Work RERC

Policy Change and the

Accommodating Workplace:

Issues, Barriers and Opportunities

Paul M.A. Baker, Ph.D., AICPNathan W. Moon

Workplace Accommodations RERCCACP

www.workrerc.org

Center for Advanced Communications Policy (CACP) and the Center for Assistive

Technology and Environmental Access (CATEA)Georgia Institute of Technology

National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR),

U.S. Department of Education

International Conference on Aging, Disability and Independence (ICADI)

St. Petersburg, FL

Friday, February 22, 2008

1.0 Introduction: Policy and the Workplace

1996 Panel of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) found 7.2 million individuals with a disability able to work with some limitations in the type of work they could do

Implementation of appropriate workplace accommodations is one approach that has been used to reach the goal of equal employment opportunity for people with disabilities

Successful workplace accommodations incorporate an array of technological, process, and policy at the employer and governmental levels

Design of policy/process/environments, facilitating workplace integration of employees, aging or otherwise, to optimize workplace collaboration and engagement

1.0 Introduction: Policy and the Workplace (II)

Research conducted by Workplace Accommodations Rehabilitation Engineering and Research Center (RERC), identifies, designs, and develops devices and systems to help people with disabilities be more productive in the workplace

Provide ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the pertinent policy, legislative, and regulatory environments

Develop a policy framework to identify and assess policies, practices and issues that influence the nature and availability of workplace accommodations

Generate policy and practice options, and propose programmatic recommendations

2.0 Federal Policy Environment

Policy influences employment context as well as the development and availability of technology

Legislative efforts, even within disability context, focus on cost reduction, not increased civil rights of people with disabilities

U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) program reviews

Office of Disability Employment Policy (Labor Dept.)/ Society for Human Resource Management alliance to promote employment of PWD

Department of Justice 2006 report “Access for All: Five Years of Progress,” looks at nationwide enforcement of (ADA) during the past five years

Market based approaches (e.g. Sec. 508 Rehabilitation Act)

3.0 Policy Design Approach

Empirically based research used to develop policy approaches

Conceptual framework (“themes,” associated barriers, impact on workplace, stakeholders, policy related approaches to addressing the problems, and potential outcomes from problem resolution) developed to guide policy change

Consultation with key stakeholders

Key issues, and potential policy options probed using online policy Delphi Method

Output from Policy Delphi used to develop and influence policy formulation (papers, briefs, guidances, regulatory filings)

4.0 Policy Delphi

Conventional Delphi is a systematic, judgmental forecasting procedure to obtain, exchange informed expert opinion

Policy Delphi more closely matches complexities of policy problems; involves informed advocates or key stakeholders, in addition to policy issue “experts”

72 questions related to forecasts, key issues, goals and options

First round of the Delphi (December 2006 and January 2007) E-mail invitations sent to key stakeholders. 91 people registered for the e-Delphi, 44 completed the first round

Subsequent rounds scheduled for completion this year

4.0 Policy Delphi (example page)

Workplace Accommodations Conceptual Policy Matrix

THEME BARRIER TYPE

ISSUES STAKEHOLDERS

APPROACHES OUTCOMES

Telework/ Telecommuting (T)

Access/Awareness

Lack of availability of this type of accommodation; lack of knowledge about this type of accommodation by PWDs[i]

Misconception on the part of the employer about actual costs of telework 1

Misinformation on the benefits of this kind of accommodation Misconceptions about the effect of telework on the work environment 1

Aging/Older populations PWD Employers

Develop materials for knowledge dissemination to employers & employees with disabilities regarding telework Provide cases of best practices in telecommuting Educate policy officials about telework issues specific to PWDs

Increase the employment numbers of PWD

Economic Therefore there is an imbalance in the physical costs vs. possible benefits 1

Concern by employers over the costs of implementing telework (technology & other costs)14

Concern that telework implementation is more expensive with PWDs (AT & such)

PWD Employers Government officials Disability advocates

Develop/support community broadband/telecom initiatives14

Changes an employer’s perception of telework and PWD Provides a better CBA analysis of telework

[i] Anderson, Jane. (2001). “Telecommuting: Meeting the needs of businesses and employees with disabilities,” Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, (16) 2.

5.0 Key Conceptual Themes

Emergency preparedness and safety in the workplace for persons with disabilities

Inadequate/insufficient data on the incidence, nature, and cost of workplace accommodations

Incomplete employer understanding/awareness of workplace accommodations

Telework as an accommodation for persons with disabilities

Aging as an issue of increasing salience regarding the U.S. workforce and the need to address the needs of aging persons with disability and workers aging into disability.

5.0 Accommodation Barriers/Considerations (I)

Emergency plans for workplaces may not be designed to fit

the needs of employees with disabilities

Employer misconceptions (in an emergency situation) that employees with disabilities are more likely to be at risk of serious injury than able-bodied employees.

Insufficient comprehensive data available on workplace accommodations implemented for persons with disabilities

Employer perspectives lacking in the development of “best practices” workplace accommodations;

Employers lack clarity on what is an “accommodation”

5.0 Accommodation Barriers/Considerations (II)

Interoperability issues

Legislation/ rulemaking mandating the accessibility of telecommunications services for persons with disabilities fails to address newer technologies: e-mail, wireless telecom, etc.

Research in collaborative and virtual workspaces not necessarily conducted with special considerations for people with disabilities (telecommuting vs. telework)

Needs of aging workers with disabilities vs. workers aging into disability?

Older workers with disabilities lack awareness that they may be eligible for workplace accommodations

6.0 Policy Objectives/Considerations (I)

Increased involvement of people with disabilities in the emergency plan development process

Increased outreach efforts to encourage corporate awareness about information technology accommodation resources

Systematic cataloguing of existing accommodations to provide best practice examples of existing workplace accommodations

Balance federal guidelines and regulation to encourage implementation of telework for persons with disabilities with alternative market-based/outreach mechanisms

6.0 Policy Objectives/Considerations (II)

Develop examples, best practice approaches, training modules

to help employers foster proximate/virtual social networks

Explore consensus based (consultative) approaches, to augment traditional federal intervention approaches

Increased participation of employer in policy development: research, barrier assessment, best practice development

Development of a common understanding of “workplace accommodations”

7.0 Interim Conclusions (I)

Emergency preparedness and safety issues received the highest degree of support by respondents, yet respondents were unclear on how to best address problem

Employers increasingly recognize aging workers as a growing population; and consequently the importance of appropriate accommodations

Employers unclear on range of accommodation options available to them, or reluctant to pay for them because they assume that they are too expensive

Continued need to develop approaches to improve issue awareness, and information flow to/from policymakers: outreach and education

7.0 Interim Conclusions (II)

Policy interventions include training initiatives employee and employer, economic incentives, public sector examples

Expand use of formal commenting processes (via filings, comments and testimonies) to inform policymaking, and regulations

Multi-disciplinary research initiatives beyond technical issues addressing social inclusion/participation issues, including ancillary disciplines such as planners and sociologists

Expand use of wireless/IT technologies/collaborative virtual environments to improve the teleworking experience for all

8.0 Policy Development/Next Steps (I)

Delphi (first round) provides issue clarification and policy objectives

from experts/stakeholders

Subsequent research focuses on 4 key issue areas using policy to link objectives to proposed outcomes

Specific interventions, strategies and initiatives to be developed and refined with input from key stakeholders and are designed to address specific identified barriers

Increased collaboration with other related RERCs to leverage policy activities and effect policy change

Expand expert resources through renewed stakeholder involvement using “collaborative policy network” concept

8.0 Policy Development/Next Steps (II)

Ongoing monitoring legal, regulatory, and policy activities at the

federal and state level

Produce informative newsletters, publications, guidance and other materials

Generate filings/comments to the FCC/ pertinent agencies

Outreach Activities (e.g. Southern Growth Policies Board; RESNA Committee; American Planning Association)

Delphi Round 2 will run for about another 2 weeks; to participate contact: nathan.moon@cacp.gatech.edu

www.workrerc.org

We wish to acknowledge the assistance of Lynzee Head, Andrew C. Ward, the Wireless RERC, the HERO (Human-Environment Regional Observatory) online Delphi System, Penn State University [http://hero.geog.psu.edu/eDelphi/]

This research supported by grant #H133E020720 and H133E010804 from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education H133E010804. The opinions contained in this publication are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Education.