For years, disability advocates have worked to try and change a long-standing policy that allowed the employment of disabled workers at sub-minimum wages. The use of sub-minimum wages was offensive on many grounds, not the least of which is that it in many ways implies that a disabled employee is automatically worth less than a non-disabled employee. The Minnesota DFL party sought to change it, and now, as the Star Tribune reports, it is about to happen:
Krystal Halford recalls feeling jubilant after landing a job at an assembly plant in Eagan that employs people with disabilities.
But after opening her paycheck, Halford's excitement turned to dismay. For two weeks of work, Halford discovered that she had made just $100 — amounting to less than $4 an hour. "It sent a message that I wasn't valued, that I didn't deserve what others have because I happen to be different," said Halford, 32, who has Asperger's syndrome, a developmental disorder.
There are so many things wrong with the sub-minimum wage. It is based on a set of vague definitions interpretations by the company hiring. It allows employers to define the worth of the employee based on their disability, and if you think a minimum wage of $7.25 isn’t livable, or a minimum wage of $15 is going to be hard, imagine making a minimum wage of $1 per hour. One dollar. Tom Ridge, former governor of Pennsylvania, addressed this in USA Today:
The phase out of what is known as section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, which sanctions paying individuals with disabilities less than minimum wage, is no less than another critical civil rights issue. It is inconsistent with the fairness and equal opportunity guaranteed to every citizen in the United States under existing legislation.
Some people working under 14(c) certificates earn mere pennies per hour. This system tells Americans with disabilities and their families that they are not worth the same as other Americans, that society values them and their labor less.
In 1938, when the FLSA legislation was passed, it was assumed that a worker with a disability was less productive than a non-disabled worker. In retrospect, it was a flawed assumption. We want to be fair to the intent of the original legislation, which was to provide individuals with disabilities an opportunity to enter the workforce.
Every senator and House member in Washington knows someone with a disability or cares about someone with a disability. They have family who may be disabled, or they know that at any moment, they could become disabled.
Minnesota’s DFL went to the statehouse and, with the support of a Democratic governor, accomplished something incredibly important. They gave opportunity and access as well as fair pay and recognition to workers who did not have access to those protections before. Minnesota has a lot of work to do in order to help more disabled Americans find access to work, but this is a positive step toward recognition and opportunity.