The Productive Pessimist

Disability inclusion is the art of planning for the future; when you create places and spaces that are inclusive by design, you accommodate the frailties and limitations that can come with ageing, you accommodate the way peoples' needs will change, outside of ageing, over time, as their circumstances and preferences change. Including disability from design, through build, and into completion saves resources, creates significant cost-efficiencies, and creates a consistency in development and provision which can both predict demand trends, and respond to emerging demands. Disability inclusive design isn't just about making entrances wheelchair accessible.   Disability inclusive design is about how a place is built, how space is laid out, how adaptable by individuals it is, how easily and to what degree things can be adjusted to suit individual needs and preferences. So much of the building of places and design of spaces is just an unthinking continuation of "the way we'v...

  The social model of disability  states that there is no "disability", in the sense of individual limitations, only "social barriers".  In its neutral form, this is simply an invitation to business and government to come together, and be guided by individuals affected by social barriers in how to create a better world. Unfortunately, very few things' neutralities survive their first exposure to human beings, and the social model of disability is no different; even in a "perfect" world, with maximal intersectional inclusion, there would still be people who had a negative experience, despite not behaving in anyway that "deserves" punishment or exclusion. (Although, in a truly maximally intersectionally inclusive world, it could be argued that no one  would "deserve" punishment or exclusion... It depends on whether there is any real possibility of educating and socialising out intolerance in others, which is very much the "elepha...

  One of the positive - if the government don't fumble it, and employers step in to provide the necessary 'assist' - elements of Labour's Welfare Reform announcements on March 18th was the "Right to Try", where claimants, including those on Limited Capacity for Work Related Activity, can engage with employment they feel they may  be able to manage alongside disabilities and health challenges, without  the risk of losing their welfare support, meaning that, if they can't  manage the workload, or an employer feels it is not safe for them to continue, they - in theory - wouldn't be required to start a new claim (which, for those currently on LCWRA, would see them receive substantially less  than their existing claim pays, obviously not a desirable outcome for anyone.) I've been around long enough, and had enough interaction with the UK's abysmal employment landscape, and encountered enough of the toxic, self-important, ableist attitudes of employe...

  I don't normally do personal deep dives on this blog, which is, after all, my professional presence as The Productive Pessimist Ltd. In the past - in jobs, when building connections and relationships, in social media discourse, and yes, in blog posts - I've apologised for "going into all of that"  or "going on about me".  In several jobs, I've been made  to apologise - and to feel ashamed - for mentioning personal challenges I was facing.  In my first office-based job, aged 21, on my first day, I was told, directly: "When you come to work, you leave all your personal shit at the front door of your own house. You're not you , here; you're the company, and the company doesn't have headaches, the company isn't tired, the company isn't worried about how it's going to pay its rent, the company doesn't have family members or friends who die, that it gets sad about. You're being paid to be the company for 10 hours a day, f...

This morning, LinkedIn was being very Monday, very LinkedIn, not very demure, not very mindful. A woman, whose profile suggested she works in recruitment, responded, quite aggressively, to a disabled man asking why companies were still  engaging in discrimination against disabled individuals with: "Because disability is a liability, it costs money, and businesses can't expect to run up their costs to an infinite degree whilst tiptoeing around every single need people could ever possibly have." This isn't an isolated thought.  It's not often said out loud in the UK - but it always has been elsewhere in the world, and it very much is being shouted from the rooftops of the USA. And it's not just recruiters and executive leadership; it's ordinary people, meaning that, even with the most inclusive, welcoming, accommodating leadership, disabled people will still be encountering hostile environments courtesy of the able-bodied people they have to work with  on th...

  What do you consider a reasonable commuting distance?  20miles? 30?  Maybe, for a hybrid role, up to a two-three hour drive away, depending on how many times you're expected to be in the office?  The Department for Work and Pensions expects jobseekers on Universal Credit to travel up to 90minutes, each way - yes, including  for minimum wage roles. Well, John Tuckett, the UK's new "Border Tsar" (or Immigration Services Co-ordinator, to give him his official title), considers a commute of 1,834miles, from his "family home" to the UK, to be completely reasonable, and believes it won't have any impact on his ability to effectively carry out his new role - which comes with a £140,000 a year salary. If you were driving, you'd be on the road for almost two days, with a 37hr drive time. Of course, John Tuckett is going to be flying to the UK to carry out his new job (carbon footprint, anyone..?); with a flight time of 2hrs 52mins, plus travel to and from...

  "It's not pie! More for other people doesn't mean less for you!" This was the howl of social media's self-declared #neurodivergence, #disability communities in the late twenty-teens and into the twenty-twenties. It sounded almost convincing, a worthy rallying call that everyone who wanted to be On The Right Side of History should immediately get behind. And if you dared  to hesitate to get behind the statement, if you so much as thought  that it maybe didn't sound quite  right - well, you were privileged , you were guilty of ableism , you just wanted disabled people to not exist!  If you were  disabled yourself, and had some reservations about the pie-ness of inclusion, then you were "everything that's wrong with the world!" But - as so often happens - those who were hesitant have been proved right.  It turns out that, as many disabled people with observable, high-impact impairments, who need  workplace accommodations - and, most importantly, w...