4 ms·
I'm disabled myself. I don't disagree with the contention in your last paragraph. That said, as a former founder from Seattle, I'm quite aware of the NC's shen
by atdrummond 8y ago
I'm disabled myself. I don't disagree with the contention in your last paragraph.
That said, as a former founder from Seattle, I'm quite aware of the NC's shenanigans. If there's scope to pay the proper minimum wage to these employees ($10.35 based on the NC's arguments that only federal disability and wage laws apply to them) then I'd prefer to see that happen.
As it stands, if one assumes the NC's stance on contractor wages to be correct, the disabled workers could still be paid a few dollars per hour. This would still be above the subminimum wage, so the article's quote about being above the minimum wage would still be accurate. But these workers would be missing out on $7-8 dollars per hour that federal wage law demands they be paid.
- i_am_proteus 8y agoI get your perspective, but disability is a continuum. As a founder, you're not really the disabled population I'm thinking of. I'm technically disabled myself, but entirely able to earn a good living. There are some disabled people, though, who can't provide $10.35/hr in economic benefit. If the "full" minimum wage is applied to them, it's much more likely that they end up with nothing to do than they end up making those extra $7-8/hr. Businesses are not charities and will we shouldn't expect them to behave as such. If our society wants to provide for a disadvantaged group, straightforward taxation and redistribution is a much more fair way to accomplish that goal than enacting a wage minimum.