Disability in the Labour Market: An Exploration of Concepts of the Ideal Worker and Organisational Fit that Disadvantage Employees with Impairments

Abstract

Citation for final published version:Foster, Deborah Jane and Wass, Victoria Jane 2013. Disability in the labour market: an exploration of concepts of the ideal worker and organisational fit that disadvantage employees with impairments. Sociology 47 (4) empirically, a generic 'ideal worker' and a 'one best way' of working. As Rose (1988: 26) argues, 'At the core of any theory of industrial behaviour lies an image of the typical worker'.This paper has two central objectives. The first is to explore the extent to which a concept of an ideal, typical or universal worker has been promoted in managerial ideas, shaping approaches to work study and organisation. By identifying a universal norm prior to, and as a foundation for, job design, our approach differs from previous ideas-based studies of disability and work that have focused on stereotypes which reduce disability to bodily work studies and job design that have standardised work roles and management practices and have abstracted and disembodied the worker from the job, with significant consequences for 3 disabled employees. Sociological critiques that have challenged the assumed 'neutrality' of organisational culture and values from a feminist perspective (Acker 1990;Billing 1994;Ferguson 1984) are then examined for their potential relevance in explaining the relatively neglected workplace disadvantage experienced by disabled employees.The positive duty on employers to make 'reasonable' workplace adjustments for disabled employees was introduced in the UK Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 (now the Equality Act (EqA) 2010). The importance of the DDA, we shall argue, is that it directly challenged the match between an employee and a given job specification. It was predicated, however, on the assumption that employers would recognise the ableist values attached to the notion of an ideal worker around which jobs and production systems had been traditionally designed and understand the need for, and agree to, functional, task, person and organisational flexibility.2 Evidence we present from four Employment Appeal Tribunals (EATs) adjudicated on the 'reasonableness' of workplace adjustments questions these assumptions. First, we show how employees with impairments are disadvantaged by specific, inflexible and multiple-task job descriptions and secondly we show how employers (and the judiciary) seek to resolve the contradiction between the constraints imposed by a chain of production, organised around a set of standard fits between an ideal employee and the job, and requirements under the DDA to make adjustments.

Macho, mobile and resilient? How workers with impairments are doubly disabled in project-based film and television work

“…Ableist values are not only written into the core of job design, but into the fabric of modern capitalist production itself (Foster and Wass, 2012). Unlike the standardization of Fordist production principles, which Foster and Wass (2012: 708) argue were better suited to people with impairments, 'post-Fordist principles … emphasise jobs designed around multiple-tasking, interchangeability and team working', where such jobs are 'likely to disable an impaired employee'.…”

“…Much existing research on disability, work and employment focuses on labour market or policy issues (see Berthoud, 2008;Jones and Wass, 2013) with a few notable exceptions focusing on the workplace (Fevre et al, 2013;Foster and Wass, 2012). There appear to be no published studies that examine the workplace experience of disabled workers in contexts where non-standard contracts (such as freelancing) are common, in the creative industries, or in highly qualified or professional work.…”

Critical social science and emancipation:II, development and application

“…Heery's dimensions of diversity and depth might also be mentioned. Under the former, formalisation might impose a model of an ‘ideal worker’, that is, a worker who meets all the performance requirements of an explicit regime of job descriptions (Foster and Wass, ). This might damage the interests of some groups accustomed to a different model, for example, one based tacit rules that time‐keeping would not be rigidly enforced.…”

Gender, Dis‐/ability and Diversity Management: Unequal Dynamics of Inclusion?

“…Kalev et al , ) as well as from diversity research (Nkomo and Stewart, ; Lambert and Bell, ). In contrast, the category of dis‐/ability leads a shadowy existence within the ‘diversity paradigm’: ‘gender is now accepted as a legitimate dimension in studies of organizational processes, power and practices […] Similar debates concerning disabled employees, nonetheless, remain conspicuous by their absence’ (Foster and Wass, , p. 710).…”