Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Group_8_Powerpoint.ppt - Wikispaces


									      Group 8
Precarious Employment,
  Disability and Social
      Presentation Summary
Shivani – Course reading 2 (Precarious
Ryan – Course reading 2 and GWD
Saif – Course reading 1 (From flexibility to
Aditi – Article (Mechanisms of disability
Mike – Critical analysis (Universal Design)
Precarious Employment
   and People with
      Tompa et al.
 definingdisability
 government legislation for
 article
            Theorizing Disability
   Two Conceptual Frameworks:

   Nagi’s version: “Disability is an inability or
    limitation in performing socially defined roles and
    tasks expected of an individual within a
    sociocultural and physical environment.”
   Nagi and WHO’s version: “Disability is not taken
    as a characteristic of an individual but, rather, as
    a relational phenomenon that arises from the
    interaction of an individual and her or his
    personal characteristics within a particular social
 Policy and Legislation Context
 Historic labour market Disadvantage
  for the disabled.
 What are some of the costs and
  benefits to the society if the
  government assists these
     Inherentcivil right to participate in
      economic activities.
   Establishing equal opportunities for
   Introducing Canada Human Right in 1978.
   Employment Equity Act through which the
    federal government designs four main
    groups to be given equal rights:
        Aboriginal people
        Women
        Visible minorities
        Peple with disabilities
   Pay Equity: “Equal pay for work of equal
   Article: ‘Just because you can get a wheelchair in the
building doesn’t mean that you can still participate’: Barriers
    to the career advancement of disabled professionals.

 The   participation rate for disabled is
  still less compared to non-disabled.
 Leadership roles are not defined for
 ‘Glass Cliff’- explains different
  reasons for precariousness in
  leadership job roles.
 Reasons that lead to an increase in
 precariousness for the disabled in the
     Lack of   opportunity
     Lack of   knowledge
     Lack of   time and resources
     Lack of   organizational and peer support
Research on the
 Labour Market
           2 questions
1. What is the experience of people
   with disabilities?
2. How have these experiences
   changed with policy shifts and labor
            2 data sources
1.   Survey of Labour and Income
     Dynamics (SLID)
2.   Labour Market Activity survey
 Identifying people with disabilities
 “Doyou have any long term
 disabilities or handicaps?”
            General findings
           Prevalence of disability
 Labour Market Activity Survey – 13-
  14% have disabilities
 Survey of Labour and Income
  Dynamics – 17-18% have disabilities
          General findings
    Employment while being disabled
With disability 43-63%
Without disability 83-88%
Fig 4.1
            2 clusters
Cluster 1
Anyone aged 17 - 64

Cluster 2
Anyone aged 17 – 64 who are in the
   labour force
Cluster 1
 Business cycle
 Average annual income
 Household

Cluster 2
 Household income (relative to cluster 1)
 Non-standard work
 Working poor
         Part time work
    time work (15-21% vs. 11-
 Part
GWD (2005) Reasons for part time


 An important general trend…
 Gender   and intersectionality

Employment while being disabled
Men 48-71%
Women 35-57%
     Mechanisms of Disability
Discrimination In large Bureaucratic
   Ascriptive Inequalities in the

    Pamela M. Robert & Sharon L.
   Nature & Extent of Work
    Organizations responsibility.

   It looks at 2 Types of Mechanisms:
    – Interpersonal Mechanisms of
    – Organizational Mechanisms of
     Tolerance and Encouragement.
      Interpersonal Mechanisms of
   Marginalization :
    Being an “Outsider in the Workplace”.

   Fictionalization :
    Acquiring an Imputed Identity through
    Reflected Appraisals: “Incompetent;

   Harassment :
    Feeling the Sting of Hostility.
    Organizational Mechanisms of
    Tolerance and Encouragement.

   From Marginalization to Job

   The Impact of Fictionalization on
     Job Placement, Promotion and
     Reasonable Accommodation.

   Harassment and the Hostile Work
     From flexibility to
 accommodation? Disabled
people and the reinvention of
         paid work

          Wilton, R
From flexibility to accommodation?
Disabled people and the reinvention
           of paid work
 3 main objectives of the paper:

  examines the paid employment
 experiences of disabled people, with
 attention access to accommodation.

 Considers   how paid work constitutes a
 site for disciplining of disabled
 bodies/mind in contemporary society

 Connects    to the experience of disabled
Several ways to find out in which this organizational culture
has implications fro disabled people:

1.Workplace accommodation
2.Disabled bodies/mind depart from disabled norms (self-
3.Disabled vs non disabled workers (problem worker and
special treatment)

    A study on a Hamilton based non-profit employment service
for disabled people concerning these implications and were
organized under three broad categories

•Training and multi-tasking
•Speed of the labour process
•Emotional and aesthetic labour
•At base, each of these is concerned with the extent to
which workers are able to exercise control in the context of
the labour process/work environment.

•The analysis demonstrates that respondents’ frequent
lack of control made it difficult to obtain accommodation
at work.

•It also shows how a lack of accommodation inscribed the
bodies and minds of workers with impairments as
problematic and of limited value.
Towards socio-spatial inclusion? Disabled
people, neoliberalism and the
contemporary labour market.
This paper examines the implications of
 changes wrought by neoliberalism for
 disabled people where employment is the
 primary factor for social inclusion .
 The paper explores the extent to which
 these developments place disabled
 workers in a precarious position between
 an increasingly hostile welfare state and a
 labour market in which the ‘able-
 body/mind’ remains a largely
 unquestioned norm
The basic difference with the previous article is. It is
done from employer perspectives on hiring and
accommodating disabled people.

A study based in Hamilton was done (employers).
Principal area of interest in the analysis was respondents’
conceptualization of the ‘suitability’ of disabled workers in
the context of specific labour process/ workplace
configurations .

These judgements are a key determinant of the success
or failure of social inclusion programmes centred on paid
The analysis produced five themes

If you can’t, you can’t . . .

A level playing field



Meaningful accommodation
     Comparing the two articles:
 Role of Government policies
 Role of union and employer.
 The experience of disabled people in the
  labour force is shaped by the economic
  reforms of society as employment is a
  principal factor for social inclusion.
 Able mind/body is a dominant norm
  which hinders disabled peoples’
  employment opportunities.
 Both from employers’ and employees’
  perspectives the struggling experience
  and the precariousness of their
  workplace is eminent.
   Universal Design: an
interdisciplinary approach
        Universal Design: an
     interdisciplinary approach
 Vosco  describes disability as an
  imbalance between individual and his
  or her environment.
 Typically, disability is perceived as a
  problem with the individual rather
  than the environment.
 The stigma is that people with
  disabilities require special treatment
  and that his treatment is costly.
 But why?
 Accommodation is not as costly as it
  is perceived to be.

 Techniques for universal design in
 the workplace can benefit all, not
 only those who need it.
   Curb Cut

   Automatic Doors

   Improved software that is simple,
    intelligent legible.
             Getting started:
 Breaking  the misconception.
 VIDEO: Body Storming

 An example a design technique that
  can be used by employers to see the
  actual limitations of their employees.
 Suddenly, Accommodation doesn’t
  seem so daunting.

Vosko, Leah and Nancy Zukewich. 2006. “Precarious by Choice? Gender
     and Self Employment.” pp. 67-89 in Vosko, ed. Precarious
     Employment: Understanding Labour Market Insecurity in Canada.
     Montreal and Kingston:    McGill-Queens University Press.

Wilton, R; Schuer, S. (2006). “Towards socio-spatial inclusion? Disabled
     people neoliberalism and the contemporary labour market.” Area
     vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 186-195.

Wilton, R. (2004). “From flexibility to accommodation? Disabled people
     and the reinvention of paid work”. Transactions of the Institute of
     British Geographers, vol. 29, no. 4, , pp. 420-432.

Robert P. M. & Harlan S. L., (2006). Mechanisms of Disability
     Discriminations in Large Bureaucratic Organizations: Ascriptive
     Inequalities in the Workplace. The Sociological Quarterly 47, 599-
     630. Retrieved February 3, 2009 from Scholars Portal.
Wilson-Kovacs, Dana; Ryan, Michelle K.; Haslam, S. Alexander;
   Rabinovich, Anna (2008). "Just because You Can Get a Wheelchair
   inthe Building Doesn't Necessarily Mean that You Can Still
   Participate": Barriers to the Career Advancement of Disabled
   Professionals. Disability & Society, 23(7), 705-717.

To top