Washington, Feb 16 (IANS) A House hearing in Wisconsin has reignited the US debate over disability employment and wages, with lawmakers weighing whether Section 14(c)—which ties pay to productivity for some workers with significant disabilities—protects “dignity” and “purpose” through work or should be ended in favor of competitive, integrated jobs.
The hearing was held at Green Valley Enterprises in Beaver Dam this past week. Rep. Glenn Grothman said the goal was to move the discussion “out of the Beltway” and into “the real world.”
“Work is not a dirty word, it’s an opportunity for individuals to receive not only income but dignity, purpose, opportunity, and engagement through their employment,” Grothman said.
Section 14(c) allows certain employers to pay workers with significant disabilities wages based on productivity. Supporters call it a pathway to work. Critics call it subminimum wage.
Grothman said eliminating the rule would “erase people’s jobs and would take away the community and friends they love.” He cited cases in states where facilities closed and said “the vast majority of people rather than enjoying work are just are not.”
Rep. Burgess Owens defended the program as a matter of culture and work ethic. “The way that you command respect is by winning,” he said. He described work as a source of pride and said employees “come to work every single day and they have a chance to do little things that make them feel like I’m serving somebody, my presence is a value.”
Barbara LeDuc, President and CEO of Opportunities Inc., urged lawmakers to preserve 14(c) “as a choice.”
“Eliminating 14 C does not remove their barriers, it removes their choices, their opportunities and in many cases their sense of purpose,” she said.
LeDuc cited a 2025 Government Accountability Office study. She said in states that eliminated 14(c), “we simply do not know where many individuals went or what happened to them after these options disappeared.”
Kathy Armstrong, whose 37-year-old daughter Clara works at Green Valley and has Down syndrome, said the program gives her daughter stability.
“14 C is very vital it provides her with a job that she can perform successfully at her own pace,” Armstrong said.
She questioned the push toward community jobs with limited hours. “Where are they the other 30 hours of the week?” she asked.
Opponents argued that the policy traps workers in segregated settings and low wages.
Laura Owens, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, said subminimum wages “produce predictable outcomes, poverty segregation and lost economic potential.”
“Disability should never be the reason someone is paid less for their labor,” she said. Owens cited studies showing higher employment in states that ended subminimum wages. She said expectations and outcomes improve when workers receive competitive pay.
Kit Brewer, Vice President of the Coalition for the Preservation of Employment Choice, disputed that view. He said available data show many workers struggle after facilities close.
He told lawmakers that “less than 25 per cent of individuals forced out of their jobs were able to make that transition” in the states studied.
The debate reflects a broader national divide. As of 2024, 15 states and the District of Columbia have eliminated subminimum wage certificates. Others continue to defend them as part of what supporters call an employment continuum.
