ASAN co-wrote and signed onto three separate letters from three separate groups: The End Subminimum Wage Coalition, Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities (CCD), and Collaboration to Promote Self-Determination (CPSD). All three letters are about the Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act (TCIEA).
End Subminimum Wage Coalition Letter
Download this letter as a PDF here.
September 9th, 2024
Dear Chairs Sanders and Foxx, Ranking Members Cassidy and Scott, and Members of Congress,
We, the one hundred (100) undersigned organizations, stand united in our support for the bipartisan “Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act” (S. 533 / H.R.1263). Broad consensus for TCIEA exists among this letter’s varied signatories, representing the interests of disabled people, businesses, employers, state agencies, providers, and families. It is our shared position that there is dignity in work, and that all disabled workers deserve fair pay in integrated employment settings. We strongly urge you to pass TCIEA during the 118th Congress.
TCIEA is the rare kind of legislation that is a win-win-win-win for legislators, state providers, businesses, and disabled people because it would enable employers to provide good, cost-effective jobs for disabled people, thereby increasing disabled peoples’ participation in the workforce and financial independence. Disabled people want to work. TCIEA will help that goal come to fruition because it provides the grants and technical assistance necessary to both advance opportunities for competitive integrated employment (CIE), as well as to gradually sunset the Section 14(c) program over five years in the Senate bill and four years in the House Bill. The process outlined in this legislation will not harm businesses and state agencies, but as a matter of fact, will help them.
Myths vs. Reality
TCIEA will not force certificate-holding employers to shut down. With the passage of TCIEA, current subminimum wage employers will be provided with the resources to transition their business models to CIE. Businesses can continue to provide goods and services, employ people with disabilities, and secure Medicaid funding for job coaching and other support that their workers need. TCIEA also provides a framework states can use to support disabled individuals whose employers do not choose to transition their business practices. TCIEA helps 14(c) employees find and retain competitive integrated employment (CIE), which may occur at their current place of employment following a program model transformation, or in another CIE setting.
The loudest TCIEA opponents claim that some disabled people are too impaired for any job setting besides sheltered workshops. These opponents believe that eliminating sheltered workshops would result in disabled people losing “the place they go every day” and losing support services. Sheltered workshops, however, exacerbate our impairments and compromise our access to quality support services. Segregated, subminimum wage jobs deprive us of the chance to know what we’re capable of when our needs are valued and met. When disabled people are instead given the appropriate accommodations and wraparound services, we often stop demonstrating the behaviors or characteristics that got us (mis)labeled as “low-functioning” or “profoundly disabled” to begin with. Many more of us would be capable of competitive integrated employment (CIE) if we were provided with the reasonable accommodations protected under the ADA, including those that teach and allow us to communicate via augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Many more of us would be capable of CIE if provided with wraparound services, like occupational and physical therapy, that advance employment outcomes. Disabled people are better positioned to reach our highest potential when we first get the fair wages, accommodations, and support services we rightly deserve. We will rise to the occasion when employers, family advocates, and legislators start fulfilling their responsibilities to us. And even if higher expectations do not lead to decreased support needs over time, disabled people still deserve the right to work in an integrated environment at a fair wage, whether or not we conform to ableist standards.
Disabled people deserve “dignity of risk,” which is the belief that individuals with disabilities have the right to the freedom to make their own decisions, which may involve risks. Disabled people deserve the deeply human opportunity to make mistakes, learn, grow, and work toward personally-determined goals, just like individuals without disabilities.
The Business Case for TCIEA
Studies have also shown, time and again, that transitioning to CIE is better for businesses’ bottom line. It costs the state’s adult services agencies more money to pay for sheltered workshops than to provide employment supports. Sheltered workshops are a type of segregated employment in which disabled employees are kept apart from the rest of the community. Approximately 96% of 14(c) employees are at sheltered workshops.1
According to a study in the Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, “Research indicates that employees receiving supported employment services generate lower cumulative costs than employees receiving sheltered workshop services and that whereas the cost-trend of supported employees shifts downward over time, the opposite is the case for individuals receiving sheltered workshop services.”2 Similarly, a meta-analysis of five studies “found no evidence in support of segregation as a method of achieving any meaningful preferred employment outcome— not in CIE, not in wages, not in hours, not in cost, not in quality of life, not in achieving greater independence.”3 Recently, the Washington Post’s analysis of eight states that ended their programs before 2022 showed that “employment rates for adults with cognitive disabilities increased by at least 14 percent after state programs were canceled, when adjusted for overall employment rate growth.”4
Over time, TCIEA could reduce the number of people relying on government assistance. People earning subminimum wage are at a higher risk of living in poverty, even if they are also receiving social security and other forms of financial support. This means that even high-cost government assistance programs are not enough to break many disabled people out of the cycle of poverty. Nearly half of working-age disabled people had annual household incomes under $30k.5 And there is a 25.9% poverty rate for working-age disabled people who live in the community, which is more than double the poverty rate for their non-disabled counterparts.6 Having the opportunity to make at least minimum wage, while certainly not enough to cover the cost of living, would be a step in the right direction toward financial self-sufficiency.
TCIEA will help states and businesses meet their legal obligations. Federal guidance is clear that individuals with disabilities must be able to live, work, and receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.7 The Department of Justice’s 2024 investigation of Utah and DOJ’s 2022 settlement with Oregon are enforcement efforts that demonstrate that the agency stands by their guidance.8,9 The 14(c) program segregates employees in isolated, disability-specific work settings that limit economic independence, chances for professional advancement, and community interaction.
Employee Testimonies
Many people who were placed in subminimum wage jobs have spoken out about the abusive and harmful nature of these programs. Below are testimonies from two people about their experience in 14(c) certificate-holding sheltered workshop employment settings.
David Pinno – Wisconsin
“I worked in a sheltered workshop from 2003-2011 in Wisconsin. I was paid $4.28 per hour while at the sheltered workshop. Other people did the same work and got paid minimum wage – a lot more than me. I felt worthless and I was often retaliated against for speaking my mind. I chose to leave the sheltered workshop and pursue work. I ended up working two jobs for $13 per hour at McDonald’s and Goodwill. I would never have been able to be independent and own my own home if I had remained stuck in 14 (c) just because of my disability. 14(c) is wrong and needs to end”
Donna Spears – Louisiana
“Working for less than minimum wage took away my dignity. I worked in Louisiana at a 14(c) sheltered workshop. I worked as a secretary doing hard administrative work for only 45 cents an hour (about 38 dollars a month). I was humiliated when I learned that other workers were paid much more than me for the same work. Worse, some of these people got credit for projects I completed. I decided to leave the sheltered workshop because I knew I could do better. I went back to school and now have two degrees in Psychology. I now work for a fair wage helping people with IDD advocate for themselves. 14(c) has to end. It is wrong because it takes away from the dignity of work and exploits people like me.”
Conclusion
The Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act lays the groundwork for both businesses and their disabled employees to have better opportunities for advancement. TCIEA offers realistic alternatives to the broken10 system of segregated employment and subminimum wage. The one hundred (100) undersigned organizations endorse the bipartisan “Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act” (S. 533 / H.R.1263), and we strongly urge you to pass TCIEA this congressional session.
Sincerely,
The End Subminimum Wage Coalition
American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD)
Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN)
National Council on Independent Living (NCIL)
National Association of Councils of Developmental Disabilities (NACDD)
Allied Organizations
Access Center for Independent Living – Ohio
Access Living – Illinois
Access Ready, Inc. – National
Access to Independence, Inc. – Wisconsin
Accessible Resources for Independence, Inc. (ARI) – Maryland
Association of People Supporting Employment First (APSE) – National Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living (APRIL) – National Autism Society of America – National
Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network (AWN) – National
Autistry Studios – California
Boston Center for Independent Living – Massachusetts
Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled (BCID) – New York
Cape Organization for Rights of the Disabled, Inc. – Massachusetts
Caring Across Generations – National
Center for Independence of the Disabled, New York (CIDNY)
Center for Independent Living for Western Wisconsin – Wisconsin
Center for Public Representation – National
Community Options – Multistate (UT, AZ, IA, MD, NH, NJ, NM, NY, PA, SC, TN, TX) CT State Independent Living Council – Connecticut
Disabilities Resource Center of Siouxland – Iowa
Disability Empowerment Center – Pennsylvania
Disability Law Center – Massachusetts
Disability Law Center of Alaska
Disability Law Center of Utah
Disability Pride Pennsylvania
Disability Rights Arizona
Disability Rights California
Disability Rights Center – New Hampshire
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund (DREDF) – National
Disability Rights Florida
Disability Rights Iowa
Disability Rights Louisiana
Disability Rights Michigan
Disability Rights Montana
Disability Rights New Jersey
Disability Rights New Mexico
Disability Rights North Carolina
Disability Rights of West Virginia
Disability Rights Ohio
Disability Rights South Carolina
Disability Rights Tennessee
Disability Rights Wisconsin
ENDependence Center of Northern Virginia
FREED Center for Independent Living – California
Green Mountain Self-Advocates – Vermont
Hawaii Disability Rights Center
Independence Associates, Inc. – Massachusetts
Independent Living Center of North Central Ohio, Inc. – Ohio
Independent Living, Inc. – New York
Indiana Disability Rights
Kentucky Protection and Advocacy
Liberty Resources Inc. – Pennsylvania
Little Lobbyists – National
Marc Gold & Associates – National
Marin Center for Independent Living – California
Matrix Parent Network & Resource Center – California
Microsoft – International
Minnesota Disability Law Center at Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid
National Alliance for Direct Support Professionals, Inc.
National Association of Statewide Independent Living Councils (NASILC)
National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD)
National Disability Rights Network (NDRN)
National Down Syndrome Congress (NDSC)
National Down Syndrome Society (NDSS)
National Organization on Disability (NOD)
National Partnership for Women & Families (NPWF)
Native American Disability Law Center – National
New York Association on Independent Living
North Dakota Protection & Advocacy Project
Northcoast Aging and Disability Resource Center (ADRC) – California
Not Dead Yet – National
Ohio Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC)
Oklahoma Disability Law Center
Oregon Statewide Independent Living Council
Pennsylvania Council on Independent Living
Progress Center for Independent Living – Illinois
Red Rock Center for Independence – Utah
Resources For Independence Central Valley – California
Roads to Freedom Center for Independent Living (RTFCIL) of North Central Pennsylvania Roads To Independence – Utah
Rolling Start, Inc. Center for Independent Living – California
Rural Advocates For Independent Living, Inc. – Missouri
Self Advocate Coalition of Kansas (SACK) – Kansas
Self Advocates Becoming Empowered (SABE) – National
Service Center for Independent Life (SCIL) – California
Southeastern Ohio Center for Independent Living – Ohio
Spa Area Independent Living Services – Arkansas
Summit Independent Living – Montana
Suncoast Center for Independent Living Inc – Florida
TASH – National
The Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies – National
The Statewide Independent Living Council of Illinois – Illinois
Tri-County Independent Living, Inc. – California
Western Reserve ILC, Inc – Ohio
WILS – Missouri
Wisconsin Coalition of Independent Living Centers – Wisconsin
1 The Association of People Supporting Employment First (APSE). (2023). Trends and Current Status of 14(c). https://apse.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/APSE-14c-Update-REV-0723.pdf
2 Cimera, R. E. (2008). The cost-trends of supported employment versus sheltered employment. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 28(1), 15-20. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert-Cimera/publication/230853211_The_cost-trends_of_supported_employment_versus_sheltered_employm ent/links/0f317531a1daed13b6000000/The-cost-trends-of-supported-employment-versus-sheltered-employment.pdf
3 Taylor, J. P., Avellone, L., Wehman, P., & Brooke, V. (2023). The efficacy of competitive integrated employment versus segregated employment for persons with disabilities: A systematic review. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 58(1), 63-78. https://content.iospress.com/download/journal-of-vocational-rehabilitation/jvr221225?id=journal-of-vocational-rehabilitation%2Fjvr221225
4 Some disabled workers in the U.S. make pennies per hour. It’s legal. (2024, August 30). The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2024/08/30/subminimum-wage-disabled-workers/
5 Warren, A., Chege, W., Greene, M., & Berdie, L. (2023). The Financial Health of People With Disabilities Key Obstacles and Opportunities. Financial Health Network. https://finhealthnetwork.org/research/the-financial-health-of-people-with-disabilities/
6 Paul, S., Rafal, M., & Houtenville, A. (2020). Annual Disability Statistics Compendium: 2020 (Table 6.3). Durham, NH: University of New Hampshire, Institute on Disability. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED613086.pdf
7 U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. (2023). Questions and Answers on the Application of the ADA’s Integration Mandate and Olmstead v. L.C. to Employment and Day Services for People with Disabilities. https://www.ada.gov/resources/olmstead-employment-qa/
8 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs. (2024). Justice Department Finds That Utah Violates Federal Civil Rights Law by Segregating People with Disabilities. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-finds-utah-violates-federal-civil-rights-law-segregating-people
9 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs. (2022). Justice Department Announces Conclusion of Landmark Agreement Addressing Segregated Work Settings for People with Disabilities. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-conclusion-landmark-agreement-addressing-segregated-work
10 Government Accountability Office. (2023). Subminimum Wage Program: DOL Could Do More to Ensure Timely Oversight. (GAO Publication No. 23-105116). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-105116.pdf
Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities (CCD) Letter
Download this letter as a PDF here.
September 9, 2024
Dear Chair Sanders, Ranking Member Cassidy, and all Members of the Senate HELP Committee,
The Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities (CCD) Employment and Training Task Force is pleased to continue supporting the Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act (TCIEA, S. 533). Further, we urge the HELP Committee to both include TCIEA in its broader workforce development package and ensure TCIEA’s passage this congressional session.
CCD is a coalition of national rights, advocacy, consumer, provider, and self-advocates organizations representing the nation’s 61 million people with disabilities (PWD). The Employment and Training Task Force concerns ourselves with policies and programs affecting PWD’s ability to achieve economic self-sufficiency through competitive integrated employment (CIE).
TCIEA provides the funding and technical assistance necessary for states and employers to prioritize CIE for people with disabilities as the bill gradually sunsets the 14(c) program over five years. To date, 11 states have fully enacted legislation to eliminate the subminimum wage, three have eliminated it without any legislation or official policy action, and four are actively phasing it out.1 If passed, this legislation will ensure that ALL workers with disabilities have the right to earn at least the Federal minimum wage in integrated employment settings, just like workers without disabilities. This is a necessary step in achieving the full intent of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which aims to advance economic self-sufficiency and ensure basic civil rights for people with disabilities. Furthermore, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) of 2014 established competitive integrated employment as a priority, ensuring that people with disabilities work in mainstream jobs alongside, and are paid comparable wages to co-workers without disabilities.
We support the efforts currently underway to end the use of 14(c) certificates under the Fair Labor Standards Act. An effective phase-out of Section 14(c) must involve the building of necessary infrastructure and supports to ensure that better alternatives are available during and after the transition. TCIEA provides that infrastructure and comprehensive support through grant programs and technical assistance to assist with the transition. This is an important piece of legislation that will create a pathway to support the transition for the 42,134 people with disabilities earning subminimum wage under 14(c) certificates.2
Additionally, we strongly recommend that members of Congress visit worksites and community rehabilitation programs that have already gone through a transition away from 14(c) to learn about their experiences. Members of the CCD Employment and Training Task Force welcome the opportunity to work with the Senate HELP Committee to arrange for these tours.
We thank you for your commitment to these issues and are available to answer any questions you may have. please feel free to contact any of the Task Force Co-chairs with any questions – Julie J. Christensen, APSE, julie@apse.org; Alicia Epstein, SourceAmerica, aepstein@sourceamerica.org; and Rick Webster, National Industries for the Blind, rwebster@nib.org.
Sincerely,
Access Ready Inc.
American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD)
American Council of the Blind
American Network of Community Options and Resources (ANCOR) Association of People Supporting Employment First (APSE)
Association of University Centers on Disabilities
Autism Society of America
Autistic Self Advocacy Network
Disability BelongsTM
Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF)
National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities (NACCD) National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services National Center for Learning Disabilities
National Disability Rights Network
National Down Syndrome Congress
National Down Syndrome Society
National Industries for the Blind
National Partnership for Women & Families
SourceAmerica
1 Association of People Supporting Employment First (2024, July). Trends and Current Status of 14(c). Retrieved from https://apse.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/APSE-14c-Update-REV-Jul24.pdf
2 U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division Section (2024, July 1). 14(c) Certificate Holders. Retrieved from https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/workers-with-disabilities/section-14c/certificate-holders
Collaboration to Promote Self-Determination (CPSD) Letter
Download this letter as a PDF here.
September 9th, 2024
Dear Chair Sanders, Ranking Member Cassidy, and all Members of the Senate HELP Committee,
The Collaboration to Promote Self-Determination (CPSD) writes today to urge the Committee to include S.533, the Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act (TCIEA), into the larger workforce markup package and ensure TCIEA’s passage this congressional session.
Founded in 2007, the Collaboration to Promote Self-Determination is a national advocacy coalition of organizations representing people with intellectual, developmental, and other disabilities and their families, disability service agencies, and other individuals with experience and expertise. The mission of CPSD is to push for major systemic reform of the nation’s disability laws and programs to advance economic security, enhance integrated community participation, and increase opportunities for people with disabilities so that they can lead self-determined lives.
TCIEA, S.533 and H.R.1263, was introduced in late February of 2023 by Senators Bob Casey (D-PA) and Steve Daines (R-MT), along with Representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Bobby Scott (D-VA). This bipartisan, bicameral legislation will provide states and businesses with the grants and technical assistance necessary to advance disabled employees’ opportunities for equal access to competitive integrated employment (CIE). Competitive integrated employment is more effective than the alternatives, both in cost and outcome.1,2,3,4 TCIEA also sunsets Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which is a discriminatory provision that authorizes employers with 14(c) certificates to pay disabled workers less than minimum wage in segregated settings. TCIEA gradually ends 14(c) over five years in the Senate bill and four years in the House Bill, but it does not force certificate holders to shut down their businesses. TCIEA provides a framework states can use to support disabled individuals whose employers do not choose to transition their practices. TCIEA helps 14(c) employees find and retain CIE, which may occur at their current place of employment following a program model transformation, or in another CIE setting. Former certificate holders can continue to provide goods and services, employ people with disabilities, secure Medicaid funding for job coaching and other support that their workers need, and make use of TCIEA’s grants and technical assistance.
We thank you for your commitment to helping states and businesses increase disabled people’s participation in the workforce and financial independence. We are available to answer any questions you may have.
Should you have questions, or if you would like to learn more about CPSD, please feel free to contact Stephanie Flynt McEben, Public Policy Analyst at the National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) at Stephanie.McEben@ndrn.org, or Nina Stoller, Policy Coordinator at the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network (ASAN) at nstoller@autisticadvocacy.org.
Sincerely,
Allies for Independence
Applied Self Direction
Association of People Supporting Employment First (APSE)
Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living (APRIL)
Association of University Centers on Disabilities (AUCD)
Autism Society of America
Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN)
CareSource
Center for Public Representation
Community Options
Marc Gold & Associates (MG&A)
Microsoft
National Disability Rights Network (NDRN)
National Alliance for Direct Support Professionals
National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services (NASDDDS) National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD)
National Disability Institute (NDI)
National Down Syndrome Congress (NDSC)
TASH
Williams Syndrome Association
1 Competitive integrated employment (CIE) is defined in the The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). 34 CFR 361.5(c)(9) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/part-361/section-361.5#p-361.5(c)(9)
2 Taylor, J. P., Avellone, L., Wehman, P., & Brooke, V. (2023). The efficacy of competitive integrated employment versus segregated employment for persons with disabilities: A systematic review. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 58(1), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.3233/jvr-221225
3 National Council on Disability (NCD). (2012). Report on Subminimum Wage and Supported Employment. https://www.ncd.gov/report/national-council-on-disability-report-on-subminimum-wage-and-supported-employment/
4 Cimera, R. (2008). The cost-trends of supported employment versus sheltered employment. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 28(1), 15–20. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert-Cimera/publication/230853211_The_cost-trends_of_supported_employm ent_versus_sheltered_employment/links/0f317531a1daed13b6000000/The-cost-trends-of-supported-employment-ver sus-sheltered-employment.pdf