Disabled should work for less than minimum wage

[ElvishArchdruid]

Watching BBC24 and astounded at a woman who has come on to endorse that disabled folk should be paid less than normal (whatever that is) folk.

It's done her daughter the world of good and she thinks it fair as her daughter works at a slower pace with Downs Syndrome. I feel like they're casting a rather big net for a single group that may work slower. But the insinuation that I should be paid less than minimum wage is pretty outrageous. I'm sure there's lots like me who are mentally very capable, but have a body that doesn't co-operate.

A charity has endorsed this position too.

It has left me fuming, the woman by appearances can take the hit of her daughter getting paid less than minimum wage, let alone a living wage, subsidising her daughter possibly.

There is anger whilst I type this, but I can't see myself ever accepting such a suggestion.

So those in employment could be let go to make room for the cheaper unemployed rubies
There is no way of squaring this and making it work.

flatly although I share your views on this 'workfare' I think you are being harsh on Vegan. I took her posts as thinking out loud, working out the pros and cons and she had a point.

Its not her fault that disablism is so ingrained in our society that we find ourself feeling grateful for crumbs.

I have this vague feeling that that's sort of how the system works in Germany. If you're disabled, you aren't just judged either 'fit to work' or 'not fit to work' but they work out a percentage which represents the extent to which your disability limits you.

Then if you're employed (and every company with more than 20 employees, I think, has to have a percentage of disabled staff) then your employer pays you that percentage of your wage and I think the government makes up the difference maybe? Very uninformed on this, but I know my cousin is described as 'being on 75%' because of his back issues, which means his wages are subsidised by the government.

In Germany it works very well and avoids that awful gap where either people are written off and put onto benefits because they can't work, or are forced onto JSA and pressured into taking jobs they aren't well enough for because our system insists on this stupid dichotomy.

Thankyou mrs dv.i did feel upset by what flatly put..and I've never heard of this idea before ,and I was only thinking about my son..when you take into account all the people in the workforce with a disability,doing a bloody good job,why should employers get their labour for less

hey already are. .......my cousin has 'worked' for the British heart foundation shop for 15 years. He works hard, pretty much 9 till 5, days a week.

He cleans, sorts stock, works the till, prices things up helps on the van with collections / deliverys etc. All without being paid a penny.......and there ARE paid staff members, none of them have any sort of disability. It's bloody wrong, he puts the work in and is a valued employee, he should be paid for it.

Quite rightly if this was happening to a group of trafficked people, there would be absolute outrage and the 'Criminal' gang that was forcing someone to work 40 hrs a week for no money would face long ' Jail Sentences' !

Yet because it is a 'Charity' and your cousin has a disability people believe it is quite acceptable for your cousin to do a full weeks work for no pay !

Quite Disgusting

However, those of you that think this is a question of the 'Left and Right' our quite wrong.

This is all to do with the 'general public' perception of disabled , disability and what they can get away with when abusing vulnerable people!

The issue is bigger than whether 'Labour ' will give Disabled people £20 a week more than the conservatives .

It is about believing that 'Disabled' people should be in the work place in jobs , careers that are compatible with their ability and hence appropriate pay should follow !

Don't be upset Vegan This is an emotive subject. People feel strongly and personally about it. I am pretty sure flatly didn't mean to upset you.

I am bloody sick of people suggesting my son should work in a garden centre or in a cafe.

I'm with you on this - how fucking irritating!

If a person's disability renders them unfit for work, or makes properly paid work unrealistic, society needs to support them. If they can work, they should be paid the minimum. It is MINIMUM, with the rest of whether you deserve it being whether you can do the job adequately. If you can't, you should be receiving generous benefits.

*test

I think conflating people who can't for example understand money/cross the road by themselves with people who can work in a conventional job with reasonable adjustments is unhelpful.

flyingwithwings

Do you think everybody who works in a charity shop should be paid then? As I understand it each shop has one paid manager, the rest of the staff are volunteers, is the usual set up. Some smaller charity shops have no paid staff though and are run entirely by volunteers.

Thanks mrs dv,again....but honestly is this is all pie in the sky???? Would never get through parliament..not in this day and age..would it?.. it's open to abuse and it would be like going backwards by a 100 yrs..

I think conflating people who can't for example understand money/cross the road by themselves with people who can work in a conventional job with reasonable adjustments is unhelpful.

Completely agree.

Ffs. Maybe a sore spot with me but there are plenty of full abled people that work at a speed of 1/3 of the next person. Nice acedotal story but I will always go to the physically disabled librarian over the fit one because she's faster. Why should she get paid less?

And quite frankly a limited education should count because it takes longer to do basic computations.

Someone with a disabled family member shoul get paid less because they are less efficient due to stress.

And woman pay us less cause of all those hormones and shit.

A rule for all disabled people is the same as rule for all non-white people. You cannot generalise.

"I think conflating people who can't for example understand money/cross the road by themselves with people who can work in a conventional job with reasonable adjustments is unhelpful." slightly off-topic but on point, after what I have learned this week I don't think so.

In London there is a restaurant which is staffed entirely by blind people. It is a dine in the dark experience where customers apparently have the ability to experience dining in an entirely dark setting, the alleged idea being that they have the sensory experience of tasting the food rather than going purely on presentation.

In reality what it is is a place where guests can go and play at being blind for a couple of hours, and pay £55 per person upwards for the experience. The waiting staff are all blind, and from what I've learned this week from people who work there they experience customers pretending not to be there, hiding under tables when they go to serve them, claim to be somewhere they're not, all to exploit the fact that the waiting staff can't see them. Added to which the food is cut up small in order to prevent choking, and the guests, most of whom have no experience of dining in complete darkness abandon all cutlery and eat with their fingers ending up in a mess and covered in food. Oh, and given it's a restaurant staffed by blind people, they don't even have a Braille menu.

And yet this establishment upholds itself as an example of a company who employs blind people. Except what actually happens is that it's a restaurant where blind people are humiliated and get paid for the experience.

They're recruiting atm and given I've been looking for work now for five years and am desperate for a job, I know I could almost certainly walk into a job there. Oh, and they pay minimum wage but less the London weighting.

I've worked in management previously and customer service as well as secretarial. But I know there are people who would say that I should go and work there and be grateful..

This is what society thinks of people with disabilities.

I understand fully getting people into the community, there used to be really good provisions for young and old to socialise in suitable environments. But funding cuts meant such places went years ago.

I recall being referred to Leonard Cheshire who do some fantastic work, in order to crow bar my backside out the door. But again my life is just (shudder) all the time. If I could commit to some groups then working in an office would be viable.

I understand wanting your child to have equal opportunities. I really hope they find a job, because that's what you/they want, a job, to make them fulfilled that isn't washing pots, or watering plants as per their wishes. I totally understand that this is fulfilling for some and shouldn't be stopped.

Decades ago at 16 I got paid in line with my colleagues and then got a further pay rise, as my employer felt no matter your age, what they can get away with paying, you are paid according to your contribution towards the company. I don't feel this subject is that different, in that those in the WRAG group may find themselves penalised twice.

I honestly can't see morale being that good with such persons. As others have stated, outgoings remain the same, whether disabled or able. Maybe tax credits will top up earnings but that's just asking for legislation to cut expenditure.

MrsJayy - thank you, I think when I wrote out the post, it was mostly the condescending tone of what was being said, that really riled me up. I had a peak on Twitter with the name and it was coming up with Lord Monckton, so I'm assuming he is some relation.

Volunteers work in charity shop through choice being disabled and getting lesser pay is not and never should be a thing

If a person's disability renders them unfit for work, or makes properly paid work unrealistic, society needs to support them. If they can work, they should be paid the minimum. It is MINIMUM, with the rest of whether you deserve it being whether you can do the job adequately. If you can't, you should be receiving generous benefits.

Completely agree.

WannaBe, what on earth about this blind restaurant?!?

I'm a little torn on this. A government top up/subsidy would be more palatable so the employee gets the same salary but employers are incentivised and therefore more people are employed who wouldn't be otherwise. I don't agree that disabled people should not be expected to work, there are lot of people who are disabled but are very capable of working, myself included. However I also believe we should bend over backward to enable every disabled person to lead as normal a life as is possible for them, decent benefits, carers, improved access, whatever it takes, for those who can and can't work.

Sorry things are tough OP, I have a friend who has similar problems and there's no easy solution.

I can see some kind of logic as unpalatable as it may be... Then again look at the different rates of NMW for different age groups: how is that justified? Is an 18yrs old worth inherently less than a 25yr old?

elvish a lot of do gooding language associated with disability and LD is ingrained it is very frustrating .

I disagree that a vulnerable population should be exempt from a legal control over possible exploitation that would apply to others. In a few situations, such as the training cafe that Monckton has set up, perhaps it could work, but I do not think it should ever be permitted to pay a person with a disability less than a person without a disability simply because they have a disability, and the law should not change. Generally, I think people in privileged positions ( they can afford to support Domenica) are aware that other people's circumstances are different, but Monckton can sometimes come across as if she isn't.

But there are so many disabled people working as volunteers because there aren't the businesses who will take them on and pay them the standard NMW- that's the problem. And I'm not saying that people with SLD should work, but plenty do. People without additional needs find it hard enough dealing with rejection by prospective employers again and again, so my heart goes out to those people who just want a chance. So many of us get a sense of fulfilment, pride and accomplishment from working, and the way things are at the moment that's being denied to too many people with disabilities. I think if someone with SEN or LDs wants to work we should make it as easy for employers, particularly small, local businesses in our communities, to take them on and provide them with a stable role that offers remuneration.

I have a disability and I wouldn't want to be paid less than someone else and the type of job I do am already on a crap hourly rate and I work my ass off.

But the fact here is that employers discriminate against all disabilities so where should we draw the line?

At the moment it seems that people are suggesting that we draw the line at people with LD's who potentially don't have the understanding that they are being paid less than society as a whole. Because ultimately no other disabled candidate would go for that kind of scheme where they were less valued in monetary terms, but people feel that employers can justify it if it's someone with a disability which doesn't afford them the mental abilities to comprehend their wage situation?

What about someone like me or others on this thread? I want to work, but I A, gave up a career to bring up a child which already puts me at a disadvantage, and B have a disability which is in one of the highest levels of unemployment (84%). Should I be forced to accept a less than minimum wage job? What kind of worth would that give me?

I have just finished a back to work programme with a large charity. They actually pulled out of the programme but still did the basics, and the overriding thing they said throughout was "the less information you can give about your disability, the less you can alert the employer to your disability until you absolutely have to the better, because employers can and do discriminate, all the time."

This kind of attitude isn't going to make employers value the disabled any more, it's going to make discriminating against them even easier than it already is.

Fake. Do you think expecting a person to do 40 hours a week 50 weeks a year for is volunteering or 'exploitation' . It is one thing a say a 'retired' ex Teacher/ Doctor giving up one afternoon a week. However, it is another thing expecting a 'Disabled' person to work 5 days a week every week, in the 'vain' hope that some paid employment might come there way.

I found some of the 'attitudes' on here quite extraordinary !

You have some posters on some threads expressing 'moral' outrage for some of the most minor issues yet 'condoning' this form of exploitation !

Just found that restaurant (I think...assuming there's only one)