Gender as a differential indicator of the employment discrimination experiences of Americans with multiple sclerosis

Information from the Integrated Mission System of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was used to investigate the employment discrimination experiences of women and men with multiple sclerosis (MS). Spanning the years 1992 to 2003, the EEOC database included 3,663 allegations of discrimination filed by 2,167 adults with MS. With respect to women and men with MS, the researchers examined the comparability of a) demographic characteristics; b) industry designations, locations, and size of employers; c) the nature of discrimination alleged; and d) the legal outcome or resolution of those allegations. On average, women and men with MS were in their early forties, with the majority of both groups being Caucasian. Both women and men were most likely to allege discrimination related to discharge and reasonable accommodations, although women were more likely to file harassment charges than men. Men with MS were more likely to allege discrimination regarding hiring and reinstatement. Women with MS were more likely to file allegations against employers in the service industries, and men were more likely to file allegations against employers in the construction, manufacturing, and wholesale industries. No gender differences were found in the geographic distribution of allegations. Both groups had comparable rates of merit closures (23% vs. 27%) as a result of the EEOC's investigatory process. Implications for rehabilitation counseling and employer-oriented interventions are discussed.     

Workplace discrimination, deafness and hearing impairment: the national EEOC ADA research project

Data compiled by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), in its Integrated Mission System, provide documentation regarding the employment discrimination experience of Americans who are deaf or hard of hearing. This paper presents an analysis of 8,936 allegations filed by persons with hearing impairment and closed by EEOC between July 26, 1992 and September 30, 2003, as compared to 165,674 allegations filed by individuals with other physical or sensory disabilities. The investigators compare and contrast demographic characteristics of Charging Parties, characteristics of Respondents, the nature of allegations, and the outcomes of the allegations in order to illustrate how these variables differ between the two groups, herein referred to as HEARING (deaf, hard of hearing, or other hearing impairment) and GENDIS (general disability). Most allegations derived from both groups were filed against larger Respondents (those with 500+ workers). The most common allegation issues in the HEARING group involved matters of discharge, reasonable accommodation, and hiring. Outcomes derived from HEARING allegations were more likely to result in merit resolutions when compared to GENDIS, by a 25% to 21% margin.     

Multiple chemical sensitivity and workplace discrimination: the national EEOC ADA research project

Information from the Integrated Mission System of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was used to investigate the employment discrimination experiences of Americans with multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) in comparison to Americans in a general disability group with allergies, asthma, HIV, gastrointestinal impairment, cumulative trauma disorder and tuberculosis. Specifically, the researchers examined demographic characteristics of the charging parties; the industry designation, location, and size of employers against whom allegations were filed; the nature of discrimination (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the legal outcomes or resolutions of these allegations. Findings indicate that persons with MCS were, on average, older than the comparison group and comparatively overrepresented by Caucasians and women. People with MCS were proportionally more likely than the comparison group to allege discrimination related to reasonable accommodations. People with MCS were proportionally more likely than the comparison group to file allegations against employers in the manufacturing and public administration industries, employers with 201-500 workers, and employers in the Western Census region. People with MCS were proportionally more likely than the comparison group to receive non-merit resolutions as a result of the EEOC's Americans with Disabilities Act Title I investigatory process. Implications for policy and advocacy are addressed.     

Drivers of workplace discrimination against people with disabilities: the utility of Attribution Theory

The purpose of this paper was to determine what drives workplace discrimination against people with disabilities. These findings are then compared to available literature on attribution theory, which concerns itself with public perceptions of the controllability and stability of various impairments. The sample included 35,763 allegations of discriminations filed by people with disabilities under the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Group A included impairments deemed by Corrigan et al. [1988] to be uncontrollable but stable: visual impairment (representing 13% of the total allegations in this study), cancer (12%), cardiovascular disease (19%), and spinal cord injuries (5%). The controllable but unstable impairments in group B included depression (38%), schizophrenia (2%), alcohol and other drug abuse (4%), and HIV/AIDS (7%). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had resolved all allegations in terms of merit Resolutions (a positive finding of discrimination) and Resolutions without merit. Allegations of workplace discrimination were found to center mainly on hiring, discharge, harassment, and reasonable accommodation issues. Perceived workplace discrimination (as measured by allegations filed with EEOC) does occur at higher levels in Group B, especially when serious issues involving discharge and disability harassment are involved. With the glaring exception of HIV/AIDS, however, actual discrimination (as measured by EEOC merit Resolutions) occurs at higher levels for Group A.     

Workplace discrimination and HIV/AIDS: the national EEOC ADA research project

This article utilizes data from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Integrated Mission System database to document the levels of employment discrimination involving individuals with HIV/AIDS. The researchers explore the theory that the nature of HIV/AIDS related employment discrimination is rooted in deeper stigmatization than discrimination against other disability groups. Researchers compare and contrast key demographic characteristics of Charging Parties and Respondents involved in HIV/AIDS related allegations of discrimination and their proportion of EEOC merit resolutions to those of persons with other physical, sensory, and neurological impairments. Findings indicate that, in contrast to the general disability group, HIV/AIDS was more likely to be male, ethnic minorities, between the ages of 25-44, in white collar jobs, in the South and West and to work for businesses with 15 to 100 employees. Additionally, the allegations in HIV/AIDS were more likely to receive merit resolution from the EEOC by a large difference of ten percent.     

Workplace discrimination and disfigurement: the national EEOC ADA research project

Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with disfigurement is documented. Key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with disfigurement and persons with missing limbs are compared and contrasted. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of Charging Parties; the industry designation, location and size of Respondents/employers; the discrimination Issue (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the legal outcome or Resolution of these allegations. Charging Parties with disfigurement who are female or between 30 and 39 years of age are more likely to encounter employment discrimination than their counterparts with missing limbs. Harassment and Non-wage Benefits are the Issues that emerge in higher proportion. Allegations derived from persons with disfigurement are more common in among mid-size employers, those located in the South, or those in Retail or Service industries. Following investigation, allegations derived from persons with disfigurement are less likely to have Merit Resolutions than those brought by Charging Parties with missing limbs.     

Workplace discrimination and diabetes: the EEOC Americans with Disabilities Act research project

Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with diabetes is documented. Researchers compare and contrast the key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with diabetes and persons with other physical, sensory, and neurological impairments. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of the charging parties; the industry designation, location, and size of employers against whom complaints are filed; the nature of discrimination (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the legal outcome or resolution of these complaints. Findings indicate that persons with diabetes were more likely to encounter discrimination involving discharge, constructive discharge, discipline and suspension - all job retention issues. Persons with diabetes were less likely to encounter discrimination involving hiring, reasonable accommodation, non-pension benefits, and layoff. They were also more likely to encounter discrimination when they were older or from specific ethnic backgrounds, or when they worked for small employers or in the Southern United States. Implications for policy and advocacy are addressed.     

Workplace discrimination and missing limbs: the national EEOC ADA research project

Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with missing limbs is documented. Researchers compare and contrast the key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with missing limbs and persons with back and other non-paralytic orthopedic impairments. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of the charging parties; the industry designation, location, and size of employers against whom complaints are filed; the nature of discrimination (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the legal outcome or resolution of these complaints. Findings indicate that persons with missing limbs were more likely to encounter discrimination if they were male, under 20 or over 65 years of age, and White or Native American. They were also more likely to encounter more frequent discrimination when they worked for employers in the Southern United States, those with 200 or fewer employers, or whose industry designation involved manufacturing, construction, or transportation. Finally, the nature of job discrimination experienced by Americans with missing limbs is more likely to involve hiring, promotion, or job training than other issues. Implications for policy and advocacy are addressed.     

Workplace discrimination and traumatic brain injury: the national EEOC ADA research project

Using the Integrated Mission System of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the employment discrimination experience of Americans with traumatic brain injury is documented. Researchers compare and contrast the key dimensions of workplace discrimination involving Americans with traumatic brain injury and persons with other physical, sensory, and neurological impairments. Specifically, the researchers examine demographic characteristics of the charging parties; the industry designation, location, and size of employers against whom complaints are filed; the nature of discrimination (i.e., type of adverse action) alleged to occur; and the outcome or resolution of the investigations. Findings indicate that persons with traumatic brain injury were more likely to encounter discrimination after obtaining employment as opposed to during the hiring process. They were also more likely to encounter discrimination when they were younger or Caucasian or when employed in the Midwestern or Western United States. Implications are addressed.     

Impact of retirement type on income for people with disabilities

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of involuntary retirement on the economic security of persons with a disability. Very little research examines the economic consequences to forced retirement and no research focuses on persons with disabilities who have a higher rate of involuntary retirement than the general population. Analysing the 2006 Canadian Participation and Activity Limitation Survey, we find that persons with a disability who involuntarily retire have lower median personal and household incomes and they are more likely to be under the low-income cut-off point than those who retire voluntarily. When socio-demographic, socio-economic and geographical characteristics are controlled; those who retired involuntarily are more likely to be under the low-income cut-off point than those whose retirement was voluntary. Further, those who retired involuntarily are more likely to receive disability benefits whereas those who retired voluntarily are more likely to receive retirement income. The authors argue for employers and governments to implement accommodation in the workplace and flexible employment opportunities so that more persons with disabilities are able to continue in their employment for as long as possible.     

Patterns in perceived employment discrimination for adults with multiple sclerosis

Using multiple correspondence analysis, data from the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1992-2003) were examined for types and patterns of allegations of discrimination filed by adults with multiple sclerosis (MS) under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Women comprised the majority of the Charging Parties (n=687, 67%), and most of the Charging Parties were White (n=769, 76%). The total number of allegations studied (N=3,668) was divided into two datasets, specifically 1,142 occurring separately and 2,526 occurring as part of a multiple allegation set. The four most frequent allegations were related to discharge, reasonable accommodation, terms and conditions of employment, and harassment. Multiple correspondence analysis indicated that a 5 axis model was required to explain approximately 50% of the variance in allegation patterns, and no charging party or employer characteristics were related to the axes. Axis themes derived from perceived discrimination on the part of employers included threats to retention (2 axes), employer hostility, informal or formal employer actions, and barriers to career mobility. Results supported the need for rehabilitation counseling interventions to help adults with MS identify and address precipitants to discharge (involuntary termination) or constructive discharge (voluntary termination in response to an untenable work situation).     

The context of discrimination: workplace conditions, institutional environments, and sex and race discrimination charges

This article explores the organizational conditions under which discrimination charges occur. Drawing on structural and organizational theories of the workplace, the authors demonstrate how organizational conditions affect workers' and regulatory agents' understandings of unlawful discrimination. Using a national sample of work establishments, matched to discrimination-charge data obtained from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the authors examine how characteristics of the workplace and institutional environment affect variation in the incidence of workers' charges of sex and race discrimination and in the subset of discrimination claims that are verified by EEOC investigators. The findings indicate that workplace conditions, including size, composition, and minority management, affect workers' charges as well as verified claims; the latter are also affected by institutional factors, such as affirmative action requirements, subsidiary status, and industrial sector. These results suggest that internal workplace conditions affect both workers' and regulatory agents' interpretations of potentially discriminatory experiences, while institutional conditions matter only for regulatory agents' interpretations of those events.     

Workplace discrimination and cumulative trauma disorders: the national EEOC ADA research project

Employment discrimination of persons with cumulative trauma disorders (CTDs) was explored using the Integrated Mission System dataset of the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Demographic characteristics and merit resolutions of the Charging Parties (persons with CTD) were compared to individuals experiencing other physical, sensory and neurological impairments. Factors compared also included industry designation, geographic region, and size of Respondents against which allegations were filed. Persons with CTD had proportionately greater allegations among large Respondents (greater than 500 workers) engaged in manufacturing, utilities, transportation, finance insurance and real estate. The types of discrimination Issues that were proportionately greater in the CTD group included layoff, failure to reinstate, and failure to provide reasonable accommodation. The CTD group was significantly less likely than the comparison group to be involved in discrimination Issues such as assignment to less desirable duty, shift or work location; demotion; termination, or failure to hire or provide training. Persons with CTD had higher proportions of merit Resolutions where allegations were voluntarily withdrawn by the Charging Party with benefits.     

‘But I can do the job’: examining disability employment practice through human rights complaint cases

Natural data on the Australian Human Rights Commission’s website outlining the complaint cases generated from Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 (DDA) were used to examine the social construction of disability employment discrimination. Using a social model and human rights citizenship lens, some 987 complaint cases were analysed to assess the prevalence of disability discrimination in employment, and its relationship to the types of disability, gender, entity undertaking the actions and organisational context. Of all complaint cases across the Australian Human Rights Commission’s operations, by far the largest proportion involves disability discrimination. Within the disability discrimination complaint cases, employment makes up the greatest proportion of these cases. In examining the patterns of discrimination seven major themes emerged involving: distinctive patterns across disability type; access to premises; human resource mismanagement; selection of new employees; integration of assistive technology; perception of cost of disability inclusions; and inflexible organisational workplace practices. The discussion examines the underlying reasons for the emergent themes where employers misunderstood key legal concepts that underpin the DDA including: unjustifiable hardship; inherent requirements; reasonable adjustment; direct; and indirect discrimination. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of the findings as a way of understanding the social construction of disability discrimination in employment to signal ways to better develop inclusive organisational practice.     

The meaning of workplace discrimination for women with disabilities

Studies have found that persons with disabilities who are also members of other minority groups or women encounter dual discrimination. This paper describes how women with disabilities who are in the workplace experience discrimination. In order to determine whether discrimination was a viable issue, theoretical contexts of feminist theory, disability theory, and attribution theory were examined as well as literature examining employment of women with disabilities. For this study, three women with various disabilities were interviewed regarding the effect of their disability on their typical workday, their employment and job seeking history, and employment opportunities. Qualitative data were also provided through mapping by the participants and pictorial data of worksites. Data were grouped into themes of pre-conceived notions of others, attitudes of others, accommodation issues, inclusion issues and exploitation issues. From these themes definitions of discrimination, nondiscrimination in the workplace were developed. Conclusions include the need for more research on workplace experiences of other or more specific populations that experience discrimination as well as the need for ethical reflection on the part of the researcher regarding vulnerable populations.     

Putting technology to work: Users' perspective on integrating assistive technology into the workplace

This qualitative study examined the experiences of people with disabilities who use assistive technology in open employment. This study aims to describe and understand the factors the participants perceived as important in integrating technology into the workplace, as well as the barriers encountered in the process. Fifteen people with a range of acquired and congenital disabilities as well as their employers (8) or co-workers (4) were interviewed. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed. Nud*ist Version 4(R) was used for data management. Emergent themes related to the integration of assistive technology were software compatibility, Information Technology (IT) and product support, and the interaction between technology and the work environment. Participants also reported on the impact of technology on their performance and comfort at work, as well as dealing with people and processes in the workplace. By identifying the issues and support strategies for technology users in the workplace, appropriate measures can be implemented to ensure that the spirit of disability discrimination legislation is realized.     

Disabled persons’ job interview experiences: stories of discrimination,uncertainty and recognition

This paper explores disabled persons’ narrated experiences from job interviews. Based on interviews with employed disabled persons in the United States and Norway, the analysis investigates how the informants understand and deal with employers’ interpretations of disability. Three kinds of stories are identified: discrimination, uncertainty and recognition. In the first two stories, informants portrayed employers who used a non-inclusive discourse of disability. In the story of recognition, informants perceived employers to be primarily interested in their competence, and disability was dealt with in an inclusive manner. The comparison between American and Norwegian accounts reveals striking similarities in disabled persons’ narratives.     

Queering the Workplace

Despite many advances toward equity in society, gay, lesbian, and bisexual (GLB) individuals remain subjected to many stereotypes and experience negative consequences resulting from a dominant heterosexual environment, which includes significant obstacles that inhibit opportunities and participation in the workplace. As a start to addressing these issues, this conceptual article begins by providing an overview of the experiences of GLB people in the workplace, focusing on forms of discrimination, its impacts on GLB people, and coping mechanisms employed to mitigate stress. Though the literature supporting this endeavor is largely derived from the United States, an examination of extant literature suggests that experiences of GLB Canadians are similar. This paper concludes by encouraging employers to foster expansive learning environments as a means of promoting full participation for GLB individuals in the workplace.     

Perspectives on workplace disability management: a review of the literature

Work-related musculoskeletal injuries represent a major source of work disability. While many employers recognize the importance of workplace disability management approaches and are assuming greater responsibility for preventing and minimizing work-related disability, questions about the effectiveness of these interventions exist. The purposes of this article are to: 1) describe the essential components of workplace disability management programs related to musculoskeletal injuries; 2) review the literature on disability management practices based on research evidence by focussing on workplace-based interventions and the role of the workplace; and 3) provide recommendations for disability management in the prevention and reduction of disability, and the rehabilitation of injured workers with musculoskeletal work injuries. The literature suggests that employer participation, a supportive work climate and cooperation between labour and management are crucial factors in facilitating return to work. Given the complexity of the disability management process and the numbers of individuals involved, it is essential that all workplace parties work together to achieve the goal of safe and early return to work.