employment and disability

[davidc4430]

The struggle to get and keep employment when you have a disability

https://www.abc.net.au/life/struggle-to-get-and-keep-work-when-you-have-a-disability/11141692

[springyzone]

I suppose the key is to be able to find a job where the disabled person can still fulfill the normal conditions of work.

So if a person can physically only manage to work part time, they need to be able to find a job that is only part time etc

I think that's where a lot of the difficulty lies at times, finding a job that will fit in with their needs.

Then there is the hurdle of being considered for the job.

I don't think it is only disabled who get overlooked. I think probably the biggest area of discrimination at the moment is age.

Once you're over 50, it is much harder.

i have a friend who never puts her age on applications but she said employers can make a bit of a guess from your educational or work history and it's hard to even get an interview. She is 60

[martinw-48]

Ageism is rampant but the heart of the problem is the total control by the Job Network Members.
They will only put forward the candidate that gives them the greatest financial return.
If you are recently out of work.
They will get no funding for finding you a job.
Most jobs can only be applied for through a Job Network Member now,.
Not all but most.
No money for them means absolutely no action until you pass the waiting time for funding to start.
That's what privatization of the CES did.
It turned unemployment and the unemployed into commodities.
Now the outcomes are driven by financial returns.
Job Network Members are there for their own financial returns.
Not to assist the unemployed find work.
They also get paid to get the unemployed into work for the dole.
So it is a financial disincentive to find the unemployed work because that is only one payment.
Keep them out of work and doing work for the dole is a yearly payment

[not_for_sale2025]

I was once asked to chair a selection panel in replacement of a previous panel who failed an applicant who was blind. The reason given was that an open driver's licence was desirable (not mandatory). The blind applicant threatened to lodge a human rights complaint. As it turned out, the blind applicant did not get the position because she did not meet the selection criteria as well as the successful applicant. She was satisfied with this outcome as the decision was not based on her blindness.

Had she won the position the employer would have needed to provide for her disability in the form of taxi vouchers, escorts on occasions and making some modifications to the workplace environment etc. This was an EEO legislation obligation. While the employer never let on, I sensed she was relieved because of the cost savings and avoidance of inconveniences. Some employers just want a competent person to take on the job. This, in part, is what disabled people are confronted with and unfortunately need to sell themselves as excellent, must have applicants (who happen to have a disability).

[springyzone]

---

@not_for_sale2025 wrote:

I was once asked to chair a selection panel in replacement of a previous panel who failed an applicant who was blind. The reason given was that an open driver's licence was desirable (not mandatory). The blind applicant threatened to lodge a human rights complaint. As it turned out, the blind applicant did not get the position because she did not meet the selection criteria as well as the successful applicant. She was satisfied with this outcome as the decision was not based on her blindness.

Had she won the position the employer would have needed to provide for her disability in the form of taxi vouchers, escorts on occasions and making some modifications to the workplace environment etc. This was an EEO legislation obligation. While the employer never let on, I sensed she was relieved because of the cost savings and avoidance of inconveniences. Some employers just want a competent person to take on the job. This, in part, is what disabled people are confronted with and unfortunately need to sell themselves as excellent, must have applicants (who happen to have a disability).

---

Those sorts of conditions do the disabled person no favours.

 In most workplaces, it is a worker's own responsibility to get to work. No one subsidises their transport or costs for that.

It should be the same for the disabled.

If they apply for a job, they should have it in mind how they would get there and shouldn't expect taxis paid for by an employer.

If they are asked to go from their workplace to another place during work hours, as a one off, that's different.

[not_for_sale2025]

---

@springyzone wrote:

---

@not_for_sale2025 wrote:

Had she won the position the employer would have needed to provide for her disability in the form of taxi vouchers, escorts on occasions and making some modifications to the workplace environment etc. This was an EEO legislation obligation. While the employer never let on, I sensed she was relieved because of the cost savings and avoidance of inconveniences. 

---

Those sorts of conditions do the disabled person no favours.

 In most workplaces, it is a worker's own responsibility to get to work. No one subsidises their transport or costs for that.

It should be the same for the disabled.

If they apply for a job, they should have it in mind how they would get there and shouldn't expect taxis paid for by an employer.

If they are asked to go from their workplace to another place during work hours, as a one off, that's different.

---

The position the blind applicant applied for was a 24 hr MH support position in the community. She was a Psychologist. The taxi vouchers would have been issued so she could have visited the clients at their residence. Other members of the team would have driven a work car. So the vouchers would have been necessary for her to carry out her duties.

[lyndal1838]

I see that as the blind applicant just looking for a fight.

If a job requires the applicant to have a driver's licence then why would a blind person even think of applying?

It reminds me of an applicant for a job where I was working.....my job.  To get into the building there were 3 steep steps and once inside there were various levels in the showroom involving one or two steps.  And finally the job entailed going down very steep steps into the basement where the goods were packed.

This was back in the 1970s when very few buildings catered for wheelchairs....and certainly not the very old building where we were.

The wheelchair bound applicant was very annoyed when she was told she was not suitable.  Even if she had help to get into the building she could not move freely around the showroom and certainly could not go downstairs, even with help.....and the ladies toilet was down there.

[chameleon54]

There are various government and not for profit agencies that will help with the cost of specific requirements for people with disabilities who are entering a new job. The NDIS is also active in this role. ( although the NDIS system is a complete shemozzle ) This can be for one off technology or for ongoing costs. It pays to be pro-active and stay in the loop if a disabled person is actively seeking work.

[domino-710]

One would think in applying for any job - disabled or not - one would have to feel capable of/qualified enough - to do the job on offer.

[not_for_sale2025]

---

@lyndal1838 wrote:

I see that as the blind applicant just looking for a fight.

If a job requires the applicant to have a driver's licence then why would a blind person even think of applying?

---

The blind applicant was not looking for a fight. The requirement for a driver's licence was desirable, not mandatory. She applied because the position appealed to her and she believed she could perform well in the role. As it turned out, she was an excellent psychologist and excelled in another position.