It gets worse. When I worked for a nonprofit ARC (Association for Retarded Citizens - yes they use that word in the name) I was tasked with conducting ātime studiesā of disabled workers to determine their hourly wage.
Basically the way a time study worked is an āable-bodiedā worker was timed doing a task. This became the standard. Then disable workers would be timed doing the same task. If they performed 60% as fast as the set standard, theyād only be paid 60% of the hourly wage set for the task.
I was tasked with conducting the time studies so I head out and start doing them. The majority of the disabled workers were performing to 85% or better of the āable-bodiedā times.
I turned the reports in and was told, āthatās not possible. Do them again.ā
So I did them again. Weāre talking a few hundred time studies.
The results were the same. In fact at least a dozen of the workers actually improved their previous times.
I turned them in and was told, āThis canāt be right. They canāt be doing that well.ā
I told them results spoke for themselves. They (the head of the client services department [at this ARC disabled workers were called clients]) said it wasnāt possible for the workers to be performing above 65% at the highest. So I must be doing something wrong or falsely reporting to try and get the clients more money.
I vehemently denied this.
So they sent me to do the studies a third time. This time with a supervisor to ensure no funny business on my part.
Once again, the disabled workers performed to an average of 85% of the standard.
With the supervisorās approval I turned in the third set of reports.
I was told that the standard time must be out of date. Go and time one of the abled workers and use the new time as the standard and conduct all of the hundreds of studies a fourth time.
So, I went and timed an abled worker. Their time was slower than the existing standard. Not wanting to get yelled at, I decided to time 10 Abled workers and average their times to get the new standard.
The new standard was only 6 seconds faster, but it was faster.
So, using the new time standard, I did all of the time studies again.
And again, the disabled workers times averaged out to about 85% of standard. With a good number of them performing at 100%.
I girded my loins and turned the studies in.
I feel like I should mention that these studies are reviewed by ADA and the State Labor Board for compliance with the āsub minimum wageā rules. So theyāre a big deal. Because if an ARC or similar organization is found in violation of the rules it could be the end of that organization.
I was already pretty nervous about the fact that weād conducted so many studies and how that would look. But I was just a 22 yr old worker bee also earning just minimum wage ($8.25/hr) and didnāt want to lose my job.
So yeah, turned in the studies. And was told by the DIRECTOR OF CLIENT SERVICES - the person who was supposed to be the TOP advocate for the disabled workers at this ARC - that if we paid the disabled workers at their reported rates that it would impact her annual bonus.
She then told me to go back and falsify the reports to average 65% performance.
So she fired me for āviolating dress codeā.
I couldnāt afford a lawyer, so I couldnāt file a lawsuit for illegal dismissal.
That ARC is still in operation.