Unemployment Down for General Population, Up for People with Disabilities

via AAPD (8.5.11):
 

 

People with Disabilities Remain Unemployed at Higher Rate than Other Americans

July Stats Show Year-Over-Year Increase in Unemployment for Americans with Disabilities

 

While the unemployment rate for Americans without disabilities dipped slightly in July, the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) decried the disproportionately high unemployment rate for people with disabilities and its increase since July 2010. 

“A 16.8 percent unemployment rate is unacceptable.” says Mark Perriello, President and CEO of the nation’s largest cross-disability advocacy organization. This is a significant increase from July 2010, when we were at 16.4%. This needs to change.”

“More than three quarters of a million people without disabilities have been hired over the last year,” Perriello added. “It’s time for employers to step up to the plate, set some targets, and hire qualified people from our community as well.”

“For a qualified person with a disability who wants to work, who wants to get out there and contribute to her community, to be responsible for herself — we can’t say to that person, no, this country doesn’t value what you have to offer.” said Joyce Bender, AAPD Board Chair and President of Bender Consulting. "We need to open the doors of freedom through competitive employment to all people," she added.

According to the latest information released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, over 970,000 people with disabilities were unemployed in July 2011, compared to 919,000 last year.  [BLS table at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t06.htm]

AAPD has long recognized that employment plays a critical role in economic sufficiency and independence for people with disabilities. The organization is committed to improving employment outcomes for people with disabilities, and reversing the persistently high percentages of people with disabilities who are not working but are ready, willing, and able to work.   

For more on AAPD and employment visit: http://www.aapd.com/site/c.pvI1IkNWJqE/b.5606959/k.6189/Disability_Employment.htm

Comments

[Mick T]

I would expect that AAPD would be upset with the current Obama Administration policies and how they are negatively impacting the business community from increasing employment.

High regulations, taxes and uncertainty impact all business, especially small businesses which are the largest hiring entity for persons with disabilities and older workers.

I know AAPD has traditionally been critical of the past administration policies, but certainly the current environment as described by Obama policy has been the worst for persons with disabilities.

[eila]

It would be an important systemic review to document, with photos, how even the jobs provided through the American recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (ARRA) were still inequitable opportunities located in largely inaccessible facilities. Small businesses are overwhelmingly inaccessible, as well.

Obama is not our enemy. Ongoing segregation and de-valuation of Americans with disAbilities is our common enemy.

[Patricia Bordonaro]

I was terminated from a state agency for becoming disabled (and they will not hired disabled people in classified position - ie teacher assistants, custodians, cafeteria workers, office personnel because they can not drive a school bus as they can not get a commercial drivers license). Even though you may never drive a bus, as I didn't because it wasn't necessary, if you can't hold a Commercial Drivers License, you can not work for them. So that means, if you can't drive, you can't teach a child, clean a classroom, cook or serve a meal, answer a phone, file papers, etc.. I tried to have the policy amended to say, if you have a documented medical disability, you would not be required to hold a CDL, I was told after careful consideration, they would not change the policy. The policy they have in place says you must have a CDL and be willing to drive a bus to be a classified employee. It also states that the superintendent can make exemptions. The past superintendent granted exemptions when necessary, but the current one doesn't. They educate disabled students because they have to by federal law, and they teach the students in the Life Skills classes and the lower Occupational studies classes to cook, serve meals, clean, answer phone, filing skills, people skills and even send them out with job coaches at tax payers expenses, but as soon as that child crosses the stage and receives the certificate of completion (students in Life Skills do not get regular diplomas), Johnston County Schools in NC "NEVER" has to deal with them again because they will never have to employ them. These student can not get a regular drivers license and certainly not a commercial drivers license. After I made the request to amend the policy, a memo was sent out to all classified employees, that in the 2011-12 school year, they would be hiring more "bus driver only" people, so they wouldn't be needing as many classified people to drive bus, BUT, they would still be requiring all classified to hold a CDL. I have filed a claim through the EEOC and have told this could take 10 - 12 months. I have been in education for 17 years and now, because I can not drive, I can no longer teach a child.

[Therese Shellabarger]

It was an expensive political mistake to design the ADA without an affirmative action clause, but that's Republicans for you...they can't write or pass a piece of legislation without putting a poison pill someplace in it. Can we say NAFTA? That was another bastard piece of work with the fingers of Republicans on it.

[Colleen Kelly Starkloff]

Seems to me that Medicaid also figures into this low employment rate. The Starkloff Disability Institute conducted a focus group last week with people who have completed college and are unemployed-seeking jobs, or underemployed-seeking jobs. There were talented people with disabilities at the table. Quite a few of these talented people are only working part-time, so as not to lose valuable benefits under Medicaid and some stand to lose a great deal--like attendants--if they go to work. Medicaid provides necessary benefits, like income (SSI), health insurance and attendants. That's a good thing. But then Medicaid tells people "If you go to work, you give up your benefits." That doesn't make sense to me. We need to change that policy and let people with disabilities go to work, keep their benefits, and have the opportunity to either buy in to Medicaid for health insurance and attendants--- and create a reasonable formula that provides an incentive for them to go to work--- rather than penalize them for seeking economic independence. Under such a plan they could drop SSI income, replaced by salaried income, perhaps go onto the employers health insurance plan, and other cost savings to Medicaid. Either way, they become tax payers and not just tax consumers. And let's not forget the dignity that comes from economic independence. This is NOT ROCKET SCIENCE! We're paying these benefits anyway. Revamping Medicaid (instead of cutting the heart out of it) could be the solution that the Congress is looking for right now! It should also meet with bi-partisan support.

Colleen Starkloff
Starkloff Disability Institute

[JFA Moderator]

Thank you for all of your comments. Employment for people with disabilities is a top priority at AAPD. As we move into this next election cycle, we will have to work together to make disability employment a main focus, too.

[David Smithe]

don't get caught into the trap of linking a job to freedom too much, that is, the fallacy that "work sets you free" -- written over the door of nazi camps -- freedom is much more than having a job and getting to buy stuff.

[eila]

September 8, 2011: HHS (http://www.hhs.gov/) announces yet another affirmative training program for underrepresented minorities, that does not presumptively include PwD.

It's called, Minority Access to Research Careers (http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Minority/MARC/), and offers special research training support to educational institutions with substantial enrollments of race and ethnicity-based minorities.
The goal is to increase the number and competitiveness of underrepresented minorities engaged in biomedical research, and to increase research training opportunities for students and faculty at these institutions..

We're still being omitted. I think that "people with disabilities" should be granted presumptive eligibility for the same affirmative opportunities that are rolled out for other recognized "economically disadvantaged minorities " (often listed as: women, minorities and service-disabled veterans).

Isn't there enough "preponderance of evidence" to include Americans with DisAbilities in such affirmative economic and educational opportunities?

What do others think?