Originally published here.
For many people with disabilities, finding and sustaining work is a challenge. Indeed, it has been estimated that in the United States (US), only one in three (34.9%) individuals with disabilities are employed compared to 76% of their counterparts without disabilities, and this disparity appears to be increasing over time (Houtenville & Ruiz, 2012;Kraus,2017;Lauer& Houtenville, 2017). Similar employment gaps have been observed in other industrialized countries. For instance, the employment rate among working-age Canadians living with a disability is 49%, while it is 79% for those without a disability (Turcotte, 2014), and in the European Union, these figures are 47.3 and 66.9%, respectively (Eurostat, 2017). While the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011) shows that employment rates vary across countries, Bthe bottom line is that, all over the world, a person with a disability is less likely to be employed than a person without a disability, often much less so^(Heymann, Stein, & de Elvira Moreno, 2014,p.4).Even when employed, workers with disabilities are more likely than their counterparts without disabilities to report underemployment, involuntary part-time or contingent employment, and lower than average salaries (Brault, 2012; Konrad, Moore, Ng, Doherty, & Breward, 2013; see also Baldridge, Beatty, Konrad, & Moore, 2016). Notwithstanding legislation specifically targeted at promoting and protecting the rights of people with disabilities (e.g., Americans with Disabilities Act [1990] of 1991), the employment participation of people with disabilities is still lagging when compared to their able-bodied, and comparably educated, counterparts (WHO, 2011;see also Colella & Bruyère, 2011;Kruse&Schur,2003).
A primary reason for the lower participation rates and underemployment of individuals with disabilities is that employers often harbor pessimistic views about the work-related abilities of these individuals. We note that these pessimistic views have been well-documented in the literature (e.g., Gold, Oire, Fabian, & Wewiorksi, 2012; Hernandez et al., 2008 For many people with disabilities, finding and sustaining work is a challenge. Indeed, it has been estimated that in the United States (US), only one in three (34.9%) individuals with disabilities are employed compared to 76% of their counterparts without disabilities, and this disparity appears to be increasing over time (Houtenville & Ruiz, 2012;Kraus,2017;Lauer& Houtenville, 2017). Similar employment gaps have been observed in other industrialized countries. For instance, the employment rate among working-age Canadians living with a disability is 49%, while it is 79% for those without a disability (Turcotte, 2014), and in the European Union, these figures are 47.3 and 66.9%, respectively (Eurostat, 2017). While the World Health Organization (WHO, 2011) shows that employment rates vary across countries, Bthe bottom line is that, all over the world, a person with a disability is less likely to be employed than a person without a disability, often much less so^(Heymann, Stein, & de Elvira Moreno, 2014,p.4).
Even when employed, workers with disabilities are more likely than their counterparts without disabilities to report underemployment, involuntary part-time or contingent employment, and lower than average salaries (Brault, 2012; Konrad, Moore, Ng, Doherty, & Breward, 2013; see also Baldridge, Beatty, Konrad, & Moore, 2016). Notwithstanding legislation specifically targeted at promoting and protecting the rights of people with disabilities (e.g., Americans with Disabilities Act [1990] of 1991), the employment participation of people with disabilities is still lagging when compared to their able-bodied, and comparably educated, counterparts (WHO, 2011;see also Colella & Bruyère, 2011;Kruse&Schur,2003).
A primary reason for the lower participation rates and underemployment of individuals with disabilities is that employers often harbor pessimistic views about the work-related abilities of these individuals. We note that these pessimistic views have been well-documented in the literature (e.g., Gold, Oire, Fabian, & Wewiorksi, 2012; Hernandez et al., 2008. For many people with disabilities, finding and sustaining workis a challenge. Indeed, it has been estimated that in the UnitedStates (US), only one in three (34.9%) individuals with dis-abilities are employed compared to 76% of their counterpartswithout disabilities, and this disparity appears to be increasingover time (Houtenville & Ruiz, 2012;Kraus,2017;Lauer&Houtenville, 2017). Similar employment gaps have been ob-served in other industrialized countries. For instance, the em-ployment rate among working-age Canadians living with adisability is 49%, while it is 79% for those without a disability(Turcotte, 2014), and in the European Union, these figures are47.3 and 66.9%, respectively (Eurostat, 2017). While theWorld Health Organization (WHO, 2011) shows that employ-ment rates vary across countries, Bthe bottom line is that, allover the world, a person with a disability is less likely to beemployed than a person without a disability, often much lessso^(Heymann, Stein, & de Elvira Moreno, 2014,p.4).
Even when employed, workers with disabilities are more likely thantheir counterparts without disabilities to report underemploy-ment, involuntary part-time or contingent employment, andlower than average salaries (Brault, 2012; Konrad, Moore,Ng, Doherty, & Breward, 2013; see also Baldridge, Beatty,Konrad, & Moore, 2016). Notwithstanding legislation specif-ically targeted at promoting and protecting the rights of peoplewith disabilities (e.g., Americans with Disabilities Act [1990]of 1991), the employment participation of people with disabil-ities is still lagging when compared to their able-bodied, andcomparably educated, counterparts (WHO, 2011;seealsoColella & Bruyère, 2011;Kruse&Schur,2003).
A primary reason for the lower participation rates and un-deremployment of individuals with disabilities is that em-ployers often harbor pessimistic views about the work-relatedabilities of these individuals. We note that these pessimisticviews have been well-documented in the literature (e.g., Gold,Oire, Fabian, & Wewiorksi, 2012; Hernandez et al., 2008; Kaye, Jans, & Jones, 2011; Lengnick-Hall, Gaunt, & Kulkarni,2008; see also white papers by Domzal, Houtenville, &Sharma, 2008; Gaunt & Lengnick-Hall, 2014). What is missingis an in-depth analysis of where in the employment relationshipemployers’pessimistic views appear, and whether these concerns are supported by empirical evidence.
In this article, we provide an organizing framework to un-derstand where employers’viewsarelikelytohavethegreatest implications for persons with disabilities. We do soby mapping employer concerns onto the management prac-tices associated with each stage of the employment cycle,which is described in the next section. For each employmentcycle stage, we summarize and evaluate the relevant empiricalevidence and provide recommendations for organizationscommitted to creating more effective, equitable, and inclusiveworkplaces for all.To locate source material for our analyses, we conductedcited reference searches of key empirical papers documentingemployers’pessimistic views (Kaye et al., 2011;Lengnick-Hall et al., 2008) and a classic review paper (Stone & Colella,1996) pertaining to workers with disabilities.
We alsoreviewed more recent handbook chapters and review articles(e.g., Baldridge et al., 2016; Colella & Bruyère, 2011;Santuzzi & Waltz, 2016) to locate relevant primary researchabout each concern. Finally, given that research on workerswith disabilities spans several fields, we used several data-bases: PsycINFO, Scopus, EBSCO, PubMed, and Medline,as well as Google Scholar, using keywords related to disabilitytopics (i.e., accommodation, disability, participation barrier)along with keywords related to each employment cycle stage,in turn, to locate additional primary research. We integratedthe current literature in human resources, management, andindustrial/organizational psychology with research in otherfields (e.g., rehabilitation sciences, public health).
The Employment CycleWe have organized managers’concerns about the suitabilityof people with disabilities by following the typical course ofthe employment relationship (e.g., recruitment, selection, so-cial integration, performance management). Figure 1illus-trates the employment cycle, along with the relevant concernsthat managers may have at each stage of the process. We assume that the employment relationship begins when bothparties first become aware of each other’s existence, reflectedin the goals of anticipatory socialization (from the prospectivemember’s perspective) and active recruitment (from the em-ployer’s perspective).
At this stage, the labor supply and theease of reaching appropriate applicant pools may be of con-cern. Indeed, managers may wonder whether people with dis-abilities are even available, and, if so, whether recruiting fromthis labor pool is complicated. Managers may further askwhether people with disabilities would be interested in theirjob openings. From a selection perspective, managers mayquestion whether applicants with disabilities would actuallyhave the right qualifications. Managers may also be concernedthat they would have to change their recruitment approach if they encounter an applicant witha disability.
Underlying mostHR processes, from encounter to separation, is the topic ofaccommodations, and we address this concern at the momentin which accommodations may first be discussed: during theselection stage. Once selected, the employee and employermove into the actual employment relationship, during whichsocial integration and performance management are key ele-ments. Here, managers may be unclear about the impact thenewly hired employee may have on existing employees. Furthermore, managers may express concerns about workerswith disabilities’performance and safety behaviors. If perfor-mance problems do occur, managers may be unsure as to howto address them, or, in the event that they persist, how toterminate the employment relationship.
Workers with disabilities form one of the largest diversitygroups in the workplace (Hyland & Rutigliano, 2013).Because of the high level of unemployment among peoplewith disabilities, many have argued that they are insufficientlyutilized as a labor pool and that employers will want to recruitfrom this pool to address the labor shortage caused by demo-graphic shifts as the baby boomers retire and are replaced byfewer new entrants to the workforce (Lengnick-Hall et al.,2008; Kruse et al., 2010; Schur et al., 2014; see also Fredeenet al., 2013).
Yet, despite advances in diversity and inclusion prac-tices in the workplace, the entry and progression ofpeople with disabilities in the workforce remain problematic. Indeed, Lengnick-Hall et al. (2008)argue that most employers hold stereotypical beliefs not supportedby research evidence^(p. 255). Because these widelyheld beliefs are often fueled by a lack of information,we provided evidence-based answers to 11 concerns thatmanagers express about employing people with disabil-ities.
Our analysis, based on empirical evidence, sup-ports inclusive employment practices that go beyondmere legal compliance. Indeed, the empirical literaturereviewed in this paper reveals that across the employ-ment cycle, workers with disabilities should not because for concern for employers. Rather, employerswould be wise to make use of this underutilized laborpool, given the return on investments afforded by inclu-sive organizational practices.In this paper, we have provided an overview of theconcerns expressed by managers about hiring workerswith disabilities, as well as used the current literature inmanagement, human resources, industrial/organizationalpsychology, rehabilitation sciences, and public health toexamine the validity of these concerns.
In future work, theconcerns along the employment cycle could be mirroredby focusing on the employees’perspective. For example,the concerns expressed by managers surrounding accom-modations are, from the perspective of employees withdisabilities, concerns of appropriate provision of support.Similarly, concerns about performance go hand-in-handwith provision of accurate and timely feedback from theemployees’point of view.
Managers’concerns of organi-zational integration can be experienced by employees as adisjunction between attitudes and behaviors.To be sure, some of the concerns expressed by managers,such as those surrounding organizational integration, may berelevant to other groups who are stigmatized in the workplace.Others, such as the concerns surrounding accommodationcosts, or safety behaviors, are not. We have kept our focuson disabilities, which has provided us with a greater opportu-nity for an in-depth analysis.
Thus, in addition to evidence-based responses to managers’concerns, we have also provid-ed managers with practical recommendations and additionalresources that they may find useful if they seek to supportworkers with disabilities throughout the employment cycle.Finally, we have provided suggestions for additional researchthat further addresses these concerns. Our intention was toprovide a starting point for a consideration of the experiencesof workers with disabilities; given the considerable potentialof this segment of the workforce, we should endeavor to le-verage their abilities.
You can read the complete article here.