Rate this article:
Average rating:
Total votes: 1
Not so long ago -- the beginning of the '90s -- employers routinely discriminated against workers and job seekers with physical or mental handicaps. Accommodations enabling those men and women to perform their jobs were rare.
Today it is illegal to fire or not hire people with disabilities who are able to perform essential job functions, thanks to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which President George H.W. Bush signed into law in 1990. Reasonable accommodations, including flexible work schedules, adjustable workstations and speakerphones, are so common that employees without disabilities often use them.
But like any innovative legislation, the ADA has led to unforeseen consequences -- not all positive. Where are we now?
After the ADA
"If you have a job and become disabled, you now get to keep it," says Cyndi Jones, director of the Center for an Accessible Society. "In the beginning, the ADA was seen as being aimed only at people who were born disabled. But anyone can become disabled or injured, and employers now look at how to retrain workers, rather than letting them go on disability. That's good for everyone."
On the other hand, job seekers have not benefited from the ADA as much as some expected they would. "Some companies are afraid that once they're hired, disabled people may ask for too many accommodations," Jones says. "So prescreening has become more rigorous." While that's illegal, she adds, "how can someone prove he didn't get a job just because he's disabled?"
Andrew Houtenville, a senior research associate at Cornell University specializing in the ADA, calls the act "very important civil rights legislation." He says no hard data connects the ADA with employment but notes, "The evidence suggests it has improved job retention among people with disabilities. And there's other evidence that suggests accommodations help minimize the pace at which people go on disability and leave the workplace."
Houtenville says that one big economic surprise has been the low cost of compliance. "Many people thought the definition of 'reasonable accommodations' would be an expensive issue. But it became apparent pretty quickly that most accommodations are easy to do -- a different desk, adaptive software -- and cheap." The typical one-time cost of an accommodation is just $500, he adds.
Jones says the most expensive accommodations for workers with disabilities are in place. "Most places now have handicap bathrooms and ramps. The hardware is there. And the other stuff, like large-print formats on computers, we don't even think about. But the ADA helped drive technology companies to offer accessibility too."
Now vs. Then
Marca Bristo, former chairwoman of the National Council on Disability, says the ADA's public-accommodations portion has forced architects to make workplaces more open. "Corporate offices are now much more inclusive," she says. However, "mom-and-pop businesses have been slow to fulfill the requirements."
While changes are not costly, Bristo says they won't happen in smaller workplaces unless workers with disabilities demand them. At the same time, she says, "there is a backlash when disabled people attempt to enforce their rights. Business owners say, 'This will put us out of business.'"
Overall, Bristo says, business has not yet fully embraced the ADA. "We'll never know the number of people who don't get jobs because of fears of what employers think compliance will cost or because they worry that employees won't be able to get to work on time."
In fact, the ADA has had an unintended positive effect on the transportation industry, says Bristo. In Chicago, for example, the municipal bus fleet now has 100 percent wheelchair-lift capability. "That means disabled people can get to work," she says.
Houtenville says many people expected the definition of an accommodation to be the big issue. "But a bigger question has become who is covered. That's been the majority of cases the Supreme Court hears."
On many levels, the judicial system has played an active role in interpreting the ADA. Bristo eyes the growing conservatism of America's courts and worries future legal challenges may be resolved unfavorably for job seekers and employees with disabilities. Most recent employment cases have been decided in favor of employers, she says, adding, "Discrimination is still hard to prove."
