Mediation of Employment Discrimination Disputes Involving Persons With Psychiatric Disabilities

Moss, Kathryn; Swanson, Jeffrey W.; Ullman, Michael; Burris, Scott

doi:10.1176/appi.ps.53.8.988

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1999). It is interesting to note that persons with psychotic disorders, the group with the largest unexplained employment and wage differentials in our results, had the lowest rates of charges resulting in benefits (Moss et al. 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…1999); charges from claimants with mental disorders were significantly less likely to be assigned a high‐priority level (Ullman et al. 2001); and claimants with mental disorders were significantly less likely to be referred to the EEOC mediation program to resolve employment disputes (Moss et al. 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Empirical evidence from disability-related complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), however, suggests the ADA may be less effective in combating workplace discrimination against persons with mental disorders than against persons with general medical disorders. Throughout the period in which the ADA was implemented (1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998), persons with mental disorders were less likely to have findings of reasonable cause for a discrimination complaint than persons with general medical disorders (Moss et al 1999); charges from claimants with mental disorders were significantly less likely to be assigned a highpriority level (Ullman et al 2001); and claimants with mental disorders were significantly less likely to be referred to the EEOC mediation program to resolve employment disputes (Moss et al 2002). Among persons whose charges were investigated by the EEOC, those with mental disorders had lower benefit rates than those with general medical disorders (Moss et al 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Throughout the period in which the ADA was implemented (1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998), persons with mental disorders were less likely to have findings of reasonable cause for a discrimination complaint than persons with general medical disorders (Moss et al 1999); charges from claimants with mental disorders were significantly less likely to be assigned a highpriority level (Ullman et al 2001); and claimants with mental disorders were significantly less likely to be referred to the EEOC mediation program to resolve employment disputes (Moss et al 2002). Among persons whose charges were investigated by the EEOC, those with mental disorders had lower benefit rates than those with general medical disorders (Moss et al 1999). It is interesting to note that persons with psychotic disorders, the group with the largest unexplained employment and wage differentials in our results, had the lowest rates of charges resulting in benefits (Moss et al 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Labor Market Outcomes of Persons with Mental Disorders

Baldwin

Marcus

2007

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present nationally representative estimates of unexplained employment and wage differentials between nondisabled persons and persons with mental disorders, a disabled group subject to exceptionally strong stigma. Estimates are provided for persons with mental disorders overall, and for subgroups of mood, anxiety, adjustment, and psychotic disorders. The results reveal distinctly different patterns of outcomes across subgroups, consistent with a severity gradient such that persons with adjustment disorders experience the most favorable outcomes, while persons with psychotic disorders experience the least favorable.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Labor Market Outcomes of Persons with Mental Disorders

Baldwin

Marcus

2007

Industrial Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some scholars have critiqued the EEOC, which, in shifting legal claims from the courts to administrative proceedings, should make legal claims more affordable and easier to access. However, these scholars argue that the EEOC was underfunded and never capable of handling claims in a timely manner, acted as a useless roadblock that postponed litigants’ day in court, and ironically (given its mission) discriminated against certain groups such as individuals with mental illness . This is another example of how law and legal systems might sometimes generate or exacerbate stigma.…”

Section: Limits Of Antidiscrimination Law: Enforcementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Remedies to Address Stigma‐Based Health Inequalities in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities

Blake

Hatzenbuehler

2019

Milbank Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stigma is an established driver of population‐level health outcomes. Antidiscrimination laws can generate or alleviate stigma and, thus, are a critical component in the study of improving population health. Currently, antidiscrimination laws are often underenforced and are sometimes conceptualized by courts and lawmakers in ways that are too narrow to fully reach all forms of stigma and all individuals who are stigmatized. To remedy these limitations, we propose the creation of a new population‐level surveillance system of antidiscrimination law and its enforcement, a central body to enforce antidiscrimination laws, as well as a collaborative research initiative to enhance the study of the linkages between health and antidiscrimination law in the future. Context Stigma is conceptualized as a fundamental cause of population health inequalities. Antidiscrimination law is one important lever that can influence stigma‐based health inequities, and yet several challenges currently limit the law's potential to address them. Methods To determine whether antidiscrimination law adequately addresses stigma, we compared antidiscrimination law for its applicability to the domains and statuses where stigma is experienced according to the social science literature. To further examine whether law is a sufficient remedy for stigma, we reviewed law literature and government sources for the adequacy of antidiscrimination law enforcement. We also reviewed the law literature for critiques of antidiscrimination law, which revealed conceptual limits of antidiscrimination law that we applied to the context of stigma. Findings In this article, we explored the importance of antidiscrimination law in addressing the population‐level health consequences of stigma and found two key challenges—conceptualization and enforcement—that currently limit its potential. We identified several practical solutions to make antidiscrimination law a more available tool to tackle the health inequities caused by stigma, including (1) the development of a new surveillance system for antidiscrimination laws and their enforcement, (2) an interdisciplinary working group to study the impact of antidiscrimination laws on health, and (3) a central agency tasked with monitoring enforcement of antidiscrimination laws. Conclusions Antidiscrimination law requires better tailoring based on the evidence of who is affected by stigma, as well as where and how stigma occurs, or it will be a poor tool for remedying stigma, regardless of its level of enforcement. Further interdisciplinary research is needed to identify the ways in which law can be crafted into a better tool for redressing the health harms of stigma and to delimit clearer boundaries for when law is and is not the appropriate remedy for these stigma‐induced inequities.

show abstract

Mental illness at work: An assessment of co‐worker reactions

Peters

Brown

2009

Can J Adm Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guided by Colella, Paetzold, and Belliveau (2004), we surveyed 305 employees on their reactions towards co‐workers with mental illness. Co‐workers were less likely to view longer/more frequent work breaks as appropriate accommodations for the mentally ill relative to flexible hours, banking of overtime hours, and counselling. Moreover, employees who believed that co‐workers with mental illness were being equitably (or fairly) treated at work were more likely to report that they would self‐disclose—and seek assistance for—a mental illness. Finally, employees with workplace contact with the mentally ill were more likely to support hiring people with mental illness. Copyright © 2009 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Mediation of Employment Discrimination Disputes Involving Persons With Psychiatric Disabilities

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Labor Market Outcomes of Persons with Mental Disorders

Labor Market Outcomes of Persons with Mental Disorders

Legal Remedies to Address Stigma‐Based Health Inequalities in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities

Mental illness at work: An assessment of co‐worker reactions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About