Search

The Americans with Disability Act sets forth the conditions under which management is compelled to respond to informal and formal requests for accommodations, one of which is that requests must relate to essential job functions. When requests do not relate to essential job functions, employer responsiveness becomes voluntary. The difference between compelled and voluntary management responsiveness to efforts by employees with disabilities to acquire workplace accommodations is import to the decision-making processes of employees with disabilitiess as is discussed here for the benefit of employees with disabilities, their supervisors, and advocates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Americans with Disability Act sets forth the conditions under which management is compelled to respond to informal and formal requests for accommodations, one of which is that requests must relate to essential job functions. When requests do not relate to essential job functions, employer responsiveness becomes voluntary. The distinction between compelled and voluntary compliance has important implications for the process by which employees with disabilities pursue accommodations. The rather well-defined process for acquiring an accommodation when the ADA compels managers to respond is reviewed here. Discussion then turns to issues and examples associated with the less familiar process that some employees follow when management responses are voluntary. This less familiar process is discussed in the context of a strategy, known as job crafting, for expanding the boundaries, and thus the essential functions, of a job. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Participation in competitive employment and other meaningful work activities is considered a fundamental human right and crucial to the health and well-being of people with and without disabilities. Approximately less than 30% of the persons with a disability aged 16 to 64 were employed in 2017, which is a striking disparity given that 73.5 % of people in this age group without disabilities were employed. Several 2 x 2 Factorial Designs were used to determine how a job applicant's disability status (disability disclosed, disability not disclosed) and gender (female, male) impacted how Human Resource Managers' (N = 392) evaluated the job applicant in three areas, including (a) how likely are they to hire this job applicant, (b) how qualified do they view this job applicant, and (c) what would they recommend as a starting salary if the applicant was hired. Furthermore, there was an interest in investigating how knowledge of Title 1 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) influenced the Human Resource Managers' hiring-related decisions. Findings revealed that the starting salary was significantly lower for the applicant with a disability. Knowledge of the ADA did not control for any hiring-related decisions. Discussion and implications are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]