An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of SB 1226 and an Employment First Approach
By: Brynna James
Rather than “othering” individuals with disabilities in the workplace, efforts to promote the greater inclusion of individuals with disabilities should be the norm. The question is, what is the best strategy for promoting this inclusion? The establishment of an Employment First policy has been a common approach taken by many state legislatures to facilitate a more complete inclusion of individuals with disabilities in the workforce. With the passage of SB 1226 during the 83rd legislative session in 2013, Texas joined the ranks of states that have implemented an Employment First policy.
An Employment First approach consists of assuming that the individual can work and does not have to prove their “readiness” for work as well as assisting the individual in finding employment with the general workforce that offers a living wage¹. SB 1226 makes employment the expected outcome of any publicly funded program or education that serves Texans with disabilities. This bill also establishes the Texas Employment First Task Force to promote the competitive and integrated employment of these individuals². In 2013 when SB 1226 was passed, only 24.7% of individuals with a disability in Texas reported they were employed in contrast to 57% of individuals without a disability, a massive gap that raised concern³. Individuals with disabilities have also have an average income below far below that of individuals without disabilities.
It was not until 2019, years after the implementation of SB 1226, that the state passed SB 753 to phase out subminimum wage for individuals with disabilities⁴. Prior to 2019, employers could obtain certificates from the Department of Labor allowing them to pay those individuals as little as pennies per hour⁴. Until this point, the Americans with Disabilities Act that protected these individuals from discrimination in the workforce still failed to protect them from such an extreme wage gap. With employment should come the income that allows an individual to fully participate in society as well as added benefits of greater self-esteem, social interaction, and a sense of purpose. Today, the question remains, is this Employment-First policy an effective strategy for promoting the employment, as well as a correlating increase in income levels, for Texans with disabilities? Survey data from the Texas Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System can help answer that question and allow us to take a closer look to assess if individuals with disabilities are truly better off now than they were before SB 1226 was passed.
An analysis of employment rates for individuals with disabilities in Texas raises some concerns about the effectiveness of the Employment First policy and task force. A marginal increase in employment, from 24.7% to 26.5% of individuals with disabilities, indicates that the Employment First task force needs to take a hard look at the strategies they have held in place thus far and reevaluate³. The employment rate of individuals with disabilities is still far lower than those without disabilities. Even the 2% increase in employment could be more of a product of general economic conditions improving than an indication of a minor success by the task force, the employment rate of individuals without disabilities shared a similar gain. This failure of the Employment First task force to produce any substantial improvement in the employment rate of individuals with disabilities may support concerns raised by some advocates following the emergence of the Employment First movement across the nation. They argue that the mere production of reports and policies will not result in any measurable increases in workforce participation of individuals with disabilities⁵. Under SB 1226, that is the extent of the power of the Employment First task force, they lack the authority to mandate change, only recommend it in their reports. SB 1226 should be amended to give greater authority to the task force, freeing them to make the comprehensive systems change necessary to ensure greater workforce participation for individuals with disabilities across the board. Such change could stem from the power to shift resources towards integrated employment, accountability for achieving outcomes, and a system that provides much greater quality of employment assistance and supports⁵.
The secondary goal of the Employment First policy, increasing the income level of individuals with disabilities, is partially realized over the years since the implementation of the policy. A higher income level allows for an improved standard of living and the opportunity to afford leisure activities and other gains in quality of life. There is a marked decrease in the percentage of respondents who report making less than $25,000, from 55% in 2013 to 44.1% in 2018³. There is a promising increase in the number of individuals with disabilities who report making $50,000 or more per year, from 21.7% in 2013 to 34.9% in 2018³. The 13.2% increase from 2013 to 2018 in individuals with disabilities who report making $50,000 or more a year far outpaced the 8.2% increase in individuals without disabilities in the same income bracket, suggesting this growth is more than a product of general economic conditions in the state³.
This indicates that although efforts to improve employment rates for individuals with disabilities were not particularly impactful, the task force may have been successful in developing strategies to transition these individuals into higher-paying jobs. One of the task force’s recommendations that could have influenced this change is their development of a plan to phase out subminimum wage work programs, segregated from the rest of the workforce⁶. SB 1226 required that this transition take place, placing much more authority behind this aspect of the task force’s recommendation plan than the less explicit goal of increasing the employment rate. This additional authority likely contributed to the greater success in increasing income levels when compared to the less successful employment rate initiative. Employment services are now to prioritize placement of individuals with disabilities to competitive integrated positions in the workforce and eventually end placements to subminimum wage positions altogether. You can reasonably conclude that since the transition plan took effect following the first task force report of 2014, SB 1226 has been relatively successful in raising the income level of individuals with disabilities and should continue unchanged in this regard.
Most disability rights advocacy groups assert that subminimum wage work programs should be a thing of the past as everyone deserves a fair wage for their work. They argue that “disability rights are workers’ rights” in their fight to end subminimum wage in state and federal legislatures⁷. Some families argue against such legislation due to a concern that people with more severe disabilities would not be able to participate fully in the general workforce and would lose the opportunity to earn a sense of purpose⁷. Nevertheless, Texas’ initiative under its Employment First policy to transition individuals with disabilities out of subminimum wage programs and into the general workforce seems to have been successful in increasing income levels for these individuals.
SB 1226 failed to provide a measurable improvement to the employment rates of individuals with disabilities in Texas. This indicates that pivoting to new strategies for the complete integration of an Employment First policy across the state should be considered. SB 1226 has been relatively successful in phasing out subminimum wage positions and raising the income levels of individuals with disabilities across the state. Efforts to promote integrated and competitive employment in the general workforce should continue until individuals with disabilities enjoy equitable employment to the greatest extent possible.
References
1. Owens, L. APSE Fact Sheet: Employment First [Pamphlet]. Rockville, MD: Association of People Supporting Employment First. (n.d.).
2. SB 1226, Eighty Third Session of the Texas Legislature Cong. (2013) (enacted).
3. Texas Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, (2013–2018). Texas Health and Human Services.
4. Cohen, D. (2019, July 24). Texas is Right for Ending Subminimum Wage. Retrieved December 02, 2020, from https://news.utexas.edu/2019/07/24/texas-is-right-for-ending-subminimum-wage/
5. Hoff, David. “SELN Working Document: Employment First Resource List.” State Employment Leadership Network, Institute for Community Inclusion, May 2016, apse.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/SELN-Employment-First-Resource-List-May-2016.pdf.
6. Rep. No. Senate Bill 1226, 83rd Legislature, Regular Session, 2013-Texas Employment First Policy and Texas Employment First Task Force Report (2014).
7. Diament, Michelle. “House Votes To End Subminimum Wage.” Disability Scoop, 19 July 2019, www.disabilityscoop.com/2019/07/19/house-votes-to-end-subminimum-wage/26924/.
