Today, I attended a webinar on "Capability and Ill-health in the Workplace". It was hosted by a corporate insurer who provides HR consultancy services.
Those attending were business leaders and HR representatives, and the Q&A at the end made it clear they believed they were only in a "room" with other leaders and HR reps.
Their attitudes around long-term ill health and disability were immediately presented as:
. This is an intolerable and ridiculous burden to us as employers
. This is too expensive
Those attending were business leaders and HR representatives, and the Q&A at the end made it clear they believed they were only in a "room" with other leaders and HR reps.
Their attitudes around long-term ill health and disability were immediately presented as:
. This is an intolerable and ridiculous burden to us as employers
. This is too expensive
. These people are taking the piss
. It's not going to be fair to able-bodied people who have to pick up their slack.
This is also the attitude I've personally, directly encountered as someone trying to work whilst also being disabled. It's the attitude that lost me my last job - a job I mostly enjoyed, and a role I'd hoped to build a career from.
Employers. HATE. Disabled. And. Chronically. Ill. Employees.
They do not want to employ disabled people.
The webinar host began her presentation immediately with "Ill-health and disability is not just a people issue, it's a business risk." That's how human beings are seen by those who get to decide whether we can afford to live or not... a "risk."
And what do businesses in the UK typically do about risk?
They avoid it at all costs. They will go out of their way to avoid risk.
And they see disabled and chronically ill people not just as a risk, but as a piss-taking risk. As a risk that means they'll have to be "unfair" to the able-bodied, healthy, low-risk people they actually want to hire.
There were some statements that contradict a lot of what the UK government, and employers, are telling people with disabilities and long term health conditions:
. Employees do NOT have to have a formal diagnosis to request and access reasonable adjustments.
. Smaller employers, and smaller teams, are not expected to provide the same level of accommodations and adjustments as larger companies
. Employers are supposed to be contacting and liaising with Access to Work, not expecting employees to make the running around that.
The webinar was a little triggering, particularly the Q&A, but it was both relevant and necessary for me to be there, and hear what employers, business leaders, and HR reps are thinking - and saying, when they think they're exclusively among friends. Especially at this point in the UK socio-political climate around welfare reforms, and the government's attitude to disabled people, as is being reflected in current policy, and mainstream media communication around the lives of disabled people.
Being front and centre of the current attitudes of employers makes it clear that welfare payments are compensation for systemic barriers and cultural attitudes towards disabled people that are still a very present reality in the UK.
Employers see disabled and chronically ill people as a risk, a burden, an imposition, and an inconvenience. Their demand is that "reasonable adjustments" do not cost anything, do not require any change from them, do not inconvenience any able-bodied employees, and, most importantly, literally erase the impact of someone's disability or health condition/s entirely, so they can "work like a normal person."
. It's not going to be fair to able-bodied people who have to pick up their slack.
This is also the attitude I've personally, directly encountered as someone trying to work whilst also being disabled. It's the attitude that lost me my last job - a job I mostly enjoyed, and a role I'd hoped to build a career from.
Employers. HATE. Disabled. And. Chronically. Ill. Employees.
They do not want to employ disabled people.
The webinar host began her presentation immediately with "Ill-health and disability is not just a people issue, it's a business risk." That's how human beings are seen by those who get to decide whether we can afford to live or not... a "risk."
And what do businesses in the UK typically do about risk?
They avoid it at all costs. They will go out of their way to avoid risk.
And they see disabled and chronically ill people not just as a risk, but as a piss-taking risk. As a risk that means they'll have to be "unfair" to the able-bodied, healthy, low-risk people they actually want to hire.
There were some statements that contradict a lot of what the UK government, and employers, are telling people with disabilities and long term health conditions:
. Employees do NOT have to have a formal diagnosis to request and access reasonable adjustments.
. Smaller employers, and smaller teams, are not expected to provide the same level of accommodations and adjustments as larger companies
. Employers are supposed to be contacting and liaising with Access to Work, not expecting employees to make the running around that.
The webinar was a little triggering, particularly the Q&A, but it was both relevant and necessary for me to be there, and hear what employers, business leaders, and HR reps are thinking - and saying, when they think they're exclusively among friends. Especially at this point in the UK socio-political climate around welfare reforms, and the government's attitude to disabled people, as is being reflected in current policy, and mainstream media communication around the lives of disabled people.
Being front and centre of the current attitudes of employers makes it clear that welfare payments are compensation for systemic barriers and cultural attitudes towards disabled people that are still a very present reality in the UK.
Employers see disabled and chronically ill people as a risk, a burden, an imposition, and an inconvenience. Their demand is that "reasonable adjustments" do not cost anything, do not require any change from them, do not inconvenience any able-bodied employees, and, most importantly, literally erase the impact of someone's disability or health condition/s entirely, so they can "work like a normal person."
I've directly been told by a manager that "the point of getting these accommodations in place is that you're able to work like a normal person" - no. The point of accommodations is to prevent a person's disability/ies and health condition/s being made worse by employment, and to lower the barriers that disability and chronic health issues create.
This webinar showed, very clearly, that disability welfare reform cannot happen until culture and attitude change has taken place in the leadership and HR levels of British business, and been given time to trickle down and circulate into the wider society.
It was also insightful from a personal perspective; since I began significantly losing my sight four years ago, my attitude has been
"It's just a pretty normal thing that happens to a lot of people, and I should just be able to do what everyone else does, with a few tweaks." I've found it very difficult to identify adjustments and accommodations I'd need, beyond the obvious things of a screen reader and a larger monitor screen.
Putting all of my health impacts into perspective, with the insights gained from the webinar, I am finally able to identify what I need to do the best work I can.
I am aware that I realistically need a salary of £37,000 per year to be able to support two disabled adults, as my wife has more, and higher-impact health issues and disabilities than me, and is genuinely unable to work in any traditional way, including having reliable emergency and retirement savings. That's a huge challenge in my area - an area I am unable to move away from, as I literally wouldn't even be able to afford hire a moving van at this point.
(And have no friends or family who could help for free.)
My major issue is obviously being blind.
The impacts of that are:
. I can't see video content very clearly
. I can't easily see screen shared content (eg, slide decks) - however, I'm fine if the decks are sent to me ahead of time.
. I can't easily engage with graphic-heavy content
. My reading time has slowed drastically - I get headaches and nausea relatively quickly when I'm reading, especially from screens.
. I struggle to navigate in crowded spaces, and I'm completely lost in unfamiliar layouts and new places. My ability to move around quickly has been compromised significantly, which really frustrates me.
. I get screen fatigue very quickly, which causes eye pain, significant visual disturbance, physical fatigue, and nausea.
. I can't easily read facial expressions
. I have very specific ranges of "light levels I can see in"
. I'm completely night blind
. I'm medically banned from driving
Beyond being blind, which is my highest impact issue, I also have:
. Psychiatric diagnosis, with the following impacts:
. Severe depression, and a complete inability to mask, meaning I often get accused of being "negative."
. Social anxiety, which makes it very difficult for me to communicate confidently verbally. (Which is going to run headlong into the impacts of being blind sooner or later.)
. Paranoia
. IBS, where the impacts are
. Stress-triggered diarrhoea
. Chronic gas and stomach pain
. Auditory Processing Disorder (which is a fun co-occurring alongside being blind)
. It takes a little longer for me to process verbal communication
. I get overwhelmed in environments with a lot of background noise, though I've recently started using noise-cancelling headphones, which are helping a lot.
. I need to know about a phone call (or remote call) at least 24hrs in advance, so that I can prepare, and ensure I'm in a quiet, distraction-free environment to take the call, with a means to take notes during the call, as I don't process verbal information naturally, which can make it challenging to actually remember the conversation if I don't have notes. (That's less a disability impact, and more an "everyone thing.")
Attending this webinar brought up an immediate issue:
Smaller companies and teams do not have to provide the same level of accommodations as larger corporations.
Unfortunately, I work best in smaller teams, and for smaller, less formal companies.
Also, in the area I live (from which I'm not in a position to afford to move at the moment) the majority of employers are smaller, independent businesses.
That's the case pretty much across my entire region, especially for places I can get to on public transport.
The most relevant, single accommodation I need would be working fully remotely, because, working from home, I can pretty much cover all of my other access accommodation needs. (I'd also need an IT department that doesn't freak out about the idea of internet downloads, or allowed me to use my own computer, as that would mean I wouldn't even need to have a screenreader like JAWS provided, as there are some great downloadable options that can support native text-to-speech tools which are built in to most proprietary systems.)
Unfortunately, there is an aggressive reaction against remote working in generally, and full remote working in particular, in the UK worksphere at the moment, with companies which are supportive of remote working practices typically being in the tech and creative sectors; I can't afford to get qualifications that would give me access to the tech sector at the moment. Truthfully, it's never been a particular interest of mine, but a job doesn't have to be interesting and engaging - that's what the life you're able to fund with your income is for, in my perspective.
I should start researching tech roles, and the qualifications and experience I would need for them, to see if there are realistic possibilities (that won't be overtaken by AI.)
I would struggle significantly with the demands of roles in the creative sector, because my sight loss makes it difficult to work with graphic elements and video, and has even started to compromise my ability to effectively edit text, which is something I've always been really good at. The written element of the creative sector has also already been more or less taken over by AI, and I suspect that will be the case with the graphic and video elements. I also have no graphic design skills or background.
It may be the case that I'll need to get some kind of qualification in AI to be able to even get in front of hirers in accessible sectors. Which I'd prefer not to do, because I'm not a fan of general purpose AI, on environmental sustainability and "human beings actually remaining baseline functional" grounds.
In all honesty, the most immediately accessible option career wise would be management, which I'm already qualified in (L7 Leadership and Management, CMI), especially in roles with significant strategic responsibility, but those are limited, especially roles which are fully remote; however, these are the roles I'm prioritising applying for.
Personal Next Steps:
. Research the roles & requirements in the tech sector
. Research whether AI, my moral objections notwithstanding, might make the creative sector more accessible (basically, I can't afford moral principles at the moment, and the militantly anti-AI howlalongs on social media aren't offering to pay my bills...)
. Try and find some kind of "foot in the door" for management roles, prioritising remote opportunities.
. Research what the few larger employers in my area are offering, and what would be needed to have a decent chance of being hired by them (my personal "performs better in smaller organisations" more or less has to be dropped, because...I can't afford to follow the paths that are a more natural/better fit for me.)
The government's priority schedule for true disability reform looks like:
. Direct, no-bullsh*t frank talking with business leaders and HR execs around their genuine perception of disabled people, disabilities, and chronic health conditions, and a re-education of entrenched negative attitudes, deconstruction of harmful stereotypes, and showcasing of how simple, immediate, low-cost, and wider-benefit accessibility adjustments can be for the whole team.
. Priming the trickle-down for societal attitude change by identifying and recruiting a diverse range of disabled people, for the full spectrum of roles across all aspects across society, from the pool of currently unemployed disabled people, who feel they would or may be able to work, and putting resources behind promoting disabled entrepreneurs without social or financial capital to promote their skills and businesses.
. Learning, from people with direct, lived experience of high-and-ultra-high impact disabilities and chronic health conditions which mean they are unable to work, either in any capacity, or in "traditional" employment, what their challenges, needs, ambitions and barriers are.
. Dismantling the barriers that have been identified by disabled people and by employers as far as possible.
. Replacing "health element Universal Credit", "PIP", etc with simply disbersing the full annual allowance available through Access to Work directly to disabled people, without complex application processes, assessments, or means testing, with additional support of higher-ticket aids and treatments available by application and means-testing where these are required, and their cost is above the annual allowance of Access to Work.
. I can't easily read facial expressions
. I have very specific ranges of "light levels I can see in"
. I'm completely night blind
. I'm medically banned from driving
Beyond being blind, which is my highest impact issue, I also have:
. Psychiatric diagnosis, with the following impacts:
. Severe depression, and a complete inability to mask, meaning I often get accused of being "negative."
. Social anxiety, which makes it very difficult for me to communicate confidently verbally. (Which is going to run headlong into the impacts of being blind sooner or later.)
. Paranoia
. IBS, where the impacts are
. Stress-triggered diarrhoea
. Chronic gas and stomach pain
. Auditory Processing Disorder (which is a fun co-occurring alongside being blind)
. It takes a little longer for me to process verbal communication
. I get overwhelmed in environments with a lot of background noise, though I've recently started using noise-cancelling headphones, which are helping a lot.
. I need to know about a phone call (or remote call) at least 24hrs in advance, so that I can prepare, and ensure I'm in a quiet, distraction-free environment to take the call, with a means to take notes during the call, as I don't process verbal information naturally, which can make it challenging to actually remember the conversation if I don't have notes. (That's less a disability impact, and more an "everyone thing.")
Attending this webinar brought up an immediate issue:
Smaller companies and teams do not have to provide the same level of accommodations as larger corporations.
Unfortunately, I work best in smaller teams, and for smaller, less formal companies.
Also, in the area I live (from which I'm not in a position to afford to move at the moment) the majority of employers are smaller, independent businesses.
That's the case pretty much across my entire region, especially for places I can get to on public transport.
The most relevant, single accommodation I need would be working fully remotely, because, working from home, I can pretty much cover all of my other access accommodation needs. (I'd also need an IT department that doesn't freak out about the idea of internet downloads, or allowed me to use my own computer, as that would mean I wouldn't even need to have a screenreader like JAWS provided, as there are some great downloadable options that can support native text-to-speech tools which are built in to most proprietary systems.)
Unfortunately, there is an aggressive reaction against remote working in generally, and full remote working in particular, in the UK worksphere at the moment, with companies which are supportive of remote working practices typically being in the tech and creative sectors; I can't afford to get qualifications that would give me access to the tech sector at the moment. Truthfully, it's never been a particular interest of mine, but a job doesn't have to be interesting and engaging - that's what the life you're able to fund with your income is for, in my perspective.
I should start researching tech roles, and the qualifications and experience I would need for them, to see if there are realistic possibilities (that won't be overtaken by AI.)
I would struggle significantly with the demands of roles in the creative sector, because my sight loss makes it difficult to work with graphic elements and video, and has even started to compromise my ability to effectively edit text, which is something I've always been really good at. The written element of the creative sector has also already been more or less taken over by AI, and I suspect that will be the case with the graphic and video elements. I also have no graphic design skills or background.
It may be the case that I'll need to get some kind of qualification in AI to be able to even get in front of hirers in accessible sectors. Which I'd prefer not to do, because I'm not a fan of general purpose AI, on environmental sustainability and "human beings actually remaining baseline functional" grounds.
In all honesty, the most immediately accessible option career wise would be management, which I'm already qualified in (L7 Leadership and Management, CMI), especially in roles with significant strategic responsibility, but those are limited, especially roles which are fully remote; however, these are the roles I'm prioritising applying for.
Personal Next Steps:
. Research the roles & requirements in the tech sector
. Research whether AI, my moral objections notwithstanding, might make the creative sector more accessible (basically, I can't afford moral principles at the moment, and the militantly anti-AI howlalongs on social media aren't offering to pay my bills...)
. Try and find some kind of "foot in the door" for management roles, prioritising remote opportunities.
. Research what the few larger employers in my area are offering, and what would be needed to have a decent chance of being hired by them (my personal "performs better in smaller organisations" more or less has to be dropped, because...I can't afford to follow the paths that are a more natural/better fit for me.)
The government's priority schedule for true disability reform looks like:
. Direct, no-bullsh*t frank talking with business leaders and HR execs around their genuine perception of disabled people, disabilities, and chronic health conditions, and a re-education of entrenched negative attitudes, deconstruction of harmful stereotypes, and showcasing of how simple, immediate, low-cost, and wider-benefit accessibility adjustments can be for the whole team.
. Priming the trickle-down for societal attitude change by identifying and recruiting a diverse range of disabled people, for the full spectrum of roles across all aspects across society, from the pool of currently unemployed disabled people, who feel they would or may be able to work, and putting resources behind promoting disabled entrepreneurs without social or financial capital to promote their skills and businesses.
. Learning, from people with direct, lived experience of high-and-ultra-high impact disabilities and chronic health conditions which mean they are unable to work, either in any capacity, or in "traditional" employment, what their challenges, needs, ambitions and barriers are.
. Dismantling the barriers that have been identified by disabled people and by employers as far as possible.
. Replacing "health element Universal Credit", "PIP", etc with simply disbersing the full annual allowance available through Access to Work directly to disabled people, without complex application processes, assessments, or means testing, with additional support of higher-ticket aids and treatments available by application and means-testing where these are required, and their cost is above the annual allowance of Access to Work.
Comments
Post a Comment