is recognized that benefit changes sometimes lag behind wage increases, icularly in good times when steady wage earners are at work. Such situations ally are remedied, however, before the disparity becomes too great. e would suggest that the President's admonitions and Congressional interest well as other considerations will furnish states with the necessary incentive to benefits in line with wages. Therefore, we ask this Committee to leave with states the responsibility for establishing benefit levels. enator ANDERSON. Mr. Nagle. TEMENT OF JOHN F. NAGLE, CHIEF, WASHINGTON OFFICE, r. NAGLE. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is r. Chairman, recognizing the need to improve and expand the ting Federal-State unemployment compensation program, the se of Representatives last year passed H.R. 14705, a bill designed rovide better and broader protection against the disastrous social economic consequences of unemployment in the lives of workingand their families. I discussing the inclusion of nonprofit organizations under the ployment compensation law, House report 91-612 states at page ur committee does not want to change the present tax status of non-profit izations, but it is concerned about the need of their employees for proon against wage loss resulting from unemployment. t, Mr. Chairman, the concern of the House Ways and Means mittee did not go so far as to provide protection against wage resulting from unemployment for handicapped workers emed in sheltered workshops. or was this omission an oversight, Mr. Chairman. ction 104 of H.R. 14705 specifically declares that this section does -pply to service in a facility conducted for the purpose of carryut a program of— providing remunerative work for individuals who because of their im1 physical or mental capacity cannot be readily absorbed in the competibor market ** * may be argued in justification of this exclusion, Mr. Chairman, sheltered workshops are charitable institutions with uncertain imited financial resources and cannot afford the burden of progunemployment compensation coverage for their employees. tthis argument would only be partially correct. use Report 91-612 states at page 45 : exclusion (in clause (b) of section 104) applies only to the services med by an individual receiving * * remunerative work under the pro * Mr. Chairman, the Ways and Means Committee and the House presentatives would seem to believe that, although charity doluld be found and should be used to provide the protection of unyment compensation for the administrative staff of a sheltered hop-for supervisors and truckdrivers, for secretaries and board operators-for physically fit employees-charity dollars 1-184-70-17 could not be found and should not be used to give similar protection to the handicapped workers in such facilities, to the handicapped men and women for whose sole benefit sheltered workshops are established and maintained. Mr. Chairman, we ask and urge this committee and the Senate to delete this unjust and discriminatory exclusion from H.R. 14705. Mr. Chairman, much progress has been made in recent years toward the democratic goal that all men should be and must be judged for their individual merit That they should be and must be considered and judged as individuals, with separate and identifiable capacities and capabilities That they should not be and must not be prejudged and condemned by false and derogatory generalizations That they not be compelled to live differently because they are physically different. We who are impaired by blindness share with our sighted fellows the expectations of equal treatment and full and fair opportunity. And we have not sat patiently and passively by while others fought our battles for us, while others sought to make the American dream a reality in the lives of handicapped Americans. Rather, we, blind people, have joined together in our common cause and shared concerns and experiences, and we have worked and struggled together Against the disparagements of ignorance and the discriminations and denials of antiquated thinking and outmoded practices Against the despair of indifference and the despotism of misguided benevolence and misdirected effort and concern. And clause (B) of section 104 of H.R. 14705, which would withhold the benefits and protection of unemployment compensation from handicapped workers employed in sheltered workshops this provision, Mr. Chairman, represents all of the adverse attitudes and embodies all of the adverse forces against which we, blind people, have contended in our striving for equality of opportunity to achieve according to our abilities and expended effort Equality of opportunity, too, to participate fully with our physically fit fellows in the challenges and responsibilities of building a better world. Mr. Chairman, are men less than men because they are physically or mentally impaired? Are the needs of individuals for food, clothing, and shelter different because they are mentally or physically different? Do the basic living requirements of handicapped workers employed in sheltered workshops end when their wages end? What of these people, Mr. Chairman? What are they to do when their work runs out and they become unemployed? Are they to turn to their relatives for aid and private charity, or are they to apply for admission to the relief rolls and beg for public charity? Mr. Chairman, why is such recourse considered less degrading and less shameful for handicapped workers than for physically fit workers? It is our belief that the dignity of the disabled worker, his plight when employment stops should be of just as much concern to the Con g. ress and to the Nation as the dignity and plight of the physically worker when he becomes unemployed. Unable to secure work in the regular economic pursuits of the com- Mr. Chairman, it is neither just nor equitable to penalize this handi- Found. t is a recognition that men who work have a right to and a need for vernment-provided help when wages cease and new work cannot t is a recognition that men who work have a right to dignity even We ask you to extend this concept of dignity-in-unemployment to ut these people have refused the easy and the demeaning way, is our belief that handicapped workers employed in sheltered shops deserve the right, for they certainly have earned the right, treated as other workers when they are confronted by the catasne of unemployment. e plead with this committee and the Congress to recognize that ployment is a catastrophe, whether workers are physically fit or cally impaired, whether they work in competitive business and try or in sheltered workshops. e fact that unemployment is a catastrophe has nothing to do a worker's physical condition or the nature of his employment. The catastrophe is loss of wages and rapidly multiplying unpaid bills. We ask and urge this committee and the Congress, therefore, to delete clause (B) of section 104 of H.R. 14705, which would deny unemployment compensation to disabled men and women who work in sheltered workshops. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to appear. Senator ANDERSON. Thank you. We all appreciate your testimony and are glad to have you here today. Senator BENNETT. No questions. Senator WILLIAMS. No questions. Senator ANDERSON. Thank you very much for appearing here. Mr. McDaniel. STATEMENT OF DURWARD K. MCDANIEL, NATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE, AMERICAN COUNCIL OF THE BLIND, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. MCDANIEL. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am Durward K. McDaniel, National Representative of the American Council of the Blind. I appear here today with particular reference to the coverage or lack of coverage of nonprofit organizations. The American Council endorses the coverage of all nonprofit organizations but this is that it should be on one or more employees rather than four or more. With respect to the employees of sheltered workshops that Mr. Nagle spoke on, the council believes that the employees of these sheltered workshops should also be covered, that we are talking about approximately 1,500 workshops in the country employing all kinds of handicapped people, including blind, and perhaps 100,000 people. With respect to the workshops for the blind, there are quite a number of them but there is one class of such workshops which I want to speak on specifically and that is those who are qualified under Federal law, under the Wagner-O'Day Act, to fill purchase orders for the Federal Government. There are now some 81 such shops. In 1968 there were 78. The number is growing all the time. At this time more than 5,000 line workers are employed in these shops and they fill Government purchase orders according to schedules and prices set by the Government. In 1968 they produced more than $22 million worth of commodities for the Federal Government and overall, for all sales, $50 million.. Gentlemen of the committee, this is production labor. This is the labor market. This is not charity production. And I propose as part of my statement an amendment to the H.R. 14705 which would at least cover these people. According to the annual report for 1968, these people earned an average hourly wage of $1.57. They received $8,820,000 in wages. And these people are in the labor market. They are competing with other industry for Government business and for commercial business, and they certainly should be covered. With reference to the arguments of whether or not they are productive, these people are. The other people, in the other workshops, really should be covered, too, because if they become unemployed, they have the choice of doing without or applying for public assistance and with ll of the other advantages that the workshops have, this is a very mall increase in cost for this coverage, and some of them have waived heir exemption but they should all be required to carry it. Gentlemen of the committee, I hope that you will consider the mendment which we have proposed and I appreciate the opportunity f speaking to you today. Senator ANDERSON. Thank you. Senator GORE. I would like to ask a question. Why do you think they ave not heretofore been covered? What is the justification or what is e reason? Mr. MCDANIEL. Well, the arguments have been made that they are ot working in productive industry but I think the facts are otherwise. Senator GORE. Well, they draw wages for their work, do they not? Mr. McDANIEL. Oh, yes. Quite often subminimum wages but still ges, based on the production. Senator GORE. Well Mr. MCDANIEL. The charity angle is a big factor in it but if they are ing to be in business, then they ought to really be in business and ovide these benefits. Senator GORE. Well, the meagerness of the wage would seem to argue Mr. MCDANIEL. I think the need is even greater for these people. Senator ANDERSON. Thank you very much. Mr. McDaniel's full statement follows:) PARED STATEMENT OF DURWARD K. MCDANIEL, NATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE, Ян RESS ESS he American Council of the Blind: or more. SUMMARY Favors unemployment compensation coverage for all employees of nont organizations. Favors basing such coverage on one or more employees rather than on Opposes the exclusion of workers performing services in facilities coned for the purpose of carrying out a program of rehabilitation for individuhose earning capacity is impaired by age or physical or mental deficiency jury, or providing remunerative work for individuals who because of their ired physical or mental capacity cannot be readily absorbed in the comive labor market (§ 3309 (b) (5)). Favors coverage for all workers performing services for a facility which een certified to participate in the filling of purchase orders of the Federal nment pursuant to 41 U.S.C. §§ 46-48. STATEMENT e concern of the American Council of the Blind is for more than 5,000 |