Work Reform

13206 readers

251 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

seeCseas@lemmy.world

tintory@lemm.ee

TinMod@lemmy.world

195

Trump just made It OK to continue paying disabled workers peanuts (www.motherjones.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/workreform@lemmy.world

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

Anyone that is legally disabled that can still work, deserves time and a half all the time and their paycheck should not make any difference to their government assistance.

If you have the same job and are upset that they are making more than you, know that all that keeps you from getting a raise is your resolve and willingness to sacrifice.

[+] shalafi@lemmy.world -6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Sounds like we need to change the definition of "disabled" for this purpose. The people I'm reading about in the story are not the people I had imagined, such as Down's folks who can't do much else. I can see the later being paid less than minimum. Bring that hate.

For the people I was thinking of, with serious mental disabilities, I think we should continue with sub-minimum wage. Sound heartless? Deliberate with me.

Pretend you're an employer that requires menial tasks anyone can do. You can hire someone with Downs to handle it. Great! But if you have to pay them the same as anyone else, why bother with them? (I can argue against myself on that point!) These are people who derive great satisfaction from being able to contribute, we all do. The ability to contribute is one of the three things that drive us. (I think that's an extraordinary video that can help you frame your employment and life, why you may or may not be happy doing what you do. Worth your 10-minutes or your money back!)

Anyway, I guess dialing this thing into something sane would be too hard, too finicky for law, but I feel for the people who would be cut off from the socializing and the contribution they would otherwise lack.

[–] DosDude@retrolemmy.com 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Here in the Netherlands workers like that are subsidized. Meaning the employer pays less for disabled workers, while they still earn over minimum wage. The difference is paid by the government.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Technically true here as well. There are both federal and state incentives, so I might have fallen for their reasoning too: it makes sense to protect those job opportunities

However:

those government subsidies are tax incentives, so don’t help the charities that probably account for most jobs
state incentives are of course up to the state, meaning some are non-existent
it ever actually says how much

However some key points of the story are evidence that removing the subminimum wage does not reduce employment opportunities: reality trumps feelings. I know the highlighted stories were picked for outrage but it surely outrages me just how poorly some of these people are paid.

It’s all in the details and apparently our details are inhumane