COFAR blog

In what we consider to be very good news for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) who are seeking work opportunities, the federal Department of Labor announced this month that it has ended an effort started by the Biden administration to phase out the payment of subminimum wages.

Subminimum wages have been permitted under federal law since 1938 to ensure that people with I/DD are not denied work opportunities.

While opponents of subminimum wages argue that they are discriminatory, we and a number of other advocates maintain that those wages have helped many people who would otherwise be unable to find work in the competitive, mainstream workforce.

The Trump administration’s decision to keep subminimum wages in place comes as the administration has also offered the public an opportunity to propose the elimination of federal regulations considered burdensome or unnecessary.

In response, we have joined other advocates in calling for the termination of the federal “Settings Rule.” The Settings rule sharply restricts congregate programs for persons with I/DD, including sheltered workshops.

Massachusetts had previously eliminated subminimum wage payments and sheltered workshops

We hope the latest federal action on subminimum wages will change the dynamic in Massachusetts, which had previously adopted a policy of eliminating those wages for clients of the Department of Developmental Services (DDS).

In April 2023, DDS announced it was no longer allowing the payment of subminimum wages to anyone entering a DDS-funded employment program. Previously, as of 2016, Massachusetts had eliminated all remaining sheltered workshops in the state. That policy resulted in an erosion of work opportunities for people with I/DD, according to data analyzed by COFAR.

The Healy administration has adopted an “Employment First” policy framework under which it has made it a priority to place DDS clients in jobs in “integrated settings,” with wages at or above the state’s minimum wage of $15 per hour.

Closing workshops did not lead to more integrated employment in the state

But those policies have not been successful in getting DDS clients into mainstream or integrated employment, according to the data we have reviewed.

In 2021, we reported DDS data showing that total integrated employment hit a peak of 7,180 DDS clients in October 2019, and then declined to 7,090 as of October 2020.

The data were contained in a DDS 2021 “progress report,” which also showed that the number of clients being placed in day programs after the closure of the state’s remaining sheltered workshops had far outpaced the number entering integrated employment.

The 2021 Progress Report acknowledged that the state was experiencing “difficulty obtaining job opportunities for individuals with significant disabilities who require customized work.”

There don’t appear to have been any further Progress reports since 2021. However, we were able to locate a DDS “Statewide Employment Snapshot” for 2024.

The Snapshot report contained data indicating that the elimination of the subminimum wage paid to clients of DDS providers increased the average wage received by DDS clients. However, according to the data, 547 fewer people overall were working in integrated employment in 2024 than in 2019. That was a drop of more than 11%.

The Snapshot acknowledged that the total number of people in integrated jobs still did not return to pre-COVID levels. The Snapshot, however, didn’t discuss whether the decrease may have been due to the minimum wage requirement.

Family advocate wants Massachusetts to revisit its elimination of the subminimum wage

As we have previously reported, Patty Garrity’s brother Mark, 54, used to participate in a sheltered workshop in Braintree run by Road to Responsibility (RTR), a provider to DDS. When the workshop closed, Mark’s program, like others throughout the state, was converted into a day program.

Patty said this week that she still takes Mark  to the day program once a week for two hours. When it was a workshop, Mark worked 25 hours a week there and would perform simple tasks such as placing stickers on packaging or assembling simple products.  He took pride in that work and found fulfillment in it, Patty said. Now he has nothing to do other than occasional paper shredding.

“Mark can contribute, learn, and work to his capacity, but he’s not learning now,” Patty said. “He hasn’t learned a new skill in 10-plus years.”

Mark, as Patty has pointed out, is not a viable candidate for integrated employment. He cannot produce at the rate necessary to earn the minimum wage. “He deserves to be protected by this (subminimum wage) law,” she said. “It’s time to revisit it (the elimination of the subminimum wage in Massachusetts). Eliminating the subminimum wage is not working.”

Patty added that the lack of viable activities in Mark’s day program has led to increased anti-social behaviors by many of the participants there. “They are bored there,” she said.

We hope the Healey administration ultimately takes a cue from the federal government and revisits its subminimum wage policy, as Patty suggested.

In our view, the data showing that integrated employment actually declined in Massachusetts since the closures of the workshops and the restrictions on the subminimum wage are evidence that those policies have failed.