As a sponsor of HB 1706 I am writing you this email with information regarding the discrimination of this bill by denying the opportunity of any disabled person to work as an apprentice, learner or messenger. By eliminating the special certificates for people with disabilities, the other jobs are also denied. Apprenticeship, learners and messengers can be great jobs for people with certain disabilities and it’s shameful to deny those choices.
As stated in the documentary “Bottom Dollars” produced by Disability Rights Washington and Rooted in Rights – “If people are given the proper services and supports and proper assistive technology, the sky is the limit for many, many individuals” I truly believe this – unfortunately, HB 1706 does not address any of the issues of support – just the wage. Do not pass HB 1706 until all the issues are addressed and planned as is recommended in research by national agencies.
Supported Employment is great – it can open up many opportunities for people. It needs funding to be successful and this bill does not address the issue of supporting funds for job coaches, job development, job training or transition planning. It only looks at eliminating the special certificates. Eliminating special certificates without addressing the critical issue of funding supported employment/integrated employment for this population will result in a crisis. This population is already involved in a crisis situation with lack of caregivers and supported living with many people stuck in hospitals with no place to go. Passing this bill at this time is not in the best interest of anyone.
It is interesting to note that not one research report of any advocacy agency recommends immediate elimination of certificates. A well planned and funded transition is needed for a stable and sustainable integrated supported employment opportunities. There is nothing in this bill that addresses any issues regarding transition. It has been stated that a rapid elimination would actually be detrimental to our population.
Elimination of special certificates without taking into consideration the other issues involved will only result in job loss. It will not increase the employment opportunities nor will it mean that those with disabilities will now make a living wage. When a person is only able to work 10 hours a week, minimum wage will not allow them to be self-supporting.
In Seattle, the legislation caused people to lose hours at their jobs. Yes, their wages increased but their hours decreased. For some of these people their job was also their opportunity to be integrated in the community – with the loss of hours, their community integration opportunity decreased too. A question asked in today’s public hearing by Representative Mosbruker was regarding an evaluation of what has happened in places that have eliminated the special certificate. This is a very critical question that also needs to be answered before moving forward. There is information available on this for New Hampshire, Maine and some other states – I would be more than happy to provide links to you.
In Seattle, there were 8 people who were working under a Special Certificate – 6 at Ballard Locks were working 5 hours a day had their hours cut to 3 hours a day, the person at Ballard Lutheran had her hours cut from 15 hours a week to 12 hours a week and the person at Ballard Market was working 6 hours a week and did not have hours cut but the manager express concern about being able to hire employees with significant intellectual/developmental disabilities in the future. It should be noted that none of these employees needed 1:1 job support for their jobs.
I did not hear anyone testify about the support needs for those involved in integrated employment or talk about the number of hours these employees may work a week or the coordination of supports (transportation, housing, personal needs support) needed to be employed. These are all critical issues that need discussion before a bill such as this is passed.
Again, as an example, my son who lives in Supported Living also has supported employment. He works 9 hours a week at Lowe’s and makes $16.59 an hour. This means that his gross wages are $597 per month. He also receives SSI which is reduced due to his wages so overall his income is roughly $900.00. He needs to pay rent, utilities, groceries and all living expenses from that $900.00.
The County (through DDA) pays the employment vendor about $2400.00 a month to provide the support to my son for his 1:1 job support. What have you heard about the funding for these integrated jobs for people like my son who needs 1:1 support to be employed in an integrated community setting? While the employer is paying the employee minimum wage, someone needs to pay the job coach or there is no job at all.
Please do not pass HB 1706 at this time. Yes, fair and equitable wages are important but in order to have fair and equitable wages in an integrated setting we need to look at the whole picture.
At the risk of continued personal assaults from one of the people testifying today, I feel obligated to inform people of the consequences of taking such rash actions without a full understanding and acknowledgement of the various issues involved in coordination of supports. It was not a collaborative process at all with Shaun Bickley (he was co-chair of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities) taking the helm and violating the First Amendment by censoring and blocking comments from constituents to the Seattle Commission and later writing libelous comments about others and most recently commiting fraud, conspiracy and interference with contractual relations with regards to my work as a registered nurse. This is all in retaliation against me for trying to have accountability and transparency in the process of the elimination of special certificates in Seattle.
I would be more than happy to provide information on national research regarding the issue of special certificates and special wages, integrated and supported employment and transition planning to ensure sustainability and success.
Thank you for your concern and attention to this critical issue.
Here we go again discussing the issue of what the Special Certificates really are and what the subminimum wage really is. HB 1706 is the bill that will be heard in the Washington State Labor and Workplace Standards Committee on F
ebruary 11, 2019. (meeting cancelled due to weather)
For those people who are working for a special wage under a special certificate, eliminating this choice and option will essentially eliminate their job. The Special Certificate allows a special wage (not be be confused with a sub-minimum hourly wage) for a specific job and specific amount of work. It is not a wage based on an hourly rate. This also means that when one hears stories of people making “pennies an hour” one is led to believe that people are slaving away with a whip over their head being exploited and coerced to work.
Yes, Seattle passed legislation this past year eliminating special certificates. The legislation also eliminated the opportunity of ANYONE with a disability to work as an “apprentice, learner or messenger.” This greatly discriminates against disabled in taking jobs in these categories. This legislation was passed based on false information, lack of input from those directly affected and caused people to lose precious hours being integrated in their community. Essentially – the opposite of what law,makers were told.
Currently, we have much more critical issues to address with regards to appropropriate supports for our vulnerable population which actually will affect the health and safety of many, many people in our state. Now is not the time to address this issue which has had very little research or evaluation done in states (or cities) that have eliminated these special certificates.
Now is the time to sit back on this, evaluate and assess what has already occurred and how those affected have weathered the changes – it is not the time to create more havoc and crisis in our lives.
I fully support paying everyone a fair and just wage. I also know that for our population with profound disabilities, their job alone is not the only income they have to support themselves and the great majority of people in this population work less than 11 hours a week (DDA Caseload)
As a fiber artist, I spend hours and hours on one project. The price I sell a piece for is far less than “pennies an hour” for my work. I would imagine that any artist will tell you the same thing. Some jobs are not paid by the hour but by the product.
Special Certificates for Special Wages are not for jobs that are paid on an hourly wage but for jobs that are paid by the product.
When I got home from work last night, my husband handed me the New York Times and told me to read the Opinion Essay written by David Brooks titled
“Once you adopt binary thinking in which people are categorized as good or evil, once you give random people the power to destroy lives without any process, you have taken a step toward the Rwandan genocide.”
It really was good timing given the events of the day. I had found out that SB, a person who identifies as the Co-Chair of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities had written a scathing letter about me to the CEO/President of the company that employs me. My job has nothing at all to do with my volunteer work with this blog or with my volunteer advocacy work so the only reason that Bickley would have to write such as letter would be harassment and abuse.
Since I had to file a police report on November 3, 2018 for cyberbullying and libel due to another public essay written by SB, I have not seen or heard anything from this person. Why the sudden letter writing campaign now? What is the purpose of the harassment and what does SB have to gain by abusing and bullying others?
There is one word which could have nipped all this abuse in the bud – ACCOUNTABILITY. Unfortunately, when my encounters with SB started, SB refused to be accountable and continues to refuse – instead fabricating actions of abuse from others and claiming to be a victim from all the ableist people in our communities.
Now, SB has also solicited a friend, Jennifer White, CEO of Able Opportunities to also write a letter to the CEO/President of my employer. I have never met Ms. White nor have I ever had any contact with her. She also wrote that she did not know me but asked if I was using these “bullying tactics with Mr. Bickley, how is she interacting with other vulnerable adults with disabilities who receive services at your hospital?
Now, again, with the escalation of abuse and threats written by SB in this recent letter, another police report will be filed, legal counsel will be retained and there may be court interventions.
It is shameful that things have been allowed to get so out of control. The issues are not new and many people have reported complaints of abuse, harassment, stalking and other behaviors of SB to the City of Seattle.
Mayor Durkan did not reappoint SB to his Commission seat and SB then solicited the Commission to appoint them to a Commission seat and also to re-appoint them to the co-chair position in August 2018. September 21, 2018, SB was “voted out of committee” for this Commission seat despite several people providing public testimony against this appointment.
Typically, once a Commission Appointee is “voted out of committee” they are officially appointed by the Full Council the next council meeting. The other Commission Appointee from the September 21, 2018 committee meeting was appointed on October 1, 2018. To this date, SB has not been appointed by the City Council identifies as the Co-Chair of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities and writes letters with that title.
It’s one thing to be called out for something one actually did but when one is “called out” for false allegations against you that is cyberbullying/libel. It’s a whole different ball game.
Great News for Job Development and Training with Apprenticeships – but unfortunately, not in Seattle.
I have been an advocate of apprenticeship programs for many years – not just for those with disabilities but for everyone who would be interested in this type of training to develop job skills.
The US Department Labor Department – Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) has contracted with Social Policy Research Associates (SPR) to develop up to four pilot apprenticeship worksites. One of these sites is Apprenti in Redmond, WA.
(see the article from SHRM regarding an announcement of this program.)
Unfortunately, there has been recent legislation in Seattle which prohibits people with Disabilities to work as an “apprentice, learner or messenger” – regardless of the pay. This discriminatory legislation was instituted by the work of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities and the Office of Labor Standards.
The rule change and subsequent legislation were rushed through a process without conversations and collaboration with those in our community. There were violations of the First Amendment by the Seattle Commission which greatly impacted the outcome of this legislation.
There was little insight into how this rule change would affect those who were actually impacted and the wording in the new law (which was to remove discriminatory practices) actually is more discriminatory by the current wording.
Below is the wording of the legislation for SHRR 90-050 – Learners, apprentices, messengers, workers with a disability from the Seattle Office of Labor Standards Minimum Wage Rules.
- a. The Director may issue special certificates to pay a subminimum wage for learners, apprentices, and messengers as described in RCW 49.46.060
- b. The Director shall not issue special certificates to pay a subminimum wage for people with disabilities as described in RCW 49.46.060.
Apprenti – Redmond, WA – indicates that their training wage at least 60% of fully-qualified regular employees; then a raise to at least 70% and after 6 months, at-will. If this is the case with this pilot program, no employees in Seattle will be able to participate due to the legislation regarding people with disabilities.
Again, issues such as this could have been alleviated if the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities allowed discourse with community self-advocates and other disability advocates who were affected.
If the haste of this rule change and subsequent legislation had been made public and shared, if the Commission had allowed discussions to take place, if the Commission had listened to what the community members were saying, we could have had a law written that did not discriminate against those with disabilities.
The Commission for People with Disabilities, of all Commission, should be responsive to the needs of the disabled community. In this situation, they were not and ended up taking away choices for those they are to serve.
Persons with a Disability: Labor Force Characteristics Summary (Bureau of Labor Statistics – United States Department of Labor)
see post “Haste Makes Waste – Seattle Style” for more information on this issue
Disability Rights Washington is presenting their “Breaking Barriers” awards fundraiser this month. Below is information from the Disability Rights Washington Website which describes this award.
Ex-Commissioner (Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities) Shaun Bickley, was chosen as the recipient for the Advocacy Award. There are many of us in the disability community who have been victims of Shaun Bickley’s online malicious and cruel attacks, slander and libel. We are upset about Bickley’s violations of the First Amendment as a Commissioner, falsified data and information Bickley presented to the Commission, the previous Mayor, the previous Director of the Office of Labor Standards and the Seattle City Council.
In addition to the above allegations (all well documented in public records), Bickley had extreme disregard for the by-laws and code of conduct of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities. In fact, after Mayor Durkan did not re-appoint Bickley to the Commission, Bickley took it upon himself to return to the Commission the next month and have himself voted in as the co-chair with a Commission appointed seat. Bickley continues to refer to himself as the Co-Chair of the Commission despite not being appointed by the City Council. This is a violation of the by-laws but evidently, Bickley is not held accountable to those by-laws.
“Bully” is the least offensive description that many who have encountered Shaun Bickley use to describe his actions towards others.
How has it come to be that a BULLY is being honored as a recipient of this “Breaking Barriers” award?
September 29, 2018
Each year, Disability Rights Washington presents its Breaking Barriers Awards. These prestigious awards honor a business, an elected official or public servant, and an advocate with a disability for breaking barriers to advance the rights of and improve the lives of people with disabilities in Washington State. Specifically, Disability Rights Washington will present the following awards:
- Advocacy Award
- Public Policy Award
- Business Leader Award
Disability Rights Washington presents this award to an advocate with a disability who has made significant contributions in the past year to advance the rights of people with disabilities in Washington State.
Seattle has been played by a disability activist who has worked extremely hard to have legislation passed that removed the use of special certificates for people with disabilities. While this may seem like a great step forward in the name of social justice, in reality, it has caused people to lose employment hours and discriminates against people with disabilities by limiting choices and alternatives.
The old saying “haste makes waste” was very evident in the process that has occurred. Information from concerned and involved stakeholders was blocked which made it impossible to collaborate with the Commission and the Office of Labor Standards with regards to the rule change. Several City of Seattle staffers questioned the urgency of the issue but continued to push this along at the rapid-fire rate the activist was insisting upon.
When the voices of those directly involved are silenced and actions are taken without their input, violations occur. This is an all too common theme in issues related to those with disabilities – particularly those with intellectual/developmental disabilities. It’s even more frustrating when this rebuff is done by a Commission that is there to advocate with and for those with disabilities.
This transcript sums up fairly well the response that I received to any inquiry or concern. The Co-Chair alleges that I harassed and stalked him in addition to many other fabricated stories of what I have done. This conversation was between a disabled community advocate and the Co-Chair of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities. transcript between Cheryl Felak and Shaun Bickley May 2018
The law, as now written, actually discriminates against people with disabilities who would be able to get a job as “an apprentice, learner or messenger.”
It is costly and time-consuming to hire and train anyone and employers may be even more wary of hiring a person with an intellectual/developmental disability. Having the option of using a special certificate for a limited amount of time as a trial is an alternative that actually could have provided an opportunity for both employers and employees to “try out” a job without out a full investment for something they may not be sure would work out for either of them. Having a time limit to the special certificate is a protection for the employee.
According to the Policy Manager of the Office of Labor Standards, the Minimum Wage ordinance prohibits our office from approving a special certificate for any individual who meets the criteria of “an individual whose earning capacity is impaired by age or physical or mental deficiency or injury” regardless of the individual’s occupation.
It also needs to be noted that the Commission did not contact the City of Seattle Supported Employment Program for any information regarding supported employment. The City of Seattle is recognized as a “best practice” and has received many awards for the work they do. Supported Employment Brief Overview_2018 describes the City of Seattle Supported Employment program.
Some excerpts from City of Seattle Supported Employment Overview:
We customize each job by bundling a variety of entry-level duties into positions that individually match candidates’’ skills, which also allows your other employees to maximize their time. The supported Employment program’s hallmark is its ability to design effective positions that adapt to individual human and organizational needs.
Job coaches provide training and coaching “support’ as needed for the supported employee. Job coaches are a valuable resource for the entire workplace of a supported employee, and are available at no cost to an employer who hires a supported employee. Coaches are dispatched from local community agencies that serve the employment-related needs of people with developmental disabilities.
How did the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities totally ignore this program and employees? One reason is that the Commission refused to communicate with anyone that had concerns or questions about their push for a rule change and legislation.
It’s too late now to change the law in Seattle but there is time to stop this activist from going statewide with this and causing more harm.
Seattle Minimum Wage and People with Disabilities describes some of the deceit, lies, and violations of the First Amendment practiced by The Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities in pursuing the law to eliminate special certificates.
If you are approached by Shaun Bickley (@lLeftistAutist on Twitter) to sign on to the campaign he has posted or circulated – please think it through and understand what is missing in this campaign – mainly planning, transition, funding, collaboration and sustainability for disabled employees and our community.
The Seattle Disability Commission is proud to be among the first organizations to call for an end to Washington’s exemption to minimum wage laws, which allow employers to pay disabled people, and only disabled people, less than minimum wage.
A current copy of the letter can be found here: https://docs.google.com/…/1cCT_IL6I3HLcmYKdK5QhdNamqQ…/edit…
If your business or organization (operating in the state of Washington) would like to be added, please email firstname.lastname@example.org . Text is below:
We, the undersigned organizations, oppose the practice of paying workers with disabilities subminimum wage. On April 13, 2018, Seattle joined the states of Alaska, New Hampshire, Vermont and Maryland, in ending the outdated practice of allowing subminimum wage employment of people based on their disabilities. We do not believe workers should be discriminated against on the basis of disability and join the growing coalition advocating for an end to state laws that allow such discrimination.
We believe all workers should be fairly compensated and are entitled to the same minimum wage protections regardless of their disability status. We hope the State of Washington will join other states and cities in taking the lead to put an end to this unfair employment practice.
Able Opportunities, Inc.
Allies in Advocacy
The Arc of King County
The Arc of Snohomish County
ASUW Student Disability Commission
Autistic Self Advocacy Network
Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network
Community Employment Alliance
Disability Rights Washington
Downtown Emergency Service Center (DESC)
Geeks Without Bounds
National Federation of the Blind of Washington
Open Doors for Multicultural Families
People First of Snohomish County
People First of Washington
Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities
Seattle LGBTQ Commission
Self Advocates in Leadership (SAIL)
Sherwood Community Services
Washington Low Income Housing Alliance
The issue of the elimination of the special certificates for people with disabilities has been very controversial. There have been many problems related to lack of transparency and accountability on the part of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities.
Many attempts to have a conversation with the Commission and collaborate have been denied which is a violation of The Constitution of the United States, First Amendment.
The First Amendment provides individuals with the right to engage in protected speech without government interference. If a local government establishes a social media site to communicate with the public about agency business, the First Amendment will apply to the comments and posts made by others on that site.
So, the moderator of the agency page cannot simply delete, hide or block posts or people based solely on the content of the message that was posted.
The Commission blocked, censored and harassed community members, disability advocates, people with disabilities and stakeholders who had concerns and/or questions from interacting on the Commission’s public Facebook page. This exclusion by the public entity of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities of the very people the Commission was set up to advocate for is an extreme example which is becoming all too common.
When ideology is used without consideration of other viewpoints as the sole decision-making process, there can be many unintended consequences. A healthy debate with varying viewpoints and a rational analysis to problem solve in the decision-making process can help to mitigate the abuse of power that is used when decisions are based solely on ideology. People do not have to agree but when there are discussions we can all learn something.
Many problems have been encountered in this process and I question the legality of the decisions that have been made when proper procedures were not followed.
- June 2017 was the first mention of any issue of the elimination of the special certificates for people with disabilities according to the Commission’s meeting minutes.
- A quorum was not achieved at the June 2017 meeting in which the Commission reports they had a unanimous vote to eliminate the special certificates.
- According to the by-laws of the Commission, they need a majority of appointed Commissioners present in order to have a quorum. During June 2017 there were 13 appointed Commissioners – they would have needed 7 Commissioners present for a quorum – they only had 6. This means they would not have been able to have a meeting or a vote.
- A Quorum needs to be present in order to have a vote
- The so-called “unanimous vote” was actually invalid according to the Commission by-laws
- June 15, 2017 minutes PwD
- It was reported in July 2017 by the Mayor and Councilmember Herbold that there had been a unanimous vote by the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities. This article states that the Office of Labor Standards will begin rule revisions and a City Council vote before the end of the year.
- Revisions proposed to the City of Seattle’s Minimum wage rule – eliminating subminimum wages for employees with disabilities – August 17, 2017
- First public notice from OLS regarding Special Certificates requesting public comments – unfortunately, the decision had already been made by former OLS Director Dylan Orr, Former Mayor Murray, and Councilmember Herbold. Was the information shared during legislative meetings in June 2017 by Commissioners Shaun Bickley and Matt Kanter representative of the community they represent?
- Office of Labor Standards (OLS) received the most comments on this issue than any other rule revision comment request in the past. They received 70 responses and it had been reported that there was a “slight” preference for the elimination of the certificates. (later found to be false when records were reviewed – see below)
- OLS announces Final Rule September 29, 2017
- If you submitted a comment you most likely received the following email from Karina Bull from OLS about September 30, 2017, with a copy of the Press Release dated September 29, 2017.
From: Bull, Karina
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2017 7:15 AM
To: Bull, Karina <Karina.Bull@seattle.gov>
Subject: OLS Issues Final Rule Revisions for Seattle’s Minimum Wage Ordinance
Thank you for submitting a comment to inform our rulemaking process for subminimum wages for people with disabilities. We carefully considered all comments and sincerely appreciate your contribution to this process. Yesterday, our office announced the final rules; the announcement is below.
Again, thank you for your participation.
City of Seattle | Office of Labor Standards
810 Third Avenue, Suite 375
Seattle, WA 98104-1627
10. Given the lack of transparency and accountability in this legislation, I began to do more research into how the decision had come to be made.
11. Seventy comments were received by OLS – 33 (or 18 if duplicate scripts are not counted) were in favor of the elimination of certificates; 37 were against the elimination of certificates. Clearly far from unanimous and from my perspective indicates there needs to be more research done on the issue.
12. There were 15 comments which were identical to the script template that Commissioner Shaun Bickley had sent out and tagged many people on Social Media sites to send in to bolster his project – 45% of the comments in favor of elimination were this exact script.
Dear Ms. Bull
I am writing to express solidarity with the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities’ recommendations to end subminimum wage and the use of subminimum wage certificates in Seattle.
As you know, the Commission conducted an extensive four-month review, and received overwhelming support for this course of action from both community members with disabilities and disability organizations. They also contacted the workers making subminimum wage along with their family members and employers, who have all agreed to this timeline.
I believe that we should listen to people with disabilities, especially those with intellectual and developmental disabilities who are most impacted by this. They know what they need and we should support them and applaud them in their quest for equality before the law.
I look forward to Seattle becoming the first location on the west coast to grant wage equality to workers with disabilities, and in finally ending this blatantly discriminatory practice.
(Resident of Seattle, connection, etc)
13. Comment received from Karina Bull, Policy Manager of the Office of Labor Standards regarding the corrections to the reported facts on the OLS comments.
“Our office carefully reviewed the outpour of comments in favor of retaining subminimum wage, as well as the outpour of comments in favor of prohibiting the subminimum wage. Ultimately, the final rule was reached with strong support of our former Director, Dylan Orr, former Mayor Murray, and Councilmember Herbold. The more recent decision to codify this prohibition in our Minimum Wage ordinance was passed by City Council, 8-0
14. My view of this is that the comments sent in were basically meaningless in the decision-making process. I do not know what information Dylan Orr used but I do believe that both former Mayor Murray and Councilmember Herbold were not provided with accurate information on the issue. Again, the saying “Nothing about us, without us” was disregarded in this legislation.
Where is the accountability for the actions taken by this renegade Commission? Do they represent what you need? If not, join me in attending their meetings and providing much needed common sense and input.
The response that I have gotten from many people who have listened to the abuse that the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities spewed at me after their last meeting (May 17, 2018) is “Did he say what I think he said?”
YES – Hear for yourself – if you are offended by this encounter (this was the first “in-person” conversation that I had with this person) please write to any or all of the following people or agencies.
It doesn’t matter if one is a volunteer or not, disabled or not – as a representative of a City and Community Commission, one needs to uphold the duties of the office.
If you would like to read a history of the questions and concerns that were excluded from any discussion on the legislation which eliminated choice and alternatives for those with significant disabilities, here is the document sent to the Office of Civil Rights (per their request) to receive answers to.
Next Post will discuss the issues of the Office of Labor Standards and comments received regarding the rule change in September 2017.