COFAR blog

Last week, at least 17 people testified in an online hearing hosted by the U.S. Department of Labor in favor of work programs that pay subminimum wages to persons with intellectual and other developmental disabilities.

Those 17 people were primarily mothers of children with severe or profound levels of intellectual disability or autism. They were from states all over the country, and they outnumbered the five people, most of them policy analysts or corporate provider employees, who spoke against subminimum wages.

Speaker after speaker said their son or daughter, or sometimes sibling, is not able to produce at the level necessary to earn a minimum wage. Consequently, those cognitively disabled individuals are unable to get work in integrated or competitive employment settings.

I also testified on behalf of COFAR at the November 1 hearing, arguing that disabled individuals and their families have a right to choose programs that pay subminimum wages. Yet, I had the feeling that the apparent majority support for subminimum wage programs during the hearing made no difference, and that minds in DOL have been made up on this matter.

The November 1 hearing was the second of three such DOL hearings regarding subminimum wages or “Section 14(c)” programs. The first hearing was held on October 26, and the final hearing will be on November 15 at 5:30 p.m. Information about registering for the November 15 hearing is available here.

There is no question that the payment of subminimum wages has been under attack. Most, if not all, of the members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation oppose subminimum wages.

Michelle Diament of Disability Scoop wrote last month that the DOL is “reviewing” subminimum wage programs at the request of a wide range of disability advocates and policymakers, including the Government Accountability Office, the National Council on Disability, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and the Labor Department’s Advisory Committee on Increasing Competitive Integrated Employment.

The U.S. Department of Justice appears to have summed up the federal position last month regarding subminimum wages and congregate employment settings, stating that:

In many sheltered workshops, for example, people with disabilities perform highly repetitive, manual tasks, such as folding, sorting, and bagging, in shared spaces occupied only by other people with disabilities. They also often earn extremely low wages when compared to people with disabilities in integrated employment, resulting in stigmatization and a lack of economic independence.

It doesn’t seem to have occurred to the DOJ or the other organizations listed above that that not all people with developmental disabilities are capable of achieving economic independence. There is no recognition by these organizations that there are individuals with developmental disabilities for whom highly repetitive, manual tasks are appropriate and fulfilling.

I wish at least one of the lawmakers in the Massachusetts delegation could have listened to the parents testifying during the November 1 hearing instead of listening only to lobbyists and the corporate providers on this issue.

Carol Skelly  of Fairfax, VA, for instance, said her son Patrick, 36, has an intellectual disability and autism, and “really likes doing repetitive tasks.”

Carol said her son has “no notion of money,” so a minimum wage would mean nothing to him. No one will hire him at a competitive wage, she said. “Restrictions on subminimum wages have taken important work away from people at the more severe end of the disability spectrum,” she added.

Erica Royale, the parent of a 35-year-old man with a developmental disability, maintained that eliminating subminimum wages “will be the death of sheltered workshops.” She said her son “is thrilled at the jobs he accomplishes” in his sheltered workshop, and that the work “has brought meaning to his life.”

Carissa Ross of Warren County, NJ, spoke about her own experience in a sheltered workshop. She said that when she turned 19, she suffered a stroke that left her in a coma for 27 days. She underwent rehabilitation and had to relearn how to walk and eat.

Today, she said, she is legally blind and epileptic. Because of her disabilities, she was repeatedly denied employment in competitive workplaces. But in May 2015, a nonprofit accepted her into a 14(c) day program. “The 14(c) work program saved me,” she said. “The amount of money I made didn’t matter. The purpose of life matters.”

Elizabeth Steinleitner of Allentown, PA talked about her son John who was fired from several jobs. His 14(c) program “has been a Godsend for him,” she said.

Similar assessments of the benefits of subminimum wage programs were given by Mary Miller of Wisconsin about her 30-year-old son; Stacy of Boston regarding her sister Brenda; Susan Burke about her 22-year-old son; Kenneth Eisenhower of Texas about his 22-year-old daughter; Beth Lambert of Connecticut about her 40-year-old son;  Darlene Borre about her son; Jacob Caplan of New Jersey about his brother; Carol London of California about his 26-year-old son; and Karen Rubel from Chester County, PA, about her daughter.

As the federal Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act states, “Individuals with developmental disabilities and their families are the primary decision makers regarding the services and supports such individuals and their families receive.”

Policy makers at all levels of government must begin to recognize that it is those individuals with disabilities and their families who know what is best for them. They need to understand that the wishes of individuals and their family members should be paramount with regard to the care and services that government provides and funds.