{"id":2152,"date":"2015-11-14T17:06:31","date_gmt":"2015-11-14T17:06:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/?p=2152"},"modified":"2015-11-14T17:06:31","modified_gmt":"2015-11-14T17:06:31","slug":"25-years-after-ada-employment-still-lags","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/2015\/11\/14\/25-years-after-ada-employment-still-lags\/","title":{"rendered":"25 Years After ADA, Employment Still Lags"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em>By Micaela Connery<a href=\"#_ftn*\" name=\"_ftnref*\">*<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<p>Last week the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2015\/11\/02\/upshot\/fake-cover-letters-expose-discrimination-against-disabled.html?smid=tw-share&amp;_r=0\">New York Times<\/a> shared the findings of a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nber.org\/papers\/w21560\">disability employment<\/a> study by the National Bureau of Economic Research.\u00a0 While conclusions showed improvement since the 1990 passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the United States still has a long way to go in the realm of employment for people with disabilities.\u00a0 The study, following a similar format to research done on gender and race discrimination in employment, sent fake employment applications.\u00a0 A third of resumes disclosed that the applicant had Asperger\u2019s, a third disclosed a spinal cord injury, and a third had no disability disclosure.\u00a0 The results: candidates who disclosed having a disability received 26% fewer expressions of interest from employers than those who did not.<\/p>\n<p>The results aren\u2019t surprising when considered in the context of overall dismal employment statistics for those with disabilities. According to October 2015 <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dol.gov\/odep\/\">employment statistics<\/a>, only 19.4% people with disabilities participate in the labor force, compared to 68.4% of people without.\u00a0 The unemployment rate for those with disabilities who do participate in the labor force is 10.5%, more than twice the 4.6% unemployment rate for those without disabilities.\u00a0\u00a0 If people with disabilities are employed, they <a href=\"http:\/\/money.cnn.com\/2015\/07\/26\/news\/economy\/americans-with-disabilities-act-problems-remain\/\">earn $9,000 less<\/a> than workers without disabilities and are <a href=\"http:\/\/www.bls.gov\/news.release\/disabl.nr0.htm\">much less likely to hold management or professional<\/a> roles.<\/p>\n<p>How is this possible? Legislative efforts like the 1973 Rehabilitation Act, the 1986 Employment Opportunities for Disabled Americans Act, the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (and 2008 amendments) have all included provisions focused on equitable and meaningful employment of Americans with disabilities.\u00a0 Court cases have been successfully won on behalf of employees with disabilities. State agencies and nonprofit organizations target employment outcomes.\u00a0 People with disabilities are attaining diplomas and receiving specialized vocational training at higher rates than ever.\u00a0 Yet the numbers still paint a bleak picture. The following are some of the reasons for this dissonance.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Laws Support Keeping Jobs, Not Getting Them <\/strong>In <em>Disability Rights Law<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.law.umich.edu\/FacultyBio\/Pages\/FacultyBio.aspx?FacID=sambagen\">Samuel Bagenstos<\/a> argues that among the reasons for why the ADA and other legislative efforts have not strongly improved employment outcomes for people with disabilities is that most of the prohibitions on disability discrimination have been applied to \u201cincumbent\u201d employees, not \u201capplicants\u201d.\u00a0 During the application period, \u201cit is often difficult to determine with any certainty that discriminatory intent factored into an employer\u2019s decision to choose one applicant\u201d, Bagenstos concludes.\u00a0 To illustrate, many of the notable successful federal cases concerning disability employment have involved employees who risked losing their jobs or were dismissed from their jobs because of disability.\u00a0 Even federal programs supporting those with disabilities cite \u201cWork Incentives\u201d targeted to benefices so they are \u201cencouraged to return to work\u201d, without mention of supporting people who are trying to enter the work force.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Federal Funds Support Assistance, Not Employment <\/strong>A primary source of income for those with disabilities is Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability (SSDI).\u00a0 Federal costs have been increasing over time as more and more people with disabilities qualify to receive benefits.\u00a0 Since 1990\u2014interestingly, the same year that the ADA was passed\u2014the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ssa.gov\/policy\/docs\/chartbooks\/disability_trends\/sect01.html\">number of disabled workers receiving benefits has increased by 84 percent<\/a>.\u00a0 While one can debate about the reasons for this increase and the challenges of how to deal with the increasing number of recipients, the more important issue is the fact that there is much more federal and state funding for income assistance than for training, hiring, and employment supports for people with disabilities.\u00a0 Many people with disabilities would prefer to work than to rely on Social Security, but the current system supports the latter much more than the former.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Employers Practice Direct Discrimination <\/strong>Putting policies, statutes, and funding aside, the most disconcerting reality about disability employment, as highlighted by the NEBR study, is direct discrimination.\u00a0 The study purposely used two disabilities\u2014spinal cord injuries and Asperger\u2019s\u2014that are unlikely to impact work performance and are not linked with developmental or cognitive issues.\u00a0 But even with these relatively non-work related disabilities, discrimination was clear and present.\u00a0 Legal cases also point to employers who quite intentionally limit employment of people with disabilities.<\/p>\n<p>The day after the New York Times published the NBER employment findings, the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.bostonglobe.com\/metro\/2015\/11\/02\/boston-mayoral-aide-shares-struggle-with-adhd\/znlx2Pti7jMgAY0HKDyEDK\/story.html\">Boston Globe did a profile<\/a> on Daniel Koh, the Chief of Staff to Boston\u2019s Mayor Walsh.\u00a0 Demonstrating exceptional vulnerability and honesty, Koh shared his own struggles with ADHD.\u00a0 While ADHD is considered a \u201cdisorder\u201d and not a learning disability, the fact that this 30-year-old high-achiever only recently felt comfortable sharing his story says a lot about how our society looks at disability and difference.\u00a0 If someone who has had such a successful career and two degrees from Harvard was hesitant about sharing his challenges, one can only imagine how the millions of other Americans with disabilities must feel.\u00a0 The unfortunate reality is that too many people equate disability with inability.\u00a0 Many assume that people with disabilities are less capable of working, living, and operating like the rest of society. History has shown us that statutes and lawsuits alone will not solve the employment challenge for people with disabilities.\u00a0 More effort must be put into combating real discrimination, changing the mindsets of employers and recruiters, and supporting work-force entry.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref*\" name=\"_ftn*\"><em>*<\/em><\/a> Micaela Connery is a Master in Public Policy student at the Harvard Kennedy School focusing on disability and housing policy. She is the founder and former CEO of Unified Theater, a national organization fostering inclusion through the arts.\u00a0 She&#8217;s passionate about inclusion in decision making, policy design, and service delivery.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By Micaela Connery* Last week the New York Times shared the findings of a disability employment study by the National [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":2153,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[247,248,249],"class_list":["post-2152","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-blog","tag-ada","tag-disability-employment","tag-discrimination"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/89\/2015\/11\/file0001072667093-640x457.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/peZQka-yI","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2152","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2152"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2152\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2153"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2152"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2152"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/lpr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2152"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}