Who exactly is empowered?
A recent article caught my eye. Under the guise of empowerment, the article highlights some vocational training programs here in California that exploit their disabled participants for corporate interests. Whilst programs like the El Capitan hotel’s “housekeeping integration” boast heartwarming stories of skills training and community acceptance, they primarily serve to furnish companies with cheap, subsidised labour under the banner of “experience.”
Let’s be clear - these students are fulfilling essential hotel and café functions that would otherwise require fair compensation. Yet the county education offices trumpet the exposure itself as the achievement whilst glossing over the cost-savings windfall for their corporate partners. This hijacking of disability access progress to pad bottom lines lays bare the capitalist opportunism at play.
In reality, these lauded training initiatives prioritise external perceptions and public relations for companies over genuine economic inclusion for special education students. The programs set these individuals on career trajectories towards below living-wage service roles as opposed to skills cultivation that ensures their financial independence. That such structures are piecemeal rather than systematically scaled nationwide demonstrates the underlying lack of interest in uplifting this community post-graduation.
When the successful graduate still requires government assistance to survive, how empowered can they really be? The true test must be measured in a trainee’s ability to wholly sustain themselves. Though undoubtedly well-intentioned on an individual level, these county office efforts share much in common with Goodwill’s sub-minimum wages for disabled workers. They aim to showcase abilities over economic security. Until the work facilitates complete self-sufficiency, can we truly call it empowerment? With most headed towards reliance rather than independence, companies remain the clearest winners.
What I would like to see.
Whilst the vocational training efforts profiled in the article aim to provide empowering experiences, they underscore the clear absence of any overarching apprenticeship infrastructure in the US specially tailored to serve disabled individuals after high school. Instead of intentional career roadmapping, these students face fragmented and scattershot program availability largely dependent on the initiative of individual districts and counties. What this community could truly benefit from is a formalised, unified national apprenticeship program focused squarely on guiding them into living-wage trajectories post-graduation.
Much like apprenticeships have long served as pillar institutions enabling career progression for trades like plumbing, electrical work, and construction, a national disability-focused apprenticeship framework could completely transform economic inclusion. Students could be officially registered into multi-year paid placements rotating across business partners in fields compatible with their strengths. Course curriculum would integrate vocational skill-building with on-site training by workplace mentors. Critically, these registered apprentices would draw income throughout their training to provide financial stability whilst actively preparing for independence in roles suited for self-sufficiency.
A nationwide system with transferable regionally-recognised credentials would provide the continuity and direction so desperately lacking today. Disabled talent pipelines could systematically funnel graduates towards appropriate opportunities matching local labour demand instead of one-off cafeteria and housekeeping gigs. Students could experience targeted multi-year career journeys tailored to abilities rather than revolving temporary placements. In the end, a national disability apprenticeship framework could finally focus vocational efforts into meaningful economic justice rather than just exposure.