People with learning difficulties should be paid less.

[Drabarni]

The latest to come from CONSERVATIVE.
I think I must be missing something. Yet people will vote for these people why?
What do they offer the average working family?

There are many people with learning difficulties who are carrying out their normal day to day living, doing the same job and as well as someone without learning difficulties.

I've not seen anything other than discrimination from this party.
Anyone who votes for them are openly voting for discrimination as it's not like they don't know.

Sweeping generalisation it may seem but many people within the spectrum (please see red2green website) can cope with & become highly skilled in Computers,IT & repairs, even with fairly profound social or sensory issues

You are right - it is a sweeping generalisation

Who's to decide that they wouldn't be employed at all though. Whilst it may be clear for some people others would be more borderline. I think once there is a precedence to employ some people on lower than national minimum wage it would get expanded to start to include all people with disabilities including physical disabilities. Calling it national minimum wage where his everyone else gets a living wage is just playing with words. The Conservatives currently call national minimum wage the living wage. You are suggesting a new minimum wage which would just be lower.

I'm not suggesting a new minimum wage for employees, but for employers - the difference would be subsidised by the government, so the employees would still get the same pay, but employers would be more likely to take them on.

As to who would be eligible for such a scheme, it would be be based on certain disability benefits and/or doctor recommendations. I've come across people with severe learning difficulties in the workforce who cannot work as fast or as efficiently as their colleagues, but I haven't come across many. Subsidising employers would potentially allow many severely disabled people to get into the workforce who would otherwise struggle to get hired. Benefits would still have to be made available and it would have to be repercussion-free if the arrangement just didn't work out and was harmful for the employee rather than helpful.

As I said though, there would need to be an awful lot of safeguards. I'm behind engineering job opportunities in this way from a social point of view rather than a commercial point of view, and we would need to protect any vulnerable people involved because they might not be able to fight for their rights as easily.

On second thoughts, I'm not sure I trust the government not to screw this up.

I wonder if the councillor concerned was talking about learning disabilities rather than learning difficulties like Dyslexia. Whichever way, though, her 'solution' is absolutely vile.

Before I had to stop working, I needed quite a bit of support from the Access to Work scheme, as my physical disabilities were profoundly affecting my attendance, productivity and the quality of my work. Dependent on the size of the business/organisation, they are expected to pay for some or all of it I think these things are part of the reasons why they don't want disabled staff. This doesn't mean, though, that they should be allowed to get staff on the cheap.

@Thingybob - It is making sure the employer does not lose out to competition if it does require some additional time from other staff members. I guess it’s helping employers build a more inclusive workplace. People don’t bat an eyelid if it’s a subsidy to help employers be green or farmers be biodiverse.

It sounds like some people with severe learning and/or physical disabilities And their families would feel it is positive instead of negative. Providing it has good safeguards to prevent exploitation and not affect benefits and allowing the person to give up if it doesn’t fit, sounds like it could work well.

wood you miss my point. I'm not suggesting anyone should be paid less than the current nmw. I think all employers should be forced to pay an actual living wage to regular employees, with the current nmw as the alternative for those genuinely unable to do any job completely.

You're missing my point. It doesn't matter what you call it you are saying everybody without disabilities should be paid a certain minimum wage which those with disabilities can be paid a lower wage.

which whereas

These last posts highlight what I was trying to say upthread but badly.

Who would determine if you were full wage or half wage? What would this be judged on?
It's really not workable solution at all.

It's also important to remember the job too.
My example again low IQ managed to get a PgCE for which I'm dead proud of myself.

What I couldn't do in a million years is support a child in school with Maths. I could not be a TA as I'm not capable, anyone over y3 would be teaching me. All the support or allowances wouldn't make a jot of difference.

That does not mean to say that when I was teaching I was under performing, I didn't need Maths for the subject/ level I was lecturing.

Unfortunately there came a time when I was forced to leave the profession and this was down to my lack of Maths ability.

It sounds like some people with severe learning and/or physical disabilities And their families would feel it is positive instead of negative.

Yes I think the vast majority of people with LDs, their families and those that work with them would be in favour but.....

look what happens when the mother of a girl with downs syndrome suggests a way to help people like her daughter. Some of the venom on this thread towards that mother are despicable. Do you not think those same people would be outraged if it was suggested we should 'pay' employers to employ "people with disabilities"

By the way it's not about the money or the hourly rate for those with learning disabilities. As Rosa pointed out many young people like her daughter do not understand money and even if they do the cohort we are talking about will not be much better off in work. The ones I used to work with were all long term DLA/PIP claimants who also claimed means tested benefits so earning a wage reduced benefits meaning their total income only increased by a few pennies for every hour worked.

Yes - I can see how the soundbite of the govt ‘paying employers to employ disabled people’ sounds bad. But it’s a shame for the people who could benefit.

Not many people on the thread object to the GOVT subsidising employers to employ people with severe disabilities who need extra supervision though. Personally I don’t see it as that different from the govt paying maternity leave payments if you haven’t worked for a company for long enough.

Drabarni

Fantastically done re your achievements! Especially as it sounded you had a difficult start in life. Sorry to hear you had to leave teaching-thats pants!
I thought teaching was being more accommodating to staff who weren't maths geniuses - when maths had Jo bearing on subject taught (I have two pals still in state school teaching without maths - art teacher and an English teacher... Both very talented.)

I'm wondering given your dyslexia /dyspraxia...were you ever tested for dyscalculia? That may explain why you find numbers difficult?

I'm also wondering what sort of age you are? Simply as testing has changed over the years... Many people who were labelled as having a low IQ were nothing of the sort... They had profound either social or other challenged whick masked their (completely usual) ability?

I can't remember the reason MENCAP objected to the idea of employers being given money to employ people with severe learning disabilities but I have a feeling that they were going to be given the whole salary rather than a subsidy in order that it would be worth paying the person minimum wage so not quite the same thing.

Yes I think the vast majority of people with LDs, their families and those that work with them would be in favour but.....

Except they are not. This women is only thinking what might work for her child without thinking of the broader implications for people with disabilities in general.

@Drabarni I also wondered about Dyscalculia, I'm sorry to hear that you were forced out of the profession because of a lack of mathematical ability.

My DC is currently studying a level 2 C&G at college, has ASD and has an IQ of just above 70 but with a spiky profile so while having a reading and single word recognition ability in the top 2% is great having a maths and speed of information processing in the bottom 3% is possibly going to stop progression onto the level 3 course, no amount of extra time will help my DC to pass a maths exam, extra support in maths is essential but what there is in place is useless because it is the wrong kind of support. I dread to think what will happen next year when DC can drop the maths.

It sounds like some people with severe learning and/or physical disabilities And their families would feel it is positive instead of negative.

So you have already extrapolated to physical disabilities...I am disabled with a progressive disease and I doubt anyone with my disease would appreciate being paid lower than the minimum wage. I can't imagine anything worse than become more disabled and then being put into a category where employers are allowed to discriminate and pay me less than nmw because of it!

Same reason as under 21s have a lower minimum wage than other adults- its an incentive to employers to consider hiring someone they probably wouldnt otherwise.

Same reason as under 21s have a lower minimum wage than other adults- its an incentive to employers to consider hiring someone they probably wouldnt otherwise.

That is the reason given although in reality it's just gives some employers an excuse to pay them less.

This whole topic of using people with LD as an electioneering point to me, is utterly vile.
I have a sister with LD in 30s and the prospect of her being in a work situation would be terrifying to me because she is very vulnerable.
She is very trusting and would pretty do anything asked of her. She would have no idea if someone was taking advantage of her and could be made to work basically in servitude.

Even here on this website there are a plethora of threads about workplace bullying, harassment and sexual exploitation. Just how would anyone govern or put in the right level of safeguards for people with LD, in these magical utopian workplaces?

Not everyone with LD is able to work but they should not be vilified/stigmatised or be put under the stress of a job.
For someone with LD life is hard enough without this added pressure being put on them and now being used as a political football.

The denigration by the Tory wannabe MP is deplorable of LD people, to speak about human beings in such a fashion is frankly disgusting! She was literally a step away from suggesting workhouses of old!
Just because my sister has LD does't make her subhuman and ok to be exploited by the Tory Party.

We are reaping what we show to a degree.

Remploy used to directly employ disabled people with meaningful work - my employer used to purchase bindery services from them. That element of Remploy's work was shut down by a Tory government several years ago who no longer wanted to subsidise it. The point being people who work have purpose, pay taxes, spend money in the economy, put something back.

No one really cared, although there was a campaign (I think Gordon Brown was involved) and many people wrote pointless letters.

The Conservatives don't care about you if you can't contribute economically.

Sow even, not show!

The real issue is not the pay ... it's the extra supervision and the amount of productive hours. Think about small to medium sized businesses, and the expectation they have. It's so difficult, in order to gain employment, everyone has to proof their "worth" in terms of productivity. As it is put perfectly in the article linked by OP:

On the whole, employers are not charities, and it is difficult for them to employ people if their output amounts to a loss. Most of our graduates will manage only eight to 15 hours a week.

I and a few of my friends used to work for Remploy back in the day it was shit conditions terrible subsidised pay it certainly wasn't meaningful work I lasted 4 months before i handed my notice in because it was such a joyless place to work.

@Drabarni, it sounds like you’ve worked hard and made great strides in your life in spite of your challenges. This is commendable and you are certainly an example to others. I am absolutely not belittling the struggles you’ve come up against. However, you are a tiny minority. Unfortunately, by its very nature, the vast majority of people with learning disabilities (even mild ones) would not have been able to do what you have done because it is actually impossible. By their very nature, their LD means they cannot get a degree. Some of us on this thread are talking about those people. They have huge worth and value and an enormous amount to contribute to society. It may be they can only do a tiny fraction of a basic job but they want to work and be considered employable. However, sadly, they cannot do this but if they were to be able to paid a smaller amount, employers would be more open. I understand people who are looking at it as “pay disabled people less” but it’s not like that at all. I work with people with LD and I have a disability which actually limits what I can do within my job, so I feel I’m quite close to the topic. I’m very passionate about employment and have been working on a project to get people with more complex needs to engage in the working world. However, I am not naive and know many of the individuals cannot sustain a regular job but would benefit from a reduced wage type role.

wood I've not mentioned anything about paying people less simply because they have a disability. As I've repeatedly said, it's people such as in the article that otherwise wouldn't be able to work at all.

What's your solution?

drabani ditto the dyscalculia. It might also be worth investigating whether the way you were originally taught maths might not have been ideal, especially in light of your dyslexia.

Not that it should matter whether you are or are not any good at maths, I'm only mentioning it because you feel it's holding you back.

As to the topic, there's no justification why someone such as you should need to be paid less, because there are plenty of careers, let alone jobs that are accessible, or could be with reasonable adjustments and a decent employer. It's when there's absolutely no other options available that I think some people would benefit from exceptions.