Goodwill is paying some of its disabled workers just 22 cents an hour, while the charity’s executives make six figure salaries. A labor law loophole enables the practice.

Some Pennsylvania Goodwill workers who are disabled made as little as 22, 38 and 41 cents per hour in 2011, according to Labor Department documents reviewed by NBC News. That’s because a 1938 law, called the Special Wage Certificate Program, aimed at encouraging employers to hire disabled workers, allows charities and companies to get special certificates from the Department of Labor that permits them to pay disabled workers based on their abilities, with no minimum.

Though other employers take advantage of the same loophole, a recent investigation by Watchdog.org brought attention to Goodwill's use of the certificate.

As some workers were making as little as 22 cents per hour in 2011, Goodwill International CEO Jim Gibbons made $729,000 in salary and deferred compensation. The CEOs of Goodwill franchises across the country collectively earned about $30 million, according to NBC.

Brad Turner-Little, Goodwill's director of mission strategy, told The Huffington Post that compensation of Goodwill executives and the wages earned by workers with disabilities aren't "connected." He explained that local Goodwill organizations make independent determinations about what to pay their executives based on what they need to recruit "good talent."

As for the workers with disabilities, their pay is determined through a "rigorous" review process in line with Department of Labor regulations that assess their productivity and other factors, Turner-Little said. Goodwill performs the reviews at least every six months to make sure employees are being paid properly.

"It's not a connected issue, it’s a different kind of job," Turner-Little said.

Still, the provision allows for a stark contrast between the executives' pay and that of some of their workers, an issue more commonly associated with for-profit companies than non-profit charities. S&P 500 CEOs make 204 times what their workers make on average, according to April data from Bloomberg.

In a HuffPost blog post published earlier this year, Gibbons defended the wage program, arguing that Goodwill has been “unfairly singled out” in the debate.

“While it is quite easy to look at this provision quickly and ask why people with disabilities should be paid less than other workers, the truth is the certificate allows Goodwill and many other employers to provide opportunities for people with severe disabilities who otherwise might not be a part of the workforce,” he wrote.

He added in a blog posted Friday, that “for young people with the most significant disabilities, the Special Minimum Wage Certificate means the difference between reaching their personal employment potential and having no job at all.”

Indeed, the employment rate for Americans with disabilities between 20 and 24 years-old is just 32 percent. And Goodwill's program provides workers with disabilities with more than just pay, Turner-Little said. They get services like transportation and community socialization activities.

"The wage earned is only part of the benefit of Goodwill’s use of the certificate," he said. "We welcome conversation that creates more opportunity for people with disabilities."

Link to above story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/21/goodwill-workers-disabilities-low-wage_n_3478013.html

Corroborating links: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/06/24/2201101/goodwill-pays-cents-per-hour/

http://now.msn.com/goodwill-pay-for-disabled-workers-as-low-as-22-cents-an-hour-labor-department-says

So, what do you guys think? I think it's completely unfair, this a ridiculous loophole that needs to be closed. Until Goodwill changes its ways I say we boycott it, no shopping, no donations.

As fucked as this is, I can see why they would do this.
I mean, you pay for what you get.
A disabled person won't work nearly as well as an abled person.
We are different, as harsh as it is.
This isn't just money making men evil either, this is human nature.
Back in the day when we were all monkeypeople in the woods or whatever; the sick, weak, young, and disabled are usually the first to be eaten...or...I don't know. (I don't really give a shit about the plight of cavemen.)

It's survival of the fittest, and unfortunately in this case, the rule is strictly physical.

/devilsadvocatecomeatme

>>2 I see what you mean. But I guess it depends on what kind of disability and what kind of work they do - I mean, a blind person would have more trouble stocking shelves than a deaf person, but a blind person might be able to communicate with customers better (under the assumption the deaf person only uses SL).
It's still discrimination, and I still think pay should be determined by the quality of their work, but there isn't much I can do.
However, I think disabled people should be choosing jobs that won't be affected by their disability. I'm not going to go and choose a job that needs me to be making precise details and using my hands excessively (crippled hands), and my mother wouldn't choose a job that involves heavy lifting (very severe back problems). If they can't do that job properly, they should find a new one - one where they will be receiving decent pay. Because that figure is fucking ridiculous.

Just saying, I've been in plenty of Goodwills, and the disabled employees tend to cause a lot of problems. They're extremely slow on the cash register and make frequent mistakes. They price things too high and too low (have heard other employees complaining about it). A lot of the time they'll just wander around the store playing with trinkets until another employee snaps their attention back.

Realistically, they would never be hired if they were getting paid minimum wage - they're not worth minimum wage. Most of them aren't worth half that. In fact, they're not worth anything. They don't add anything to the store, and many of them cause losses in revenue. I think we should be grateful that they have any work to do. Not to mention that it doesn't matter what they're getting paid, in my opinion, because 98% of them who are getting paid this price don't pay for their own lives anyway. By giving them something to do eight hours of the day, we're also freeing up time for those who usually take care of them. They need jobs to be able to get out of the house and learn a bit of society, but I see no need for them to be getting paid minimum wage. The Goodwill stores would probably go out of business (at least around here) since they have huge amounts of mentally disabled emloyees in each store.

I think we should be commending Goodwill for giving them anything rather than putting them down for not paying them well enough. I have nothing against disabled people, of course; I'm really happy for them to have a job at all since most the disabled kids I know get rejected specifically because of that.

And to be honest, the CEO of Goodwill is not making anywhere near as much money as he could be. Look at the CEO's of other charities who are making twice that amount. Goodwill is a multimillion dollar corporation, and if he was greedy, he'd be taking a lot more money out of it than that. I think he works pretty damn hard keeping Goodwill running and legal, and even if he took 100k out of his own salary, they wouldn't be able to add more than a cent or two to the hourly salaries of the sheer number of disabled workers they have.

>>3 They're probably not talking about physical disabilities. They do have some physically disabled people who they'll put on the cash register, but mainly Goodwill is known for taking in mentally disabled workers.

And there ARE disabled employees who work really well. This article isn't talking about them. Goodwill bases the amount they pay disabled employees on how well they work, and this article is focusing around those who are heavily disabled and don't do much for the store in the end. I doubt they're paying the lightly disabled workers who work like regular employees as low; plus, media always goes for the more dramatic end, so 22 cents an hour is probably the absolute lowest amount they've paid a workers when those who are doing their job decently during their evaluations are getting paid more.

>>4 Ah, that makes sense. Thank you very much for that information! I'm not even sure if there are any Goodwill stores here (though we have something similar), so I wouldn't know.
The problem here is not that these workers are being paid so little - it's that, if Goodwill were to stop hiring them, people would call them ableist and start boycotting the store or attempting to sue, ect ect. Tumblr would have a fucking field day with it.
As far as I'm concerned, people with very significant mental disabilities shouldn't have to work in such jobs. If they can find a job that fits their needs that's great, but they shouldn't be working when they can't contribute to the business/are detracting from the business's value. If they are so incapacitated they cannot work effectively they shouldn't be working - you don't go to work when you're recovering from some major operation or whatever, because you won't be able to do your job properly. The same basic idea applies.
But this all rolls in with the whole employment and discrimination argument. If you don't hire x then you're discriminating against x, blah blah blah.

>>6 But I'm also against having them sit around in their houses and vegetate simply because they're not good at conventional jobs and their caretakers can't afford recreational activities to take up their schedules. I think that businesses like Goodwill are good because they're getting them out and actually doing something, even if it's not always adding revenue to the business and even if the disabled persons aren't getting paid a lot.

They're not causing too much harm since Goodwill is still a pretty stable business, so I don't see why they should stop being hired.

asdf

Based Baba is based.

>>7 Definitely, they should have something to do. Since Goodwill is a large business and it doesn't seem to be losing that much by hiring them, there's no real problem.

>>9 Based or biased?

----

----

Woop

Bump, to promote the discussion of actual news.

He should take that up with the Head.

because goodwill is for charity!! most of the workers are volunteers!

because goodwill is for charity!! most of the workers are volunteers!

>>18 Except that's not actually true. Try reading the article before commenting.

That sucks

Bump.

that's not enough at least $2.50

Minimum wage would be nice. Certainly disabled people can find their niche. I have severe vision issues and am blind in one eye due to a degenerative condition that gives me 45% of natural vision so probably wouldn't be a good idea for me to be stocking shelves or handling money. But certainly I can sort clothes donations based on color. Shouldn't that earn me minimum wage?

At least not all workplaces are like this. I used to volunteer at a county rec center and they had lots of disabled people working, who all earned minimum wage. Although that may be only because the rec center is connected with the local government.

For anyone jumping into this discussion, I'd read >>4. It gives a much needed alternate perspective into this. The article is a bit misleading, as expected, in that it generalizes the issue and makes it sound like goodwill pays all disabled workers such a minuscule amount exclusively. Which is simply not the case.

Plus, when it said that the CEO made $729,000 in salary? That's not a particularly gracious amount. To the uninformed, all they hear is "he's just raking in the cash! 700k is a big number!!" but they forget that he's the CEO of an entire franchise across the country. Do you expect him to be making as much as a common employee?

As Barabi put it, "even if he took 100k out of his own salary, they wouldn't be able to add more than a cent or two to the hourly salaries of the sheer number of disabled workers they have."