« Needed: Advice for Mandy | Main | Sidestepping Barriers to Connect With First-time Contacts »
June 03, 2008
Breaking Barriers, Both Legitimate and False
Just two months ago, David Paterson became governor of New York. His blindness became national news.
"The concentration that I have had to engage to make this adjustment sometimes feels overwhelming," Paterson told The Associated Press last Wednesday.
As a visually impaired person who doesn’t use braille or a screen reader, he suddenly found himself outside his comfort zone. He worried that he’d forget the names, the briefings, the facts and figures he had committed to memory.
"That was a little frightening, but I think I’ve gotten past that point," he said.
In his first extensive comments about his disability, Paterson, who took the job March 17, also speaks with pride about how his unlikely ascension has taught him to embrace his disability and may help others be more comfortable with theirs. He rose from the lieutenant governor’s office when Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned amid a prostitution scandal.
Another New York governor, fellow Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt, once hid his polio by using secret doors and hallways in the Capitol.
But Paterson is up front about being legally blind. Paterson said people with all kinds of disabilities -- those who have to turn to hear people talk or sit in a wheelchair when others are standing -- face daunting "ancillary disabilities."
"It’s how it makes you feel as a human being, and that’s the reason that a lot of people try to hide that," he said.
"I had been, on occasion, accused of trying to hide my own disability," the governor said.
"But now, to be able to be myself and have it known ... I think there are a lot of people who have a lot of different problems who feel more empowered."
He said, "If that’s the case, I’m feeling pretty good about that aspect of the job."
See the Associated Press interview with Gov. Paterson.
Paterson’s comments remind me of the four key points Michael T. Bailey, Portland, OR, made at the 30th anniversary celebration of Disability Rights Wisconsin, a protection and advocacy agency, in Madison Saturday night.
Bailey is a national leader in the parent and self-advocacy movements, civil rights attorney and author on empowerment, self-determination, self-advocacy and institution closure. He has a daughter, Jill, who has Down’s Syndrome.
Bailey pointed out that Jill has helped him become aware of four realities:
The first reality is that disability is a normal part of every-day life – and has been throughout history. About 14 percent of the U.S. population has some type of disability; that increases to 41 percent in people who are 65 years old and older.
The second reality is that American culture has tended to hide and shun those with disabilities. That tendency has gradually fallen by the wayside during the last 30 years. In 1978, Wisconsin had 30 “special” schools for kids with disabilities. I attended one of them. Now Wisconsin has two.
The third reality is that the abilities of individuals with disabilities are often underestimated by others -- even those close to them. Bailey accidently discovered recently that Jill could tie her shoes, a surprise for him because her teachers had set that as a goal year after year during grade school with no apparent success. Jill finally admitted to her Dad: “That was a dumb goal.”
And the fourth reality is that accommodations for those of us with disabilities are not unusual because we, as vulnerable human beings, all require some form of accommodation. At no small expense, for example, hotels routinely provide chairs, as an accommodation, for those who attend conferences without wheelchairs or scooters. Offices provide extensive lighting for those who can see, when it is not needed for those who are blind.
Both Paterson and Bailey are helping change perceptions in government and business. Over the years, our eSight members have echoed, within a disability employment context, what they are saying: Among decision makers, false perceptions, not prejudice, are our real barriers.
Shattering such false perceptions is achievable -- even though it may have to happen within one person (one hiring manager, one supervisor, one co-worker etc.) at a time.
That means determining whether a specific perception is legitimate or false and then addressing it in the most appropriate manner.
For example, consider Don, an owner of a small specialty foods distribution business, who says:
“I’m concerned about the imposition a worker with a disability would have on others in our office.
“How would our present employees treat that new worker with a disability? What extra work would they have to do to ‘cover’ for that new worker? Would that lead to resentment among our present employees?
“This truly could be a disadvantage for me as an employer. I want to do the right thing, but I don’t want to unnecessarily disrupt our work flow.”
How do you evaluate Don’s concern? What’s the best way to address it?
Add your comments to this posting
Posted by Jim Hasse at June 3, 2008 12:16 PM
Comments
"I'm concerned about the imposition a worker with a disability would have on others in our office.
"How would our present employees treat that new worker with a disability? What extra work would they have to do to ‘cover' for that new worker? Would that lead to resentment among our present employees? Great question and I am glad you asked. Your present employees would treat myself or any other person with a disability the way they treat people with disabilities which I hope would be with respect and dignity. People are people and there will be differences of opinion and treatment. The idea of "covering" for a person with a disability suggests a lack of understanding how people with disabilities work. I do not expect anyone to cover for my work since I would not expect to be hired for any job for which I could not perform the essential duties of the job with or without accomodation. "Covering" suggests that I am not capable, competent or quite up to the task. If there is something that I cannot do that is essential to the job I would expect the employer to realize that and not hire me. If resentment were to rear its ugly head that would be a function of lack of understanding or communication concerning the situation. If anyone ever has a question about my disability I would simply request that they ask what they want to know. If the staff feels that special favors have been granted, is not the hiring decision and job description at the discretion of senior management who needs to manage these situations. Companies hire abilities (not disabilities). If I am hired for my ability I would expect the same treatment that my peers receive. Will that sometimes be different, perhaps but I am wanting to work on a level field not a tilted field. Let's ask the question another way: if everyone in the company were blind and I was sighted how would I feel? If everyone were in a wheel chair except me how would I feel? We need to build a bridge of open communication across the chasm of separation that is often created by disability. Talk with me I can tell you my story. Talk with me and we can solve any problem that arises.
"This truly could be a disadvantage for me as an employer. I want to do the right thing, but I don't want to unnecessarily disrupt our work flow." Without educating yourself about the facts regarding the hiring of people with disabilities you will be at a disadvantage because you will probably choose to avoid hiring people with disabilities because you do not understand. Hiring me or any other person with a disability is not about doing the right thing but about hiring the most qualified talent for the position. You are hiring assets to maintain global competitiveness. I can be one of those assets if you will talk with me.
Posted by: barney mayse at June 4, 2008 05:00 PM
Don has a valid point, but unfortunately the write-up has too little information to determine how to handle the issue. If he's a construction foreman, then there are precious few jobs that he could hire some disabilities for, and plenty others for other disabilities. Office scenario? Same thing. Research facility? Same thing. Global business? Same thing.
The thing is, different disabilities have different capabilities where they can excel and different liabilities where they can become not only dangerous for themselves but also to any co-workers in the area.
Essentially, Don needs to know that there are some disabilities that won't necessarily disrupt his work flow, and to focus on those if he insists on hiring a disabled person "to do the right thing." However, Barney is right: go for the person most qualified that can work in that environment.
Posted by: Bill B. at June 11, 2008 11:38 AM
Hi Don. You're definitely doing the right thing by hiring someone with a disability, there's no doubt about that. One thing a lot of employers have questions about, as was pointed out in this entry, is how to handle accommodations. I'd honestly have to lay some of the blame for this on an attitude that is running rampant in society in general, but particularly within the blindness community. That is, one size fits all. This is certainly not the case. A person with good enough vision to make out large print on a computer screen, for example, would most probably need ZoomText, Magic or some other screen magnification program to effectively perform the duties assigned him or her. A person with no vision would need a screen reader on the job, and no two screen reader users are likely to use the same screen reader. Too often state VR agencies go for the cheapest solution, but that just might not be what the consumer requested. At a previous job I had requested JAWS because that was the screen reader with which I was most familiar at the time, but the VR agency gave me Window-Eyes instead. Try to have an open mind when making your final decision, because nobody is exactly the same. Jake
Posted by: Jake Joehl at June 18, 2008 01:05 PM