Compassion deserts Cameron

[DominicJ]

RC
But the original point was not, disabled people must be paid less.
It was disabled people COULD accept jobs for less than minimum wage if they so wished.

[JohnB]

Isn't the real issue about disabled people who are capable of doing a job, but at a fraction of the speed of a non disabled person? The employer is doing something good providing the opportunity, and the employee feels good from having a job. However, it's tough on an employer to be expected to pay the normal pay rate, and provide all the facilities, to get a much lower number of units of output for the same labour cost. So what's the fairest solution for employer, employee, and maybe the taxpayer or a charity?

[kenneal - lagger]

My wife's step mother has been in two different homes and both have been brilliant. We had to move her to a new home which was more secure as her dementia worsened. The fact that she is still alive after eight years is a testament to the quality of care that she has received in both homes. One was charity run and the other is private.

[RenewableCandy]

RC
But the original point was not, disabled people must be paid less.
It was disabled people COULD accept jobs for less than minimum wage if they so wished.

I can sort of see your point but inevitably the two will become indistinguishable with time.

Perhaps if they do individual licence applications (like the ones for an U14 taking on a job) it might work...but an U14 is vouched-for by his/her teachers and parents: who could do that fairly for a disabled person? And will the licencing process inevitably seague into a mere formality (clue to the answer: yes).