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 The functional division of urban activities (mainly work and residence) has led people to use urban space separately. The aim of this research is to observe how urban planning affects women in different ways. The patriarchal conception where men’s‘natural attributes’are to provide protection and be the source of the family’s economic income, i.e. productive activities, while the women’s role are the reproductive and care activities have a strong influence on how cities are shaped. This gender division has led to the idea that productive and reproductive roles are carried out in completely different, distant, and unrelated spaces, segregating women in the domestic sphere and excluding them from the public sphere (McDowell, 2000;Moser, 1989;Valcárcel, 2013).
Furthermore, both genders are confronted with the friction of distance and the principle of return in a greater or lesser degree. Individuals’experience is based on the limitation to carry out their daily activities within a radius of action from home, the selection of different services or destinations to satisfy people’s need and consequent patterns of displacement are traditionally determined by the availability of time, budget, and transportation mode. However, aspects such as age, income, primary activity and gender will have a level of influence on this (Ellegård & Vilhelmson, 2004;Næss, 2006).According to the evidence of colocation between housing and employment provided by Suárez Lastra and Delgado Campos (2007,p. 2010), distance has a more significant impact on the location of paid work. Although revealing, their research does not analyse the information by gender, which would reveal very different realities of employability for each household member. Salazar (1999,p. 132) makes it very clear that, in the specific case of women, the domestic organisation (whose immediate environment of activity is the house and the neighbourhood) must be added to the labour market, the urban structure, the location of residential areas, and the public transportation network, aspects faced by the population in general.
Also, Hanson and Pratt (1991,2003), Fanning Madden (1981), and Mojica Segovia (2014) pointed this out in their writings. This study comprises four variables associated with the reproductive work of working women living in the Monterrey Metropolitan Zone -MMZ- Main Map: marital status, number of children, age of the youngest child, and relationship to the head of house- hold. The particular interest is to relate them to the geographical location of women’s paid work and determine if there are differences in the distance and concentration of women between the female productive work-residence trajectories.
Stress is defined as a situation that poses a risk to one's health or is beyond one's capacity for adjustment. Stress may come from inside a person or it might come from the outer world. It is a necessary and unavoidable component as a result of rising living standards and competency [1]. An individual's routine, physical, mental, social, and spiritual well-being are all disrupted. Stress is a vital component of life and may have both good and bad effects [2]. In the present period, women are actively contributing to the social and economic development of the country [3].
Women now have more career options because to expanding urbanisation and industrialization, and they are entering the workforce in greater numbers. According to the 2011 census, India's female literacy rate has climbed to 65.46 percent, and the country's growing urbanization has resulted in higher rates of female labour engagement in the rural and urban sectors, respectively, of 26.1% and 13.8%, respectively [4]. In contrast to their colleagues, who do not have to be homemakers, the number of working women is rising daily.
Due to the challenges, they have in balancing job and home obligations, their multiple roles are stressing out their lives. According to a US poll, 60% of working women said that family issues are mostly brought on by work stress [5]. Since decades, women have been seen as being in charge of the bulk of home tasks including cooking, cleaning, raising children, caring for the elderly, etc., while men were primarily responsible for providing for their families.
These firmly defined gender roles, however, had to evolve as more and more women entered the labour and pursued jobs [6]. Unfortunately, as a result of what transpired, women today have more responsibilities than ever before, and they must manage the conflicting demands of their job and home responsibilities [7]. Around 64% of all family labour is performed by employed women, and as compared to married males, their involvement was especially significant when it comes to work done inside (78%) and childcare (67%). It is important to note that Kashmiri women, who live in a patriarcal culture, are also victims of this issue [8]. They have to balance conventional tasks with managing their careers. Thus, it is an additional responsibility for working women.
Some of the coping strategies employed women can exercise to deal with routine stressors of life are: 1. Stop being perfect as perfection is a myth, stay the way you are as a person. Stop being so hard to yourself, you can’t keep everyone happy. Let people accept you the way you are, else you will end up being drained and exhausted. 2. Don’t start fights, it is an irksome character. Stay calm, here to everyone and don’t look for faults in others. 3. Be respectful all the times, stay polite and value people around you. 4. Learn to let go, letting go is quality of a strong person. So for your peace of mind let go the things, situations and people that provoke negativity. 5. Learn to adjust, never sacrifice; because once you sacrifice something for someone it will become routine. Try your best to adjust as it is temporary and will help you in adapting. 6. Seek approval from within and from your husband only. Respect others but seeking approval from everyone is miserable. 7. The first step to tackle stress at home is teamwork with family members. Good teamwork requires the concept of helping each other. It begins with everyone doing an equal share or some share of work. 8. Good communication is integral for a sound family health. By talking to people around you and inviting to their sense of civility, you can get their help in doing some home chores and lessen your workload and stress. 9. Practice Religious rituals and Meditation as it can produce a deep state of peace and serene in mind and can benefit both emotional and mental well-being. 10. Perform deep Breathing exercises, yoga, jogging and brisk walks. 11. Have some entertainment and fun, you will feel less overwhelmed by the stressors you face. 12. Have Balanced diet, as it helps to counter the impact of stress by fortifying the immune system. 13. You are important, care for your own body. A bot bath, sound body massage and other form of pampering re-energizes you and improve your emotional well-being. 14. A vital way to balance work and family stress is sound time Management.
You can read the complete article here.