Sunday, January 12, 2020

Thursday, January 9, 2020

Disability Wrongs: Advocacy gone awry


This video is from ACCSES, an organization representing disability service providers including providers of work centers (sheltered workshops). On 7/25/18, the organization held a Capitol Hill Briefing in defense of a broad range of work settings for people with disabilities including work centers for people who would otherwise be unable to compete for employment. Self-advocates who participate in these work programs were scheduled to speak, but they were shouted down and the meeting disrupted by other self-advocates from disability organizations with opposing views. 


According to ACCSES, this is what happened:

“Despite what disability policy seems to indicate: People with disabilities are not a monolithic group. Rather, people with disabilities are individuals, with the same right to choose where they want to live, work, and thrive as anyone else. That basic civil right to live life with dignity and respect is being subsumed by feel-good laws that do not benefit many individuals, and advocates who support those laws over individual rights. That’s the rub. Right now, current and proposed laws and regulations, as well as policymakers, agencies, and some advocates—even those with good intentions—are putting a broad range of employment, residential, and community support options for people with disabilities at risk. In doing so, they are taking away the civil rights of individuals with disabilities.


“That was never made more clear than on July 25, 2018, when a dozen people with disabilities, some of whom work on the Capitol campus and others who traveled all the way from the middle of the country, wanted to share their stories of why their jobs matter. Instead, they were shut down by advocacy groups that crashed an ACCSES Capitol Hill briefing and frighteningly shouted over the self-advocates with disabilities who were scheduled to speak. The Capitol police had to be called, the individuals who came to speak never got to address the audience in the room. This is where current disability policy has led, not to increased opportunity and respect, but to a concerted effort to take away the civil rights of individuals with disabilities by limiting their choices. It must end. Individuals must be allowed to live, work, and thrive in settings that best meet their needs – not the needs of others.” 

The organizations taking the lead in these disruptive activities were ADAPT and NCIL, the National Council on Independent Living. They put out their own version of events on 7/25/18, “Disability Rights Groups Protest Provider Efforts to Continue the Exploitation and Isolation of People with Disabilities”.

The ACCSES briefing included support of a House bill called the "Workplace Choice and Flexibility for Individuals with Disabilities Act". You can read the bill, H.R. 5658, in less than 5 minutes and see for yourself if it has anything in it that would produce the cataclysmic results that ADAPT and NCIL are predicting. There is nothing in it that would limit or impede the opponents of the bill to receive the employment services in integrated, competitive work settings that they say they want. In the ADAPT/NCIL hyperbolic assessment of the bill, they claim that “This bill resurrects walls of exclusion by segregating people with disabilities both socially and economically, allowing service providers to keep disabled people in workplaces that are isolated from the rest of society, and to pay those workers pennies on the dollar for the value of their work.” 

In the ADAPT/NCIL version of events there is no mention of disability self-advocates and their families supporting the bill who believed they had a meaningful opportunity to express their support, only to be shouted down by other advocates from opposing advocacy organizations who claim to represent everyone with a disability. One of the ADAPT organizers, Anita Cameron, is quoted as saying, “They need to hear from disabled people, they need to hear about the lives we want to live and the communities we want to build. 28 years after the signing of the ADA it is insulting that any organization would pretend to know our needs better than we do.” This was not intended ironically, even as the demonstrators were shouting down other people with disabilities and disrupting the meeting to the extent that the police had to intervene and make arrests. 

Another well-known advocate supporting the demonstrators was Ari Ne’eman, a founder of ASAN, the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, and a former member of the National Council on Disability. He is currently an advisor to the American Civil Liberties Union on disability policy and Medicaid. He is seen sitting in the audience holding up his cell phone at 2:37 in the ACCSES video. He was covering the event by tweet, saying among other things that this was a “Historic event”. He makes no reference to others with disabilities who have opposing views to his own. 

No one deserves to be silenced by the kind of bullying displayed by the aggressive tactics of ADAPT, NCIL, and their supporters.

This whole debacle was exacerbated by disability organizations using the royal “we” when they claim to represent everyone with a disability. I found a word for it, something to add to the multitude of “isms” and other terms that get thrown around and at people who one disagrees with: Nosism. According to Wikipedia, Nosism, from the Latin nos, "we", is the practice of using the pronoun "we" to refer to oneself when expressing a personal opinion. At least “we” learned something new from this tawdry event.

Tuesday, January 7, 2020

Public forums on the future of Michigan's behavioral health system (a.k.a. Community Mental Health)

This is a notice from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) inviting anyone interested in the future of the behavioral health system (Community Mental Health), including Medicaid services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, to attend a forum to voice your opinion.

Here is the notice followed by links to background information and my personal opinion about the cluelessness of state officials regarding the problems in our system of care and services.


MDHHS PUBLIC FORUMS:

THE FUTURE OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH IN MICHIGAN

Please join the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) for a conversation about the future of behavioral health in Michigan.

In December 2019, MDHHS outlined a vision for a stronger behavioral health system that integrates specialty behavioral health and physical health services. If you are served by Michigan’s Medicaid-funded behavioral health system or are the family member of a person served, we want to hear from YOU.

MDHHS is hosting five public forums throughout the state and online in early 2020. Department leadership will be in attendance to further discuss the vision, answer your questions, and listen to your feedback. Please join us!

Detroit: January 8, 2020, from 5:00—6:30 p.m.
Cadillac Place, 3044 W. Grand Blvd
Conference Room L-150

Grand Rapids: January 9, 2020, from 5:00—6:30 p.m.
Grand Valley State University L.V. Eberhard Center, 

301 W. Fulton, Room 201

Marquette: January 22, 2020, from 5:00—6:30 p.m.
Marquette Senior High School

1203 W. Fair Ave
Little Theater

Saginaw: January 30, 2020, from 5:00—6:30 p.m
Saginaw Valley State University, Gilbertson Hall, 

7400 Bay Road
Ott Auditorium

Virtual Forum: February 6, 2020, from 5:00—6:30 p.m.

The link for this event will be shared on www.Michigan.gov/FutureOfBehavioralHealth

in late January.

To learn more about the Department’s vision, please visit www.Michigan.gov/FutureOfBehavioralHealth


If you cannot attend an event, we would still love to hear from you. You can email your feedback to FutureOfBH@michigan.gov.

*********************************

Speech by Robert Gordon, Director of MDHHS, to the Community Mental Health Association of Michigan

The vision MDHHS is proposing

Section 298 Initiative The 298 Initiative has been abandoned, but it looks like current proposals by the state are trying to resurrect it. 


For many years, Medicaid Health Plans, both for profit and nonprofit, have been trying to get their  hands on Medicaid funds for behavioral health services (CMH) with promises that they can do it better and for less money than the public agencies that most people rely on. For some very good reasons, people don't believe them. Medicaid Health Plans do not have experience providing the social service supports people with IDD and other disabilities need to survive (housing, case management, caregiving, family supports, health maintenance, etc.). When medical health systems are faced with limitations on funding through a managed care system, they naturally turn to denying and limiting services to the people they are supposed to serve.

Let's not kid ourselves.The community mental health system leaves much to be desired with its inability to recognize or serve the full continuum of services that are needed by this diverse population. 

The State's proposals for reforming the behavioral health system (again) do not tell us what they are trying to reform other than a system of financial management for Medicaid funds. It seems to me this is starting at the wrong place again with the wrong people.

If you want a say in the future of Behavioral Health, tell the MDHHS what you know and what they need to know to do a better job. Lead with that, and don't let the state's proposals be the only thing you respond to.

Sunday, December 15, 2019

More comments on non-competitive employment for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities


Testimony from 18 Missouri, an organization representing 6,000 families in support of people benefitting from non-competitive employment.

See more on Youtube.


Today, 12/15/19 is the last day to submit comments to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Regarding Section14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. 14(c) allows employers to pay people with disabilities less than minimum wage based on their individual abilities and needs. Protections in the law make acceptance of non-competitive employment voluntary. Other employment opportunities are available for people with disabilities who want competitive employment for at least minimum wage through Vocational Rehabilitation agencies and supported employment services. 

Submit comments by email here, subminimumwages@usccr.gov . 

Although comments are due today, anyone can comment any time to the US Commission on Civil Rights.

The following are excerpts from a letter dated 11/14/19 from Jill Escher, President of the National Council on Severe Autism, to the US Commission on Civil rights regarding “non-competitive employment options with severe cognitive, functional and behavioral disabilities”. Read the full text of the letter here.

************************
National Council on Severe Autism
PO Box 26853
San Jose, CA 95159
info@ncsautism.org
ncsautism.org
November 14, 2019 

United States Commission on Civil Rights
Via email: subminimumwages@usccr.gov 

...We fully understand and appreciate that some individuals with disabilities have been paid less than their productivity warrants—clearly, justice requires that those individuals receive competitive wages. However, a substantial portion of the disability sector—namely, those with substantial cognitive and behavioral impairments who lack the ability to engage in work at a competitive level—require noncompetitive, highly supported options…. 

All Americans should have access to work, but elimination of 14(c) de facto excludes our severe ID population from the workforce based on the fantasy that all intellectually disabled adults could achieve competitive employment. A few more key points: 
  • Given the staggering increase in the population with severe autism, we see a clear imperative to create vastly more, not fewer, options for day programming and supported forms of employment. …We need to maximize their person-centered options, including work that pays special wages based on less-than-competitive productivity.
  • Subminimum wage work is but one benefit accruing to the significantly disabled clients. …A standard job supervisor is unlikely to treat seizures, change diapers, or handle getting punched or scratched, to put it mildly. The extremely valuable, though non-monetary, therapeutic dimensions should be considered before over-simplistically labeling subminimum wages as discriminatory. 
  • 14(c) programs serving the significantly intellectually disabled provide a protected form of employment unavailable in the free market...the employee’s needs comes first, and profitability is not the prime endpoint. The nonprofit work is typically tailored to the particular skillset of the worker, a customization unavailable in the free labor market where individuals are expected to conform to pre-established performance standards...Disability advocates often accuse 14(c) wage programs of exploiting or abusing their disabled workers, but for severely challenged adults, the opposite is almost always true— the programs often protect clients from exploitation and abuse by offering protected employment. 
  • No person with a disability is forced into 14(c) work, and wages are set carefully. … 
  • Most workers with disabilities, for example physical disabilities, are already in the competitive market...As Harris Capps, the father of Matthew, who loves his job in an Ohio work center, states, "If a higher functioning individual is able to get a job providing a mandated minimum wage, surely, they already have the minimum wage law in effect to protect them." 
  • When non-competitive workshops close, participants often end up idle at home, lonely and unemployed, or if they work at all, with decreased job hours and decreased total wages. Where is the data suggesting better outcomes for the severely disabled who are denied the opportunity to work? We have seen none. Slashing their jobs, leaving them to languish at home, detached from any community of peers, with no viable alternative discriminates against our most vulnerable. The ostensible “liberation” of requiring competitive employment obviously strands our most vulnerable citizens. At a minimum, 14(c) must remain intact for our subset who lack capacity for competitive employment. 
*********************

Fact Sheet on Subminimum Wages for People with Disabilities

The DD News Blog testimony to the USCCR


Friday, December 13, 2019

Testimony on special wage certificates for people with disabilities


December 13, 2019

To: The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
From: Jill R. Barker, Ann Arbor, Michigan 


Re: Do 14(c) wage certificates violate the civil rights of people with disabilities?

Answer: NO, not with the protections properly enforced in current law and the availability of choices to meet individual needs.

I am the parent of two adult sons with profound intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Despite the claims by many disability advocacy groups, that all people with disabilities can work in integrated, competitive work settings, my sons are not capable of work of any kind, although there are many services and protections that are afforded to them that improve and maintain the quality of their lives.

I also belong to local and national disability organizations that acknowledge a broad spectrum of ability and need and avoid proclaiming to know with absolute certainty what all people with disabilities can and can’t do. Only by empowering individual voices of people with disabilities (including legal guardians) and their families to advocate for their own needs and preferences will we ever get to a system of care and services that is in synch with the needs of this diverse population.

Special wages below minimum wage are permitted under Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act for people with disabilities. The claim that these are inherently discriminatory is belied by the protections in law that make acceptance of these services voluntary and a choice among alternatives for employment.

According to a Fact Sheet from the U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, on “The Employment of Workers with Disabilities at Subminimum Wages”,

“The fact that a worker may have a disability is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant the payment of a subminimum wage.”


Special wage certificates allow people with more severe cognitive and other disabilities to work at their own pace in skill development centers (sheltered workshops, usually in community settings) and receive pay adjusted to their abilities and how fast they work. Special wages are below the federal minimum wage and are a way to subsidize employers who provide jobs to people who would otherwise not be able to compete for employment.

Wages must be commensurate with the individual’s abilities and productivity: “All subminimum wages must be reviewed and adjusted, if appropriate, at periodic intervals. At a minimum, the productivity of hourly paid workers must be reevaluated every six months and a new prevailing wage survey must be conducted at least every twelve months;” … “any worker with a disability paid at subminimum wages, or his/her parent or guardian, may petition the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division for a review of their special wage rates by a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge.”


People with intellectual and developmental disabilities who wish to work in integrated competitive work settings for at least minimum wage should be eligible for ongoing supported employment services, usually funded by Medicaid Waivers.

With Medicaid and social security benefits and a variety of options available to people with IDD, it is hard to imagine that individuals who choose to work in non-competitive work settings are depriving themselves of their civil rights.

Depriving people with severe disabilities of an accommodation that allows them to engage in appropriate work is in itself discriminatory.

In an article from The Hill, “Eliminating subminimum wage waivers will harm hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities”, 8/10/2018, David Ordon writes,

“In 2014, 75 percent of individuals with I/DD receiving day or employment services through a state I/DD system were attending a sheltered or facility-based environment.


“This means that efforts to remove 14 (c) subminimum wage certificates are essentially targeting one group, and one group alone: people with disabilities who choose to attend sheltered workshops”.

Protecting the choices of people with severe disabilities also protects choice in general for all people with disabilities. Eliminating choices that some advocates don’t approve of may feel good to them in the moment, but using civil rights as a weapon to deprive people of needed services is unfortunately an excuse that is not lost on government agencies and legislators always looking for ways to cut costs for vulnerable populations.

Jill R. Barker
12/13/2018

Thursday, December 12, 2019

A brief history of work centers for people with disabilities and subminimum wage


[The term "Sheltered Workshop" is used pejoratively by many advocacy organizations promoting the elimination of these programs. Other terms, such as facility-based or center-based work programs for people with severe disabilities are equally valid and often preferred by those who need and want these programs to continue, even when they pay less than minimum wage as allowed by law. Any of these terms mean the same thing as far as I am concerned.] 

A 1998 Technical Assistance Circular from the U.S. Department of Education on State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies and Community Rehabilitation Programs gives some historical perspective on the origins of employment programs for people with severe disabilities:

"In 1938, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed into law the Wagner O'Day Act to provide employment through the sale of products to the Federal government for persons who were blind. Congress amended this Act in 1971 as the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (JWOD) to also include Federal contracts for products and services and expanded the Act to provide employment opportunities for other persons with severe disabilities..."

The 1971 amendments to the act include expanded employment opportunities. State Vocational Rehabilitation agencies were encouraged to coordinate with Community Rehabilitation Programs (CRPs) that employ people at or above minimum wage, but also to provide “extended employment”. Extended employment is defined as "work in a non-integrated or sheltered setting for a public or private non profit agency that provides compensation in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act, and any needed support services to an individual with a disability to enable the individual to continue to train or otherwise prepare for competitive employment, unless the individual through informed choice chooses to remain in extended employment[emphasis added].

One of the criticisms of the 1938 law is that it is old - sometimes the word "archaic" is used. Tell that to people receiving social security old age benefits based on a 1935 law, and I doubt that many of them will return their checks because the law is old.

A criticism of the 1971 amendments (JWOD) is that the people who passed the law were somehow unenlightened and did not believe, as many advocates now claim, that everyone with a severe disability can work in integrated, competitive employment. Thousands of people in center-based work programs and their families disagree. They need and value the types of employment and other services offered by these so-called archaic work programs. Many disabled individuals have tried integrated, competitive employment, and either could not find or keep a job or could not function in competition with other employees in integrated work settings.

Vocational Rehabilitation programs that train and provide services for people with disabilities for competitive employment are time-limited and the goals of these programs are out of reach for many people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). WIOA, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act signed by President Obama in 2014, loosened up some of the requirements for vocational rehabilitation services, but it prioritizes integrated competitive employment above work in non-integrated work settings that may not be suitable for many people with IDD.

Supported Employment Services, are defined in the DD Act (The Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000) for people with IDD as follows:

The term 'supported employment services' means services that enable individuals with developmental disabilities to perform competitive work in integrated work settings, in the case of individuals with developmental disabilities
  • for whom competitive employment has not traditionally occurred; or
  • for whom competitive employment has been interrupted or intermittent as a result of significant disabilities; and
  • who, because of the nature and severity of their disabilities, need intensive supported employment services or extended services in order to perform such work.
Supported Employment is often funded through Medicaid Waivers for people with IDD in integrated settings for at least minimum wage. These services can continue as long as needed, unlike vocational rehabilitation services that are time-limited. These services, however, can be very costly and not suitable for some people with more severe disabilities.

Work programs that hire people with more severe disabilities can obtain special wage certificates under the Fair Labor Standards Act to pay employees less than minimum wage, but commensurate with the individual's abilities and productivity. Wage certificates are threatened with elimination as are the programs that employ people with severe disabilities. The claim that these are inherently discriminatory is belied by the protections in law that make acceptance of these services voluntary and a choice among alternatives for employment.

**********************

Comments needed by 12/15/19.


The DD News Blog on supported employment

Monday, December 9, 2019

Fact Sheet on Subminimum Wages for People with Disabilities

The US Department of Labor issued a Fact Sheet on “The Employment of Workers with Disabilities at Subminimum Wages” in 2008. It still applies, even as discussion of changes to the law is currently a hot topic.

Special wage certificates allow people with more severe cognitive and other disabilities to work at their own pace in skill development centers (sheltered workshops, usually in community settings) and receive pay adjusted to their abilities and how fast they work. Special wages are below the federal minimum wage and are a way to subsidize employers who provide jobs to people who would otherwise not be able to compete for employment.

The facts show, that working in a sheltered workshop or other non-competitive employment situation is not an arbitrary decision nor is it compulsory: “The fact that a worker may have a disability is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant the payment of a subminimum wage.”

Wages must be commensurate with the individuals abilities and productivity: “All subminimum wages must be reviewed and adjusted, if appropriate, at periodic intervals. At a minimum, the productivity of hourly paid workers must be reevaluated every six months and a new prevailing wage survey must be conducted at least every twelve months;” 
“…any worker with a disability paid at subminimum wages, or his/her parent or guardian, may petition the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division for a review of their special wage rates by a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge.” 

In addition, Many facility-based job sites for people with more severe disabilities offer other services in addition to employment. Most employees with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) receive benefits such as Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid covered health insurance, and other supports for people with low incomes and special needs. .

People with developmental disabilities who wish to work in integrated competitive work settings for at least minimum wage should be eligible for ongoing supported employment services, usually funded by Medicaid Waivers.

With these benefits and choices available to people with IDD, it is hard to imagine that individuals who choose to work in non-competitive work settings are depriving themselves of their civil rights.

************************

U.S. Department of Labor
Wage and Hour Division
(Revised July 2008)

Fact Sheet #39: The Employment of Workers with Disabilities at Subminimum Wages

This fact sheet provides general information concerning the application of section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Characteristics

Section 14(c) of the FLSA authorizes employers, after receiving a certificate from the Wage and Hour Division, to pay subminimum wages - wages less than the Federal minimum wage - to workers who have disabilities for the work being performed. The certificate also allows the payment of wages that are less than the prevailing wage to workers who have disabilities for the work being performed on contracts subject to the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA) and the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act (PCA).

A worker who has disabilities for the job being performed is one whose earning or productive capacity is impaired by a physical or mental disability, including those relating to age or injury. Disabilities which may affect productive capacity include blindness, mental illness, developmental disabilities, cerebral palsy, alcoholism and drug addiction. The following, taken by themselves, are not considered to be disabilities for purposes of paying subminimum wages: education disabilities, chronic unemployment, receipt of welfare benefits, nonattendance at school, juvenile delinquency, and correctional parole or probation.


Section 14(c) does not apply unless the disability actually impairs the worker's earning or productive capacity for the work being performed. The fact that a worker may have a disability is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant the payment of a subminimum wage.

Coverage

Any person who works on or otherwise handles goods that are moving in interstate commerce is individually subject to the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the FLSA. In addition, employees of enterprises operated for a business purpose that have an annual dollar volume of sales or business done of at least $500,000 are also subject to the FLSA's requirements. Furthermore, employees of public agencies; hospitals; institutions primarily engaged, in the Act's own words, “in the care of the sick, the aged, or the mentally ill or defective who reside on the premises;” schools for children who have disabilities; or preschools, elementary or secondary schools, or institutions of higher education are covered on an enterprise basis regardless of the annual dollar volume of the employer.

Requirements

Certification

Employers must obtain an authorizing certificate from the Wage and Hour Division prior to paying subminimum wages to employees who have disabilities for the work being performed. Employers shall submit a properly completed application (Form WH-226-MIS, Application for Authority to Employ Workers with Disabilities at Subminimum Wages.) and the required supporting documentation to: 

United States FS 39
Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, 230 South Dearborn Street, Room 514, Chicago, Illinois, 60604-1757; (312) 596-7195. Certificates covering employees of work centers and patient workers normally remain in effect for two years. Certificates covering workers with disabilities placed in competitive employment situations or School Work Experience Programs (SWEPs) are issued annually.

Commensurate Wage Rates


Subminimum wages must be commensurate wage rates - based on the worker's individual productivity, no matter how limited, in proportion to the wage and productivity of experienced workers who do not have disabilities performing essentially the same type, quality, and quantity of work in the geographic area from which the labor force of the community is drawn. The key elements in determining commensurate rates are:

•Determining the standard for workers who do not have disabilities, the objective gauge against which the productivity of the worker with a disability is measured.

•Determining the prevailing wage, the wage paid to experienced workers who do not have disabilities for the same or similar work and who are performing such work in the area. Most SCA contracts include a wage determination specifying the prevailing wage rates to be paid for work on the SCA contract.

•Evaluating the quantity and quality of the productivity of the worker with the disability.

All subminimum wages must be reviewed and adjusted, if appropriate, at periodic intervals. At a minimum, the productivity of hourly paid workers must be reevaluated every six months and a new prevailing wage survey must be conducted at least every twelve months.

Overtime, Child Labor and Fringe Benefits

Generally, workers subject to the FLSA, SCA, and/or PCA must be paid overtime at least 1 1/2 times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek. Minors younger than 18 years of age must be employed in accordance with the youth employment provisions of the FLSA and PCA. Neither the FLSA nor PCA have provisions requiring the payment of fringe benefits. Workers paid subminimum wages, however, must receive the full fringe benefits listed on the wage determination when performing work subject to the SCA.

Enforcement


The Wage and Hour Division is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the FLSA. In addition, any worker with a disability paid at subminimum wages, or his/her parent or guardian, may petition the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division for a review of their special wage rates by a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge.

Worker Notification

Each worker with a disability and, where appropriate, the parent or guardian of such worker, shall be informed orally and in writing by the employer of the terms of the certificate under which such worker is employed. In addition, employers must display the Wage and Hour Division poster, Notice to Workers with Disabilities Paid at Special Minimum Wages (WH Publication 1284).

Where to Obtain Additional Information

For additional information, visit our Wage and Hour Division Website: http://www.wagehour.dol.gov and/or call our toll-free information and helpline, available 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. in your time zone, 1-866-4USWAGE (1-866-487-9243).

This publication is for general information and is not to be considered in the same light as official statements of position contained in the regulations. U.S. Department of Labor Frances Perkins Building 200 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20210

1-866-4-USWAGE

TTY: 1-866-487-9243Contact Us

************************

See also, Because We Care - "What is all this about subminimum wage?"

The DD News Blog - more on special wage certificates