A Comparison of the Implementation of the Employment Provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) in the United States and the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 in the United Kingdom

This summarizes the results of recently conducted surveys in the United States and Britain to assess employer response in each of these countries to their respective employment disability nondiscrimination legislation.

Questions & Answers About Persons with Intellectual Disabilities in the Workplace and the Americans with Disabilities Act

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. Title I of the ADA makes it unlawful for any employer to discriminate against a qualified applicant or employee because of a disability in any aspect of employment. The ADA covers employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments. Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act provides the same protections for federal government employees and applicants. In addition, most states have their own laws prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of disability. Some of these state laws may apply to smaller employers and provide protections in addition to those available under the ADA.

Mexican Workers in the United States Labour Market: A Contemporary Dilemma

"Ever since the present political boundary separating Mexico and the United States was established in 1848 by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and partially amended in 1853 by the Gadsden Purchase, there has been migration of Mexican citizens into the United States. In fact the border between the two nations was completely open until, with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, the Border Patrol was established and it became a felony to enter the United States illegally. No quota, however, was applied to immigration from Mexico until 1968. During that year legislation became effective which restricted total annual immigration from all Western Hemisphere nations to 120,000, with a maximum of 40,000 from any one country. Both these figures are regularly exceeded. In 1973, for instance, there were 173,123 legal immigrants from all Western Hemisphere nations, including 70,141 Mexicans. That the real flow exceeds the quotas is explained by the numerous exemptions allowed. With the exception of only three years since 1960, legal immigration from Mexico to the United States has exceeded that of every other nation in the world."

The Eligibility Definition Used in the Social Security Administration’s Disability Programs Needs to be Changed

In its October 2003 report on the definition of disability used by the Social Security Administration’s (SSA’s) disability programs [i.e., Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for people with disabilities], the Social Security Advisory Board raises the issue of whether this definition is at odds with the concept of disability embodied in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and, more importantly, with the aspirations of people with disabilities to be full participants in mainstream social activities and lead fulfilling, productive lives. The Board declares that “the Nation must face up to the contradictions created by the existing definition of disability.” I wholeheartedly agree. Further, I have concluded that we have to make fundamental, conceptual changes to both how we define eligibility for economic security benefits, and how we provide those benefits, if we are ever to fulfill the promise of the ADA. To convince you of that proposition, I will begin by relating a number of facts that paint a very bleak picture – a picture of deterioration in the economic security of the population that the disability programs are intended to serve; a picture of programs that purport to provide economic security, but are themselves financially insecure and subject to cycles of expansion and cuts that undermine their purpose; a picture of programs that are facing their biggest expenditure crisis ever; and a picture of an eligibility determination process that is inefficient and inequitable -- one that rations benefits by imposing high application costs on applicants in an arbitrary fashion. I will then argue that the fundamental reason for this bleak picture is the conceptual definition of eligibility that these programs use – one rooted in a disability paradigm that social scientists, people with disabilities, and, to a substantial extent, the public have rejected as being flawed, most emphatically through the passage of the ADA. Current law requires eligibility rules to be based on the premise that disability is medically determinable. That’s wrong because, as the ADA recognizes, a person’s environment matters. I will further argue that programs relying on this eligibility definition must inevitably: reward people if they do not try to help themselves, but not if they do; push the people they serve out of society’s mainstream, fostering a culture of isolation and dependency; relegate many to a lifetime of poverty; and undermine their promise of economic security because of the periodic “reforms” that are necessary to maintain taxpayer support. I conclude by pointing out that to change the conceptual definition for program eligibility, we also must change our whole approach to providing for the economic security of people with disabilities. We need to replace our current “caretaker” approach with one that emphasizes helping people with disabilities help themselves. I will briefly describe features that such a program might require, and point out the most significant challenges we would face in making the transition.

Universal Access-NY User’s Guide

What is Universal Access-NY? Universal Access-NY is a complete online planning toolkit, www.UniversalAccessNY.org, where a One-Stop Delivery System can assess its practices, and develop work plans to improve physical and programmatic accessibility for all One-Stop customers. This web site and manual was developed by Cornell University’s Employment and Disability Institute, through the support and guidance of the New York State Department of Labor, with funding from two U.S. Department of Labor Work Incentive Grants (WIG 1 and 2). This web site was designed for use in a collaborative manner, bringing together One-Stop personnel, agency partners, business leaders and customers with disabilities. Universal Access-NY supports continuous improvement, with features that encourage multiple uses and incremental systems change.

Discovering an Untapped Resource: Recruiting, Hiring, and Promoting People with Cognitive Disabilities.

Sections to the Paper include the following: America's Shrinking Labor Force, People with Cognitive Disabilities: an Untapped Labor Source, Focus, Initiative, Understand, Enhance.

Disability in a Technology-Driven Workplace

New Internet and Web-based technology applications have meant significant cost and time efficiencies to many American businesses. However, many employers have not yet fully grasped the impact of these new information and communication technologies on applicants and employees with certain disabilities such as vision impairments, hearing problems or limited dexterity. Although not all applicants and employees who have a disability may experience IT-access problems, to select groups it can pose a needless barrier. The increasing dominance of IT in the workplace presents both a challenge and an opportunity for workers with disabilities and their employers. It will be up to HR professionals to ensure that Web-based HR processes and workplace technologies are accessible to their employees with disabilities. .