Perspectives - Text Only

Perspectives

Jim Jeffers - BMW, Human Resources

"I have been involved with Human Resources on a professional level for 18 years. On a personal level, I have been involved with Disability Rights for about the same period of time.

I concur with the disappointing employment rates for people with disabilities and have often attempted to draw conclusions as to why. In my mind there are two significant and powerful barriers: The first of these barriers is a fear within all of us which leads to a uniquely powerful prejudice against people with disabilities. What I mean by this is that any person can possess great prejudice for people of color yet have no fear that they will wake up the next morning as an African American. Conversely, any person can possess great prejudice towards people with disabilities and at the same time acutely realize that "but there for the grace of God go I. I recall hearing someone at a rally in Washington refer to these folks as "TAB's": Temporarily Able Bodied. In any event, this is a significant barrier unique to all of us in all our settings. As such, it is a barrier which carries over to the
workplace.

The second barrier at play is a direct workforce barrier. Unfortunately, the barrier is one of word association which I believe can be addressed over time by having people with disability advocates approach the workplace issue with different terms or at a minimum directly clarifying them. As an HR professional, few HR programs conjure up more Macho, Team Player, Company Man, Business Need disdain than the word: "Disability". To corporate america today, "Disability" does not refer to someone with unique mental or physical challenges who could easily and effectively contribute to an organization it represents a Problem. It represents the employee bathing in Miami on Company time while faking a disability.

"Disability" conjures up 20/20 television specials of the employee on disability loading lumber into a pickup truck. "Disability" conjures up business need bottlenecks which are created by being unable to replace the critical employee "milking the system" due to overly protective laws. Worse yet, the disability might actually be a Real. In which case this would have a profound impact on the bottom line, which will in turn raise the already skyrocketing medical benefit expenses and experience ratings. I have yet to meet a insurance representative who has not referenced a unique and expensive individual medical claim as the basis for a rate increase (the more expensive the case and the more serious the illness, the more compelling the pitch). Few of us can argue against expenses being utilized to keep a coworker alive.

In my mind, a major barrier to employing people with disabilities is the current view of management towards people taking disabilities. As a result and in the inappropriate mindset of many: Why hire a known "disability problem" when they have plenty of their own.

My recommendation as you pursue your noble goals is to aggressively and overtly disconnect perceptions of people taking disabilities from people with disabilities. In the minds of some, the first group "does not want to work" where as the second group is looking for the "opportunity to work". I truly believe this overt clarification would be huge. Secondly, I would champion the research which clarifies the nominal expense associated with reasonable accommodation. Finally, I would "overly communicate" any and all statistics comparing time off and medical costs between able bodied people and people with disabilities."