Job accommodation resources: lessons from the global neighborhood. (Accommodations and Global Perspectives).

The United Nations' Division of Social Development estimated that there were more than 500 million people with disabilities in 2000. Of this number, 386 million were estimated to be of working age (U.N. Division of Social Development, n.d.). Countries struggle with the issue of employment of people with disabilities. International conferences such as the World Assembly of Disabled Peoples' International, the General Assembly of Rehabilitation International, and Annual Conference of the World Association of Persons with Disabilities focus on issues pertaining to people with disabilities and employment. When people with disabilities obtain and maintain employment, their contributions help strengthen personal, community, and even national economies. The intent of the present investigation was to gain international perspectives on (a) resources available to facilitate employment, (b) worksite accommodation information-dissemination models, and (c) existing barriers to employment of people with disabilities. These were the topics for the three questions asked of disability experts and individuals with disabilities around the world. What is happening in the global neighborhood?

Requests originating outside the U.S. for accommodation information sparked the present work by the International Center for Disability Information (ICDI). The ICDI has a 30-year history of service and research on issues related to improving employment of people with disabilities. The ICDI serves as the umbrella organization for a variety of funded programs, including the Job Accommodation Network (JAN). JAN is a free consulting service funded by the U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Disability Employment Policy. The mission of JAN is to assist in hiring, retraining, retaining, and advancing people with disabilities. This is accomplished by providing free, immediate, up-to-date, and comprehensive information on disability issues, work accommodations, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and other U.S. disability-related legislation. JAN provides information concerning all types of disabilities and functional limitations. Currently, JAN consultants respond to approximately 32,000 cases annually. Inquiries come from employers of all types and business sizes, rehabilitation counselors, legal and educational professionals, and individuals with disabilities and their families.

JAN was founded in 1983 by the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities (now known as the U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Disability Employment Policy). Since 1983, JAN has grown considerably. This growth has been a result of advancements in technologies (Internet access) and an increase in the need for information as a result of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The development and growth of the World Wide Web prompted JAN to augment its service delivery methods to include (a) an extensive website on disability, employment, and work accommodation issues and (b) e-mail contacts from people seeking accommodation solutions. At present, this website experiences nearly five million "hits" annually. From 1986 through 2000, the Canadian government (Canadian Council on Rehabilitation and Work) also contracted with the ICDI to provide accommodation information throughout Canada.

In the first six months of 2001, there were 53,448 users of the JAN website from outside the U.S. These contacts came from 123 countries. The most frequent international users during that six-month period were Canada (with 18,028 hits), Japan (4,562), United Kingdom (4,543), Australia (3,842), and Germany (3,390). Other users included France, Israel, China, Pakistan, Peru, Botswana, Nepal, Belize, Nicaragua, Nigeria, and 108 other countries. Inquires have been received concerning translating JAN's Searchable Online Accommodation Resource (http://www.JAN.wvu.edu/SOAR/) for use in various nations. From inquires and statements JAN has received from around the world, it is clear that there is a universal need for accommodation information. Accommodation options transcend national borders. What helps an individual with a specific learning disability in the United States is likely to assist someone with a similar limitation in a similar work situation in another country. The literature provides some guidance as to recent international trends in employment and worksite accommodations.

Four strategies used by various nations to provide employment in competitive industry were described by Bordieri and Comninel (1987). Strategies used primarily in industrialized countries were (a) quota systems, (b) government grants and tax credits to employers, (c) government wage subsidies, and (d) affirmative industries. First, under quota systems, public and private employers with more than a specified number of employees were required to employ a given percentage of workers with disabilities or pay a fine. For example, when Bordieri and Comninel conducted their research, quotas were 1.5 percent in Japan, 2 percent in the Netherlands, 3 percent in England, 5 percent in Israel, and 6 percent in the Federal Republic of Germany. Often, however, employers paid the fines rather than adhere to the quota. Larger firms and public employers more readily accepted and abided by the quota systems. Second, government grants and tax credits were used to pay the person's salary during trial employment or to modify the job site. In Germany, Great Britain, and Japan, for instance, grants made to employers could fund workplace modification, purchase of special tools, or other job accommodations. Third, government wage subsidies have been used to find work that suits the individual and to pay a portion of the employee's salary. Sweden and the Netherlands operated model programs of government-subsidized employment for persons with disabilities. Fourth, affirmative industries were reported to differ from "sheltered workshops" in that the employees participated full time on work tasks, the work involved challenging and valued tasks, workers with and without disabilities were employed, and the industry was predominantly self-sufficient. The U.S. has experimented with an assortment of subsidies, tax credits, and incentive systems for employers and consumers, prior to and after the Bordieri and Comninel (1987) report. For example, the Targeted Jobs Tax Credit (now called the Work Opportunity Tax Credit) had positive impact on employment of people with disabilities (Hollenbeck, 1986). As a second example, after implementation of the ADA, the Disabled Access Credit was made available to small businesses for implementing accommodations (Internal Revenue Code, 1986). A third example is the Social Security Administration's evolving work incentive programs for SSDI beneficiaries and SSI recipients.

From an international perspective, Konig (1996) analyzed labor-market integration of people with psychosocial disabilities. As reported by Konig, the International Labour Organization's (a United Nations specialized agency focusing on the world of work) policy toward vocational training and employment of people with disabilities included the following principles. People with disabilities should (a) enjoy the same rights and privileges as all citizens, in particular regarding access to opportunities for training and employment, (b) receive training in skills that are demanded by the labor market, and (c) be placed in integrative employment, receiving support services if necessary. Policy makers and governments should (a) accept their responsibility to plan, fund, and coordinate responsive standards, (b) support consumer-responsive training opportunities, and (c) create quota-subsidy-tax provisions that encourage integrated employment and reduce disincentives. In addition, this United Nations emphasis noted that employment accommodations are usually inexpensive and can "have beneficial effects for the workforce in general" (Konig, 1996).

Transition of young people with disabilities from school to work also is an area of concern. Brodsky (1990) discussed actions taken by Japan, Sweden, Italy, Denmark, and the U.S. to facilitate transition to employment. These strategies included employment quotas, environmental changes, wage subsidies, job creation, supported employment, counseling, training, and placement.

The "World Programme of Action" concerning persons with disabilities, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1982, had the goal of full participation and equality in social life and development. A United Nations General Assembly resolution in 1992 proclaimed December 3rd as International Day of Disabled Persons with the aims of (a) increasing awareness and understanding of disability issues and trends and (b) mobilizing support for practical action at all levels, by, with, and for persons with disabilities. In 2001, the U.N. General Assembly approved the Mexican Resolution (co-sponsored by 24 other countries) to encourage proposals for comprehensive and integral international strategies to promote the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities (United Nations, n.d.).

Method

Participants

Individuals with disabilities and professionals in the field of disability and employment who had previous contact with ICDI staff were the respondents. A total of 17 responses were received from 12 countries (Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, England, Ghana, India, Japan, Mexico, Scotland, South Africa, and Uzbekistan). As noted previously, the three questions concerned employment resources in their countries, job accommodation models in their countries, and existing employment barriers in their countries.

Available Resources for Accommodation

The first question posed to the respondents was the following. "1. What resources for accommodation information specific to employment are available in your country? For example, resources might be laws, national policies, government programs, organizations, or services."

Respondents with disabilities who previously had sought ICDI services provided answers including descriptions of accommodation devices, courses of study, programs, and organizations. Assistive devices such as wheelchairs and scooters, blind and low-vision aids, ramps and automatic doors, and heating aids were mentioned by respondents from Uzbekistan and Canada. The reply from Ghana cited available courses in printing, computer programming, welding, and art. Government and private programs and organizations that respondents included were (a) Association of Physically Disabled (India), (b) Blind Men's Association (India), (c) Learning Disabilities Association of Ontario (Canada), (d) hiring quota (India), and (e) agreements between non-government organizations and private companies (Argentina). The government of South Africa, in cooperation with grass-roots organizations for people with disabilities, issued white papers and regulations on (a) "Code of Good Practice on how best can we accommodate persons with disabilities in the work place" and (b) "Integrated National Disability Strategy."

Professionals with disability-related programs provided comprehensive answers to the question regarding resources available in their respective countries. These respondents focused on programmatic and legislative resources.

One such expert informant from England indicated that the U.K. government "has a three-pronged strategy for tackling discrimination and improving equality of opportunity...." First is the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 (DDA) with further legislation planned to strengthen it and to meet commitments of a European Union Employment Directive. The DDA requires employers with 20 or more employees to make "reasonable adjustments" for people with disabilities. This Act bans unlawful discrimination in recruitment, promotion, transfers, training, and dismissal. The Disability Rights Commission provides advice and support regarding implementation of the DDA and facilitates linkages to other organizations such as the Royal National Institute for the Blind. Second, there are targeted awareness-raising campaigns to enhance understanding of barriers. The Social Inclusion Partnerships campaign, for instance, brings together national government, local government, and other organizations in order to identify areas for improvement or development. Third is a set of initiatives and programs to aid people with disabilities in gaining and keeping work. The respondent from Scotland reported that the U.K. government policy is related strongly to the Australian concept of "Welfare to Work" in which people with disabilities who want to work are enabled to work. An initiative called "New Deal for Disabled People" (NDDP) is part of the government's Welfare to Work strategy and seeks to move people with disabilities from State Benefits to employment. New Deal is voluntary, and people are invited to "join" and work with "job brokers" throughout England, Wales, and Scotland who "provide help and support matching your skills and abilities to what employers need." "Access to Work" and "Workstep" assist in the employment process. The U.K. Employment Service has a specific responsibility to help people with disabilities obtain jobs, and they use various employer subsidy programs and incentives to encourage participation by both employers and people with disabilities. Unemployment, however, among persons with disabilities is still high (higher than 50 percent), according to a Labour Force Survey in 1995.

In Japan, the importance of a systematic information service to facilitate employment and job accommodation has only begun to be recognized in recent years. The law for implementing "Employment Promotion of the Disabled" includes a quota-levygrant system. Enterprises with more than 55 workers are required to meet a quota of 1.8 percent of employees having physical or intellectual disabilities. Employers who do not meet the quota are required to pay a per-person levy of 50,000 yen per month (about $390 American). Medium-sized businesses that exceed the quota are rewarded with 17,000 yen per person per month (about $135 American). Grants assist employers with providing a modified working environment, skill training, and personnel support. Grants also may fund transportation and employment-support centers. National policy dictates generation of a Five-Year Plan (Ministry of Labour, Health, and Welfare) for increased employment of people with disabilities. This plan must include guidelines for job accommodations. Available government programs include public employment security offices and public vocational rehabilitation centers that provide counseling, consultants, and job-accommodation services free of charge. A major information source is the Japanese Association for Employment of Persons with disabilities. This organization provides employer support, education, research reports, publications, and information about employment. The website http://www.kokoroweb.org.jp was cited as a well-known technical-aids information resource for people with disabilities. According to the Japanese informant, the quota system has had the most impact in that, "Accomplishing the quota (1.8% of number of total employees) is overwhelmingly the #1 reason for employers to employ persons with disabilities."

In Canada, there is not a central information facility on workplace accommodation, according to one respondent. Rather, there are a number of resource centers. Treasury Board Secretariat, Public Service Commission, Environment Canada, and Human Resources Development Canada each have a resource center devoted to accommodation of employees with disabilities. The Adaptive Devices Industry Office works with companies which produce devices, software, and other products relevant to workplace, home, and social accommodation. The Employment Equity Act of 1996 requires covered employers to identify and eliminate employment barriers and institute reasonable accommodation policies and practices. This Act applies to federal departments, agencies, crown corporations (corporations wholly owned directly or indirectly by the Canadian government), federally-regulated industries, and to major federal contractors. Amendments in 1998 to the Canadian Human Rights Act require accommodations for people with disabilities. In support of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has produced publications dealing with the duty to make accommodations. Provinces use this structure to implement their own guidelines. For instance, the Ontario Human Rights Commission produced Policy and Guidelines on Disability and the Duty to Accommodate. Those guidelines contain topics such as "most appropriate accommodation" and "duties and responsibilities in the accommodation process." Funds to assist in accommodation are provided by (a) Employment Benefits under the Canadian National Employment Service and (b) the Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities.

In Belgium, the Walloon Agency for the Integration of People with Disabilities is a public agency responsible for the implementation of government policy. The Walloon Agency (a) provides support services for integration (e.g., preparing meals, learning to drive a car), (b) helps pay for equipment and services (e.g., adaptive housing, guide dogs), and (c) facilitates job training (e.g., subsidized vocational training centers, reimbursement to employer for training) and employment (e.g., hiring incentives to employers, compensation allowance for productivity loss). In Colombia, there are numerous strategies that emanate from the National Plan of Attention to People with Disability. For example, a pilot project yielded success using Telework (telecommuting) in which people with disabilities have an accommodation allowing work from their homes.

In the United States, workplace accommodation information is available through a variety of private and public agencies. Private sources include (a) members of RESNA (a membership organization of rehabilitation-engineering professionals), (b) private rehabilitation providers (vocational counselors and case managers), and (c) accommodation units in private companies. Public sources include (a) ABLEDATA (an adaptive equipment database), (b) U.S. Department of Defense Computer Accommodation Program (an accommodation implementation service for participating federal agencies), (c) U.S. Department of Education, Rehabilitation Services Administration's Vocational Rehabilitation program (a federal-state funded system for providing physical or mental restoration, training, and job placement), and (d) Job Accommodation Network (JAN, a centralized, federally-funded, comprehensive, work-accommodation resource). The legislative foundation for accommodating people with disabilities in the workplace has been developed through the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Some states supplement the federal laws.

Models of Accommodation

The second question posed to the participants was the following. "2. As I am sure you know, the Job Accommodation Network (JAN) provides accommodation information pertaining to people with disabilities. [Note: This assumption was made because each of the participants previously had received information regarding JAN.] The JAN model provides systematic and sensitive individualized responses to employment accommodation inquiries. JAN consultants gather specific information on (1) functional limitations of the person with a disability, (2) job tasks and expectations, and (3) abilities of the person. This information is used to customize accommodation solutions. These solutions are provided through toll-free phone, e-mail, live training, and the Internet. Does your country use a model similar to JAN's to disseminate accommodation information? If not, can you describe the model used in your country?"

Respondents indicated that (1) no model for disseminating accommodation assistance exists (Uzbekistan, Mexico), (2) no such dissemination model is known (India, South Africa), (3) faculty facilitate networking, internships, and employment opportunities (Ghana), (4) individual service providers supply information (Canada), and (5) companies provide the Work Ministry with the profile of an employee that they need, but there is no systematic job accommodation service (Argentina). There is not a "regular model" at the present time, but government personnel advise employers about accommodation products (Mexico).

The contact from Belgium indicated that there is information in print and on the Internet, but unfortunately, it is "limited to details of governmental incentives, policies, and specialized support organizations." This individual from Belgium referred to the International Labour Organization (ILO) which is developing a "Code of Practice on Managing Disability in the Workplace." This Code draws on the experience in disability management of countries throughout the world and addresses recruitment, promotion and advancement, retention, and return to work of people with disabilities. The respondent from Scotland indicated that there are a plethora of U.K. disability organizations that "don't always work that well together." Information is available about specific accommodations relating to (a) sight loss from the Royal National Institute for the Blind, (b) hearing impairment from the Royal National Institute for Deaf People, (c) learning disability from MENCAP, (d) cerebral palsy from SCOPE, (e) and so on. An informant from England confirmed a range of services including (a)written information (e.g., leaflets about Disability Discrimination Act provisions), (b) telephone help lines and websites (e.g., Disability Rights Commission helpline), (c) disability-employment advisors based in Jobcentres (e.g., advice on Access to Work), and (d) voluntary and charitable organizations (e.g., Employers' Forum on Disability).

The respondent from Japan indicated that there is a great deal of information published and opportunity "to learn how to accommodate." For example, some resources are like a "telephone directory" that structure information by industrial area, occupation, type and degree of impairment, and job function. As noted previously, the five-year basic plan for employment of persons with disability (national policy) will contain "guidelines for job accommodation in terms of types and degree of disability of employees." Responses from Canada indicated that any Canadian employer wanting to accommodate an individual with a specific disability can inquire at the local chapter of a disability organization related to that disabling condition. "Some agencies such as the Neil Squires Foundation and the Canadian Council on Rehabilitation and Work can be contracted to perform an analytic assessment of accommodation needs for specific individuals. I understand that some employers may also contact JAN itself ... I am not aware of any major source of expertise in Canada. The Job Accommodation Network (JAN) in the U.S. is widely known as the best source of information on workplace accommodation."

Barriers to Accommodation

The third question posed to the informants was the following. "3. What barriers to accommodating people with disabilities exist in your country?" Barriers most frequently cited were (a) lack of needed resources and (b) negative attitudes.

"There are not any resources and necessary specialists in our country" (Uzbekistan). There are no sign language interpreters. There is poor access to education with special materials and equipment. Even the government has limited knowledge of disabilities and does not treat people with disabilities very well (Ghana). There are many people with disabilities, and because of heavy population and poverty, "it is difficult to keep track of them." Also, because of the "bureaucracy and red tape," the policies are just on paper, and aid "doesn't reach the needy" (India). Training is really lacking, along with accessible transportation, streets, and buildings. The person with a disability "is not viewed as in other countries, but is viewed more like a charity case." Thus, there are psychological barriers too. "Nevertheless, I believe that every day a person in this country changes their opinion and becomes part of the group that considers diversity something positive and not see it as more problems" (Argentina). "Culture is the major barrier ... there is a program for the inclusion of disabled professionals in the job. But there is much more to do, as the culture related to disability in our country is very poor." Also, the respondent said that only 5% of the buildings were accessible (Mexico). The system and structure are not responsive to people with disabilities. This impacts transportation, education, sport, and other aspects of life (South Africa).

One barrier cited by the respondent from Scotland was the structure-of services, suggesting that the Disability Rights Commission would be the "most obvious umbrella organization to develop a pan-disability approach in service delivery." Another U.K. barrier cited was weakness of the Disability Discrimination Act, in which, for example, the term "reasonable adjustment" is difficult to define legally. Another barrier is attitudes of employers. "There are still horrendous cases of discrimination going on in employment." The respondent from England said that employers are reluctant to employ people with disability. Some lack understanding about capabilities, and some lack awareness of what is available to help employees do their jobs effectively.

Three barriers were described by the participant from Japan. First, reasonable accommodation for an employee with disability is not an obligation because there is no anti-discrimination law. Second, the public grant system in Japan is not flexible enough to cover all types of disability and all necessary accommodation. Third, there is generally "poor recognition of importance of job accommodation."

Even though overt discrimination may be decreasing in Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission "still have large backlogs" of unsettled complaints according to one respondent. "Attitudes are the biggest barrier cited by people with disabilities, that mainstream society still presumes that they are unable to work. The disability community also maintains that government programs and services are systematically exclusive and problematic." A great deal of effort, however, is directed at improving service delivery.

A respondent replied, "I'm afraid the barriers encountered in Belgium are quite the same as everywhere else...." There are "too many people with disabilities not qualified enough to face the needs of the market." There is "loss of willingness in the head of employers, [and] even if willing, not knowing how to accommodate."

In the U.S., the employment barriers for people with disabilities are consistent with barriers found throughout the international community. These barriers include lack of related experience, lack of required skills or training, lack of knowledge of accommodation, negative attitudes and stereotypes, and the costs of accommodations (Bruyere, 2000).

Discussion

The world community is moving in uneven progress toward more barrier-free design and more inclusive participation in the workforce by people with disabilities. For example, some countries such as Argentina, India, and Uzbekistan were reported to have no systematic job accommodation model or service, but others have more systematic approaches to accommodation in employment (e.g., Belgium, U.K., Japan, U.S.). Even the latter countries often struggle with complex legislation and multiple sources of information that are poorly coordinated. It is not a surprise that the most prevalent barriers were said to be negative attitudes and lack of needed resources. Countries beleaguered by crowding, health problems, and poverty are unlikely to find the financial, training, and organizational resources to facilitate jobs and job accommodations for the average person.

Some segments of society are coming to endorse a "duty to accommodate." The deductive, top-down approach seeks imposed hiring quotas, anti-discrimination legislation, and centralized accommodation information services. Others, however, are coming to recognize "human rights in the workplace." The inductive, bottom-up approach seeks a more informed populace, sensitive to the needs of others, driving a grass-roots movement for hiring and accommodation of qualified workers. When both ends of this spectrum converge, a powerful middle ground is created where people with disabilities are best trained, placed, and accommodated. The promise of this middle ground energizes a ripple effect. As the impact of appropriate accommodations for functional limitations is better measured and understood, the inevitable ripple effect broadens our perspective. The promise of this convergence (top-down with bottom-up) has not been realized fully. Our respondents often indicated that well-intentioned policies have not reached the street. Conversely, people with disabilities, advocates, charities, job centers, employers, and others who describe the needs have not always been heard by decision makers. When these perspectives are able to converge, exclusion from equal treatment decreases, and understanding of accommodation with dignity increases.

In 2001, the World Health Organization (WHO) published the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). By the day it was released, it had been accepted by 191 countries as the international standard to describe and measure health and disability. This level of acceptance indicates, at a minimum, the global need to address these problems. The ICF identifies targets for intervention and provides perspectives as to how given accommodation strategies can optimize a worker's ability to remain in the workforce. ICF serves as a catalyst for systemic change through proactive policy development and positive attitudinal change.

Strange as it seems now, 20 years ago there was no Americans with Disabilities Act, no Disability Discrimination Act, no Mexican Resolution, no Employment Promotion of the Disabled, no Policy and Guidelines on Disability and the Duty to Accommodate, no Code of Practice on Managing Disability in the Workplace, no accommodation websites, and no Job Accommodation Network. It is incredible that so much progress in workplace accommodation and human dignity in employment has been made in such a short span in the history of humankind. While it is true that our progress in this shrinking global neighborhood is not as fast or as pandemic as might be wished, (a) the Job Accommodation Network model, (b) the legislative mandates, and indeed (c) the deeper understanding, appreciation, and endorsement by a growing proportion of the world populace is heartening.

Authors Note

Appreciation is expressed to respondents Alida Becerra, Arthur Blacklock, Laura Fernandez, Luc Fohal, Nikolay Gladkiy, Phillip Gordon, Patricia Grant, Yahaya Grushie, Yuichiro Haruna, Sergio Gerardo Garcia Kabande, Brael Mkhatshwa, Nileshis, Errol Reid, Kate Storrow, and Pat Stuart. Thanks are given to Dianna Griffin for manuscript preparation.

References

Bordieri, J. E., & Comninel, M. E. (1987). Competitive employment for workers with disabilities: An international perspective. Journal of Rehabilitation, 53, 51-57.

Brodsky, M. (1990). Employment programs for disabled youth: An international view. Monthly Labor Review, 113, 50-52. Retreived from Wilson Web on March 8, 2002.

Bruyere, S. (2000). Disability employment policies and practices in private and federal sector organizations: Executive summary. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations Extension Division, Program on Employment and Disability.

Hollenbeck, K. (1986). The effects of TJTC on Disadvantaged Populations. Task 2 Final Report. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, National Center for Research in Vocational Education.

Internal Revenue Code. (1986). Expenditures to provide access to disabled individuals. Retrieved on March 12, 2002 from http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/.

Konig, A. (1996). Vocational training and employment for people with psychosocial disabilities: An international perspective. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 19, 79-84.

U.N. Division of Social Development. (n.d.) United Nations and Disabled Persons: The first 50 years. Retrieved on March 8, 2002 from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/dis50y20.htm.

United Nations. (n.d.). The UN and people with disabilities. Retrieved December 14, 2001, from http://www.un.org/esa/socd.

Richard T. Walls
D. J. Hendricks
Denetta L. Dowler
Anne E. Hirsh
Louis E. Orslene
Carmen L. Fullmer

West Virginia University

Richard T. Walls, Ph.D., International Center for Disability Information, College of Human Resources & Education, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506-6122. Email: [e-mail]