To think he should be paid for his time?

[MargotRogers]

Name changed as this is very identifying.

DS is 24 and autistic, he's selectively mute, which means that although he can physically speak and understand, he also isn't able to make himself speak.

He's also a mechanic, this is all honestly down to my older brother who owns a garage. DS has always been good with cars, ever since he was little but after helping him apply for apprenticeships at 16, he just kept getting turned down as he can't actually handle people at all.

He doesn't like to be touched, rarely raises his head and won't communicate with anyone.

DBrother gave him an apprenticeship at his garage and then a job for two days a week. As it was his garage, no one bothered DS or gave him a hard time, it was close enough to walk too and I can tell he really likes it.

DBrother's garage is now going through a rough time and he may have to start letting people go, he's asked if instead of firing someone he could just not pay DS for a while until things get a bit better.

He said that DS is the only one that won't be negatively effected. He lives with us, we happily provide everything for him and he does get benefits as well, so he doesn't need Dbrother to pay him and he won't even realise it or properly understand.

Whereas the other people he employs, live pay check to pay check, they rely on the money to pay for their food and rent.

DS is unlikely to ever get another place as nice to work in, he enjoys going there but DBrother can't give me a definite date on when he may be able to start paying him, I don't know what right for DS, I don't want him taken advantage of but I don't want him to lose this job either.

Corkie: Bit unfair. The OP is between a rock and a hard place here. Her son has been working for her brother, he hasn't just been the beneficiary. She has a responsibity to prevent her son's labour being exploited because of his disability, surely?

It is definitely possible for people who don't have capacity to properly understand money and payment to volunteer. My DB is also an adult with SN, not autistic though, and did it for ages.

I appreciate the points people are making about thin ends of wedges etc, and broadly agree, but equally I think it's ok sometimes to just think about the interests of your own family. That is what I would be doing here. Based on what you've said OP, the thing most likely to promote DS welfare is to continue at the garage in some capacity. Which will of course mean the garage continuing to exist as a going concern. I agree in principle with the posts saying DB shouldn't be running a business if he can't comply with NMW laws, but I'd have no shame in saying I'd be much less interested in that than what I thought best for DS. So continued involvement doesn't necessarily have to be what DB has suggested, but equally it would seem clear the current arrangement is not going to be able to continue.

I think there've been good suggestions about renting him space, which might also help the business, and also the poster who mentioned the possibility of looking into grants. The very structured support programmes funded by govt have been sadly cut, which is why the well meant suggestions about finding him another job or volunteer placement may not be very realistic, but there are still some charities providing some grant income.

It's the lack of agency that your son has that makes this an issue. You have to be his agency, so the question is: Would you help your brother out by doing something that you enjoy if it didn't significantly impact your life?

We pass our values onto our children so there is a good chance that whatever decision you would make, would be the same as the one your son would make if he had the ability to decide for himself.

"It is definitely possible for people who don't have capacity to properly understand money and payment to volunteer."

Of course it is, there are loads of voluntary schemes for people with disabilities. But this isn't one. This is a job for which others are being paid, so the person in question would need to understand the concept of working for free to do a favour, where usually he would be paid. I don't think this is the case here, and we have laws that prevent it for a reason.

OP you mention having a look at other employment opportunities. I think I'd want to get a realistic appraisal of what's out there and what his chances are before making a decision. Put bluntly, if this is the only gig he's likely to get, I'd feel differently about it than I would if there were other feasible options. Based on what you have said about his limitations, I think I'd want to be sure there were other funding options or projects locally before throwing this away. Do you have any people you can ask who might be able to give a view?

Of course it is, there are loads of voluntary schemes for people with disabilities. But this isn't one. This is a job for which others are being paid, so the person in question would need to understand the concept of working for free to do a favour, where usually he would be paid. I don't think this is the case here, and we have laws that prevent it for a reason.

Indeed, and I think DBs proposed solution is legally quite dodgy. However, there are absolutely people with SN who volunteer at places where some other staff get paid. Not all people with SN and/or disabilities who volunteer do it at places where there are specific schemes. I don't think that would quite be the case here either, but there were posters upthread saying someone can't volunteer without the understanding of giving up time for free, and that isn't the case.

I wonder if DB's issue is that if he lays someone else off (who can fulfill all the demands of the job) but keeps DS on he will get a lot of grief from his employees and accusations of favoritism. However if he can tell them that DS is volunteering then they can't complain.

I think your brother is getting an unfairly hard time on this thread. It sounds like when it's suited you you've been happy to take advantage of the family connection, but now the shoe is on the other foot it's all business.

Surely it's up to DS? Even if he doesn't have the capacity to understand money, it's his choice what he would want to do? Can you use communication aids to talk about pros and cons of each?

I'm a bit at the DBs offer though - would he be asking this if your DS didn't have autism. Of course not. And that makes it exploitation, unless your DS has all the facts and is able to make a choice within his capacity.

Volunteering is a different role altogether. I imagine this will be more "expected to work for free" rather than actual volunteering

To the people suggesting he can get another job or work placement etc, do you have any idea how hard it is for someone who is autistic ( and I will use the word severe here as he is selectively mute) to get a job? My DSis is autistic and has other behavioural issues but has a high enough IQ and went to college. 10 years later still unemployed. No one will pay her to work as she simply cannot do everything that other paid employees can do and the support from the employment agencies and different charities has been shocking,

I say let him work for free as a volunteer. Better for him in the long run.

Hyacinth: That is almost what I was saying up thread, but not quite. The nuance is that others are being paid for the same work, and the OP's son has previously been paid, so it's not a voluntary thing in my opinion. It is the brother - and I mean this in the nicest possible way because I am sure he is a kind man - relying on the fact that a) his nephew is autistic and doesn't understand and b) his sister feels obliged to him for giving him the apprenticeship.

I sound harsh, but it's because we have these laws for a reason.

Who remembers when Philip Davies (Tory MP) suggested disabled people could work for less pay? He said minimum wage shouldn't apply because they are less productive. He got roasted, rightly.

What your borther wants is someone to fix cars 2 days a week. This will bring him income into the garage.

He then wants to use that income to pay other mechanics and overheads.

I would ask your brother how it will financially help him to lose a mechanic for 2 days as that will be less jobs done and less income. Your DB needs to see 'favour' or not - your DS brings capital into the business through his skills.

One of my concerns would be if your son was no longer an employee nor an official volunteer there is likely to be some sort of insurance implication? What would happen if your son was injured at work?

It's a very sad choice and everyone make valid points but ultimately the message here is a person with a disability has less value than others without and that's a bitter pill to swallow for any parent

What Plotter of Plots said. Support your DB by giving him some money on the understanding that he can then continue to employ your DS.

After all if your DS is not employed or worked for free you'd be supporting him anyway.

Offer for your DS to cut his hours, not his pay? That way he still gets to go and your brother saves some cash.

Or suggest he works for half pay or even for free for a set period, say, 3 months, but the difference needs to be paid back at a later date when the garage is doing better?

Don't fund it yourself, that's the same as him not being paid.

I would be quite keen to understand why he is automatically assumed to be the employee who will lose his job if your brother does have to let someone go. Is he the slowest at fixing cars? Is he the least experienced?

I'm a bit hmm at the DBs offer though - would he be asking this if your DS didn't have autism.

If the DS didn't have autism, he would likely still be spoken to as an employee and asked if he would continue helping out as a family member, or look for a new job. In this case, the brother realises that the therapeutic benefits of the DS continuing to work (and lack of other work opportunities) may be a consideration and is trying to take that in to account.

I would be quite keen to understand why he is automatically assumed to be the employee who will lose his job if your brother does have to let someone go. Is he the slowest at fixing cars? Is he the least experienced?

I would imagine from what the OP has said, surely it would because he cannot do all the parts of the job required of a mechanic - the customer facing roles.

OP - For me, I think I would be considering that your brother created a role for your son and paid him. Given you said your son doesn't understand a wage, isn't for him right now the "wage" the fact that he gets some independence, enjoys his working life? It certainly seems as your brother doesn't intend to try and get someone to work for nothing and genuinely is struggling.

I think I would go with a time limit - that your son will volunteer for X months but then will require his wage again. The difficulty being is that if you make a stand, your son loses out. If the business goes under, your son loses out. I think in this instance, given he is making reasonable adjusment for your son to work there despite not totally fulfilling the role I would be willing to assist your son in being accomodating for a short while.

I would agree and pay my DS myself.

It is a very hard decision - however if your brother had come to you and said he was making DS redundant and not made this suggestion is there a chance you may have come up with this idea yourself?

I know that if it were my DS I would probably just want to maintain his wellbeing and is sounds like losing the job would be very detrimental to him.

"If the DS didn't have autism, he would likely still be spoken to as an employee and asked if he would continue helping out as a family member, or look for a new job."

Or he would be the last to be fired, because he's family?

Unfair either way. There should be a fair process to decide who loses their job, it's the law.

Op just wondering was this a formal apprenticeship with qualifications at the end or an informal arrangement? sorry for all the questions I think it is a tough spot to be in. I am just thinking through legal as well as family perspective and as others have said if your ds does good quality work and his only difficulty is dealing with customers then if an official apprenticeship with a qualification he would be employable elsewhere hence suggesting NAS

"I would imagine from what the OP has said, surely it would because he cannot do all the parts of the job required of a mechanic - the customer facing roles."

But the OP also says he works as hard as everyone else. I'm not sure this is a good enough reason if he remains productive, and is in and of itself discriminatory, if there is still work for him to do 2 days a week that he does to a competent standard. However, I suspect it is an irrelevance if the garage is struggling - presumably there aren't that many customers anyway.

However, if it is the case that, for example, the garage is staffed on those days with someone who can deal with customers and then do the mechanical work, I understand why the person to lose their job would be your son.

I still think he needs to be paid for his time, or not work at all. Nothing to stop him observing for a few months rather than actually doing the work. Perhaps this could be a solution.

If you are going to speak to the social worker it would on,y be fair to let you brother know this. As an employer as opposed to an uncle he needs to run his business properly and avoid any legal issues. He may need to let your son go from his position of paid employment and leave it a few weeks before allowing him to attend as a volunteer

Nothing to stop him observing for a few months rather than actually doing the work.

The fact that he might not be able to understand this or if "observing" but doing nothing doesnt him the same sense of well being/self worth would put a stop to it.

I would be quite surprised if he was a competent mechanic who wasn't able to understand the concept of observing.

Anyway, from my perspective I would find it preferable to having him working for free as if his (competent) labour wasn't worth anything at all. I think that is a dangerous position to allow anyone to be in. Putting on my cynical hat, once his uncle knows he doesn't have to pay him, he might never see any reason to do so. A few hundred a month staying in the bank is a powerful incentive to argue that he loves volunteering, where's the harm? Etc.