Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

"when Tektronic altered an assembly line supervisor's tasks to aid a mentally retarded man, all 12 workers' output rose and errors fell."

VII. A Uniform Federal Law Is Necessary to Protect Persons With Disabilities Who Are Qualified To Work From Discrimination

While 44 states have passed laws prohibiting employment discrimination against persons with disabilities, only twelve are comparable to the Rehabilitation Act in providing protections against discriminatory practices. This demonstrates how

34

unprotected persons with disabilities are from private employment discrimination. Persons with disabilities are now the only major group that, while recognized by Congress as face widespread discrimination in employment, still has no adequate federal protection. Until the ADA is passed, Americans with disabilities will continue to be kept out of the workforce because of

stereotypes and ignorance.

The state statutes provide for coverage of private employers, at least to the extent of Title VII. The majority do not limit coverage to moderate sized employers as in Title VII. Hence, restrictions on the right of private employers to exclude

disabled workers is not new to the ADA. However, the state laws

vary widely, and do not provide as much protection as the

34.

Handicap Discrimination Legislation: with Such. Inadequate Coverage at the Federal Level, Can State Legislation Re of Anx Help? 40 Arkansas Law Review, pp. 251, 320. (Five additional states prohibit state agencies and recipients of state funds from discriminating. (Only Delaware and Wyoming have passed no legislation at all.)

Rehabilitation Act once the primary hurdle of coverage is

overcome.

One major problem is the failure of many state statutes to cover mental disabilities. In addition, many state statutes have very restrictive definitions of "handicap." Many define handicap as a limitation on work. This type of definition gives rise to the anomalous result that a person whose disability was the cause of the adverse employment decision but does not affect the ability to work is not protected against employment

discrimination.

The same anomaly results when statutes cover only severe handicaps. Others list specific handicaps leaving all other subject to arbitrary employment practices. For example, New Hampshire excludes handicaps caused by illness and Arizona excludes handicaps that were first manifested after age 18. Many statutes require a presently disabling condition despite the fact the employers often use signs of a future disabling condition to disqualify an employee. It is estimated that between 150,000 and 1.2 million pre-employment lower back x-rays are given each year. Despite the fact that they have been totally discredited in the scientific literature, they are still widely used to screen out asymptomatic applicants.35 Hawaii actually limits coverage to impairments which will last a lifetime without substantial improvement. Hence, a person with cancer may be excluded just because he may get better.

[blocks in formation]

Over one-half of the states do impose a reasonable
However, several define the term

accommodation requirement.

restrictively. In Minnesota, a $50 cap is provided.

Many

restrict the requirement to employers of over a certain number. This makes no sense, when the accommodation may involve simple readjustments of work space (lowering a desk). With the undue burden protection of federal law, there is no reason to exempt employers or limit the type of accommodation which can be made. Finally, nearly one-half of the states do not require any reasonable accommodation despite extensive documentation that accommodations are most often not costly." Yet for many disabled people the willingness to accommodate can make the difference between fruitful employment and welfare.

36

Now is the time for Congress to make a national commitment to the equal employment opportunities of persons with disabilities. The federal law is too limited in coverage and state laws vary widely and are often too restrictive. The result is the sanctioning of widespread proven employer bias and the exclusion of millions of Americans from jcts that they can perform and deserve to hold.

36.

cupent study, supra, wall Street Journal, Nev. 22, 1983,

at 1 col. 4.

Chairman OWENS. Thank you. Let me begin by asking Mr. Rochlin, what has been the experience of employers in the implementation of Section 504, of the Rehabilitation Act? Has it proven workable or have there been insurmountable problems?

Mr. ROCHLIN. Mr. Chairman, I think Section 504 and Section 503 have both been workable; 504 pertaining to those employers that are recipients of Federal funds and 503 to those employers that are contractors of the Federal Government.

There has been enough experience under the Rehabilitation Act by employers covered by both of those sections, that we have seen that the provision of reasonable accommodation is not difficult, and that it can be done cost effectively in most cases, and solves a great many accommodations.

As I mentioned in my testimony, several studies including a recent evaluation of the accommodations that our Job Accommodation Network provides indicates that over half of accommodations provided for people with disabilities do not have any cost associated with them.

What we find more times than not is that people with disabilities are not looking for gold-plated widgets. They want to go to work and they are looking for the simplest accommodation possible. There are resources for employers. One of the best resources for employers is the individual with the disability themselves. Most often, they are not consulted when they usually hold the key to effectively providing an accommodation.

They know what they need. They are not looking for something expensive. They just want to go to work, and, if consulted, oftentimes, they will provide solutions.

I know of one corporation that some years ago in a good faith effort to make their headquarters building accessible decided to lower all of the water fountains at considerable cost, without consulting any of their employees who had disabilities, and while the work was in progress, one of their employees who used a wheelchair came along and said, "You know, you really didn't have to do this. If you would have put a cup dispenser next to each water fountain, it would have been satisfactory, because we could reach the cup and fill the cup and drink from the cup. It is just that we can't get our mouth to the spigot on the fountain."

So, there are sources and there are sources of technical assistance. I thought listening to Mr. Wharen- yes, Mr. Wharen's testimony about making the work site accessible on a construction site and what was involved with the bathroom facilities.

There are manufacturers of Port-a-Johns who manufacture accessible Port-a-Johns. They are available. I just, as a matter of fact, used a number of them on a trip to Alaska, manufactured by the same outfit that manufactured the standard Port-a-John and they are wheelchair-accessible.

So, that, I think, supports the provision in the Senate bill for technical assistance. I think that was an excellent amendment, and I think if adequate technical assistance is provided, some of the concerns, such as those raised by Mr. Wharen, could be satisfactorily and economically addressed.

Chairman OWENS. Technical assistance will be provided to the businesses?

Mr. ROCHLIN. That is correct.

Chairman OWENS. A unit which gives technical assistance to businesses, to what degree will that be useful? Do you care to comment, Mr. Rasmussen and Mr. Wharen?

Mr. WHAREN. It would certainly help. Anything would be-it just is beyond me to imagine. All the construction sites I have been on in 25 years, a large number could be made accessible, but then a large number can't, especially when we are building downtown, as I am sure you've seen a lot of the buildings being constructed around here.

Sometimes the trailers for the superintendents are above the catwalks on the sidewalk because it is the only available space. Where are you going to park?

You can have a lot of opportunities for handicapped people in the main office. Especially in our industry where a lot of people are getting injured, the experience these people have, it is a terrible thing to lose.

So, I think a lot of construction companies would be very receptive to making available office space, and it is very minimal cost because we build things, so it doesn't-the cost

Chairman OWENS. Have you had any unreasonable demands made on you? What kinds and how many people have applied for jobs in the construction industry, or your industry, who had disabilities? Because all disabilities are not physical ones?

Mr. WHAREN. Right. We-well, first, Dave, the person I talked about, we hired him in a wheelchair. He didn't get disabled in our company; he came to us from another company. We hired him for his knowledge to be used in awarding subcontracts and estimating projects.

We have on the project I am currently in charge of we have several other disabled people. We have a fellow missing a hand from a birth defect. Now, he is a very hard worker, but he is limited with only one hand as to what he can do, and we take that into consideration when we make assignments, but he can't do everything, but he can do a lot of work.

We have a mentally retarded gentleman that we use to install insulation, which is a simple task. He is a good worker, he stays at it all day. So we are very happy to have those types of people.

We are really concerned about what would happen-and the clause-you are not hiring somebody because of their association with somebody who is disabled. Gee whiz, how are you going to defend yourself against that?

The construction industry is really hurting for people to work, and we are always willing to hire able-bodied workers, but to go up 200 feet in the air-if somebody comes to you that can't walk well and you require him to be 200 feet above the ground, and you don't hire him because of that, what are they going to do, sue you?

You were really looking out for his welfare or her welfare, because we have a lot of women working on our site also.

Chairman OWENS. I think you are contemplating some extreme situations that won't necessarily happen.

Mr. Rasmussen, could you elaborate on the same question? What kinds of people have applied and what unreasonable demands have

« AnteriorContinuar »