The traditional approach to helping disabled people into work has had little success, and it is evident that something fundamental needs to be changed. For example, the official unemployment rates for disabled people are always at least twice that of their non-disabled peers—often higher. The numbers of disabled people not working often approach 70% (in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada). Disabled people are more likely than their non-disabled peers to live in poverty; for example, in the United Kingdom two-thirds of the 6.2 million disabled citizens have only state benefits as income.

These problems are compounded by the fact that rehabilitation services are often unable to meet employer demand for qualified applicants.

In many countries, disability is not generally defined as an equal opportunities or rights issue. It is thus difficult to encourage corporate best practice which positions disability firmly alongside race and gender as an equal opportunities or diversity priority. Proliferation of quotas or the complete absence of relevant legislation reinforces employer assumptions that disability is primarily a medical or charity issue.

Evidence of the frustrations created by inadequacies inherent in the present system can be seen in growing pressure from disabled people themselves for legislation based on civil rights and/or employment rights, such as exists in the United States, Australia, and, from 1996, in the United Kingdom. It was the failure of the rehabilitation system to meet the needs and expectations of enlightened employers which prompted the UK business community to establish the Employers Forum on Disability.

Employers’ attitudes unfortunately reflect those of the wider society—although this fact is often overlooked by rehabilitation practitioners. Employers share with many others widespread confusion regarding such issues as:

• What is a disability? Who is and who is not disabled?

• Where do I get advice and services to help me recruit and retain disabled people?

• How do I change my organization’s culture and working practices?

• What benefit will best practice on disability bring my business—and the economy in general?

The failure to meet the information and service needs of the employer community constitutes a major hurdle for disabled people wanting work, yet it is rarely addressed adequately by government policy makers or rehabilitation practitioners.

Deep-Rooted Myths that Disadvantage Disabled People in the Labour Market

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs), governments, indeed all those involved in the medical and employment rehabilitation of persons with disabilities, tend to share a set of deep-rooted, often unspoken assumptions which only further disadvantage the disabled individuals these organizations seek to help:

• “The employer is the problem—indeed, often the adversary.” It is employer attitudes which are often blamed for the failure of disabled people to find jobs, despite the evidence that numerous other factors may well have been highly significant.

• “The employer is not treated either as a client or a customer.” Rehabilitation services do not measure their success by the extent to which they make it easier for the employer to recruit and retain disabled employees. As a result, the unreasonable difficulties created by suppliers of rehabilitation services make it difficult for the well-intentioned and enlightened employer to justify the time, cost and effort required to effect change. The not-so-enlightened employer has his or her reluctance to effect change more than justified by the lack of cooperation from rehabilitation services..

• “Disabled people really cannot compete on merit.” Many service providers have low expectations of disabled people and their potential to work. They find it difficult to promote the “business case” to employers because they themselves doubt that employing people with disability brings genuine mutual benefit. Instead the tone and underlying ethos of their communication with employers stresses the moral and perhaps (occasional) legal obligation in a way which only further stigmatizes disabled people.

• “Disability is not a mainstream economic or business issue. It is best left in the hands of the experts, doctors, rehabilitation providers and charities.” The fact that disability is portrayed in the media and through fund-raising activities as a charity issue, and that disabled people are portrayed as the natural and passive recipients of charity, is a fundamental barrier to the employment of disabled people. It also creates tension in organizations that are trying to find jobs for people, while on the other hand using images which tug at the heartstrings.

The consequence of these assumptions is that:

• Employers and disabled people remain separated by a maze of well-meaning but often uncoordinated and fragmented services which only rarely define success in terms of employer satisfaction.

• Employers and disabled people alike remain excluded from real influence over policy development; only rarely is either party asked to evaluate services from its own perspective and to propose improvements.

We are beginning to see an international trend, typified by the development of “job coach” services, towards acknowledging that successful rehabilitation of disabled people depends upon the quality of service and support available to the employer.

The statement “Better services for employers equals better services for disabled people” must surely come to be much more widely accepted as economic pressures build on rehabilitation agencies everywhere in the light of governments’ retrenchment and restructuring. It is nonetheless very revealing that a recent report by Helios (1994), which summarizes the competencies required by vocational or rehabilitation specialists, fail to make any reference to the need for skills which relate to the employers as customer.

While there is a growing awareness of the need to work with employers as partners, our experience shows that it is difficult to develop and sustain a partnership until the rehabilitation practitioners first meet the needs of the employer as customer and begin to value that “employer as customer” relationship.

Employers’ Roles

At various times and in various situations the system and services position the employer in one or more of the following roles—though only rarely is it articulated. Thus we have the employer as:

• the Problem—“you require enlightenment”

• the Target—“you need education, information, or consciousness raising”

• the Customer—“the employer is encouraged to use us in order to recruit and retain disabled employees”

• the Partner—the employer is encouraged to “enter into a long term, mutually beneficial relationship”.

And at any time during the relationship the employer may be called upon—indeed is typically called upon—to be a funder or philanthropist.

The key to successful practice lies in approaching the employer as “The Customer”. Systems which regard the employer as only “The Problem”, or “The Target”, find themselves in a self-perpetuating dysfunctional cycle.

Factors outside the Employer’s Control

Reliance on perceived employer negative attitudes as the key insight into why disabled people experience high unemployment rates, consistently reinforces the failure to address other highly significant issues which must also be tackled before real change can be brought about.

For example:

• In the United Kingdom, in a recent survey 80% of employers were not aware they had ever had a disabled applicant.

• Benefits and social welfare systems often create financial disincentives for disabled people moving into work.

• Transport and housing systems are notoriously inaccessible; people can look for work successfully only when basic housing, transport and subsistence needs have been met.

• In a recent UK survey, 59% of disabled job seekers were unskilled compared to 23% of their peers. Disabled people, in general, are simply not able to compete in the labour market unless their skill levels are competitive.

• Medical professionals frequently underestimate the extent to which a disabled person can perform in work and are often unable to advise on adaptations and adjustments which might make that person employable.

• Disabled people often find it difficult to obtain high quality career guidance and throughout their lives are subject to the lower expectations of teachers and advisers.

• Quotas and other inappropriate legislation actively undermine the message that disability is an equal opportunities issue.

A legislative system that creates an adversarial or litigious environment can further undermine the job prospects of disabled people because bringing a disabled person into the company could expose the employer to risk.

Rehabilitation practitioners often find it difficult to access expert training and accreditation and are themselves rarely funded to deliver relevant services and products to employers.

Policy Implications

It is vital for service providers to understand that before the employer can effect organizational and cultural change, similar changes are required on the part of the rehabilitation provider. Providers approaching employers as customers need to recognize that actively listening to the employers will almost inevitably trigger the need to change the design and delivery of services.

For example, service providers will find themselves asked to make it easier for the employer to:

• find qualified applicants

• obtain high quality employer-oriented services and advice

• meet disabled people as applicants and colleagues

• understand not just the need for policy change but how to make such change come about

• promote attitude change across their organizations

• understand the business as well as the social case for employing disabled people

Attempts at significant social policy reforms related to disability are undermined by the failure to take into account the needs, expectations and legitimate requirements of the people who will largely determine success—that is, the employers. Thus, for example, the move to ensure that people currently in sheltered workshops obtain mainstream work frequently fails to acknowledge that it is only employers who are able to offer that employment. Success therefore is limited, not only because it is unnecessarily difficult for the employers to make opportunities available but also because of the missed added value resulting from active collaboration between employers and policy makers.

Potential for Employer Involvement

Employers can be encouraged to contribute in numerous ways to making a systematic shift from sheltered employment to supported or competitive employment. Employers can:

• advise on policy—that is, on what needs to be done which would make it easier for employers to offer work to disabled candidates.

• offer advice on the competencies required by disabled individ-uals if they are to be successful in obtaining work.

• advise on the competencies required by service providers if they are to meet employer expectations of quality provision.

• evaluate sheltered workshops and offer practical advice on how to manage a service that is most likely to enable people to move into mainstream work.

• offer work experience to rehabilitation practitioners, who thus gain an understanding of a particular industry or sector and are better able to prepare their disabled clients.

• offer on-the-job assessments and training to disabled individuals.

• offer mock interviews and be mentors to disabled job seekers.

• loan their own staff to work inside the system and/or its institutions.

• help to market rehabilitation agencies and promote policies, organizations and disabled job seekers to other employers.

• offer customized training whereby they become directly involved  in  helping  disabled  individuals  to  acquire  specific job-related skills.

• participate on management boards of rehabilitation agencies or set themselves up in an informal advisory capacity to national policy makers or suppliers.

• lobby alongside rehabilitation providers and disabled people for better government policies and programmes.

• advise on the services and products they require in order to deliver best practice.

Employer as Customer

It is impossible for rehabilitation practitioners to build partnerships with employers without first acknowledging the need to deliver efficient services.

Services should emphasize the theme of mutual benefit. Those who do not passionately believe that their disabled clients have something of real benefit to contribute to the employer are unlikely to be able to influence the employer community.

Improving the quality of service to employers will quickly—and inevitably—improve services for disabled job-seekers. The following represents a useful audit for services wishing to improve the quality of service to the employer.

Does the service offer employers:

1. information and consultancy regarding:

• business benefits which result from employing disabled persons

• possible applicants

• access to the services and the nature of services offered

• models of policy and procedures proven successful by other employers

• legal obligations

2. recruitment services, including access to:

• suitable applicants

• job coaches

3. pre-screening of applicants as per employer expectations

4. professional job analysis and job modification services, able to advise on job restructuring and the use of technical aids and adaptations in the workplace, both for existing and potential employees

5. financial support programmes which are well marketed, appropriate to employer requirements, easy to access, efficiently delivered

6. information and practical help so that employers can make the worksite more physically accessible

7. training for employers and employees regarding the benefits of employing people with disabilities generally, and when specific individuals have been employed

8. work-experience services which provide the employer with relevant support

9. work habituation or employee-orientation services to include job coaches and job-sharing schemes

10. post–job offer support for employers to include advice on best practice in the management of absenteeism and presentation of work-related impairments

11. advice for employers on career development of disabled employees and on meeting the needs of underemployed disabled employees.

Practical Steps: Making it Easier for the Employer

Any system of services which aims to help disabled people into training and work will inevitably be more successful if the needs and expectations of the employer are adequately addressed. (Note: It is difficult to find a term which adequately encompasses all those agencies and organizations—governmental, NGOs, not for profit—which are involved in policy making and service delivery to disabled people seeking work. For the sake of brevity, the term service or service provider is used to encompass all those involved in this entire complex system.)

Close consultation over time with employers will in all likelihood produce recommendations similar to the following.

Codes of practice are needed which describe the high quality of service employers should receive from employment-related agencies. Such codes should, in consultation with employers, set standards which relate both to the efficiency of the existing services and to the nature of services offered—This code should be monitored via regular surveys of employer satisfaction.

Specific training and accreditation for rehabilitation practition-ers in how to meet the needs of employers is required and should be a high priority.

Services should recruit people who have direct experience of the world of industry and commerce and who are skilled in bridging the communication gap between the not-for-profit and profit-making sectors.

Services themselves should employ significantly more disabled people, thus minimizing the numbers of non-disabled intermediaries dealing with employers. They should ensure that disabled people in various capacities have a high profile in the employer community.

Services should minimize the fragmentation of education, marketing and campaigning activities. It is particularly counterproductive to create a milieu characterized by messages, posters and advertising which reinforces the medical model of disability and the stigma attached to particular impairments, rather than focusing on the employability of individuals and the need for employers to respond with appropriate policy and practice.

Services should collaborate to simplify access, to services and support, for both the employer and for the disabled person. Considerable attention should be given to analysing the client journey (with both employer and disabled person as client) in a way that minimizes assessments and moves the individual speedily, step by step, into employment. Services should build on mainstream business initiatives to ensure that disabled people are given priority.

Services should bring employers together routinely and ask their expert advice regarding what has to be done to make services and job candidates more successful.

Conclusion

In many countries, the services designed to help disabled people into work are complex, cumbersome and resistant to change, despite the evidence decade after decade that change is required.

A fresh approach to employers offers enormous potential to transform this situation significantly by radically altering the position of one key protagonist—the employer.

We see business and government engaged in a wide-ranging debate regarding the way in which relationships between stakeholders or social partners must inevitably change over the next 20 years. Thus employers launch the European Business against Social Exclusion Initiative in Europe, major companies join together to re-think their relationship with society in the UK in “Tomorrow’s Company”, and the Employers Forum on Disability becomes only one of various UK employer initiatives aimed at addressing issues of equality and diversity.

Employers have much to do if the issue of disability is to take its rightful place as a business and ethical imperative; the rehabilitation community in turn needs to take a fresh approach which redefines working relationships between all stakeholders in a way that makes it easier for employers to make equal opportunities a reality.

Back

Historically, people with disabilities have had tremendous barriers to entering the workforce, and those who became injured and disabled on the job have often faced job loss and its negative psychological, social and financial ramifications. Today, people with disabilities are still underrepresented in the workforce, even in countries with the most progressive civil rights and employment promotion legislation, and in spite of international efforts to address their situation.

Awareness has increased of the rights and needs of workers with disabilities and the concept of managing disability in the workplace. Workers’ compensation and social insurance programmes that protect income are common in industrialized countries. The increased costs related to operating such programmes have provided an economic basis for promoting the employment of people with disabilities and the rehabilitation of injured workers. At the same time, people with disabilities have become organized to demand their rights and integration into all aspects of community life, including the workforce.

Labour unions in many countries have been among those who have supported such efforts. Enlightened companies are recognizing the need to treat workers with disabilities equitably and are learning the importance of maintaining a healthy workplace. The concept of managing disability or dealing with disability issues in the workplace has emerged. Organized labour has been partly responsible for this emergence and continues to play an active role.

According to ILO Recommendation No. 168 concerning the vocational rehabilitation and employment of disabled persons, “workers’ organizations should adopt a policy for the promotion of training and suitable employment of disabled persons on an equal footing with other workers”. The recommendation further suggests that workers’ organizations become involved in formulating national policies, cooperate with rehabilitation specialists and organizations, and foster the integration and vocational rehabilitation of disabled workers.

The purpose of this article is to explore the issue of disability in the workplace from the perspective of the rights and duties of workers and to describe the specific role that labour unions play in facilitating the on-the-job integration of people with disabilities.

In a healthy work environment, both the employer and the worker care about the quality of work, health and safety, and the fair treatment of all workers. Workers are hired on the basis of their abilities. Both workers and employers contribute to maintaining health and safety and, when an injury or disability does occur, they have the rights and duties to minimize the impact of the disability on the individual and the workplace. Although workers and employers may have different perspectives, by working in partnership they can effectively achieve goals related to maintaining a healthy, safe and fair workplace.

The term rights is often associated with legal rights determined by legislation. Many European countries, Japan and others have enacted quota systems requiring that a certain percentage of employees be persons with disabilities. Fines may be levied on employers who fail to meet the prescribed quota. In the United States, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in work and community life. Health and safety laws exist in most countries to protect workers from unsafe working conditions and practices. Workers’ compensation and social insurance programmes have been legislated to provide a variety of medical, social, and, in some instances, vocational rehabilitation services. Specific workers’ rights may also become part of negotiated labour agreements and therefore legally mandated.

A worker’s legal rights (and duties) related to disability and work will depend on the complexity of this legislative mix, which varies from country to country. For purposes of this article, workers’ rights are simply those legal or moral entitlements considered to be in the workers’ interest as they relate to productive activity in a safe and non-discriminating work environment. Duties refer to those obligations that workers have to themselves, other workers and their employers to contribute effectively to the productivity and safety of the workplace.

This article organizes worker rights and duties within the context of four key disability issues: (1) recruitment and hiring; (2) health, safety and the prevention of disability; (3) what happens when a worker becomes disabled, including rehabilitation and the return to work after injury; and (4) the total integration of the worker into the workplace and the community. Labour union activities related to these issues include: organizing and advocating for the rights of workers with disabilities through national legislation and other vehicles; ensuring and protecting rights by including them in negotiated labour agreements; educating union members and employers on disability issues and rights and responsibilities related to disability management; collaborating with management to further the rights and duties related to disability management; providing services to workers with disabilities to assist them in becoming integrated or more integrated into the workforce; and, when all else fails, engaging in resolving or litigating disputes, or fighting for legislative changes to protect rights.

Issue 1: Recruitment, Hiring and Employment Practices

While the legal obligations of labour unions may relate specifically to their members, unions traditionally helped to improve the working lives of all workers, including those with disabilities. This is a tradition that is as old as the labour movement itself. However, fair and equitable practices related to recruitment, hiring and employment practices take on special significance when the worker has a disability. Because of negative stereotypes as well as architectural, communication and other barriers related to disability, disabled job seekers and workers are often denied their rights or face discriminatory practices.

The following basic lists of rights (figure 1 to 4), although simply stated, have profound implications for equal access to employment opportunities by disabled workers. Disabled workers also have certain duties, as do all workers, to present themselves, including their interests, abilities, skills and workplace requirements, in an open and forthright manner.

Figure 1. Rights and duties: recruitment, hiring and employment practices

In the hiring process, applicants should be judged on their abilities and qualifications (figure 1). They need to have a full understanding of the job to evaluate their interest and ability to do the job. Further, once hired, all workers should be judged and evaluated according to their job performance, without bias based on factors not related to the job. They should have equal access to employment benefits and opportunities for advancement. When necessary, reasonable accommodations should be made so that an individual with a disability can perform the requisite job tasks. Job accommodations can be as                                                                                                                     simple as raising a workstation, making a chair available or                                                                                                                             adding a foot pedal.

In the United States, the Americans with Disabilities Act not only prohibits discrimination against qualified workers (a qualified worker is one who has the qualifications and abilities to perform the essential functions of the job) based on disability, but also requires that employers make reasonable accommodation—that is, the employer provides a piece of equipment, changes non-essential job functions or makes some other adjustment that does not cause the employer undue hardship, so that the person with a disability can perform the essential functions of the job. This approach is designed to protect workers’ rights and make it “safe” to request accommodations. According to the US experience, most accommodations are relatively low in cost (less than US$50).

Rights and duties go hand in hand. Workers have a responsibility to notify their employer of a condition that may affect their ability to do the job, or that may affect their safety or that of others. Workers have a duty to represent themselves and their abilities in an honest manner. They should request a reasonable accommodation, if necessary, and accept that which is most appropriate for the situation, cost-effective and least intrusive to the workplace while still meeting their needs.

ILO Convention No. 159 concerning the vocational rehabilitation and employment of disabled persons, and Recommendation No. 168 address these very rights and duties and their implications for workers’ organizations. Convention No.159 suggests that special positive measures may sometimes be necessary to ensure “effective equality of opportunity and treatment between disabled workers and other workers”. It adds that such measures “shall not be regarded as discriminating against other workers”. Recommendation No. 168 encourages the implementation of specific measures to create job opportunities, such as providing financial support to employers to make reasonable accommodations, and encourages labour organizations to promote such measures and provide advice about making such accommodations.

What labour unions can do

Union leaders typically have deep roots within the communities in which they operate and can be valuable allies in promoting the recruitment, hiring and continued employment of persons with disabilities. One of the first things they can do is to develop a policy statement on the employment rights of people with disabilities. Education of members and a plan of action to support the policy should follow. Labour unions can advocate rights for workers with disabilities on a broad scale by promoting, monitoring and supporting relevant legislative initiatives. In the workplace they should encourage management to develop policies and actions that remove barriers to employment for disabled workers. They can assist in developing appropriate job accommodations and, through negotiated labour agreements, protect and further the rights of disabled workers in all employment practices.

Organized labour can initiate programmes or cooperative efforts with employers, government ministries, non-governmental organizations, and companies to develop programmes that will result in increased recruitment and hiring of, and fair practices towards, people with disabilities. Representatives can sit on boards and lend their expertise to community-based organizations that work with people with disabilities. They can promote awareness among union members, and, in their role as employers, labour unions can set an example of fair and equitable hiring practices.

Examples of what labour unions are doing

In England, the Trades Union Congress (TUC) has taken an active role in promoting equal rights in employment for persons with disabilities, through published policy statements and active advocacy. It regards the employment of disabled people as an equal opportunities issue, and the experiences of disabled persons as not unlike those of other groups that have been discriminated against or excluded. The TUC supports existing quota legislation and advocates for levies (fines) on employers who fail to comply with the law.

It has published several related guides to support its activities and educate its members, including TUC Guidance: Trade Unions and Disabled Members, Employment of Disabled People, Disability Leave and Deaf People and Their Rights. Trade Unions and Disabled Members includes guidance about basic points that unions should consider when negotiating for disabled members. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions has produced a guide with similar intent, Disability and Discrimination in the Workplace: Guidelines for Negotiators. It provides practical steps to tackle workplace discrimination and to promote equality and access through negotiated labour agreements.

The Federation of German Trade Unions also has developed a comprehensive position paper stating its policy for integrative employment, its stance against discrimination and its commitment to use its influence to further its positions. It supports broad employment training and access to apprenticeships for disabled persons, addresses the double discrimination faced by disabled women, and advocates for union activities that support access to public transportation and integration into all aspects of society.

The Screen Actors Guild in the United States has approximately 500 members with disabilities. A statement on non-discrimination and affirmative action appears in its collective bargaining agreements. In a cooperative venture with the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, the Guild has met with national advocacy groups to develop strategies to increase the representation of people with disabilities in their respective industries. The International Union of United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America is another labour union that includes language in its collective bargaining agreements prohibiting discrimination based on disability. It also fights for reasonable accommodations for its members and provides regular training on disability and work issues. The United Steel Workers of America has included for years non-discrimination clauses in its collective bargaining agreements, and resolves disability discrimination complaints through a grievance process and other procedures.

In the United States, the passage and implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was, and continues to be, promoted by US-based labour unions. Even before passage of the ADA, many AFL-CIO member unions were actively involved in training their memberships on disability rights and awareness (AFL-CIO 1994). The AFL-CIO and other labour union representatives are carefully monitoring the implementation of the law, including litigation and alternative dispute resolution processes, to support the rights of workers with disabilities under the ADA and to ensure that their interests and the rights of all workers are fairly considered.

With passage of the ADA, labour unions have produced scores of publications and videos and organized training programmes and workshops to further educate their members. The Civil Rights Department of the AFL-CIO produced brochures and held workshops for their affiliated unions. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Center for Administering Rehabilitation and Education Services (IAM CARES), with support from the federal government, produced two videos and ten booklets for employers, people with disabilities and union personnel to inform them of their rights and responsibilities under the ADA. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) has a long-standing history of protecting the rights of workers with disabilities. With passage of the ADA, AFSCME updated its publications and other efforts and trained thousands of members and AFSCME staff on the ADA and workers with disabilities.

Although Japan has a quota and levy system in place, one Japanese labour union recognized that individuals who are mentally disabled are the most likely to be underrepresented in the labour force, especially among larger employers. It has been taking action. The Kanagawa Regional Council of the Japanese Electrical, Electronic and Information Union is working with the city of Yokohama to develop an employment support center. Its purpose will include training individuals who are mentally disabled and providing services to facilitate their placement and that of other disabled persons. Further, the union plans to establish a training centre that will provide disability awareness and sign-language training to union members, personnel managers, production supervisors and others. It will capitalize on good labour-employer relationships and engage business people in the management and activities of the centre. Initiated by the labour union, the project promises to be a model of collaboration between business, labour and government.

In the United States and Canada, labour unions have been working cooperatively and creatively with government and employers to facilitate the employment of people with disabilities through a programme called Projects with Industry (PWI). By matching labour union resources with government funding, IAM CARES and the Human Resources Development Institute (HRDI) of the AFL-CIO have been operating training and job placement programmes for individuals with disabilities regardless of their union affiliation. In 1968, HRDI began to function as the AFL-CIO’s employment and training arm by providing assistance to diverse ethnic groups, women and people with disabilities. In 1972, it began a programme with a specific focus on people with disabilities, to place them with employers who had labour agreements with national and international labour unions. As of 1995, more than 5,000 people with disabilities have been employed as a result of this activity. Since 1981, the IAM CARES programme, which operates in the Canadian and US labour markets, has enabled more than 14,000 individuals, most of whom are severely disabled, to find jobs. Both programmes provide professional assessment, counselling and job placement assistance through linkages with businesses and with government and labour union support.

In addition to providing direct services to workers with disabilities, these PWI programmes engage in activities that enhance public awareness of people with disabilities, promote cooperative labour-management action to foster employment and job retention, and provide training and consulting services to local unions and employers.

These are only some examples from around the world of activities that labour unions have taken to facilitate fairness in employment for workers with disabilities. It is fully in line with their broad goal to facilitate worker solidarity and to end all forms of discrimination.

Issue 2: Disability Prevention, Health and Safety

While securing safe working conditions is a hallmark of labour union activity in many countries, maintaining health and safety in the workplace has traditionally been an employer function. Typically, management has control over job design, tool selection, and decisions about processes and the work environment that affect safety and prevention. Yet, only someone who performs the tasks and procedures on a regular basis, under specific work conditions and demands, can fully appreciate the implications of procedures, conditions and hazards on safety and productivity.

Fortunately, enlightened employers recognize the importance of worker feedback, and as the organizational structure of the workplace is changing to increase worker autonomy, such feedback is more readily invited. Safety and prevention research also supports the need to involve the worker in job design, policy formulation and the implementation of programmes on health, safety and disability prevention.

Another trend, the sharp increase in workers’ compensation and other costs of job-related injury and disability, has led employers to examine prevention as a key component of the disability management effort. Prevention programmes should focus on the full range of stressors, including those of a psychological, sensory, chemical or physical nature, as well as on trauma, accidents and exposure to obvious hazards. Disability can result from repeated exposure to mild stressors or agents, rather than from a single incident. For example, some agents can cause or activate asthma; repeated or loud noises can lead to hearing loss; production pressure, such as piece-rate demands, can cause symptoms of psychological stress; and repetitive motions can lead to cumulative stress disorders (e.g., carpal tunnel syndrome). Exposure to such stressors can exacerbate disabilities that already exist and make them more debilitating.

From a worker’s perspective, the benefits of prevention can never be overshadowed by compensation. Figure 2 lists some of the rights and responsibilities that workers have in relation to disability prevention in the workplace.

Figure 2. Rights and duties - health and safety

Workers have a right to the safest work environment possible and to the complete disclosure about risks and working conditions. Such knowledge is especially important to workers with disabilities who may need knowledge of certain conditions to determine whether they can perform the job functions without jeopardizing their health and safety or that of others.

Many jobs involve risks or dangers that cannot be fully removed. For example, construction jobs or those that deal with exposure to toxic substances have obvious, inherent risks. Other jobs, like data entry or sewing machine operation, seem relatively safe; however, repetitive motions or improper body mechanics can lead to disabilities. These risks can also be reduced.

All workers should be provided with necessary safety equipment and information on practices and procedures that reduce risk of injury or illness due to exposure to hazardous conditions, repetitive motions or other stressors. Workers must feel free to report/complain about safety practices, or to make suggestions to improve working conditions, without fear of losing their jobs. Workers should be encouraged to report an illness or disability, especially one that is caused or could be exacerbated by the work task or environment.

With regard to duties, workers have a responsibility to practice safety procedures that reduce risks to themselves and others. They must report unsafe conditions, advocate for health and safety issues, and be responsible regarding their health. For example, if a disability or illness places a worker or others at risk, the worker should remove him- or herself from the situation.

The field of ergonomics is emerging, with effective approaches to reducing disabilities incurred as a result of the manner in which the work is organized or performed. Ergonomics is basically the study of work. It involves fitting the job or task to the worker rather than vice versa (AFL-CIO 1992). Ergonomic applications have been used successfully to prevent disability in fields as diverse as agriculture and computers. Some ergonomic applications include flexible workstations that can be adapted to an individual’s height or other physical characteristics (e.g., adjustable office chairs), tools with handles to fit hand differences and simple changes in work routines to reduce repetitive motions or stress to certain parts of the body.

Increasingly, labour unions and employers recognize the need to extend health and safety programmes beyond the workplace. Even when disability or illness is not work-related, employers incur the costs of absenteeism, health insurance and perhaps rehiring and retraining. Further, some illnesses, such as alcoholism, drug addiction and psychological problems, can result in decreased worker productivity or increased vulnerability to on-the-job accidents and stress. For these and other reasons, many enlightened employers are engaging in education about health, safety and disability prevention on and off the job. Wellness programmes that address issues such as stress reduction, good nutrition, smoking cessation and AIDS prevention are being provided in the workplace by unions, management and through joint partnership efforts that may include the government as well.

Some employers provide wellness and employee assistance (counselling and referral) programmes to address these concerns. All of these prevention and health programmes are in the worker’s and employer’s best interests. For example, figures typically show savings-to-investment ratios between 3:1 and 15:1 for some health promotion and employee assistance programmes.

What can labour unions do?

Labour unions are in a unique position to use their leverage as representatives of workers to facilitate health, safety, disability prevention or ergonomics programmes in the workplace. Most prevention and ergonomics experts agree that worker participation and involvement in prevention policies and prescriptions increases the likelihood of their implementation and effectiveness (LaBar 1995; Westlander et al. 1995; AFL-CIO 1992). Labour unions can play a key role in establishing labour-management health and safety councils and ergonomics committees. They can lobby to promote legislation on workplace safety and work with management to establish joint safety committees, which can result in a substantial reduction in job-related accidents (Fletcher et al. 1992).

Labour unions need to educate their members about their rights, regulations and safe practices related to workplace safety and disability prevention on and off the job. Such programmes can become part of the negotiated labour agreement or union-based health and safety committees.

Further, in policy statements and labour agreements and through other mechanisms, labour unions can negotiate disability prevention measures and special conditions for those with disabilities. When a worker becomes disabled, especially if the disability is work-related, the union should support that worker’s right to accommodations, tools or reassignment to prevent exposure to stress or hazardous conditions that can increase the limitation. For example, those with occupationally induced hearing loss must be prevented from continued exposure to certain types of noise.

Examples of what labour unions are doing

The policy statement of the Federation of German Trade Unions concerning employees with disabilities specifically identifies the need to avoid health risks for workers with disabilities and to take measures to prevent them from incurring additional injury.

Under a negotiated labour agreement between the Boeing Aircraft Corporation and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW), the IAM/Boeing Health and Safety Institute authorizes funding, develops pilot programmes and makes recommendations for improvements related to worker health and safety issues, and manages the return to work of industrially impaired workers. The Institute was established in 1989 and funded by a four cent per hour health and safety trust fund. It is operated by a Board of Directors that is composed of 50% management and 50% union representation.

The Disabled Forestry Workers Foundation of Canada is another example of a joint labour-management project. It evolved from a group of 26 employers, unions and other organizations that collaborated to produce a video (Every Twelve Seconds) to draw attention to the high accident rate among forestry workers in Canada. Now the Foundation focuses on health, safety, accident prevention and workplace models for reintegrating injured workers.

IAM CARES is engaged in an active programme of educating its members on safety issues, particularly in high-risk and hazardous jobs in the chemical industries, the construction trades and the steel industry. It conducts training for shop stewards and line workers, and encourages the formation of safety and health committees that are union-operated and independent of management.

The George Meany Center of the AFL-CIO, with a grant from the US Department of Labor, is developing educational materials on substance abuse to help union members and their families deal with alcohol and drug addictions.

The Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) has done some remarkable work in the area of AIDS and AIDS prevention. Volunteer members have developed the AIDS, Critical and Terminal Illness Awareness Project, which is educating members on AIDS and other life-threatening illnesses. Thirty-three of its locals have educated a total of 10,000 members about AIDS. It has established a foundation to administer funds to members who are also coping with a life-threatening disease.

Issue 3: When a Worker Becomes Disabled—Support, Rehabilitation, Compensation

In many countries, labour unions have fought for workers’ compensation, disability and other benefits related to on-the-job injury. Since one purpose of disability management programmes is to decrease the costs related to these benefits, it may be assumed that labour unions are not in favour of such programmes. In fact, this is not the case. Labour unions support rights related to job protection, early intervention in the provision of rehabilitation services and aspects of sound disability management practice. Disability management programmes that focus on reducing the worker’s suffering, address concerns about work loss, including its financial implications, and try to prevent short- and long-term disability are welcomed. Such programmes should return the worker to his or her job, if feasible, and provide accommodations when necessary. When it is not feasible, alternatives such as reassignment and retraining should be provided. As a last resort, long-term compensation and wage replacement should be guaranteed.

Fortunately, data suggest that disability management programmes can be structured to meet the needs and rights of the workers and still be cost effective for employers. As workers’ compensation costs have skyrocketed in industrialized countries, effective models that incorporate rehabilitation services have been developed and are being evaluated. Unions have a definitive role to play in developing such programmes. They need to promote and protect the rights listed in Figure 3 and educate workers about their duties.

Figure 3. Rights and duties: support, rehabilitation and compensation.

Most of the workers’ rights listed are part of standard return-to-work services for injured workers according to state-of-the-art rehabilitation techniques (Perlman and Hanson 1993). Workers have a right to prompt medical attention and to the assurance that their wages and jobs will be protected. Swift attention and early intervention are found to reduce the time away from work. Withholding benefits can result in refocusing efforts away from rehabilitation and returning to work, and into litigation and animosity towards the employer and the system. Workers need to understand what will happen if they become injured or disabled, and should have a clear understanding of company policy and legal protections. Unfortunately, some systems related to prevention, workers’ compensation and rehabilitation have been fragmented, open to abuse and confusing for those who depend on these systems at a vulnerable time.

Most trade unionists would agree that workers who become disabled gain little if they lose their jobs and their ability to work. Rehabilitation is a desired response to injury or disability and should include early intervention, comprehensive assessment and individualized planning with worker involvement and choice. Return-to-work plans may include returning to work gradually, with accommodation, at reduced hours or in reassigned positions until the worker is ready to return to optimal functioning.

Such accommodations, however, can interfere with the protected rights of workers in general, including those related to seniority. While trade unionists support and protect the rights of disabled workers to return to work, they seek solutions that do not interfere with negotiated seniority clauses or require restructuring of jobs in such a way that other workers are expected to assume new tasks or responsibilities for which they are not responsible or compensated. Collaboration and union involvement are necessary to resolve these issues when they arise, and such circumstances further illustrate the need for labour union involvement in the design and implementation of legislation, disability management and rehabilitation policies and programmes.

What labour unions can do

Labour unions need to be involved in national legislative planning committees related to disability, and in task forces which deal with such issues. Within corporate structures and the workplace, labour unions should help organize joint labour-management committees engaged in developing company-level disability management programmes, and should monitor individual outcomes. Unions can assist with return to work by suggesting accommodations, engaging the assistance of co-workers, and providing assurance to the injured worker.

Labour unions can work cooperatively with employers to develop model disability management programmes that assist workers and meet cost-containment goals. They can engage in research of worker needs, best practices and other activities to determine and protect worker interests. Worker education rights and responsibilities and needed actions are also critical to ensuring the best responses to injury and disability.

Examples of what labour unions have done

Some unions have been active in helping governments address the inadequacies of their systems related to on-the-job injuries and workers’ compensation. In 1988, responding to cost concerns related to injury compensation and to labour union concern over a lack of effective rehabilitation programmes, Australia passed the Commonwealth Employees Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, which provided a new coordination system for managing and preventing workplace illness and injuries of federal workers. The revised system is based on the premise that effective rehabilitation and return to work, if possible, is the most beneficial outcome for the worker and the employer. It incorporates prevention, rehabilitation and compensation into the system. Benefits and jobs are protected while the individual undergoes rehabilitation. Compensation includes wage replacement, medical and related expenses, and in certain instances limited lump sum payments. When individuals are unable to return to work they are adequately remunerated. Early results are demonstrating an 87% return-to-work rate. Success is attributed to many factors, including the collaborative involvement of all stakeholders, including labour unions, in the process.

The IAM/Boeing Health and Safety Institute, already mentioned, provides an example of a labour-management programme that was developed in one corporate setting. The model return-to-work programme was one of the first initiatives taken by the Institute because the needs of industrially injured workers were being neglected by fragmented service-delivery systems administered by federal, state, local and private rehabilitation agencies and programmes. After analysing data and conducting interviews, the union and the corporation set up a model programme that is felt to be in the best interests of both. The programme involves many of the rights already listed: early intervention; quick response with services and compensation requirements; intensive case management focused on return to work with accommodation, if needed; and regular evaluation of the programme’s outcomes and workers’ satisfaction.

Current satisfaction surveys indicate that management and injured workers have found the joint labour-management Return-to-Work Programme an improvement over existing services. The previous programme has been replicated at four additional Boeing plants and the joint programme is expected to become standard practice throughout the company. To date, more than 100,000 injured workers have received rehabilitation services through the programme.

The AFL-CIO’s HRDI programme also offers return-to-work rehabilitation services for workers injured on the job at companies with affiliated union representation. In partnership with Columbia University’s Workplace Center, it administered a demonstration programme called the Early Intervention Program, which sought to determine if early intervention can speed the process of getting workers, who are out of work because of short-term disability, back to the job. The programme returned 65% of participants to work and isolated several factors critical to success. Two findings are of particular significance to this discussion: (1)workers almost universally experience distress related to financial concerns; and (2) the programme’s union affiliation reduced suspicion and hostility.

The Disabled Forestry Workers Foundation of Canada developed a programme it calls the Case Management Model for Workplace Integration. Also using the joint union-management initiative, the programme rehabilitates and reintegrates disabled workers. It has published Industrial Disability Management: An Effective Economic and Human Resource Strategy to assist in the implementation of the model, built on partnership between employers, unions, government and consumers. Further, it has developed the National Institute of Occupational Disability and Research, involving labour, management, educators and rehabilitation professionals. The Institute is developing training programmes for human resource and union representatives that will lead to further implementation of its model.

Issue 4: Inclusion and Integration in the Community and the Workplace

In order for people with disabilities to become fully integrated in the workplace, they must first have equal access to all community resources that predispose and assist people to work (education and training opportunities, social services, etc.) and that give them access to the work environment (accessible housing, transportation, information, etc.). Many labour unions have recognized that people with disabilities are not able to participate in the workplace if they are excluded from full participation in community life. Further, once employed, people with disabilities may need special services and accommodations to be fully integrated or to maintain job performance. Equality in community life is a precursor to employment equity, and to fully address the issue of disability and work, the broader issue of human or civil rights must be considered.

Labour unions have also recognized that to ensure employment equity, sometimes special services or accommodations may be required for job maintenance, and in the spirit of solidarity, may provide such services to their members or promote the provision of such accommodations and services. Figure 4 lists the rights and duties that recognize the need for full access to community life.

Figure 4. Rights and duties: inclusion and integration in the community and the workplace.

What unions can do

Labour unions can be direct agents of change in their communities by encouraging the total integration of people with disabilities in the workplace and community. Labour unions can reach out to workers with disabilities and the organizations that represent them, and collaborate to take positive action. The opportunities to exert political leverage and affect legislative change have been noted throughout this article, and they are fully in keeping with ILO Recommendation No. 168 and ILO Convention No. 159. Both stress the role of employers’ and workers’ organizations in the formulation of policies related to vocational rehabilitation, and their involvement in the implementation of policy and services.

Labour unions have a responsibility to represent the needs of all their workers. They should provide model services, programmes and representation within the labour union structure to include, accommodate and engage members with disabilities in all aspects of the organization. As some of the following examples will demonstrate, labour unions have used their members as a resource for raising funds, to serve as volunteers or to engage in direct services on the job and in the community to ensure that people with disabilities are fully included in community life and the workplace.

What unions have done

In Germany, a type of advocacy is legally mandated. According to the Severely Disabled Persons Act, any enterprise, including labour unions, that has five or more permanent employees, must have a person who is elected to the staff council as a representative of disabled employees. This representative ensures that the rights and concerns of disabled employees are addressed. Management is required to consult this representative in matters related to general recruitment as well as policy. As a result of this law, labour unions have become actively involved in disability issues.

The Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) has published and disseminated a Charter of Rights of People with Disabilities (1990), which is a list of 18 fundamental rights considered essential to the full equality of people with disabilities in the workplace and the community at large. It includes the rights to a barrier-free environment, housing, quality health care, education, training, employment and accessible transportation.

In 1946, the IAMAW began to help people with disabilities by establishing the International Guiding Eyes. This programme provides guide dogs and training in how to use them to blind and visually impaired individuals so that they can lead more independent and satisfying lives. Approximately 3,000 individuals from many countries have been helped. Part of the costs to operate the programme are borne by the contributions of union members.

The work of one Japanese labour union has been previously described. Its work was a natural evolution from the work of the Assembly of Trade Unions begun in the 1970s when a union member who had an autistic child requested labour union support to focus on the needs of children with disabilities. The Assembly established a foundation that was supported by the sale of matches and, later, boxes of tissues, by union members. The foundation started a counselling service and a telephone hotline to help parents cope with the challenges of raising a disabled child in a segregated society. As a result, parents became organized and lobbied the government to address accessibility (railways were pressured to improve accessibility, a process that continues today) and to provide educational training and upgrade other services. Summer activities and festivals were sponsored, as well as national and international tours, to foster understanding of disability issues.

After twenty years, when the children grew up, their needs for recreation and education became needs for vocational skills and employment. A vocational experience programme for youth with disabilities was developed and has been in effect for several years. The unions requested companies to provide work experiences for second-year high school students with disabilities. It was out of this programme that the need for the Employment Support Center, noted under Issue 1, became apparent.

Many unions provide extra support services to people with disabilities on the job to assist them in maintaining employment. The Japanese labour unions use on-the-job volunteers to support young people in work-experience programmes with companies that have union representation. IAM CARES in the United States and Canada uses a buddy system to match new employees who have disabilities with a union member who serves as a mentor. IAM CARES also has sponsored supported employment programmes with Boeing and other companies. Supported employment programmes provide job coaches to assist those with the most severe disabilities in learning their jobs and maintaining their performance at productive levels.

Some labour unions have established subcommittees or task forces composed of disabled workers, to ensure that the rights and needs of disabled members are fully represented within the union structure. The American Postal Workers Union is an excellent example of such a task force and the wide implications it can have. In the 1970s, the first deaf shop steward was appointed. Since 1985, several conferences have been held just for hearing-impaired members. These members also serve on negotiating teams to resolve job accommodation and disability management issues. In 1990, the task force worked with the postal service to develop an official stamp depicting the words “I love you” in a hand sign.

Conclusions

Unions, at their most basic level, are about people and their needs. Since the earliest days of labour union activity, unions have done more than fight for fair wages and optimal working conditions. They have sought to improve the quality of life and to maximize opportunities for all workers, including those with disabilities. Although the union perspective emanates from the workplace, the union influence is not limited to enterprises where negotiated labour agreements exist. As many examples in this article demonstrate, labour unions can also affect the larger social environment through a variety of activities and initiatives that are aimed at eliminating discrimination and inequities towards people with disabilities.

While unions, employers, government entities, vocational rehabilitation representatives and men and women with disabilities may have different perspectives, they should share the desire for a healthy and productive workplace. Unions are in a unique position to bring these groups together on common ground, and thereby play a key role in improving the lives of people with disabilities.

Back

To communicate overall objectives/business goals which not only embrace the provision of quality service to applicants, but clearly reflect the desire to provide an efficient recruitment service to employers and which assist employers to improve their capacity to employ people with disabilities. Emphasis should be placed on the primary aim to achieve customer satisfaction. “All of Sabre’s activities begin with our customers. Our goals are to provide recruitment solutions through effective job matching, reliable training and support and to offer expertise in the recruitment and employment of people with disabilities.”

A job fair was recently held to give people a chance to meet employers and learn about different jobs. McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd. ran a workshop on interview skills and also sponsored the job fair event along with Shell and Pizza Hut. There were employer displays which provided an opportunity for employers and prospective employees with learning difficulties to meet in an informal way.

The Coverdale Bursary Programme (UK)

For five years, Coverdale, a small (70 people) management consultancy has offered bursaries to the value of £10,000 per person to disabled individuals seeking high quality management training. These individuals then go into companies like Barclays Bank, the Post Office and Midland Bank for additional training, in a process which promotes long-term attitude change across participating companies. This programme is now being expanded. It has been adapted by The Canadian Council for Rehabilitation and Work.

Brook Street and FYD (UK)

A commercial recruitment agency, Brook Street, and a charity for young deaf people, Friends for the Young Deaf (FYD), have worked in partnership for some years. Brook Street offers work experience and assessment to the young deaf graduates completing the FYD leadership training programme; Brook Street then places appropriate candidates into jobs, charging the same commercial fee they would charge for any candidate.

Employers’ Forum on Disability (UK)

Companies involved in the Employers’ Forum on Disability, an employer-funded association that promotes the integration of disabled persons in the labour market and provides advisory services for interested enterprises, helped disabled entrepreneur Stephen Duckworth to establish his business, Disability Matters, which now offers high quality consultancy and awareness-raising on disability to companies across the UK. Its philosophy encompasses the following:

• to understand and define the business case for employing disabled people

• an authoritative employers’ voice on disability

• employment- and training-related services which are more market led

• to develop new ways to attract qualified disabled applicants and to retain disabled employees

• The key to influencing employers and mobilizing their involvement is to network in a way that:

• promotes the business case through business-to-business communication

• promotes personal contact between employers and disabled individuals

• promotes employer ownership of the issue and an awareness on the part of rehabilitation providers that the employer should be valued as stakeholder, customer and potential partner

• positions disability as part of the wider debate regarding economic and social regeneration, long-term unemployment, poverty and micro and macroeconomic policies

Other examples in the UK: The Employer Forum on Disabilities

Leading UK companies drafted a highly influential policy framework called the “Employers Agenda on Disability, a Ten Point Plan”. This was launched by the Prime Minister and is now publicly supported by more than 100 major firms. It has proven a powerful force for change because it was drafted by the employers themselves in consultation with disability experts. It is now a key tool in helping employers to comply with discrimination legislation.

Supporters of the Agenda are publicly committed to structuring their corporate policy on disability using a 10-point framework addressing the following issues: Equal Opportunities Policy and Procedures Statement; Staff Training and Disability Awareness; The Working Environment; Recruitment; Career Development; Retention, Retraining and Redeployment; Training and Work Experience; People with Disabilities in the Wider Community; Involvement of Disabled People; Monitoring Performance.

The Action File on Disability, a unique manual which provides practical information on how to implement the Agenda, has been produced by the Employers’ Forum on Disability.

Graduate Recruitment:

More than 20 companies are involved in a consortium working with “Workable”, which brokers work-experience opportunities to disabled students in a planned and structured manner.

Twenty-five companies jointly fund an initiative making annual Career Fairs for students accessible for disabled students. The Career Fairs are now wheelchair accessible, and interpreters for the deaf are available, as well as large-print brochures and other support. Employers had experienced such difficulty attracting disabled graduates to apply for jobs using traditional intermediaries that they are now pioneering recruitment methods which speak directly to the disabled students.

HIRED (US)

The project HIRED in San Francisco embodies this new employer orientation. The acronym stands for Helping Industry Recruit Employees with Disabilities. Their literature highlights the services they offer employers:

“Project HIRED is a private, not for profit organization serving the San Francisco Bay area. Our purpose is to assist individuals with disabilities to secure jobs appropriate to their qualifications and career goals. Our services to employers include:

• free referrals, pre-screened, qualified candidates matched to a company’s job openings

• quality temporary employment services at competitive rates

• customized, on site seminars on the technical, legal and interpersonal aspects of disability in the workplace, and

• consultation on all topics related to disabilities in the workplace.

In addition to less formal corporate partnerships, Project HIRED has a corporate membership programme involving approximately 50 Bay Area companies. As corporate members, these companies are entitled to free consulting and a discount on seminars. We are currently exploring additional services, such as library of video resources, to further assist corporate members successfully incorporate people with disabilities in their workforce.”

ASPHI (Italy)

The origins of ASPHI (Associazione per lo Sviluppo di Progetti Informatici per gli Handicappati) go back to the late 1970s when IBM Italy organized courses in computer programming for the visually impaired. A number of companies which had subsequently employed the trainees, together with specialist partner agencies from the non-profit sector, created ASPHI for the physically disabled and the hearing and mentally impaired. The Association involves more than 40 companies which provide financial support, staff and volunteer helpers, advice as well as employment opportunities for ASPHI’s graduates. ASPHI’s objective is to harness information technologies for the social and vocational integration of disadvantaged groups. Its activities include: job training, research and development of new products (mainly software) which facilitate alternative methods of communication, personal autonomy and rehabilitation, and community education, thus breaking down prejudices and discrimination against disabled people. Each year, some 60 young people are qualified by ASPHI. With about 85% of its graduates finding a permanent job, ASPHI’s success has brought it national and international recognition.

Swedish Employers’ Federation Initiative

The Swedish Employers’ Federation Initiative, “Persons with Disabilities in Companies”, positions disability firmly in the labour market debate in the country and conveys the message that disability is an issue of importance to the Swedish Employers Confederation and its members. The Federation states: “The path to employment for persons with disabilities must be made smoother. Requirements for this include:

• clear signals to employers concerning responsibility and costs

• financial compensation for extra costs, if any, incurred by employers who appoint persons with disabilities

• more knowledge of disabilities and the scope of persons with disabilities for changing attitudes and values

• improved cooperation between companies, authorities and individuals to create a dynamic and flexible labour market.”

Back

A 1981 study of worker safety and health training in the industrial nations begins by quoting the French writer Victor Hugo: “No cause can succeed without first making education its ally” (Heath 1981). This observation surely still applies to occupational safety and health in the late twentieth century, and is relevant to organization personnel at all levels.

As the workplace becomes increasingly complex, new demands have arisen for greater understanding of the causes and means of prevention of accidents, injuries and illnesses. Government officials, academics, management and labour all have important roles to play in conducting the research that furthers this understanding. The critical next step is the effective transmission of this information to workers, supervisors, managers, government inspectors and safety and health professionals. Although education for occupational physicians and hygienists differs in many respects from the training of workers on the shop floor, there are also common principles that apply to all.

National education and training policies and practices will of course vary according to the economic, political, social, cultural and technological background of the country. In general, industrially advanced nations have proportionally more specialized occupational safety and health practitioners at their disposal than do the developing nations, and more sophisticated education and training programmes are available to these trained workers. More rural and less industrialized nations tend to rely more on “primary health care workers”, who may be worker representatives in factories or fields or health personnel in district health centres. Clearly, training needs and available resources will vary greatly in these situations. However, they all have in common the need for trained practitioners.

This article provides an overview of the most significant issues concerning education and training, including target audiences and their needs, the format and content of effective training and important current trends in the field.

Target Audiences

In 1981, the Joint ILO/WHO Committee on Occupational Health identified the three levels of education required in occupational health, safety and ergonomics as (1) awareness, (2) training for specific needs and (3) specialization. These components are not separate, but rather are part of a continuum; any person may require information on all three levels. The main target groups for basic awareness are legislators, policy makers, managers and workers. Within these categories, many people require additional training in more specific tasks. For example, while all managers should have a basic understanding of the safety and health problems within their areas of responsibility and should know where to go for expert assistance, managers with specific responsibility for safety and health and compliance with regulations may need more intensive training. Similarly, workers who serve as safety delegates or members of safety and health committees need more than awareness training alone, as do government administrators involved in factory inspection and public health functions related to the workplace.

Those doctors, nurses and (especially in rural and developing areas) nonphysician primary health care workers whose primary training or practice does not include occupational medicine will need occupational health education in some depth in order to serve workers, for example by being able to recognize work-related illnesses. Finally, certain professions (for example, engineers, chemists, architects and designers) whose work has considerable impact on workers’ safety and health need much more specific education and training in these areas than they traditionally receive.

Specialists require the most intensive education and training, most often of the kind received in undergraduate and postgraduate programmes of study. Physicians, nurses, occupational hygienists, safety engineers and, more recently, ergonomists come under this category. With the rapid ongoing developments in all of these fields, continuing education and on-the-job experience are important components of the education of these professionals.

It is important to emphasize that increasing specialization in the fields of occupational hygiene and safety has taken place without a commensurate emphasis on the interdisciplinary aspects of these endeavours. A nurse or physician who suspects that a patient’s disease is work-related may well need the assistance of an occupational hygienist to identify the toxic exposure (for example) in the workplace that is causing the health problem. Given limited resources, many companies and governments often employ a safety specialist but not a hygienist, requiring that the safety specialist address health as well as safety concerns. The interdependence of safety and health issues should be addressed by offering interdisciplinary training and education to safety and health professionals.

Why Training and Education?

The primary tools needed to achieve the goals of reducing occupational injuries and illnesses and promoting occupational safety and health have been characterized as the “three E’s”—engineering, enforcement and education. The three are interdependent and receive varying levels of emphasis within different national systems. The overall rationale for training and education is to improve awareness of safety and health hazards, to expand knowledge of the causes of occupational illness and injury and to promote the implementation of effective preventive measures. The specific purpose and impetus for training will, however, vary for different target audiences.

Middle and upper level managers

The need for managers who are knowledgeable about the safety and health aspects of the operations for which they are responsible is more widely acknowledged today than heretofore. Employers increasingly recognize the considerable direct and indirect costs of serious accidents and the civil, and in some jurisdictions, criminal liability to which companies and individuals may be exposed. Although belief in the “careless worker” explanation for accidents and injuries remains prevalent, there is increasing recognition that “careless management” can be cited for conditions under its control that contribute to accidents and disease. Finally, firms also realize that poor safety performance is poor public relations; major disasters like the one in the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal (India) can offset years of effort to build a good name for a company.

Most managers are trained in economics, business or engineering and receive little or no instruction during their formal education in occupational health or safety matters. Yet daily management decisions have a critical impact on employee safety and health, both directly and indirectly. To remedy this state of affairs, safety and health concerns have begun to be introduced into management and engineering curricula and into continuing education programmes in many countries. Further efforts to make safety and health information more widespread is clearly necessary.

First-line supervisors

Research has demonstrated the central role played by first-line supervisors in the accident experience of construction employers (Samelson 1977). Supervisors who are knowledgeable about the safety and health hazards of their operations, who effectively train their crew members (especially new employees) and who are held accountable for their crew’s performance hold the key to improving conditions. They are the critical link between workers and the firm’s safety and health policies.

Employees

Law, custom and current workplace trends all contribute to the spread of employee education and training. Increasingly, employee safety and health training is being required by government regulations. Some apply to general practice, while in others the training requirements are related to specific industries, occupations or hazards. Although valid evaluation data on the effectiveness of such training as a countermeasure to work-related injuries and illnesses are surprisingly sparse (Vojtecky and Berkanovic 1984-85); nevertheless the acceptance of training and education for improving safety and health performance in many areas of work is becoming widespread in many countries and companies.

The growth of employee participation programmes, self-directed work teams and shop floor responsibility for decision-making has affected the way in which safety and health approaches are taken as well. Education and training are widely used to enhance knowledge and skills at the level of the line worker, who is now recognized as essential for the effectiveness of these new trends in work organization. A beneficial action employers can take is to involve employees early on (for example, in the planning and design stages when new technologies are introduced into a worksite) to minimize and to anticipate adverse effects on the work environment.

Trade unions have been a moving force both in advocating more and better training for employees and in developing and delivering curricula and materials to their members. In many countries, safety committee members, safety delegates and works council representatives have assumed a growing role in the resolution of hazard problems at the worksite and in inspection and advocacy as well. Persons holding these positions all require training that is more complete and sophisticated than that given to an employee performing a particular job.

Safety and health professionals

The duties of safety and health personnel comprise a broad range of activities that differ widely from one country to another and even within a single profession. Included in this group are physicians, nurses, hygienists and safety engineers either engaged in independent practice or employed by individual worksites, large corporations, government health or labour inspectorates and academic institutions. The demand for trained professionals in the area of occupational safety and health has grown rapidly since the 1970s with the proliferation of government laws and regulations paralleling the growth of corporate safety and health departments and academic research in this field.

Scope and Objectives of Training and Education

This ILO Encyclopaedia itself presents the multitude of issues and hazards that must be addressed and the range of personnel required in a comprehensive safety and health programme. Taking the large view, we can consider the objectives of training and education for safety and health in a number of ways. In 1981, the Joint ILO/WHO Committee on Occupational Health offered the following categories of educational objectives which apply in some degree to all of the groups discussed thus far: (1) cognitive (knowledge), (2) psychomotor (professional skills) and (3) affective (attitude and values). Another framework describes the “information–education–training” continuum, roughly corresponding to the “what”, the “why” and the “how” of hazards and their control. And the “empowerment education” model, to be discussed below, puts great emphasis on the distinction between training—the teaching of competency-based skills with predictable behavioural outcomes—and education—the development of independent critical thinking and decision-making skills leading to effective group action (Wallerstein and Weinger 1992).

Workers need to understand and apply the safety procedures, proper tools and protective equipment for performing specific tasks as part of their job skills training. They also require training in how to rectify hazards that they observe and to be familiar with internal company procedures, in accordance with the safety and health laws and regulations which apply to their area of work. Similarly, supervisors and managers must be aware of the physical, chemical and psychosocial hazards present in their workplaces as well as the social, organizational and industrial relations factors that may be involved in the creation of these hazards and in their correction. Thus, gaining knowledge and skills of a technical nature as well as organizational, communication and problem-solving skills are all necessary objectives in education and training.

In recent years, safety and health education has been influenced by developments in education theory, particularly theories of adult learning. There are different aspects of these developments, such as empowerment education, cooperative learning and participative learning. All share the principle that adults learn best when they are actively involved in problem-solving exercises. Beyond the transmission of specific bits of knowledge or skills, effective education requires the development of critical thinking and an understanding of the context of behaviours and ways of linking what is learned in the classroom to action in the workplace. These principles seem especially appropriate to workplace safety and health, where the causes of hazardous conditions and illnesses and injuries are often a combination of environmental and physical factors, human behaviour and the social context.

In translating these principles into an education programme four categories of objectives must be included:

Information objectives: the specific knowledge that trainees will acquire. For example, knowledge of the effects of organic solvents on the skin and on the central nervous system.

Behavioural objectives: the competencies and skills that workers will learn. For example, the ability to interpret chemical data sheets or to lift a heavy object safely.

Attitude objectives: the beliefs that interfere with safe performance or with response to training that must be addressed. The belief that accidents are not preventable or that “solvents can’t hurt me because I’ve worked with them for years and I’m fine” are examples.

Social action objectives: the ability to analyse a specific problem, identify its causes, propose solutions and plan and take action steps to resolve it. For example, the task of analysing a particular job where several people have sustained back injuries, and of proposing ergonomic modifications, requires the social action of changing the organization of work through labour-management cooperation.

Technological and Demographic Change

Training for awareness and management of specific safety and health hazards obviously depends on the nature of the workplace. While some hazards remain relatively constant, the changes that take place in the nature of jobs and technologies require continuous updating of training needs. Falls from heights, falling objects and noise, for example, have always been and will continue to be prominent hazards in the construction industry, but the introduction of many kinds of new synthetic building materials necessitates additional knowledge and awareness concerning their potential for adverse health effects. Similarly, unguarded belts, blades and other danger points on machinery remain common safety hazards but the introduction of industrial robots and other computer-controlled devices requires training in new types of machinery hazards.

With rapid global economic integration and the mobility of multinational corporations, old and new occupational hazards frequently exist side-by-side in both highly industrialized and developing countries. In an industrializing country sophisticated electronics manufacturing operations may be located next door to a metal foundry that still relies on low technology and the heavy use of manual labour. Meanwhile, in industrialized countries, garment sweatshops with miserable safety and health conditions, or lead battery recycling operations (with its threat of lead toxicity) continue to exist alongside highly automated state-of-the-art industries.

The need for continual updating of information applies as much to workers and managers as it does to occupational health professionals. Inadequacies in the training even of the latter is evidenced by the fact that most occupational hygienists educated in the 1970s received scant training in ergonomics; and even though they received extensive training in air monitoring, it was applied almost exclusively to industrial worksites. But the single largest technological innovation affecting millions of workers since that time is the widespread introduction of computer terminals with visual display units (VDUs). Ergonomic evaluation and intervention to prevent musculoskeletal and vision problems among VDU users was unheard of in the 1970s; by the mid-nineties, VDU hazards have become a major concern of occupational hygiene. Similarly, the application of occupational hygiene principles to indoor air quality problems (to remedy “tight/sick building syndrome”, for example) has required a great deal of continuing education for hygienists accustomed only to evaluating factories. Psychosocial factors, also largely unrecognized as occupational health hazards before the 1980s, play an important role in the treatment of VDU and indoor air hazards, and of many others as well. All parties investigating such health problems need education and training in order to understand the complex interactions among environment, the individual and social organization in these settings.

The changing demographics of the workforce must also be considered in safety and health training. Women make up an increasing proportion of the workforce in both developed and developing nations; their health needs in and out of the workplace must be addressed. The concerns of immigrant workers raise numerous new training questions, including those to do with language, although language and literacy issues are certainly not limited to immigrant workers: varying literacy levels among native-born workers must also be considered in the design and delivery of training. Older workers are another group whose needs must be studied and incorporated into education programmes as their numbers increase in the working population of many nations.

Training Venues and Providers

The location of training and education programmes is determined by the audience, the purpose, the content, the duration of the programme and, to be realistic, the resources available in the country or region. The audience for safety and health education starts with schoolchildren, trainees and apprentices, and extends to workers, supervisors, managers and safety and health professionals.

Training in schools

Incorporation of safety and health education into elementary and secondary education, and especially in vocational and technical training schools, is a growing and very positive trend. The teaching of hazard recognition and control as a regular part of skills training for particular occupations or trades is far more effective than trying to impart such knowledge later, when the worker has been in the trade for a period of years, and has already developed set practices and behaviours. Such programmes, of course, necessitate that the teachers in these schools also be trained to recognize hazards and apply preventive measures.

On-the-job training

On-the-job training at the worksite is appropriate for workers and supervisors facing specific hazards found onsite. If the training is of significant length, a comfortable classroom facility within the worksite is strongly recommended. In cases where locating the training at the workplace may intimidate workers or otherwise discourage their full participation in the class, an offsite venue is preferable. Workers may feel more comfortable in a union setting where the union plays a major role in designing and delivering the programme. However, field visits to actual work locations which illustrate the hazards in question are always a positive addition to the course.

Training of safety delegates and committee members

The longer and more sophisticated training recommended for safety delegates and committee representatives is often delivered at specialized training centres, universities or commercial facilities. More and more efforts are being made to implement regulatory requirements for training and certification of workers who are to perform in certain hazardous fields such as asbestos abatement and hazardous waste handling. These courses usually include both classroom and hands-on sessions, where actual performance is simulated and specialized equipment and facilities are required.

Providers of onsite and offsite programmes for workers and safety representatives include government agencies, tripartite organizations like the ILO or analogous national or sub-national bodies, business associations and labour unions, universities, professional associations and private training consultants. Many governments provide funds for the development of safety and health training and education programmes targeted at specific industries or hazards.

Academic and professional training

The training of safety and health professionals varies widely among countries, depending on the needs of the working population and the country’s resources and structures. Professional training is centred in undergraduate and postgraduate university programmes, but these vary in availability in different parts of the world. Degree programmes may be offered for specialists in occupational medicine and nursing and occupational health may be incorporated into the training of general practitioners and of primary care and public health nurses. The number of degree-granting programmes for occupational hygienists has increased dramatically. However, there remains a strong demand for short courses and less comprehensive training for hygiene technicians, many of whom have received their basic training on the job in particular industries.

There is an acute need for more trained safety and health personnel in the developing world. While more university-trained and credentialed physicians, nurses and hygienists will undoubtedly be welcomed in these countries, it is nonetheless realistic to expect that many health services will continue to be delivered by primary health care workers. These people need training in the relationship between work and health, in the recognition of the major safety and health risks associated with the type of work carried on in their region, in basic survey and sampling techniques, in the use of the referral network available in their region for suspected cases of occupational illness and in health education and risk communication techniques (WHO1988).

Alternatives to university-based degree programmes are critically important to professional training in both developing and industrialized nations, and would include continuing education, distance education, on-the-job training and self-training, among others.

Conclusion

Education and training cannot solve all occupational safety and health problems, and care must be taken that the techniques learned in such programmes are in fact applied appropriately to the identified needs. They are, however, critical components of an effective safety and health programme when employed in conjunction with engineering and technical solutions. Cumulative, interactive and continuous learning is essential to prepare our rapidly changing work environments to meet the needs of workers, especially as regards the prevention of debilitating injuries and illnesses. Those who labour in the workplace as well as those who provide support from the outside need the most up-to-date information available and the skills to put this information to use in order to protect and promote worker health and safety.

Back