I think it should stay that way. Afterall, if the disabled worker can meet the required standards of the job, then they don't need to be labeled as a disabled worker. They're just a worker. Therefore they'll be paid the standard wage in the current system. If they are treated as equal, then there is no reason to distinguish between a lazy worker and a disabled worker. Both can be fired for being inefficient and not getting their work done. That's always been the case for lazy workers, so taking this stance only hurts disabled workers.
This is incredible reporting. This channel is really stepping up to the plate, this journalism rivals the best traditional news outlets. Great work Defranco team!
This channel has been better than conventional news for a LONG time
@@nickdibiase5879 I think he means the journalism, not only the news
Agreed. This news team is so underrated. The big 3 networks need to take notice, as do all of the cable news outlets.
Can’t believe I used to watch this guy talk about hot chicks everyday and now people from his team talk to actual government agencies. Life’s crazy.
Omg I forgot about the Lovely Lady Of The Day era 😂
I bet you were one of the hot chicks he talked about :) Hope that makes your day just a lil better.
Guerrilla Gaming Nice guy
When he used to put hot girls in thumbnail😂omg, I got a suggestion a week ago, I hate that Phil
@@Guerrilla727 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I never comment on any of your videos but the story really hit home I have a brother who has special needs and having the opportunity to work is something people will never understand. My parents still need to work and once my brother aged Out of high school someone was going to need to be home to take care of him and programs like this really help not only with my brother but help my parents by knowing their son is in a safe environment doing something save and active, instead of just being at home sitting around all day. Again I do not agree with disabled people getting paid pennies but programs and services like these really play a huge part in helping families with special needs. In a perfect world I wish they could make minimum-wage and still keep programs like these but we all know it all comes down to money...
Thank you. What do these people think will happen when all these places close because everyone is getting minimum wage/ Where do the handicapped go now. Many cannot stay home by themselves, so what do parents who work do, now that you closed all the programs for their family members?
I agree. Both of these can exist where people with disabilities can get paid over minimum wage in a fantastic and inclusive company; but that shouldn’t mandate the closing down of places like you mention. Something is better than nothing. There are bad people doing exploitive practices in nearly every type of business or govt funded enterprise; so perhaps increased surveillance/surveys of these facilities would be all that’s needed.
I agree with you. These facilities gives one, who is unable to be mainstreamed into a regular work enviorment, a sense of accomplishment, a place to be among their peers, gives their parents or guardians the peace of knowing that there's a safe place for their child when they can't be there and also gives the disabled worker the pride of earning a wage.
There definitely needs to be a middle ground. I don't know what that is or would entail, but it should be something better.
@@cafe_rae well I think they need to pay them less because they are non profits or because they are less productive? I dunno but it's sad and I feel bad for them😕
This is rough honestly. I see the arguments for both sides. However, i honestly feel that the removal of 14c would outright eliminate a staggering majority if employment oppertunities for people who are disabled to any debilitating extent that impedes their efficiency. Not to mention theres medical and other concerns and things the employer is forced to accomidate vs a non disabled person.
As an employer theres no incentive to hire them outside of good PR and feeling good about yourself. In a world of dollars and cents that fuzzy feeling doesnt hold up against that created by profit margines.
If you ant to get rid of 14c you need to add an incentive for employers to incorperate that part of the work force and without that incentive you'll collapse that job market by a signifigant amount rapidly.
Thank you
its so hard to humanly decide which is 100% right. I feel like the only solution is leave 14c and add more people to view the work places to make sure they can work to their full potential.
A compromise could be that they keep 14c but they take away the subminimum wage calculation. So the employer would go through the application process but there would be a set subminimun wage that's, let's say, a dollar less than minimum wage. This way you won't have people working for a penny an hour but you still have that incentive since they are paid less.
However, there's still the issue of how are they meant to survive on less than minimum wage and it would be discriminatory to still have a subminimun wage for people with disabilities.
@@starrismith595 i think a dollar less might be too much, unless the original job paid 3 or more times that, the employer will most likely choose who does it faster.
It sucks.
Just going along with what you said, Neil Romano at 12:19 mentioned how sub minimum wage wouldn't even be considered with other minority groups, but the analogy doesn't hold up there since racial minorities aren't inherently reduced in productivity due to their differences. In this particular context, the traditionally considered usage of "minority" doesn't fit as well, since the problem isn't appearance and stereotypical bias, but tangible reduction in potential performance.
And yes, I acknowledge that minority factually means a smaller group and thus would broadly include disabled people, but my point is that there is no real statistic leverage in including disabilities in this context as it's only really an emotional appeal.
this is what you call high-quality content, everyone teaches you new things you never heard of... keep it up.
If a person qualifies for a 14c wage certificate they do not have doctor bills. They get disability for life from the government and work only as a means to improve their ability to function in society.
@@ziros22 sounds like discrimination to me >.> /s
@@CAGETUNES You have no clue!!!!
@CFergiee, if they paid a minimum wage to the most disabled of the people who get 14c wages, they would have to pay the staff that wipes butts, wipes faces, cleans up accidents, etc. more money. Because the staff that cares for the disabled people aren’t making more than minimum wage themselves.
@@kathleenpresloid557 on the internet, "/s" signifies sarcasm.
Im really impressed with how Philip has been becoming more like a real news channel. Exclusive stories and interviews, This is awesome.
What do you mean "like a real news channel"? He's always been one!
That's been his goal, and I'd say he's achieved it.
@@ethangivens3597 as in independent. He just rehashs what other news outlets report. Instead of getting stories from them he is now the one creating and posting the stories.
Remember the lovely lady of the day? He’s come so far haha
I don't, he's falling prey to the same practices, such as the failure a month ago or so when everybody attacked the MAGA hat teen for smirking
I'm starting to like these morning deep dives more than the regular show lol. Never heard of sub-minimum wage before
Yeah, I much prefer actual journalism about important issues, than the stupid shenanigans that x person did on x social media site.
Of course. Why would Slave-owners advertise that they only have to pay a cent an hour?
I'd keep that on the low too.
@@joshviator7365 Those are always just the first stories on the PDS. You can skip them with the new timecodes.
Most basic restaurant servers are paid sub minimum wage because they receive tips
So this is what journalism was 30+ years ago..
I don’t usually comment, but this is absolutely outstanding!! Excellent job really covering all sides of the story on an un-biased way! This truly is a complex issue, and you truly gave us a much deeper understanding of it. Thank you.
One thing I didn't see Phil touch on was how many of these disabled workers are receiving government assistance that they would loose if they made too much money. This assistance includes money, medical, and even food. I am not advocating that anyone should be paid less than what they deserve, but the bigger picture needs to be looked at. I would not be surprised if a sizable portion of those falling under this government code treasure going to work and it would do them a harm to suddenly be told that in order to keep all the benefits they are receiving they can now only go to work a few days out of the month. In the video, you see individuals referring to their work environment as their family. Perhaps better regulation of the system needs to be addressed to ensure no one is being taken advantage of instead of getting rid of the law entirely.
I was waiting on him to say something about it. I live month by month on disability. And as they said in a competitive market its too risky to take on a job that my body may not be able to handle. I have bills that need to be paid and I can't risk losing the assistance I have because my disability got in the way of "being a productive member of the work force"
enfiniti81 i work for a non profit specifically for the disabled, and all of our residents who work fall under that. They would lose benefits if they worked more or got paid more, and they rely on those benefits.
This is an excellent point.
enfiniti81 you nailed it man, was thinks the same thing
The calculation of efficiency should be done by a third party committee or something not by the employer/company. That way they don't have the opportunity to lie just to pay someone less.
My uncle worked in a “sheltered workshop” at a human services organization for almost 30 years. He has been mentally disabled since birth, is only partially verbal, and is lacking many fine motor skills. That being said, he will never be able to hold a job at a business, for many of the reasons you stated. He LOVED working at the workshop. The work was repetitive and easy - often packing tools in boxes and such - but he loves repetition and routine, so it brought him comfort.When I would go with my grandmother to pick him up, he would beam and proudly exclaim how much money he made that day. I’m not sure what he made hourly, but I’m pretty sure it was below minimum wage. That didn’t matter. Harold didn’t have a job in a sheltered workshop to support himself, he held a job there because, whether he understood it or not, making any form of money made him feel like a productive member of society. I’m not saying this is the right solution for everyone, though. I have heard stories of people being placed in sheltered workshops who could have been placed in higher functioning jobs and felt belittled in the position they were in. Ultimately, his workshop got shut down for two reasons - people complained of injustice at the state level, so funding was cut, and a main supplier to the workshop sent the jobs overseas, where they could get even cheaper labor by the exploitation of women and children in unsafe conditions. I think many can agree that THAT is a greater travesty.
Amazing comment. Thank you for sharing.
Annie Hebel the travesty is that instead of the government providing funding in order to support your uncle and allow him to be productive they decided to to close it. People should complain, because it IS unfair and things should be better, why are you not mad at the people who decided for the closure instead?
I 100% agree with you. I think this was an awesome video, but I wish they touched more on the fact that for a lot of these people, this is their sense of purpose. This gets them out of the house. And sometimes that house is with a family caregiver, like your uncle, or my brother. And other times it's a home for people who have no one. And I have been to those homes. It can be extremely disheartening, or uplifting. And to give these people any piece of normalcy that makes them identify as not disabled anymore is so important. Of course there are always the companies or people that are taking advantage of the situation, but so many more times they are not. And they are doing what they can for people who are just forgotten about or shoved aside by society.
My uncle is on the autism spectrum, and while he is capable of completing tasks and doing other work, he does not have the faculties to hold an appropriate conversation with a woman. Some people with mental disabilities aren't capable of comfortable social interaction, so for him, working in a work center felt comfortable and rewarding, and not unfamiliar or intimidating. Even with money he couldn't live independently, whatever he earned was his to go to lunch, or buy DVDs.
Annie Herbel
You're absolutely correct. If ppl r going to get self righteous on this issue, they might think of all the jobs farmed out to slave labor.
When I worked at Sony animation, they sent a LOT of work to Korea so to save a buck. A couple times a year, my boss would visit Korean studios to oversea what was going on over there, and they always came back with the same horror stories. Korean studio was always owned by one person. Was always one large, cheaply made square building with 2-3 floors of animators working elbow to elbow. Extremely humid, no ventilation, smelled like sweat, always hot. Was common to see sleeping animators with heads on desks, covered in newspapers bc they'd been working insane work weeks with ridiculous deadlines.
Rather than studio owners hiring a sufficient amount of workers, they hired few as possible, and worked them to death. Some workers said they hadn't been home in a few days. The whole top floor would be the studio owner/boss's opulent office which had air conditioning, windows, expensive decor, etc. Owners were obviously hoarding all the money Sony was paying out for the animation, while employees were making squat.
In Korea, it is customary to offer gifts to work associates in these situations, so every time our boss came back from Korea, they had very expensive gifts for everyone working on the show, which was around 50-70 gifts. So while we're receiving these insanely expensive designer scarves, Gucci key chains, etc, the highly talented workers (who haven't been able to see their families in days) deserving of these gifts r being worked to the bone, generating pennies on the dollar. And this is entertainment... I can't begin to imagine what the working conditions are like for factory workers.
There r millions of ppl around the world suffering so ppl like Jeff Bezos can become even richer. We have Bill Clinton to thank for this atrocity.
I worked for one of the state supported living centers in Texas for about 5 years. My unit was considered acute medical meaning in addition to mental and developmental disabilities these people also had significant medical limitations. Many of them were unable to move much at all and actually had staff members helping them significantly to complete tasks. Their work was simple tasks such as placing papers in a pile or placing a plastic binder on paperwork. They were not paid much but it gave them a purpose and many of them showed great pride in getting up and getting ready in the morning. It also provided spending money for individuals who did not always have families or excess funding.
Thank you so much! My son is profoundly handicapped and this effects him.
@@conkerlive101 No reasonable human being is trying to cut these programs. Just complete idiot SJWs who need the next thing to be outraged about without doing any facts or research whatsoever.
@@fairplay4164 Their room/board/medical expenses were absolutely funded- but it was definitely something they felt they personally accomplished when they got to go on shopping trips and pay with their own money that they received from a check that was collected from payroll just like anyone else.
i work for rem its a group home. i have a client who goes to work makes 25 cents an hour to shred papers and another who is paid 1$ to sweep the front entrance. what these people arent getting is this isnt even a real job no one is going to hire someone at 7.25 to shred papers to sweep 5 square feet for 8 hours. these work places allow my clients with disabilites to be out in the community. they get money through disability they dont pay rent or for their meds at the group home this is just fun for them so theyre not stuck in the house all day. if they get rid of this i will be so sad that my clients will be stuck at home wondering why theyre not good enough to work...
I can get what your saying but issue is there is those jobs that you say no one will pay someone minimum wage to do. Yet they do it here in canada. Not just for disabled people but just normal people. So to say no one will pay for that when they do is completely misleading. I have worked with many mentally disabled people in warehouses and I wouldn't expect them to make a penny less then the minimum wage that I was hired on at the time. There not someone to use for free labor. I mean you want to say that they're going to be cooped up get there are dozens of places in the community then they can usually volunteer at if they wanted to get out but if you're going to give them a paying job thing is a give them a pain way just that simple. Your people don't lose their benefits because they're making minimum wage if you disabled your disabled but if you're working you're still going to get your benefits but they still have to pay you a living wage or not slave labor.
@@The_Duggler25 if I had an employee on payroll already and a disabled person sweeping for a buck a day, I'd just hand the employee a broom and can the disabled guy if they took away my ability to pay only a dollar. It's more of a charity to let them work. I don't get this mentality of them just being the exact same as every "able" person. I've been around many people that literally can not move, eat or crap without an aide and you think they'd get employed if they needed to be paid the same as someone that can do everything themselves? You are in a fantasy if you think every human has the same capacity for work
@@UraniumReaperActual Yah you can that disabled person who already had the job and you're going to court for discrimination. They do get paid the same amount regardless here in Canada, so it doesn't matter what you think 'would happen.' But it doesn't surprise me that the US wouldn't.
@@The_Duggler25 I don't disagree with what you're saying that people should get equal pay, the issue here is the system. In the US the government funded programs set up to help disabled people whether it be financial or medical come with an income cap. My fiance is currently part of these programs when we marry our Monthly medical bills will increase by 1500 dollars because of what I make.
@@frankscrank99 well we aren't talking about Canada. And I'd "can" them in a figurative sense, because I'm pretty sure if the program shut down that the Government isn't going to force a person to then employ someone against their will
"you are the awesome one"
"Oh yeah"
Loved it
I have to agree with Tracy. I used to work for a non profit for a few years in our 'disabled' branch for. This is a controversial topic and I don't know if there is really a right answer. Because it all really depends on the level of disability. There are plenty of people who can work fine even though they have a disability. But where I worked , we had higher risk participants with disabilities. They had to be specially placed within our company and work under a 'guardian' where there was one or two employees watching a group of 3-4 at all times because they can not be out on their own or left alone for long periods of time without fear of injury to themselves, others or elopement. Alot of them couldn't be placed in certain jobs because they could not be around women or children or have violence problems.
They would do simple jobs, delivering mail, filing, or cleaning. They would work 4-5 hours a day, some days they would go to work but refuse to do anything because they thought just going to work should be enough get them paid. Some wouldn't come in at all, and some days if they did come, they could go into a state of anger very fast and hurt themselves or their gaurdians and even wreck property. Then they would have to sent home early because they were a danger to the other participants. We had to specially make their work plans. And yes they did get paid lower, and that would raise depending on how often they would regularly come into work. But they also worked within a company that provided, housing, food, medical services for them. That money they got working was for spending on extra 'luxuries' such as video games and special snacks they wanted.
You really have to take this payment issue on a case by case basis. What alot of people do not understand, working with a non profit we really need to stick to a strict budget, we almost entirely ran off United Way donation's and kindness. If our company paid our participants, who can not be placed in outside company jobs, more we would not have enough money in our budget for other employees and we would start to turn away people with disabilities because we could not help them properly.
I find your post fascinating thank you so much for sharing. So for me I'm a person that has a severe form of multiple sclerosis because I was beaten unconscious by my ex-boyfriend. This makes me so curious about situations like yours because in my opinion violence is to Loosely dealt with. I personally think that if people have some sort of conduct related disorder or cluster B related disorder that leads to them hurting other people that they should be put in a mental health facility that can help them. I personally think that we need to clean up all of the corruption in our government first. But if we were able to do that, I think it would be a good idea to start a new system of state-run mental institutions that are regulated with human rights laws thought of first. I like to always reorient myself to thinking about living my day in a way that can help contribute to the human race perpetuating and progressing to be here for a million years. I think in order for us to be here longer we have to equalize everybody and protect the masses from violent people that cause traumatic issues for healthy individuals. I think about being as healthy as possible and how I can progress as a human as much as possible because I find that so important mentally to keep pushing myself to deal with this disease. If the corruption could be handled what do you think about putting violent people in such a place. as a person that's been severely hurt by violent people I find myself very scared of them and I would have been scared to work in a facility that tolerated violence. When I say tolerate I mean, the person doesn't immediately go to jail if they strike somebody else.
Megansours V lose *
Jessica Prado Hanson yikes man, since when could someone else cause MS. I thought it was an autoimmune disease?
The place my brother (down syndrome) worked at briefly was a factory for assembly of small bathroom rubber parts. It was just a 2 year pograme and I'm pretty sure it wasn't for profit and they probably lost money, hence charity act. There are days some of them didn't want to work or did only 20% of the days work target. But they still got paid a little for their effort well below minimum wage, and of course levied against what they could achieve in a single work day.
They closed down to shift their business model and now my brother has no place to feel productive or pride in doing honest work.
I can see where the line of argument is made but sometimes it's the cruelty of opportunists that warp and circumvent the law that makes for these cases.
Much like Megansours V, I also used to work for a non-profit organization that was a part of the Arc system who's focus was on the enrichment and development of special needs. In the program where I worked, you didnt really see many people who were what many label as high functioning mentally. When I asked my supervisor about that, they said it was because those who were functioning well enough mentally often had more opportunities than say someone with down syndrome. This place did partake in 14(c) as well due to many of the participants not wanting to do their jobs with their 1:1 staff member, leaving said employees to do the work for whomever they were assigned to that day. Many of the participants were also getting food, housing, clothes, and transportation for free so the funds they got went to toys, games, movies, and going to amusement parks.
First hand, I had a group that I would take to help out at a nearby catholic school in the cafeteria and every time I would go, as well as with my coworkers, we ended up doing most of the work because our participants would become behavioral and we didn't want any school children hurt as a result since there is a system in place that prevents us from acting until it's already happened. The most they get is sent home and they keep their job. Many of my coworkers also felt that it was just a political charity act bc having the participants out in public at that school or at a grocery store got them more funding.
A topic like this can't just be generalized. People function at different levels across physical, mental, and emotional status. While I do think public integration is a good thing, I also feel like at the end of the day without 14c you'd see many centers and employers no longer hire because it's just too costly in today's economic situation. At the end of the day, things should be more fair, and I agree with that, but it should be a limit to how low that sub wage goes bc it really varies too greatly.
I worked for a DD group home who sent our clients to "work." Most of the clients would come home with $15 paychecks because they did the activites offered more than the work. However, we had 2(out of 10) that did nothing but work. An 80 year old man and a 70 year old man brought home $75 dollar paychecks. They were paid 1 cent per product they assembled and they deserved to be paid more. Someone from the State Department of Developmental Disabilities should come and observe and if they are doing as much or more than a non disabled employee they should be paid more. It sucks because they love feeling like they are working and contributing but many companies will close or outsource if they are required to pay them a decent wage. It's a very shitty situation.
It is not a one size fits all scenario when it comes to disabilities. A highly functioning autistic person who could stock shelves and other similar task should be paid more. I have a brother who lives lives in a group home. He has the mental capacity of a 7 year old and is severe epileptic so he is not able to do complicated task and his work is in a workshop. Now since he is in a group home he doesn't have to worry about any financial burdens. All of his needs are taken care of. That is different then someone who is high functioning with a disability who may live alone and just has an aide stop in for a couple hours every night to help them cook or clean. So my brother is paid under minimum wage but any money he makes is his to keep. A couple times a year the house till take him shopping to buy random things to keep his savings account under a certain threshold or he is subject to a tax threshold even though he is making under minimum wage. So for my brother the group home allows him to get out of the house and interact for 5 hours a day with other people. Which is great for him and something that may not be available to him otherwise with his challenges. But for those who are higher functioning who do have some financial responsibilities it can be a burden for them. i guess all I want people to understand is this is not a one size fits all type of situation. It is not black and white or clear cut.
@@superkoopatrooper4879 But some are more efficient . We had 2 produce between 5,000 and 7,500 every 2 weeks by themselves. Those people need to be paid at the rate of able bodied peers doing similar work. We need someone not affiliated with the company or client to observe their work to see if they are being taken advantage of. Sometimes "work" is treated like a daycare and gives the caregivers a break. It's a very nuanced situation with a wide scope of disabilities and abilities and there isn't a one size fits all solution.
No joke, do some undercover Boss BS, as awful as it sounds, get someone to pose as a disabled person and have them observe the location to see if those getting paid X are getting paid what they should be paid or way less.
@@superkoopatrooper4879 if they try they are productive, I have autism should I be paid less money because I have a disability? Despite the fact I can function and work well?
@@AlexMor0406 The nature of the law is such that those tests must be done every 6 months
Forget the whole productivity thing for a moment - the main issue here is about employment. Many people in these comments are forgetting just *how* difficult it can be to be employed when you're disabled. Even if you have the productivity of a normal worker, it's still far harder to get employed when you are disabled. Even if you have above average intelligence /productivity, ie a person with Aspergers, you can still find it difficult to find/keep a job. I mean, if you find it difficult to make eye contact, you are literally falling at the first hurdle as all the job interview advice is look them in the eye. This relates to a much bigger issue of disability rights and the infantalisation of disabled people
Wow that's one hell of a complex topic. Oof.
Wading through the comments, I thought I could be persuaded to one side or the other but the more I read, the less I'm able to. I definitely don't want to be the politician in charge of this issue, lol.
But really though, I can understand both sides. I think the best solution would really to have this program re-evaluated and better regulated.
I don't think it should go away completely, it has amazing potential - especially at good facilities that also provide support and a safe environment to those who honestly need it.
@@BewareTheLilyOfTheValley after hearing niel romano, it's pretty clear that the move to get rid of this program is a regressive ploy.
Ur pfp makes me happy
@@PIXELEDsamm yeah I agree, it's pretty sad but also hard to fix b.
My brother's work center is amazing. Without it, he would not be able to socialize with others, create friends, and stay active. Without it, he would most likely just stay at home watching TV.
And he would be fired if the subminimum wage is higher
Not to mention he'd lose his job and be a leech on taxpayer money if it weren't for the sub minimum wage.
@@thefirsttime7759 oh I agree. It's not about the money at all. He would still go even if they didn't pay anything. They even provide the transportation for him.
That's great for your brother and for the company, but i still don't understand how that stops the company (that's a work center who's porpose is to help disabled people who probably wouldn't be hired in other places) from paying your brother minimum wage for his work.
@@spicydoodles so he's being exploited.
I live in a town that hosts a facility for the mentally disabled. It is a full time facility and the people there who want to and are able to work are given the chance to do that. They are payed a few dollars per hour, but if you consider the value of the health care and housing they recieve, they would be paid about about 45 per hour. If the state was required to pay a real minimum wage, costs would go up or the level of care would go down, or their jobs would just end reducing their quality of life. The below minimum wage law still has its place but should probably be modified.
And companies paying these wages would likely pull out of these programs because the ratio of pay to productivity would be too low. And that's not to say that these companies are greedy it's that in reality companies need to make a profit.
but whats a good way for it to be modified? I can't think of a win-win solution.
Do the companies cover the health care or is the state doing that? I never knew this was a thing so I feel like it needs to be looked at a lot closer. I don’t know the answer either so I was just wondering how that works.
Are their employers covering their healthcare and housing, or is the State?
If it's the State, then the employer should pay minimum wage.
If it's the employer, then this is a good compromise.
Having someone work a full day at the best of their ability just to earn a fraction of what everyone is guaranteed to earn at minimum is not empowerment.
In the cases I am talking about the state provides everything and is the employer. These people are disabled enjoy to require full time medical care and what they do for work varies but if they were paid under the program Phil is talking about they would get just a few cents. As for modifying the program there is no win win scenario, but to be more fair I would think making the play reduction less than one for one. For example if you have a play reduction of a dollar right now, then make it 50 cents instead, something like that.
Hey, Phil, great topic. I am a physically disabled person with a background in computer programming, web design, marketing and advertising, and accounting. Being that I am disabled, I am most often passed over for jobs to people with fewer skills and less experience. Then, when I am hired, I am kept on the 2 years that companies can use my wages as a tax right off and then all of a sudden my physical disabilities become a problem. Oh, did I mention that I am often paid less than the able bodied candidate? I had a cousin that was blind as well as having several developmental disabilities, and due to one of these sheltered work programs, she was able to get her own apartment, yes it was subsidized, and gain a measure of independence. I can both see the need for these types of work programs and also am sick and tired of being treated as less because I have a disability.
You should contact the EEOC if you are able to perform the essential functions of your job position with or without a reasonable accommodation for your disability and are still being paid less. Anti-discrimination laws like Title VII and the ADA should protect you
KatieDidIt I this you misunderstood what she was saying, she was comparing her own experience as someone in the workforce with disabilities and her cousin who falls under 14C
@@madeline2282 you're absolutely right - deleting my comment. thanks : )
@@pareidolias Thanks, Bug, I have actually got something in the words right now in regards to these issues at my job and am actively look for new employment.
Yeah but that's a physical disability, like, maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's actually illegal for them to do. Like, we HAVE systems in place to fight against that. Maybe they don't work that well -- definitely a possibility, with the government sucking at everything & all -- but yeah that's messed up. If your disability has no effect on your productivity, it should have no effect on your pay/employment.
I worked for 10 years with individuals with IDD as part of a residential program. I love you Phil, but this is way more complicated than represented here. You and your team put together a great piece, but there are many important concerns that are unaddressed. For instance, we regularly had to “spend down” our residents. When a resident had too much money in an account, their government aid was jeopardized. I would worry about individuals making more money, losing their government funding, then losing their minimum wage job due to inappropriate work behavior.
Further, these programs (when done right) invest a tremendous amount into staffing and aid for these individuals. I’ve worked with people who are subject to uncontrollable emotional and physical outbursts and other major mental/health events. It would be truly naive to think that all people with developmental disorders are able to be a net positive for a business. (Picture individuals who have daily or weekly interactions with police due to violent episodes. This is common.) By definition, these individuals are less able to varying degrees. This is, quite literally, makes this group a group. That would be why we’re not having this conversation about any other groups.
My concern is that by eliminating these programs, those who are truly unable to keep up in a more traditional work environment would be left behind. There’s a major problem with finding fulfilling social and work activities for individuals with disabilities. I’m almost glad this issue doesn’t get more attention. I’m worried that empathy paired with a lack of understanding from the general population would result in a worse situation for many... I say that truly believing that the condition many of these individuals find themselves in could be dramatically improved.
I encourage people, if they want to help the disabled, to sit and talk with someone with disabilities. Become friends with someone. The root problem for this population is being treated like a project more than as an individual.
Exactly! Thank you for posting - much better than the one I posted.
Doesn't that mean we would just need to change how we approach these government programs for people that fall under this category of worker?
@@09BiGDylan More we need a change to most of the programs people with disabilities live on. I have a physical disability and I can tell you from experience that even considering a job is tough because of the rules we live under on programs like Section 8 and Social Security. I can't make more than $200 a month before I start having massive changes to my housing subsidy. People act like these programs are free money but it is a full time job just to stay on the program. And people like myself have no other choice, I spend 90% of my time stuck in bed from my disability.
Completely agree, the piece leaves out that the majority of these individuals receive disability (SSI and Medicaid). This helps pay for the additional intensive services they often need like residential supports, healthcare, and case management. Working actually jeopardizes these benefits. The solution has to take this into consideration.
I hate the 'spend down' problem. This in and of itself could use an entire episode in the problems and issues it creates for the individual, their families, the care facilities, and any legal representation they might have on their behalf.
Also, on a separate-but-related note, I'm surprised that Skilcraft wasn't mentioned once in this episode as they're generally highly regarded for payment of workers with disabilities.
Thanks for bringing light to these controversies - well done DeFranco team
No controversy if you have a person with mental disabilities in your families.
@@kathleenpresloid557 i do and i hate these programs, they don't treat the disabled well, least not the ones in my town. -_-
He's a crook better help is a scam
I am a person with a disability (totally blind), and it has been my experience that the media does not cover any issues related to disability. There was an attempt to gut the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) a couple of years ago and it slipped under the radar as the MSM had no interest in the subject.
People discuss exploitation and discrimination, but do not include the disabled community in these discussions, I wonder why?
Regarding the topic of the video, my girlfriend and I discussed this (she is also totally blind and does much more advocacy than I do) and we conclude that the issue is a little nuanced. People with profound intellectual disabilities that reside in homes where all of their basic needs are covered, e.g. housing, food and the like, are not victims of sub minimum wage. On the other hand, people such as myself, who live on our own, should be paid the same as you sighted folks, irrespective of our disabilities.
As a side note, Industries for the Blind does not engage in sub minimum wage practices.
May I ask how you typed this? I'm just impressed and curious.
If a persons productivity is equal to what an average person is capable of then Yes they deserve the same wage, but otherwise No... I believe there needs to be a better system for governing those companies that use this practice... it Obviously could be easily used for nefarious criminal acts. Everyone should be paid based upon what she/he is worth in the system... that's type of work done and productivity of work done. People aren't equal... their Rights should be. If you forced, legitimate, companies that hire severely disabled people to pay them minimum wage then many of those companies will close or stop hiring disabled people. The system is broken, but, again, I think it's because of a lack of governing and the shortsightedness of those who first instituted the practice. It should be looked at again in this age and worked upon as would be reasonable and fair.
Doc Dray maybe a dictation service?
@@docdray8546 There are keyboards with braille on the keys or this person did a voice command that writes everything down of what they said.
@@docdray8546 look up "Braille note"
I think a bigger issue is that when they do work those jobs, their ssi money can be taken away. My sister has cerebral palsey, is physically and mentally disabled, and just wants to work rather than stay home all day. She works at a place like the one here in the video and she can make less than $10 one week, and $30-40 the next week depending on which job she does and how much is completed. She has gotten ssi money taken away because she makes "too much" at her job to qualify.. that is where it's complete bullshit. I do think it would be near impossible for her and some of her friends to be able to get a job at all at their disability level if it weren't for that type of program. I had not considered if it was exploitation or not, so I'm glad it's a conversation. I know it would not be a good quality of life for my sister to not work and instead just collect ssi; she needs both. A job to keep her socialized and out of the house, and actual money to support herself.
That's a shame they took away her benefits, that is inhumane!
There are often errors in disability payments and she likely doesn’t make too much for her SSI. My brother has been kicked off dozens of times due to errors. Elderly can make a couple hundred a week without losing theirs, so $30-40/ month shouldn’t be an issue. Also she should qualify for both Medicaid and food stamps. Especially if she has any special dietary requirements.
That's a good point, I knew someone who chose not to work only because she was in danger of losing benefits if she did. It's a real shame. People shouldn't be discouraged from working like that.
Yep im on SSI, its pretty much encouraged and made to keep you poor and penniless and you certainly cannot live on it.
"Earned income means money you are paid from working. If you have earned income, the SSA will exclude the first $65 (if you don’t have any unearned income, $85 will be deducted instead), plus half of the remainder amount over $65 that you are paid each month. This reduces your countable income, which will help minimize the effects of your work on your benefit amount.
For example, if you make $1,465 per month, the SSA will subtract $65 (to get $1,400) and then half of the amount over $65 (to get $700). That $700 is your countable income from work, and it will be subtracted from your monthly SSI payment (which is $750 without a state supplement). You would still get an SSI payment of $50. In a nutshell, you can make about $1,550 a month before your SSI benefit is reduced to zero."
For reference, $1,550 is about $9.68/hr at full time, which means benefits should apply. Of course they take the benefit away if they start making enough money. It shows that they're able enough to work on their own and don't need welfare anymore.
I have such mixed feelings about this. I’ve worked in behavioral health for years, mostly in residential facilities but when I take clients to their work, often they aren’t able to complete their job to it’s fullest capacity on their own. I don’t see how a company would be able to pay them the same amount as their coworkers who are working circles around my clients. That’s not to say that all individuals with disabilities are struggling to work to that capacity but many are and I think it needs to be judged on a case by case basis. Many of these individuals I’ve worked with are also more than happy to just to have something productive to do with their time. Don’t get it twisted, I love my clients and think they can do amazing things and they do their best but I think a policy like this will result in a lot of people with disabilities just flat out not getting hired to begin with
My office is cleaned by a company that hires disabled people for minimum wage or more, some of these people are severely disabled, and would no doubt be qualified for sub minimum wage, the company also hires non disabled people for the same work. We requested three different disabled workers because they clean better, they are friendlier, they are always dressed sharply, they don’t blast music out of their cleaning cart, honestly they deserve more than some of the non disabled workers that come into the office.
How long do they take to clean everything? That's very important, because that's YOUR hours. If you getting paid for those hours, then your boss is screwed, losing on value you could provide to the company.
@@Mordewolt they said they aren't the ones that clean how is it their hours read the 1st sentence before commenting
As a person with a disabled sister, I can appreciate and respect the businesses decision. It's highly admirable. But not every business thinks with their morals first, they have to think with profit in mind because that's the way the cookie crumbles. My sister needs the socialization and time away from home more than she needs the money. If taking away sub minimum wage would take away that job, its just not worth it because its about WAY more than money.
Mordewolt If a disabled person is cleaning better, dressed better and shows a better image to people walking into their office it’s worth the wage that they get. To pay someone simply because they’re non-disabled but must clean again, dresses poorly, and/or presents themselves as rude, belligerent isn’t worth hiring. Any executive will see the importance of hiring people who do the job better regardless of disability.
@@eternalchoppedscrewed If it takes a cleaning person to do his job 2 hours more for the room because he's disabled, the whole room just lost 2 hours of work. That's 2 hours they could be productive.
I’m legally blind, (but highly independent), and in Texas we have the Lighthouse for the Blind that assembles stuff for the military etc, and it’s heartbreaking because sometimes you see people with graduates degrees working there. However, it does provide opportunities. I know if for whatever reason I am unable to find a job, that is something I can fall back on, though for me it is a worst-case scenario. About 80% of visually impaired individuals are unemployed, and contrary to popular belief, you cannot really live on SSI (social security) alone
How do you see people working with a degree. And how did you find the comment section. Also how are you reading my reply. 😳
Patrick Reilly don’t be a douche, text to speech is a thing.
@@patrickr412 Legally blind doesn't mean you can't see.
@@AnimeOtaku2 yeah but still how did shs find the video or the comment section, you cant find that with text to speech, and could she see people with the degreees?? And why does she have glasses
@@Rowjimmyguitar legally blind doesn't mean she can't see, it means that glasses or contacts cannot fix her vision 100% to 20/20. her script has to be -8.00 or above to qualify.
The first thing they should do is change the SSI laws so if a disabled person can actually make a little money they're not going to have their disability cut. The government is basically saying these disabled people should always stay impoverished even if they can make a little more money that would really help them and their needs. Most are being taken care of by their families who are usually also very poor and needy for extra money.
pookiehoney Agreed!
@@jmkosan Agreed!
It sounds like the program is an excellent opportunity for some (lower functioning), but not for all (everyone else). Instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, maybe the determinitive criteria and wage calculations needs to be revised. Or, maybe better oversight of the companies making these determinations.
Best nutshell analysis and solution in the comments section.
+
Random but I forgot "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" was a saying
I feel like that's the best solution as well. Sadly another part of the problem is that most people have a singular view of what it means to be disabled. My daugther is on the spectrum and some of the reactions I get from people when I tell them that they act as if her whole life is fucking over. Which anyone who works with people who are disabled know that's not the case. The solution likely requires a lot of regulations and oversight and obviously money which i feel wont be there to create the ideal situation. Which is truly sad.
Isn't this literally the enlightened centrist meme? How can you allow discrimination against someone who is disabled, but argue that discrimination in other regards (skin colour, gender, physical attributes etc.) is immoral? However you try to spin the subminimum wage thing, it still is discrimination against a demographic; your justification is a post-hoc one imo.
"Hello hello welcome to your extra morning news show." That has a ring to it. Nice job.
Well either way you slice it, John's crazy socks Is doing better then rob Kardashian in the sock business
Sajad Alatabi 😂 love this! Rob tries to act like he has a mental issue. Damn entitlement &baby me syndrome!!
Hi Phil! great video. however, could you please put subtitles on your morning videos? This video especially so needs subtitles to make it more accessible to your hard of hearing/deaf audience. As someone who is hard of hearing i thank you for putting subtitles on your PDS videos and would love it if you put them on your morning videos. keep up the great work!
As someone who is 'disabled' (I put that in quotes because I do not collect disability) and unemployed, I agree with both Tracey Brown and Neil Romano. There needs to be places that those with disabilities can go to find employment, but its far too easily exploitable. I am pleased to see that the Cronin's were able to be so successful.
who would hire these morons tho????
@@guccigucci5002 have you never seen a single person with a physical or intellectual disability working in your life? Seriously?
@@guccigucci5002 After seeing you post this same line so many times I'm thinking... whoever hired you.
@@guccigucci5002 You are such a f***face. Oops. I was trying to be civil.
I don't usually comment but I have watched for years at this point and I finally think I found a topic I need to chime in on. I have worked as a residential councilor for years as an aid to people with developmental disabilities. We have workshops for our clients and they choose to be a part of them. It's not really truthful to say that disabled persons are only getting paid "x" amount and it's not enough to live. Most if not all of these workers are apart of nonprofit agencies and live in community homes (where I work) they get government assistance and everything is made sure to be taken care of for our clients (I cant speak for everyone of course). The workshop is a way for them to make a little extra money as well as socialize and feel productive and independent while also learning a skill.
The wages being described "25 cents per hour" are exaggerated figures taken from the extreme end of the spectrum. For example they may pay one of our completely disabled persons (who in no way shape or form can really work) a minimum for basically hanging out and not getting much done lets say $5 for an afternoon even though they pretty much just sit in a chair and hang out. The important thing is the fulfillment these people get from being able to do these things, they don't care about the money.
My own clients have come to me with worries of not being able to attend their workshops anymore because of the threat of expunging the wage. Agencies like the one I work for pride themselves on providing this community with the most fulfilling and independent lives they can have everyone has the option to work or go to school or even just go on trips with social groups. It's become more than a job , I'm closer to my clients than my own family.
Thanks for covering this Phil it's nice to see the disabled community get a little more of a platform.
@Jordan Read Wtf man? Why so negative? I enjoyed the hell out of what TheMrNickP had to say! If you're just gonna sit here and shit on the effort he put into writing all of that, then _you_ oughta go back to not commenting...
You pointed out many things that people are completely missing. Too many are thinking like abled people who work to buy things and pay bills or only thinking of high functioning disabled. The law is for the people like the one's you work with - who just want to belong in some way. The job gives them something to be proud of or like you said, a place to hang out and be with people. Our family friend that was paralyzed with polio held a great full-pay job, as did our bind friends. But my cousin who had the mental level of a 5-yr old benefitted so much from his sub pay job - he was so happy and proud of it, and had no concept of how much he was making, just that he got his "allowance". People seem to trying to lump all disabilities in to one group and not understanding how vast the differences are from one to the next. And thank you for the work you do!! I know it takes a kind heart and boatload of patience and you don't get paid so well either. Thank you!
Statistically speaking you're talking about a vast minority of this group though. You're lucky enough to be working with those who don't need help financially, and are provided with many things that most are not.
Thank you!
Awe this comment was very sweet and from the heart. Keep up the great work not easy doing the job you’re doing!
I used to be the Network Operations Manager for a group of radio stations, and when I was hired the station already had a disabled (blind) person working there. Every Sunday morning he ran the radio station like a pro. He was, in fact, the most loyal and conscientious employee I had. I am ashamed to admit that I had no idea until now that we were possibly paying him subminimum wage. He was worth more than most other non-disabled radio board operators I had on staff. Had I been in charge of payroll I would've immediately addressed this issue and fought to pay him the same or more than other employees doing a similar job.
There is a chance though that he was paid more than someone who could see. You have to calculate productivity for sub-wages. If your employer actively lied about how well he could do to the government than maybe he was paid less. If he was faster than you and other employees he could have been paid higher.
thats a whole lot of "im upset" with a whole lot of "i dont know"
You probably weren't, you have to get certified to pay someone sub-minimum wage and you have to demonstrate that they are less productive than their non-disabled counterparts. You said he was worth more, so he wouldn't have been paid less.
@@TKUA11 work is work.... Everybody should be paid the same for the same job
Being visually impaired is a physical disability - not a developmental or intellectual disability - and his right to be paid an equal wage was likely protected under the human rights code (it would be here in Canada). People w/developmental and intellectual disabilities often fall through the cracks in regards to protections for all types of human rights (incl. in Canada, at least in Northern Ontario where I live).
I like that fancy back ground Phil. VERY established feel and look. I'll just keep the 300 rap CDs as my background. People love it :)
As a disabled woman, thank you so much for bringing light to this issue. It was pretty disheartening to read some of the comments. Most of the time, it’s the limitations that abled people put on disabled people that actually prevent disabled people from working, not an actual inability derived from the disability. Notice how not a single disabled person was asked about wages. It was abled people speaking for disabled people. Wouldn’t it make sense to...idk get a disabled persons opinion? And not just a video asking them in the warehouse how they like it there. I want a disabled person in a leadership position answering these questions for us. Stop speaking for us, pass us the god damn microphone.
As an autistic person, I relate to this so much. It annoys me so goddamn much that non-autistic people "speak for us" instead of listening to us.
For real! We're capable of expressing our opinions, especially with this kind of subject.
they probably think you'd want to be paid in cookies or something, i think it's difficult to remove the stigma that disabled people are very "innocent".
Aspergers here. There's are different levels of disability and those that don't involve mental retardation can usually find 'regular' jobs.
Not all disabled people affected by this law. "only" disable poeple in which their disabilities affect their work productivity. It is very messed up, I know. Just hoping the government will come up with the solution
With this one the difference is not whether or not a disabled person will make the minimum or less the difference is whether or not their hired in the first place. High Functioning disabled people won’t have their wages cut because their productivity will be the same
Exactly what I was thinking.
There are companies out there and organizations that have helped people get regular minimum-wage jobs. there are businesses out there and that will hire people with disabilities. I I know for a fact
@@darkestsummer2 Some. The amount to support that many downs people probably not. Most of these people just wouldnt do anything. Work programs are mostly daycare for adults that live at home. Whos families need them taken care of during the day while they work.
High functioning is a BS term though, what you mean is low support. Lots of non-disabled workers are very high support through management time, need for over/re-training and lax work attention but you don't cut their pay. While I appreciate there's a difference in ability with some disabilities it is so much BS to say that disabled workers automatically do worse than able bodied workers.
Not really. . As a person who is considered legally blind or by today's standards visually impared, I am able to complete work at the same rate as near everyone else with the exception of driving which I cannot legally do. You will normally find companies will only hire a certain amount of the disabled no matter how functioning they are. Let's just say that despite being a white male, I have been the token of several organizations before starting my own business. Go to any company location that pays minimum wage, you will find no more then one disable person per shift if that. I found in my early years of applying for jobs that if I notified them during the interview process that I was legally blind, I received very few call backs. Every job where I omitted my visual impairment, I was called in for an interview, and normally hired.
I don't think its unreasonable to allow it with more requirements. Places like Wal Mart shouldn't have the option, but places with dedicated programs and appropriate support outside of just employment should have the option of sub-minimum wage. With submitted proof that paying at minimum wage would cause the business to not be profitable or barely profitable to a certain degree, and they would be unable to operate their other services that benefit the disabled person.
And I don't think it's preposterous to establish a disabled minimum wage so they can't be paid pennies an hour.
Alternatively, if this was repealed, require businesses to pay minimum wage but offer tax credit/cuts to the business! That way the disabled person isn't harmed and the business doesn't have to do a cost/benefit analysis on the productivity of the worker.
Great suggestion CarolinerITM, they give tax cuts to businesses for far less than decreasing the gaping outflow of social security disability money every year. It doesn't seem fair to eliminate it when that will mean no more jobs at all for disabled people, so it shouldn't be eliminated without finding another way to ensure that disabled people are included in the workforce. We need to be encouraging and providing incentive for businesses to hire disabled people who want to work so that the money they live on can be earned and taxed, fair and square, instead of an arbitrary and destructive national expense.
Right? The first thing I thought was: OK but maybe it should have a lower limit of 50-60% of minimum wage or something.
@F said like someone who never even saw someone who was disabled.. there's a difference between 1 and 100%.. I really hope for your sake you'll never lose your job and need help because in the world as you see it you wouldn't survive.
@F If businesses are offered tax incentive to hire disabled people at minimum wage, it wouldn't be smart to hire them for the same duties an able bodied person can perform. In many businesses, the employees just deal with the errant, menial duties of operation tacked on to their main job description. So if businesses have the incentive, they can round up those tack on tasks and make whole positions out of them for the disabled to apply for. Which could also yield increased productivity from the able bodied positions due to decreased distraction from side tasks. When a disabled person is employed, they aren't collecting disability, they're earning their own money and paying taxes like the rest of society. So even if the tax cut is more than the incoming tax from the disabled person's wages, the system is still not losing nearly as much as it does shelling out monthly disability checks. I imagine there are other forms of incentive besides tax cuts to consider as well, but there's got to be something that can be worked out that isn't the drain on the system we have going now.
These morning videos are slowly becoming my favorite thing on UA-cam. Mad respect for covering stuff nobody is even talking about.
I guess it comes down to whether or not these disabled people could find jobs after 14c. Wish Phil could have gone a little more into that, because that seems to be the crux of the issue.
Great video though, I had no idea this was a thing
Yeah we should have looked at the states that banned sub-minimal wage
In Canada they do work. Sub-minimum wage is not a thing either here.
I am visually impaired and have been since I was 8 years old. I am now 30. I work as a quality analyst with one of the top three largest companies in the United States. I get paid depending on my cost of living. Therefore where I live I get paid about $14 an hour +5 dollars an hour for healthcare. I have been offered a new job where I’d be making a lot more and on a salary pay. My abilities are phenomenal. But not all people who are visually impaired have my skills. I appreciate you bringing this to light because it is a problem. I also want to point out if it has not been mentioned since I am in the middle of the video, these companies also get a huge tax break. A lot more than they pay us.
First, I am in Canada. What we have here are subsidized workers. So if a company hires an employee that has a severe disability that does affect his performance, the government can subsidize his/her salary. So my son is autistic, he is still a teen so not in the workforce yet. I think he will be able to find a job and be an independent adult, give him a computer and he can work magic. BUT the learning curve in a workspace might be difficult for him. So him having a subsidy might encourage some employers to take him on (referring to his first job type thing). So they pay him less than minimum wage but he gets paid more than that at the end with the subsidy. But then again, we are a "socialist" country...
I’m not completely sure how it all works here and if companies get subsidized but I think it would 100% be the correct way to do things if they don’t. The employee could get at least the minimum wage and they company could get a certain amount back from the government depending on the severity of the disability. It would give more of an incentive to hire disabled workers giving them more of a opportunity while paying them a livable wage.
Your son will be fine, at least by the description you gave, sometimes its just a matter of trying out things until you find something that works, that's why volunteering or short term employment that is subsidized is great. I don't have autism, but I do know there are certain fields where they are actually in higher demand. The feds will bend over backwards for accommodations but you need at least a degree of some sort and the ability to speak french (typically). I had a family member work for them, and was able to get all the equipment/resources needed. Also, if you're in Ontario Ford is being a giant a$$hole and I hope the autism community wins that battle.
Wow, that's actually a really good idea. After finishing I was mulling over the best way our country could approach the issue, and this seems like a great way to do it. Yeah, it might be considered "socialist" here in the US, but the same thing was said about many of the programs brought by the New Deal mentioned in the video. Now these things are taken for granted. Here's hoping we pull our heads out of our collective ass.
The US already subsidizes companies for employing disabled people to a certain extent. They just do that along with paying disabled peoples pennies an hour which let's the companies maximize their profits.
How is this paid for? If the Gov is subsidizing, its through higher taxes. This is forced altruism through taxation. Rob from the abled and give to the disabled. It should be a choice. People should own their means of production.
Wow, Phil, this is absolutely incredible. Thank you so much for educating us on this situation. You have outdone yourselves. Keep up the amazing work. I'm blown away.
I have Cerebral Palsy and I had a sub minimum wage job because people didn't think I could handle a regular job. It was at a work center and one of the worst times of my life. Now I have a great government job making good money.
I had a roommate in college with Cerebral Palsy. Thinking he would be paid less than others while he is capable of doing work pisses me off. I'm fortunate enough to be on the "high functioning" side of autism, formerly known as Asperger's syndrome. I hate the term high functioning because it makes it seem there are levels to value in society. I have known people with physical and mental struggles and know our government does so little for us. Anyway glad you are working in better conditions now
I'm sad learning about it and support the awareness of the subject.
I'm from Canada and in my province disabled people are fortunate enough to get good employment insurance to afford basic needs whether we can work or not.
I am appalled that this bill exists in any nation. disabled people can't make their disabilities go away and work the same hours and jobs as normal people.
I think it is less important to focus on how much they are payed or where they work, but how good a financial support system they have to live a descent quality life in spite of there disabilities.
Neil Romano was just sprouting false equivalency imo. The reason why there is no discussion that “X minority group should be paid Y” is because its a discussion of able bodied workers; he literally missed the core principle of why it was set in place to begin with. Im not advocate for 14c and there probably should be an alternative to it but having a chairman lack such basic critical thinking skills worries me lol
Stevey Peppers maybe he should be paid sub minimum wage.
That was the most concerning thing about this video to me, that was coming from the NCD's chairmen of all people...
I think Romano knows full well that he's talking out of his backside. Unfortunately, there are far too many activist organizations that are more interested in stirring the pot than actually helping people.
Seriously, he clearly has some ulterior motive, because his whole argument lacks basic common sense.
He's actually wrong too. Has this guy never heard of Thomas Sowell???
i think the only problem here is that there is no bottom limit for the commensurate wage.
Sorenkair That's exactly what I was thinking.
Is there a bottom to the ability of a disabled person?
@@kraft.singles I'm sorry, but you are wrong. I volunteered helping severely autistic adults (nonverbal) as a "job coach" essentially supervising them as we sanitized tables at a cafeteria. There was far more work put in to supervising, and arranging the time to help these individuals have a safe space to feel fulfilled, then they got done cleaning tables that would just have to be wiped down again by someone that could do it properly. On the extreme end of the spectrum, the work is only for the benefit of the disabled person, their sense of belonging, integration with society, and fulfillment. It is a service for them.
The employer doesn’t just get to set the amount though you didn’t watch at all did you.
@@kraft.singles That's not true, some 'work' is not worth paying anything for, & won't be bought at all
There was no mention of disability benefits in this video (that I've caught at least) but I think it has a large influence on the debate around sub-minimum wage.
These workers, if they aware of it, can collect SSI or Supplemental Security Income. This is meant to aid those who make little or no income because of their disability. It generates the coverage for basic needs such as food clothing, and shelter. While the amount given varies and I do not have numbers or personal experience collecting SSI, it is not merely just the sub-minimum wage they earn, or at least it shouldn't be.
The issue we run into with removing sub-minimum wage is that a) these people would no longer be able to feel productive because they would no longer be able to collect SSI if they were to get a job b) run the high risk of getting fired for not being able to meet the requirements of the position they've been hired for and thus, feel like a failure when they are not.
Anyone who has been without a job for longer than 3 months knows very well the depressing feeling that comes along with not being mentally stimulated, social and productive. With sub-minimum wage, it helps greatly with their isolation and depression, which is a big risk in the disabled adult community.
I'm disabled and i think Neil Romano is misleading. He talks about how disabled people as minority group are discriminated against like no other group. He's missing the point, everyone is discriminated against in the work place, if you can't do the work you can't get the job. So if anything his problem is that disabled people ARE treated equal. Any able bodied person wouldn't get hired if they couldn't do the job 100%, same goes for the disabled. He's calling for people to be treated equal while at the same time expecting people to treat disabled people differently. I'm disabled and don't see myself as equal to others, if i'd have to move bricks i'd never be as productive as a normal person so to claim i'm equal just hurts me because now it's not my disability that causes me to be less productive because i'm 'equal' after all so it must be i'm just lazy and slacking.
His argument is an appeal to emotion veiled under legalistic and "logic". I noticed he used terms like "fair" and "equal" without defining what that actually is. It's hoping that the audience thinks completely flat but business is competitive.
I agree. No minority group as a whole is less able to perform a specific job. People are equal, but what they can offer an employer is not.
Nobody cares. You are disabled
People will directly not hire you if they find out you sometimes have a medical condition and if you don't try to push yourself forward by saying "Is this because of my disability?" You will be pushed around in the work place or down and right fired. Tax benefits or not you're a walking lawsuit waiting to happen. I know as I have had disabilities for ten years and every manager I've talked with has told me that. That if you don't put screws to people? You get it yourself.
@@Josh-wm6wf Yeah, that's why his argument felt kind of weak to me. The others are talking about how it allows someone who can't perform to the same level as an able-bodied person to actually work at all. While he only argues that it's not fair while seemingly ignoring the logic behind it. John and his dad seem to have the right idea; though we never saw their workplace, I like to think that they had no reasons to lie or overemphasize the benefits.
I do believe that that should be able to be payed less if they are not capable of the same level of productivity. The problem however is there are most likely, perfectly productive disabled people getting taken advantage of because of this law.
As a disabled American, while yes I am capable of less than someone that has the ability to stand, I won’t even apply for jobs that would even slightly require it.
Living wage is a living wage. Period.
It's not a wage based on how efficient you can work. If that was the case the same rational would be applied to normal workers. Every 6 months testing your efficiency and raising your wages.
This arguement falls apart rather quickly.
@@VitruvianEngineer Your argument falls apart rather quickly if you consider that if we did hold it to the standard of everyone getting the living wage as you said then why would a company ever hire someone who couldn't perform the job? You want them to be paid equally but have an advantage when it comes to hiring practices? Sounds like a double standard to me.
@@eternalzeero The companies don't have to hire disabled people either. They do it because it's much cheaper labor than having to pay some else like $10 an hour. However, paying anyone pennies an hour shouldn't be allowed. If they are not efficient enough then you fire them. They should really make it where the minimum you can pay a disabled person is above a dollar at the very least. They get tax write off and stuff for doing it already so...Disabled people looking for work usually causes more damage to their income anyway in case you didn't know. Most state will deduct the income from your monthly disabled checks or in some cases lower your monthly disabled checks because you are just working. This happens to people a lot who get into remissions from illnesses, find jobs, and then their symptoms come back and they will try to get back until disability with a struggle and finally a lower monthly check. The system practically punishes people who try to work but are disabled so a lot of them just don't try.
What's the point if it's going to hurt you in the long run and you may not even see more money coming in to support yourself?
@@VitruvianEngineer The same rational is applied to normal workers. If you are a crappy employee, are lazy, show up late, etc etc you will not get a raise or as big of one as another person who is more productive. In many cases if its bad enough you will be fired. The only difference is where you start out in pay and if you even get hired to begin with. An employer will not hire someone who is unable to do the job. If they for say hire a disabled person at minimum wage over the years if they underperform they will not get raises or as big of ones because of there productivity and will eventually make less anyways if they even get hired. The idea of a living wage is also not a thing. There is no specific number because its all based on where you live, your specific health issues, life circumstances and if you live within your means. I can make the same as someone else but if I manage my money differently it can seem as if i'm rich over someone else who feels and looks like there barely making it and don't make enough. Companies are also no in the business of making sure there employees make enough money. It seems wrong but they are selling a product or service and if they cant afford to pay more they cant afford to pay more period. Many believe that they should not exist or be in business if you can't pay more but that is absurd. First wages are a contract you make with your employer to work for a job. You are not forced to work for that wage and if you think you can make more you can go somewhere else. If someone is happy to work for a specific pay who are you to control their life and how they live it. Its extremely elitist and authoritarian. It may be nice to have everyone at mcdonalds making $50hr but in order to do that the prices for food would undergo massive inflation, less food would be bought, and in the end less profits made if not net losses causing the company to close. Wages and benefits are the largest expense for most employers. If you can hire 2 people one disabled who would perform worse than the other person for the same wage who will you hire. No matter how good it may make you feel overall you will lose money and hurt your business if you hire unqualified people with or without disabilities.
Thank you so much for this video, Phil. I have degrees in Psychology, Anthropology, and Rehabilitation Services and it always pains me knowing not enough people have been informed about this topic, especially after learning about this years ago when I was in college. There are many more topics like this one that have extremely sad truths behind them when it comes to the lives of those persons around us who do not have the same mental or physical capabilities that we consider "normal". Another part of this that annoys me is how many places don't hold up simple codes when making their stores/businesses accessible to persons with disabilities (even ones that employ these people) but that's a whole different topic.
I know there's a bunch of things you hit on with while going through this like the difference in socializing and segregating these works places have or may lack, but thank you for keep on topic. I would love to see ya'll cover these problems as well, but I know each of these topics could take up whole videos themselves.
Thanks for all your degrees. Do you have a disabled person in your family? If not be quiet! You have no clue!
@@kathleenpresloid557 Not really sure what you're trying to get at here; do you think the only way people can have experience with something is if that thing is in their family? Whether or not a persons background is filled with work, volunteering, studying, or personal life is completely irrelevant because they all provide experience in a subject, and most of the time people are not just experienced in a field or subject through only one thing.
On top the the highly flawed logic you seem to be trying to use here the whole point of Phil's community/viewers is to get conversations, information, and feedback thrown out into the world to hopefully make it a better place. I hope you learn to have conversations in the future and learn from those around you, especially if they may have a different background than you.
You are a person with good intentions who does not appear to understand the reality of the intellectually challenged. The road to Hell in paved with good intentions.
I'm surprised there's no discussion about the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plenty of disabled employees can do their jobs just fine once some reasonable accommodations are in place. I should know. I'm autistic and have integrated just fine into the workforce.
AwSam Weston this goes past the ADA. With the ADA employers must accommodate until their productivity is impacted. 14C is for employees who cannot work at a level where productivity will not be impacted.
I have been fired and demoted from different jobs because my physical disability. Employers saw me as less productive and a burden
I am one of those "weirdos" who believes minimum wage is supposed to mean the minimum you can hire someone for. I don't believe in paying waitresses below minimum either! Tips are never guaranteed.
It is interesting to note that anytime someone is hired for any amount of time (even a few hours a week) they are counted toward the newly employed thus making the unemployment rate go down and employed go up. So yea... not every employed gets even part time hours.
If servers make less than minimum wage because no body tipped, I'm fairly sure that they are paid minimum wage for that paycheck
"An employer of a tipped employee is only required to pay $2.13 an hour in direct wages if that amount plus the tips received equals at least the federal minimum wage (the employee retains all tips and the employee customarily and regularly receives more than $30 a month in tips. If an employee’s tips combined with the employer’s direct wages of at least $2.13 an hour do not equal the federal minimum hourly wage, the employer must make up the difference."
- US Department of Labour
Hope you enjoy most wages being at minimum wage, and 90% of your jobs going over seas, because that's all that a minimum wage does.
Switzerland has no Minimum wage and look at them.
@@simplysanatori Legally yes, but wage theft totals to more than all other property crimes (burglary, auto theft, etc.). Personally, I would prefer that we got rid of all tipping altogether and just paid people fairly, but I can't start that movement by not tipping, ya know?
Every time you say “let’s just jump into it” I can’t help but picture you jumping into a swimming pool lol
I absolutely love what you guys are doing here bringing light to topics that aren't normally talked about. Excellent work as always
The question I have (which no one seems to be asking) is this - How does working at a sub-minimum wage program affect that person's disability benefits? Are they supplemented the rest of the money it takes to meet the cost of living? I'm on disability and get enough money to live comfortably. If I were to work at one of these facilities, would all that money go away, or just some of it? I actually have a brother who worked at a facility like this years ago (no idea if it was under the same federal program or not); I should ask him to post about it. EDIT - I just asked him about it, and he said that you do get disability benefits to supplement the sub-par wages.
No you would still have your benefits. I am an aide for disabled people and they are able to earn a certain amount and still keep their benefits.
@@Magicandcoffee1993 Alright, that's good to know. I wish that information would have been included in the video, since everyone else seems to think that the sub-minimum wage money is all they get.
I'm on SSDI because I worked my rear end off until I got sick at 36. 10 years after I had to go on disability, I was shoving supplements down my throat like there was no tomorrow and felt like I could try the reintegration back into working for a living program SSDI offers. On SSDI you can make up to $800 per month without losing any benefits. Unfortunately, that added stress on my body just from working part-time finally caused a severe relapse of my CFS/Fibro and I had to stop working again. There were 4 or 5 months where I made over $800 and Social Security will make you pay that back when they get around to it. That is how it works for people who were able to work normally. People who never worked at all receive a seriously non-living income from the government and may have different income guidelines.
Why doesn't 14C apply to the members of Congress: their productivity is atrocious! We should be paying them each around 2¢/hr. That's my 2¢😉
That's gives me an idea that they should be Commission based so they'd actually be focused on results!
I'm disabled. I'm also a highly skilled worker. I would never work for less than the minimum wage. There is a lot of discrimination against disabled people in the workforce. I use a stick, and people take one look at that and write me off.
My reasonable requests, like having meetings either on the ground floor or in buildings with a lift, are often met with looks of bewilderment and half the time I end up having to struggle up a couple of flights of stairs to get there.
My work is just as valuable as the work of anyone without a disability. Therefore I should get paid the same. It's both degrading and humiliating to be assumed to be worth less because I have a disability.
I'd honestly rather not have a job than effectively work as a slave. It's exploitation. It isn't actually helping anyone.
Thank you. I completely agree. It looks like most people who have written these comments have never taken the time to actually to talk to a disabled person. You're disabled. That doesn't mean you're doing less than the other employees and the fact that people automatically assume that really annoys me.
If you are just as effective as anyone else then legally you'd need to be paid the same and this story doesn't apply to you. Let's try to be rational ok?
Lack of productivity PRECLUDES being disabled. It's literally a result. Are you disabled in the head?
Yes and like the law says, if your disability does not hinder your productivity than you are legally entitled the same wage that everybody else gets paid. If you don't receive that then your employer can be sued for it. There is no need to change an entire law for it.
@@LemonWedge123 Unless everyone is being paid based on their productivity level, paying disabled people less is discrimination. It's really not that hard to understand. As a disabled person, there are still only 24 hours in a day for me. Hourly wages are paid by the hour. Period.
Thank you for talking about this. I had no idea that this was a thing at all.
You completely ignored the fact that people with intellectual disabilities depend on SSI and Medicaid for living wages and insurance. The reason for this subminimum wage is to be sure they won't make too much money and lose their benefits. Getting rid of "subminumum" wage jobs means that individuals who can't hold down a full time job with benefits (many, if not most) will not be able to work at all. It's honestly completely insane to talk about this story and leave this information out.
So the solution is that we should allow welfare to subsidize companies not willing to treat disabled workers as equal to other employees?
The solution should be to train these people in specialized trades that they are suited for. Not creating what are little more than sweatshops;
baundiesel He's got a habit of ignoring the important details in favor of attempting to sound like an earnest nice guy. Remember his coverage of the Covington situation?
@@Permafry42108 Good luck finding anyone willing to do that.
Great post
The solution would be to stop punishing people with disabilities who work and allow them to earn equal pay along with benefits they should qualify for because of their disability. Being disabled means your life is exponentially more expensive to live. Stop punishing people with disabilities who can and are willing to work by disqualifying them from benefits they need just because they earn more than poverty levels. That's right. Earning above the poverty level disqualifies you from disability benefits which is insane. The system is set up to keep you poor.
I think we can agree that being paid pretty much in pennines would be insulting to anyone.
But you're not required to work for someone who's paying you pennies...
Before I start, I used to be part of the management team at goodwill, one of the many nonprofits using these laws, and I saw first hand how exploitive the practice is. And its kinda disappointing seeing all the knee jerk comments about how they shouldn't be paid a fair wage simply because their legally disabled and how it's the only way they can even keep a job. Honestly some of the top workers at my store were those "disabled" people you guys are just casually dismissing. Frankly when it comes to entry level work I never gave a shit about what people know. It's about how much you want to be there and actually do the work, and alot of these disabled people are so much more motivated and happy to be there than the average worker. And yeah, might take them a little longer to get them into the swing of things, but they make up for that with enthusiasm that I rarely see now that I've left goodwill. And in the long run that makes for a better work environment overall. So yeah, let's get rid of this antiquated law. But not only that but this stigma that just because they're disabled they aren't capable. When I switched over to safeway they have 2 courtesy clerks that fall into the category, and when I started they weren't performing very well because everyone's first reaction was to just yell at them and overall just ignore them, I took the time to actually communicate with them and whenever they work with me frankly I see much less issues than before. These people are capable of more than what most just presume, and they should be compensated just the same as their peers. Sorry for the rambling I almost never comment but I think most people can get the gist of what I'm saying lol
I had no idea Goodwill used sub-minimum pay with its workers who are disabled (I assumed they received a regular wage). Do you know if they were working there through a work program through a care provider? Or, if they were independent and using the job to cover rent, transportation, food, etc. but with a reduced income due to the law? I'm interested, because I've only ever seen the former, but the latter example should definitely be considered an abuse.
@@nathanvantwisk5729 it varied, some are independent and others went through programs goodwill provided in-house, the latter was particularly depressing to see. Alot of times they made next to nothing and they were treated almost like cattle. Goodwill would work the shit out of them and on days off they would take them on "excursions" to our stores here to buy things. Most of these people could only afford to buy one or two things at a time, mainly just small toys or knickknacks that only cost a couple of dollars. Goodwill likes to use the excuse that they make up for the lower wages because of the cost of taking care of them but frankly it's all bullshit. Goodwill regularly provides monetary bonuses to managers and above if the store/district meets the monthly and yearly sales goals. Which is why practices like these are exploited, cutting costs that can be easily affordable just so all these people can line their pockets. In my state in particular (every state/country is different so I cant say this is a commonly used practice) even alot of the normal workers were exploited as well, my bosses would direct applicants to our state work program, which would get them hired as temporary workers. They work part time hours and their wages would come from the state. After a three month tenure the company would then make a decision about whether the company would like to keep the individual as a regular employee or decline and just wait for the state to send another individual on a temp basis...I don't think I need to say what decisions the higher ups were making...
As a disabled reporter, I love the work you’re doing!
Thanks Phil for making this video. I learned so much about something I never knew. You told boths with no bias. I can appreciate the points from both side. Thanks so much.
He didn't mention how disabled workers are usually getting government assistance on top of the subminimum wage. Sooo, he didn't really give you the whole picture.
@@farlanghn Thanks for adding on to the topic. That is very important to keep the discussion going. This is just a start, I understand there is always more but I never knew anything about subminimum wage. Awareness is the first step. This is a huge topic just like most things in life.
I mean, I had a great uncle who had down syndrome who lived to be 51 ( for those who don't know, that's pretty old for someone with down syndrome; most don't make it to 60). He lived with his sister and worked at a factory near their home. Like most people with down syndrome, he really didn't need to work. He had family support and government disability benefits that paid for quite a bit of whatever he needed, but he worked because he wanted to and he felt like he was helping. That's obviously not the case for all people in this situation, but it is for most: they're really not doing it for money, more so to either 1) have something to do, or 2) to make them feel like they are helping, which they are a little bit.
Thank you it is obvious you have a relative with disabilities.
@@kathleenpresloid557 whataprick
I'm a disabled person in Canada it is hard for me to find a job if it wasn't for my community I believe I'll be living on the streets or with my parents this is why when I see the sub pay for the disabled in the United States I'm discussed. One reason why it's so hard for international disabled people to get a job is we do not get diploma only get a certificate just like how people who skip out on school.
Do you not realize that if you had this policy, you could find a company that can pay you a fair wage for your work productivity? But because the minimum wage is above your productivity, companies aren't legally allowed to hire you without losing money? This policy is precisely to provide people like yourself structure and fair compensation.
@@GSPV33 oh yah fair compensation. No.
@F Happy your American. Cause that doesn't fly here.
For people outside of the US who might miss this point I want to mention our government provides people with disabilities with aides like SSD and insurance and foodstamps so they don't have to work in order to support themselves. It's not a perfect system, but we do support our disabled, just in a different way. If did away with subminimum wage, these people who are choosing to work for the joy of getting out and socializing and completing a task would have to either quit or reduce/lose their benefits. The more you make the less you receive, that way people who can support themselves do, and there's more support for the people who really need it
If these people want to work for $1 an hour, let them. Power to the people, not the government.
This was a very well compiled story. Thank you. Great journalism
Phil I think the real problem with this video is that it addresses all of disabled people as a collective. For some people with some disabilities, these programs are rather beneficial (although, somewhat exploitable.) Those of us with higher functioning disabilities who are far more employable can either be trapped by this system, or it can lower the employability of disabled workers. I may need some physical concessions at a job, but I can do most computer-based work more efficiently than any of the people I've worked with in my 30 years of life. Individuals all have varying levels of skills, but it's only disabled workers who have a legal precedent for being paid at a sliding scale.
I've worked as a contractor, and I'd be happy to have my productivity rated--and to make well over what my employers have paid me--but the pay-fixing that sub-minimum wage enforces is NOT competitive, and does not enable disabled people to become gainfully employed eventually. There's no point during those 6 month reviews where they take you off of the program because you're performing at an able bodied person's presumed level--they come back again in 6 weeks. Meanwhile your able bodied coworkers have legal rights and defenses for when someone catches them slacking on the job--no one's reviewing their productivity every 6 months and adjusting their pay.
Phil, I do have a question that you didn't mention in you deep dive. What about the SSD that most of these employees would be qualified for? Would getting ride of this sub-minimum wage get ride of the SSD that those are bringing in? I know that with SSi elderly people can only work so many hours a week in order to keep it. I don't feel like I am for or against this but I don't think I have enough information to make an informed decision on this. There are to many valuables that are unanswered by either side. But it looks like the employees at the one company were extremely happy working their and maybe that's all they need. They seem to be getting paid to have a social interaction with others. Now mind you they are still working and being productive. Is it really a bad thing to have this program or are people just being outraged because that is what our society has come to?
If they made more, their SSD could be affected. I work in the field and that is something that has been brought up before with certain clients.
It seems like everybody, not matter how disabled, likes to feel productive. But if these people are already getting SSD and they could lose it if they work too much or make too much money, it could hurt them because this money is supplementary and probably does help them remain independent.
Thanks for covering this, I am a diversity Employment Specialist in Canada and I work with client's that require me to negotiate positions and job coach along with provide workshops to get clients ready to work in an integrated situation. This can be challenging and although employers mean well when faced with the option of paying a full wage to someone who can multi task and work at a higher capacity compared to a carved position for someone with physical intellectual consideration employers need an incentive. Our government provides wage subsidies for employers who hire employees with recognized disabilities. It's a win win. Allowing a higher wage for the employee and the employer gets subsidized.
The reporting on this topic and the format is top tier. I deeply appreciate the quality of representation for both sides of the issue. I realize it is difficult for some topics to find well spoken and educated people to discuss the topic in a very public format. Great job to the entire PDS staff for all the hard work and effort out into covering this and the many other topics the team had delved into. Thank-you to those participating in interviews to help the PDS anime light on the topic.
Chiming in as an Australian with an intellectually disabled family member.
EDIT 2: Just do a quick search and Australia does have similar regulations called Special National Minimum Wage.
Neil Ramano's argument comparing disabilities to other minority groups is pure bullshit. There is a BIG difference between someone being of different ethnicity and someone with a disability. Yes, both are minority groups but they are minority groups FOR VERY DIFFERENT REASONS! Minorities such as race are minorities defined by sociopolitical aspects of their identity. Disabilities are minorities defined by medical differences between themselves and others.
The actual subminimum wage thing is a tricky thing though. I understand both arguments and motivations. We want people with disabilities to be treated equally but at the same time, many businesses won't take the financial hit of hiring someone that requires additional care while being less proficient. I fully believe someone like my sister, who has an intellectual disability, could work a job quite efficiently but she would also require extra training and I honestly would prefer her working somewhere she doesn't interact with the general public because my family is very afraid of leaving her alone in public because she is the sort of person that would trust anyone.
Background on my sister, she turned 23 in January, and since leaving high school has been with a service providing daytime care for young people with disabilities, and they do an amazing job. Last week my sister for the first time ever actually talked about getting a job, she wants to work as a carer for the service that's helping her now. They are an excellent group of people that I have had the joy of hearing about them for years from her, and I can see my sister working as a carer for the group, as compared to others she is very low maintenance in terms of needs.
The bottom line is, we need to ensure whatever we do we don't leave disability workers vulnerable. My sister is lucky enough to be in a supportive family that will take care of her emotionally and financially, but others aren't that lucky.
I believe that there should be an incentive for businesses to hire disabled workers that don't involve subminimum wage so that disabled workers can continue to be hired without low pay.
EDIT: Just some more input from discussing this topic with my mum, she pointed out that here in Australia we have the NDIS, which gives funds to the carers of disabled individuals, especially those with severe physical and intellectual disabilities. The Australian Government is also very dedicated to marketing the idea of hiring disabled workers to businesses, including running promotional videos on tv showing disabled workers doing menial tasks for small businesses. My mum also mentioned that many of the classmates my sister attended school with (She attended a special school entirely for disabled children.) today are doing jobs such as car washing. My mum pointed out is that those are jobs that need to be done, but most people do not see as a long-term career path. So my mum's input was that disabled workers should be paid equal wage due to the fact they are likely to be in that position for a long time, remember one of the disabled girls interviewed at the Las Vegas Employment Resource Centre mentioned working there for 15 years. In these situations, if you are going to have the worker for so long my mum argues you must make ensure that it is financially viable to the worker to remain on the staff.
PEAS Gaming I agree that lumping in all types of Minority was a dishonest move on that guy's part.
This is definitely tricky, because equality cuts both ways. If someone wants to be treated fairly in their paycheck, then they need to accept being treated fairly in all other aspects of employment. And, if I have 10 employees, and one of them has 40% the output of the other 9 employees (even after getting *more* training than the other 9 got and with more *ongoing* assistance than the other 9 get), the fair thing to those other 9 is to increase *their* wages accordingly (which just recreates the problem) or to fire the unproductive worker (since that's how any of the other 9 would be treated).
"Fairness" is a really complex idea, but advocates of all stripes throw it around as if it isn't.
In the US, companies receive tax breaks if they hire disabled folks (I wanna say $2,000 per person but it's been a while since I read my business textbook). From what I've seen in US businesses, I rarely ever see a worker with an intellectual disability. If there was a disabled worker, they usually have a physical disability. Like the above comment said, it's not good to categorize all disabilities into the same limitations as disability is pretty much a spectrum.
I like what my boss has setup, he hires both "normal" people and people with disabilities. I got my job here because of my disability (high functioning autism) we all get paid basically the same wages, only the management and the forklift drivers make more. We work completely integrated with everyone else.
The key problem here is competition, and its frustrating that they don't just come out and say it clearly. If companies are required to pay them minimum wage, which in turn causes the company to fail to make a profit on their work because the production is too low, they will have to hire someone more productive instead. Unless we supplement organizations hiring severely disabled employees, they will simply not hire them. If a business doesn't make money, it isn't sustainable and everyone loses. It's easy to attack this as being too harsh, but where does the money come from if they can't earn it. Its obviously not an easy solution or it wouldn't be controversial, but being made equally doesn't mean that the work you are able to do is equal. The work you are able to do is essential to capitalism. This competition isn't gentle to those who can't compete, and the current method is essentially an equalizer that enables companies to hire these people and still function in the market. I just hope that their wages are at least supplemented by disability earnings that aren't getting mentioned by the people in these conversations.
I like the idea is subsidizing these individuals work. They are this way through no fault of their own and since we do not have the tech to fix them we should at least help them become productive members of society.
Would you agree to a system, that allows employers to pay as low as 10% of minimum wage based on productivity, and then having the Government split the bill to bridge the gap to minimum wage?
So employer's pay a minimum of 10%, and then the Government pays the rest of the percent.
@@MC-ml3cn That exactly what they would be doing, stupid. If someone has a job and is producing, what does that make them? a contributor to society, therefore allowing less disabled people to work, is the exact issue you just cited.
Yeah, that is true, but I feel like there are some jobs where a disabled person can be just as productive as a normal person. I feel like companies deliberately underestimate the value of their disabled employees in order to pay them less. Ideally, there would be enough jobs out there at minimum wage which a disabled person is not disadvantaged in performing, or there would be enough jobs out there at a higher wage for which being disabled does not bring their productivity below what is worth a minimum wage. The other difficulty is perhaps mentally disabled people in particular don't realise they are being exploited, and they could be paid much more then they really are.
You can earn up to 14k a year on SSI and not be penalized or have your benefits taken away.
As a person with physical and mental disabilities, thank you for a really well rounded video about this issue!
Remove sub minimum wage and disabled workers will end up without jobs.
That's the danger of capitalism
@Legate Lanius Businesses can actually get tax breaks and stuff for hiring disabled people.
@@darrylhamlin7475 Then the business owner would have to do some math. does the "possible" tax breaks and benefits make up for the loss of efficiency/productivity they would get from hiring disabled employees. At the end of the day, businesses are businesses not charities.
Remove sub minimum wage and you would either create a law and force businesses to hire token disabled people, or they will be out of jobs.
@@darrylhamlin7475 but is it really worth the slower bagging that someone with one good arm has, or is it worth outfitting your entire business with ramps just so your new employee can get around? to me it's not, unless they have some substantial skill set that i want. for a minimum wage job, it's not worth it. i rather see them in a group home for people with no ability to find work due to their low skills and or lack of intelligence then higher them. at least when they are in that group home i have a reason to pay them, and it doesn't harm me any bit (and i also get a tax break for doing that).
@@darrylhamlin7475 Imagine having to fire a disabled person for the cost of having him outweighs even the tax break they get. Imagine the disabled persons pain of being unemployed and having to apply to jobs again and probably repeat this cycle until one does and the cycle could continue. Conflict of emotions whereas these centers, they wont fire them, there is no disciplinary action that could mentally harm them and they feel at home with a family. Fucking hell, this stupid opposing argument shouldnt exist my god
When it comes down to it it’s more complicated than the equal treatment issue. I work in group homes. I’ve worked direct care and as a house manager. I’ve worked closely with my many individuals day placements and work places.
Disability is a very broad term. It means so many different things and every case is very very different. Many individuals living in group homes are high functioning, but will choose not to be productive at work. I’ve worked personally with individuals like this and we continue to work with them and encourage them to do better. These individuals will often go to their day placement program and refuse to do work at all or take many extra breaks. I’ve worked with individuals who go sleep in a meeting room for half their day at their placement. These employers/ day placements also frequently deal with disruptive behaviors and difficult situations.
I believe when it comes down to it these day placements are different then an average workplace. They are there to offer a daily place for individuals to go where they have staff who can handle their disabilities and assist them. They are given work opportunities because many of these individuals will never be able to work in the community. If these placement programs paid minimum wage they would not be able to have nearly as many individuals in these programs.
Individuals with less income also generally receive more state funds and money for personal needs items. This is a another topic entirely that the state should fund these things better and I won’t get into that.
Also individuals can lose their benefits and even their paid services and housing from the state. Some of these individuals if they made over minimum wage would lose all of this and their wages would not make up the difference.
Disability is not always the people you see in news articles. It’s not a black and white situation at all. Each individual is different. Each case is different. When it comes down to it these things need to be evaluated for each person and their situation. It’s not just about disabilities and numbers. That needs to be remembered.
Allie Cats When my parents were helping my brother get his state benefits set up at 18 they had to get rid of the savings bonds my grandma got him as a baby. He wasn’t even allowed a measly $500 to his name or it was no benefits at all. It’s a crazy system we have in this country.
I’ve worked in this specific area of social services for a few years. The research has been clear for over 50 years - individualized services. Having this as an option for some people under specific situations is appropriate. There is no one side fits all. The issue is that opinions override data in our society, and we turn an eye to effective programs. If you’re ever interested in a follow up piece I have connections to most of the industry that was involved in researching this area of human life. Would love to help contribute. ❤️❤️❤️ keep it up team Philly D and as always love ya beautiful bastards.
OK, you have to elaborate on that... I'm inclined to say inspecting things on a case by case basis makes tons of sense, but a) I'm not sure if there's a specific plan associated with the phrase "individualized services" (like not trying to be snarky, but that is so broad language) b) laws can't be made so specifically. More money should definitely be put into figuring action plans for individuals, but as a policy decision I have no idea what that means.
Def not snarky!
So it’s a matter of process. For example - decision trees based on the values, individual goals, and the current skills that someone has can lead to a large matrix that helps inform what’s necessary. I was a part of a team that was developing this in Nevada actually. It’s still under development but I ventured off into scicomm and UA-cam to figure out how to tell stories so we can get this area of research more well known.
I completely agree with you that it can be specifically written into law. What I’m advocating for is that the law not be one way or another - it be contextually fit to the persons situation. They do this to an extent already with the way they measure if you’re meeting the standard rates for “full compensation”. But it’s off, in a few ways, such as how they measure. For example most focus on a percentage measure when there’s decades of research suggesting a rate measure for skills is more accurate and predictable. An overhaul is needed in how and what they measure more than anything else - and that could be translated up into law. The issue I found working in that system is when it’s left to states to interpret it leaves room for less effective methods or “preferred” methods of those in power to impede on the roll out. Down to chat this on a stream or something! It’s such a deep topic!
This is the first time I've ever had real input on a story you've done, Phil.
My grandmother was paid by the state of NY to care for three men in their 60's and 70's who had severe developmental disabilities. She lives in a very rural part of the state but they were part of a sub-wage program. All of them had the intelligence, mentally and emotionally, of a child no more than 4. They'd been in the state system thier entire lives. When she moved them into her home, she had to teach them not to wolf down their dinners or hit each other with forks - that's because, starting at a young age they had to fight off others from their plates if they wanted to eat. She had them for more than a decade before they died. Every weekday a bus came to pick them up and take them to, I guess a 'work shelter' place, where they worked on an assembly line. They made maybe 5dollars a day each. They learned how to knit while they were there!! They LOVED to knit and did it all the time. The wage they made went directly to the food my gramma cooked for them and thier medications. I don't know how much the state gave my gramma for being a caretaker, but it let her afford lots of wool for knitting and puzzles for them.
My mother works in public school teaching ESE children. It's her dream job and she's done it for 15 years. Her classrooms can have a WIDE range of disabilities - a child who cannot form memories sitting across from a child who acts out because he's really smart and really really bored.
I understand that someone with disabilities can see subwage as inhumane, but... there are some people whose disabilities are so severe that without these work programs, they'd never leave the house. They ALREADY are unable to live on their own in any capacity.. it's just a way for them to get out and make friends like them, and especially important: give their caretakers a little break and some much needed support.
God bless you Phil for this video and spreading the awareness of sub minimum wage of disabled people
It's so ridiculous I cant believe it. I wonder if Phil has a mentally and physically disabled person in their family like my son. If you dont Phil, then SHUT UP!
How this sub-minimum wage is calculated seems logically flawed. The argument is that if you work below the average productivity of 'non-disabled' persons then you should earn X% of how much you meet their productivity rate. So here's the problem. Generally speaking, productivity will be a normally distributed range, i.e. that around 50% of people will below average and 50% above. For those people who are not disabled but have below average productivity, why are they also not penalised? If they aren't also having a reduction in wages then it's simple discrimination. Because the argument is based on productivity. On the flip side, why are more productive people not generally paid more per hour? There is no incentive to work more efficiently if you're all paid the same.
You just made an argument for why minimum wage shouldn't even exist. Thanks.
Employers set quotas. If you dont make the quota, you get fired. So there isnt really a 50% below average. There is a predetermined floor. And the 50% above get promoted.
Okamakiri Thats exactly what I was thinking, He's trying to show how the sub-minimum wage discriminates because it classes these people differently but the only reason they need that entire system is because of the problem minimum wage as a whole caused.
The real question we need to ask ourselves is. If someone is incapable of generating enough income so that they can live, should they?
@Pusalieth personally I think minimum wage should be a liveable wage. 7.25 per hour for a 40 hour work week seems like it would cause issues. Comparatively minimum wage in NZ is around $12.10 usd per hour. If the problem is that their productivity is so low they get cents per hour and so a business can't afford to burden themselves with disabled persons if they must pay them minimum wage then let the government make up the difference. Either way somebody is going to end up footing the bill and its possibly better to have them working and supervised than alone or in care. There's a big difference between simply being handed money to live and feeling like you earned it.
@@Hombolicious please tell me what you mean by living wage? What can you but in a loving wage bc the kids who I teach are mostly on welfare and they all n have nicer clothing and personal electronics than me.... They seem to be making more than a living wage with government subsidies...
As someone with ASD & Dyspraxia I understand the perception that disabled people find it harder to work so the idea of offering them below minimum wage seems like a low-risk way of getting them into the workforce. However, even with inconsistent social skills, I have always prevailed in jobs that gave normal wages but precipitated that with an initial training period. Paying minimum wage isn't impossible towards disabled people, it just requires slightly more detailed and specialised support & training.
I applaud the effort that you make, it can't be easy and deserves credit for overcoming your issues and continuing to work. But some people have disabilities which mean they will never be able to perform certain tasks, if there is other work that they can do with equal productivity to their co workers then the employer would not be allowed to claim under this legislation (without fraudulent practices). It seems to do a good job of protecting people from abuse whilst affording opportunity to others. The only arguement to be had against this is if someone is profiting from it....that would be akin to slavery and should be routed out.
I have an intellectually disabled brother and I'm so glad that you've talked about this, I always worry about his future and whether or not there will be working opportunity for him. Media bringing light to the issue makes me very hopeful for his future
I feel that you should have also touched on the topic of government assistance and how people with disabilities would be affected if they were to be paid minimum wage. Government assistance makes it difficult for people to become independent and stop relying on government assistance, if you start making a little bit more money you stop qualifying for some assistance which in turn means you have to work more hours which makes you lose even more assistance and into the rabbit hole you go. I think there is a need to re-evaluate benefit programs and do that the people who are working towards independence don’t get cutoff. I don’t see a problem with paying someone with a disability below minimum wage because they require more time to do tasks that someone without a disability would but paying them cents is ridiculous.
The problem is that most people living on Welfare would rather have a fulfilling and good paying job which is not what you get working 40 hours a week for$7.25. In order to make a profit, these workplaces need to pay the worker less than their labor is worth which isn’t right especially when the person has a disability. A universal basic income would allow everyone including those with disabilities to survive. Then if they want to afford luxuries then people would work and be happy doing it.
I love these focused video! They're so good!
It also allows the discussions in the comments to be more focused. I like it
I am currently working on getting my masters in social work and I am doing an internship where I see only people with disabilities that have left them totally incapacitated. For many of them they receive benefits where if they made a certain amount of money they would potentially lose those benefits and resources which wouldn’t be made up by the minimum wage they’d receive. Perhaps in those cases that’s why people are working in day programs where they are getting sub minimum wage. I am all for fair wages for all workers despite disabilities but my fear for people with severe disabilities is that if these programs are phased out they would have no work opportunities. A lot of the people that I see as part of my work may not get paid a lot of money to do the work they do at their day programs but they love doing it because they have something that gives them pride and fulfillment. I would hate in this move to phase out this program that it did more harm than good and left people with disabilities having less opportunities than they had before.
Well said! If phased out these people may not only have no work but no outlet for interacting with peers.
These tuesday and thursday morning shows are amazing. I look forward to these every week since you've started doing them. I love the topics you choose, especially this one. Such a topic im sure a lot of us didnt know was really an issue. Interviews all across the board, sourced information. Highlighting how its not really a black and white issue. Showing the full spectrum of the topic.
THIS is what real news and reporting is about.
Thank you and your team for all of this amazing content.
I love how Phil stopped doing "social media" type of news and moved towards more serious matters, at the pricey cost of views.
Cost of views? He still gets a lot of views..
Even if the views are down, he's gone on record saying these are the most shared, liked and profitable videos he's done thus far.
Tf?
He still does that kind of news, just not in the mornings.
Well, I would be inclined to state that his cost of views also comes from him showing more and more his "leftist" bias and mentality when touching certain subjects or societal buzz as of late.
He never stopped wtf are you on
So I work for a small business and we mail out products to people all around the globe. We only do about 50 orders a week and we use a workshop for our fulfillment. We have been with them for over 4 years now.
The way the workshop is run is much like a school, the workers are only there from 8 am until 3 and are picked up and dropped off by shuttle bus. I know a lot of the workers go on to work at real businesses but I also know that some of the people who work there came there because they were fired from real businesses. When you hear about this is can sound really bad, like these people are being taken advantage of, and in some cases they are. But from my experience, the people who work at this workshop are happy. They get to go every day and socialize with other people when they would normally be at home with their caretaker. It also allows for their caretaker to go to work while they are at the shop. They are also exposed to what it is like to work with other people with a variety of disabilities and get opportunities to move on to real jobs. I think if done right it's a great opportunity and a helpful thing for these workers.
interesting. It is a more complicated topic than i first thought.
As a disabled person I am extremely grateful to you Phil for having this story covered on your channel. Thank you!
*Jobs are more than just a way to earn money*
For some people it's the only place they can meat others. It gives your life a structure and some kind of self worth. So the focus should be on creating more jobs while trying to improve the wages. Don't move fast and break things.
Yes def dont stop the exploitation any time soon
don't meat them, that sounds scary
Either have disabled workers get paid minimum wage or make it so that sub minimum wage should also apply to non-disabled workers if they aren’t productive. Fairness has to happen either way.
Well the disabled cannot do the work done by a able person.So he should get less pay
If able people aren't productive they get fired
Juice maybe where you work XD everywhere I’ve been there had always been one of these perfectly able people who drags their feet to do anything... no they don’t always get fired.
@@jasminecluney1769 what exactly do u mean by dragging their feet? I'm assuming u mean like complaining or having a shity attitude to work or avoid some work. I promise u tho that those people still get the work done because if they aren't their is no reason the manager wouldn't fire them unless the manager is oblivious or dumb
Tessitura I get where you are coming from, but could you imagine having a bad week cause a family member died then being notified by your employer that your pay is being docked to sub minimum because your productivity hasn't been as high lately? not ideal
My cousin boyfriend makes sub minium wage an he works for a company collecting and doing stuff with cardboard an he is told that its training but seems like hes worked there for a long time for training
I never even knew this was even a thing in our country. Thanks phil for doing these deep dive videos! They are very informative and I believe more people should know about stuff like this and have more discussions on topics like these.
Does America have contract wage? Here in Australia a lot of jobs especially picking or packing fruit are paid by the bin/bag you do. Can start of only getting 50 a day compared to others that have experience can get 500. Surely that pay system is fair for them?
It's not really any different than this system, though. In the American system, disabled employees must be tested every 6 months (at least) to determine their productivity. They are then paid a rate equal to their productivity.
So it's contract but only checked per 6 months instead of per pay period?
After the explanation of how they get paid relative to their productivity, it seems pretty fair to me. It's a good equation. The only issue that I think could exist is where / how they decide what the average productivity of an employee in a specific job is.
The problem with Neil's stance is that he's comparing all other minority groups to the one that is objectively disabled.
Its not a bigoted label to call someone who is mentally disabled, mentally disabled. It's just a fact of their existence. They cannot function on the same level as your normal worker, so it makes sense to pay them less. And there's a distinction to be made here between a worker who ISN'T CAPABLE of being as efficient as a normal worker and a worker who is UNWILLING to be as efficient as a normal worker. I.e the distinction between a disabled worker and a lazy worker.
The Lazy worker can do the work at required efficiency if they'd just get their shit together. The disabled worker cannot. The lazy worker can be fired for not being efficient. The disabled worker cannot. And I think it should stay that way. Afterall, if the disabled worker can meet the required standards of the job, then they don't need to be labeled as a disabled worker. They're just a worker. Therefore they'll be paid the standard wage in the current system.
If they are treated as equal, then there is no reason to distinguish between a lazy worker and a disabled worker. Both can be fired for being inefficient and not getting their work done. That's always been the case for lazy workers, so taking this stance only hurts disabled workers.
This was my thought exactly.
Really loving these stories in the morning! Keep them coming!