38 Comments - OneMan - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 1:55 pm: Good, the fact this lasted as long as it did… Too long, nice job Governor. - DuPage Saint - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 1:59 pm: It is way past time and good for the Governor. I heard about the under minimum wage deal a few years ago. I told that person she had to be wrong and that there was no way it could be allowed. I was astonished when I checked it out and saw how wrong I was. Again great news - Chuck Button - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:02 pm: Bravo to Gov JB and all the advocates who have been crying out for this change. - thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:08 pm: Great first step. Now to ensure that other public and private sector employers also cannot discriminate in employment of employees with disabilities. And then, since you asked, let’s finish off this “wouldn’t it be nice” with an end to sub-minimum wages for the service industry. I am tired of having to arbitrarily guess what price subsidy is required for my waiter to receive a fair wage to put food on their own table. - Chief - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:14 pm: Awesome job-killing move guvnah - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:21 pm: === Awesome job-killing move=== That comment is *exactly* why this was so important. I know, it sticks ya can’t discriminate anymore… - Occasional Quipper - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:27 pm: I 100% agree with equal pay for equal work. But it’s my understanding that some businesses employ people with disabilities knowing they won’t be nearly as productive as non-disabled people, hence the lower wage. Will this just force those businesses to lay off the disabled workers and replace them with someone who is more productive? - Almost Retired - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:30 pm: The elimination of the sub minimum wage for individuals with disabilities will have complications and it is not as simple as it looks. Folks who are seriously disabled receive in most cases Social Security Disability or Suplemental Security Income. Besides for being disabled there is a means test for these benefits. If one makes too much one loses their SSDI or SSI. Additionally, a large number of disabled folks get their health insurance through Medicaid or Medicare. The level of income impacts these benefits. This will have potentially have negative ripple effects for the disabled impacted by this. Some will work less depending on what income they can earn and keep their benefits. Additionally, the subminimum wage supported individuals that have a level of disability that inhibits their ability to do regular work or work at the speed necessary. Subminimum wage gave these folks the ability to work, the self-respect of work and a reason to leave home or the group home and the social interactions that come with work. For some disabled folks they will lose this opportunity. Some times advocates such as the attorneys with Equip for Equality are more interested in advocating for a principle that they think is right, however have no background or experience that would be necessary to understand unintended consequences. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:32 pm: ===Will this just force those businesses to lay off the disabled workers and replace them with someone who is more productive?=== Don’t take state contracts. “Simple” - Who else - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:39 pm: === Awesome job-killing move=== ==That comment is *exactly* why this was so important. I know, it sticks ya can’t discriminate anymore…== Yes, but I think the “job-killing” bit is the result of a lack of reading comprehension rather than the accidental expression of the urge to discriminate. From the release: “the EO requires state agencies who currently have contracts with vendors who pay people with disabilities a subminimum wage to re-negotiate those contracts to ensure everyone is paid at least the minimum wage.” From the EO: “Agencies of the State of Illinois shall be granted price adjustment authority for the purposes of amending contracts with those vendors in the State Use Program that currently pay workers subminimum wage, in order to bring wages to at or above the applicable local, if higher, or Illinois minimum wage.” The contracts will be renegotiated to increase the payments so that vendors can pay people with disabilities at least the minimum wage. So, nice try Chief, but try again. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:53 pm: === The contracts will be renegotiated to increase the payments so that vendors can pay people with disabilities at least the minimum wage. So, nice try Chief, but try again.=== You’re not wrong, I still think the interpretation is the pain is the feature, not the bug, meaning, it’s continually about bad consequences and glass half full thinking. Be well. Thanks for your addition for context. - Occasional Quipper - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:56 pm: == Don’t take state contracts. == That’s my point. If businesses stop taking these contracts, then these opportunities will cease to exist. It makes a good talking point though. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 2:59 pm: ===If businesses stop taking these contracts, then these opportunities will cease to exist.=== Are you anti-free market? Vendors are less likely to bid (in that past) because of long waits for payment than this. See, women owned, veteran, small business bidders. - OneMan - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:07 pm: =The elimination of the sub minimum wage for individuals with disabilities will have complications and it is not as simple as it looks == I think the USPS has had this for quite some time. - Adam - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:08 pm: Almost Retired - Spot on. Thank you for articulating some of the complexities of these measures. - This Just In - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:22 pm: Read what Almost Retired articulated carefully. He is spot on and speaks from experience as someone who appears to care deeply about the issue and knows what he is talking about. - Chuck Button - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:24 pm: Almost Retired — Your long paragraph is not correct or wise. Other states have *completely* disallowed employers from paying disabled workers the sub minimum wage. People with disabilities enjoy more - not fewer - meaningful work opportunities in those states. We can do it in Illinois too. Rather than the reflexive “change = bad” attitude, look deeper. What if you had a loved one who was blind, or had Down syndrome, or any other disability? Would you want them relegated to sub-minimum wage work? A Republican President once said something about the “soft bigotry of low expectations” in a very different context. But it totally applies here. KUDOS to JB. A strong, smart, and courageous step forward. Don’t listen to the “know it all” class of people who want to cling to the ways we treated people with disabilities in 1938. - Occasional Quipper - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:37 pm: == Are you anti-free market? == I am very much pro-free market. And contracts that allow a business to pay reduced wages for reduced productivity are an example of the free market at work. If a non-disabled person gets $15/hour for producing 150 widgets per hour, should a disabled person who can only produce 30 widgets per hour get the same pay? Why would a business agree to that? They don’t pay subminimum wage because they’re mean, or greedy, or “just because they can get away with it”. They do it to stay in business. Any business that overpays for the work being done won’t stay in business long. That’s why I contend that the number of positions available to disabled persons will be reduced by this move. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:39 pm: === And contracts that allow a business to pay reduced wages for reduced productivity=== Yeah. I stopped here. Maybe don’t bid on state contracts then. You want have to worry. Good luck. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:45 pm: === From the release: “the EO requires state agencies who currently have contracts with vendors who pay people with disabilities a subminimum wage to re-negotiate those contracts to ensure everyone is paid at least the minimum wage.” From the EO: “Agencies of the State of Illinois shall be granted price adjustment authority for the purposes of amending contracts with those vendors in the State Use Program that currently pay workers subminimum wage, in order to bring wages to at or above the applicable local, if higher, or Illinois minimum wage.”=== Widgets and production… love of Pete… - Demoralized - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:46 pm: ==I am very much pro-free market== Sounds to me like your a greedy businessman wanting to be able to continue to pay low wages. Why should anyone be allowed to pay the disabled lower than the minimum wage? That’s the height of discrimination. I have zero respect for people that think like you. - Candy Dogood - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:49 pm: This is a good call. People arguing that we should or that it is in the best interest of people with disabilities to earn less than the minimum wage should take some time to re-evaluate their priorities, and google “Atalissa bunkhouse.” - thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:54 pm: ===Some will work less depending on what income they can earn and keep their benefits.=== Is that a bad thing? You are essentially saying that they can work fewer hours to earn the same income to maintain status quo. Or, they can choose to work the same hours and earn more income, possibly at the loss of some benefits. Ultimately, they get to choose if the extra income is worth the reduced benefits, or if they want to work less and keep things as is. Is that a bad thing? ===They don’t pay subminimum wage because they’re mean, or greedy, or “just because they can get away with it”.=== You realize that slavery was a thing, right? I mean, it still is in some places. ===That’s why I contend that the number of positions available to disabled persons will be reduced by this move.=== If only there were other states or countries that disallow this discrimination that we could look to for data-driven, not armchair, decisions. - Occasional Quipper - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:58 pm: == Why should anyone be allowed to pay the disabled lower than the minimum wage? == Because it creates opportunities that would otherwise not exist. Again, they’re paying sub-minimum wage because the employees are producing less (sometimes much less), than non-disabled workers. The work needs to get done, so if I business can’t reduce the wages to match the reduced productivity, then they’ll stop participating in the program, and the job will just be gone. What’s better, to have these opportunities available at reduced wages, or to not have them at all? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 3:59 pm: My hope is the companies dedicated to paying disabled workers lower wages, even when this EO allows for consideration to existing contractors, decide they do not want to bid… and the free market allows *another* company to come in and hire away their workers for contracts. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:03 pm: === Because it creates opportunities that would otherwise not exist. Again, they’re paying sub-minimum wage because the employees are producing less (sometimes much less), than non-disabled workers.=== Show me you didn’t read the EO… without saying you didn’t read the EO “But I want to discriminate but I can’t with a state contract, even if the wage is factored in” I don’t want contractors to bid who think without understanding the EO. - Almost retired - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:04 pm: @Chuck Bottom I would welcome references of increased work related to the other states you mention. My comment was talking about some unintended consequences for some people with disabilities. By the way I have a severely disabled 45 year old son from a traumatic brain injury 20 years ago. I would be thrilled if he could have somewhere to go and work for sub minimum. He is assessed and because he can’t work at speed etc. and his disabilities are permanent so he is rejected as ineligible for work programs. I have and still work with individuals with multiple disabled individuals for 53 years now. I know what I am talking about and I know many who consider themselves advocates do not understand the complexity of many things and that there are for some unintended consequences. I know the current research and the current data. I am open to adapting my thoughts if you can provide the citations that back up what you said and that they speak to the concerns I mentioned. - Candy Dogood - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:07 pm: ===so if I business can’t reduce the wages to match the reduced productivity=== Exploitation is exploitation no matter how it is justified. - Hyde Park Economist - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:28 pm: The demand for labor is always a downward sloping curve. In the real world when it becomes illegal to hire someone below their marginal productivity : they will be disemployed. In my small world , I already saw it happen with a dyslexic woman I know that works at a non-profit. She was laid off in January . - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:33 pm: ===In the real world when…=== Explain exactly what this EO is doing. Not your take, thought, academic belief, explain what exactly it’s doing. Thanks. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:37 pm: ==The work needs to get done… and the job will just be gone== Why would the job be gone if the work needs to be done? Face it, you support discrimination. It’s ok. Just come out and say it. I’m glad I don’t work for anyone with your attitude. You’re the definition of a greedy businessman. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:46 pm: Lordy Lordy do some people nor understand basic economics on this page, probably the result of years of government “service”. It’s not exploitation when these people would have zero opportunities otherwise. Their productivity is a fraction of what another worker would be, and yes that matters. These aren’t even jobs to these people, they are therapy that helps defray the cost of care. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 4:56 pm: 1) that’s not “Demoralized” typing this; ===do some people nor understand basic economics on this page, probably the result of years of government “service”.=== Stop hijackimg a name just above you, Geez. 2) if you can’t explain what the EO is doing, you’re not helping your argument. - thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 5:15 pm: ===they’re paying sub-minimum wage because the employees are producing less=== A number of things are wrong here. First, not all workers with disabilities are producing less. A store greeter can be just as productive with and without disabilities. Second, not all of these jobs would be minimum wage. If their coworker makes $20/hour to make 100 widgets, should they happily accept $5/hour to make 30 widgets? Third, the relationship between wages and productivity is far more of a correlation than a causation. Other than people working on commission, there is little evidence of a direct X units produced times Y pay per unit produced way that wages are set. Fourth, we can better support workers with disabilities with direct aid or indirect subsidies. We do not need to “support” them by giving them the opportunity to be exploited. Businesses should be required to compensate all employees for their time and labor at a minimum rate. Businesses have a lot on their plates; they should not be asked to serve as ad hoc social service agencies setting the worth of a disability. Fifth, if a sub-minimum wage job is replaced by a higher paying job, that is a benefit to someone who now earns more, whether they have disabilities or not. Sixth, The same arguments that you are making here apply equally to anyone working at the minimum wage. Why have a minimum at all if the market will sort everything out? Hint: because businesses have historically been terrible at calculating the worth of their employees’ labor. See multimillionaire CEOs driving companies into the ground and leaving under scandal with a golden parachute. Also, businesses have an unequal power balance with their employees which prevents supply and demand from reaching the true equilibrium. - Downstate Illinois - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 5:47 pm: Of course it will cost employees their jobs. People with these types of disabilities will simply not be hired. Why should they be paid equal wages when they can’t perform anywhere close to equal work. Of all of the lame-brained mean-spirited actions this governor has done eliminating opportunities for people with disabilities ranks near the top. - dan l - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 6:12 pm: —– Of course it will cost employees their jobs. People with these types of disabilities will simply not be hired. Why should they be paid equal wages when they can’t perform anywhere close to equal work. —– The fact that such a statement is being made by somebody going by “downstate illinois” is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo on brand. - Excitable Boy - Wednesday, Oct 6, 21 @ 9:11 pm: - If a non-disabled person gets $15/hour for producing 150 widgets per hour, should a disabled person who can only produce 30 widgets per hour get the same pay? - Laughable. I know plenty of non-disabled people who are less productive than other non-disabled people who receive the same or even higher pay. You’re probably one of them. This was discrimination plain and simple, and only a truly vile person could see it differently. - 17% Solution - Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 7:35 am: == These aren’t even jobs to these people, they are therapy that helps defray the cost of care.== A fatter paycheck is the best therapy there is. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.