[nabs-l] Getting employed/accessing the workplace
Wasif, Zunaira
Zunaira.Wasif at dbs.fldoe.org
Thu Jun 14 12:50:34 UTC 2012
What's important to me is that Apple seems more inclined to make
accessibility a priority where as others don't seem to as much.
-----Original Message-----
From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Greg Aikens
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 5:30 PM
To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Getting employed/accessing the workplace
The idea that Voiceover only works with applications developed by apple
is false. There are many third party apps that are perfectly
accessible with voiceover. I use third party apps like Skype, Abby Fine
Reader (OCR), To-do list, Adium (chat client), Piano Pub (Pandora
client), and others all the time. There are also apps that Voiceover
does not work well with, such as MS Office, Open Office, etc. VO is
definitely customizable, especially since OS 10.7 came out last summer.
I'm not a hard core mac guy. I honestly only switched because in an
unfortunate series of circumstances, I found myself between VR cases and
I needed a laptop to start school. The Mac +VO option was far more
affordable than the PC + Jaws option. There was a lot of learning and
relearning I had to do when I first started and for a while I had my
doubts. But now I feel like mac is a perfectly good alternative to
windows + JAWS, especially for those purchasing their own equipment.
I also love Jaws. During student teaching this last semester I had the
opportunity to sit down with Jaws 13 and I am impressed with the new
features they have added. Windows seems in general more accessible then
when I last used it.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that both systems are different but
useful. In terms of overall access, Jaws may be better. But in terms
of total system integration and cost, it certainly isn't. I think
Apple's commitment to universal design is excellent, and I'm not sure
why people in the blind community take issue with it. Don't we want
affordable access?
I understand that sometimes mac users can be obnoxious and suffer from a
slight superiority complex, but don't let that distract you from the
good things about voiceover. .
-Greg
On Jun 13, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Ashley Bramlett wrote:
> Bill,
> There are many barriers in accessibility in windows with software.
However, that said, I believe windows with a paid screen reader like
jaws or window eyes gives us more accessibility in the Operating
system. We have more access too because you can customize not only the
applications but you can customize your screen reader settings. I do not
know how much customization you can do with voice over. As you said,
its drawbacks are it only works with products produced by Apple.
> The only way we solve the accessibility challenge is to raise
awareness so software makers build accessibility in the software from
the beginning. Too often its an after thought and then if you are lucky,
your employer may have scripts produced for you to access their
software.
> Accessibility is getting worse. The new ribbons from Office suite as
of 2007 make finding things more a challenge because while a sighted
person can skim the row and click on stuff, we have to tab and hear all
options. In a traditional menu, we could scroll it pretty fast with
first letter navigation or a hot key if Office assigned one. For
instance, In the old Word, I would press alt t for tools, then w for
word count.
> If you think its bad now, the windows 8 interface is worse. I know as
I spoke to some computer trainers and testers. The windows 8 system
looks more like a touch screen. We will not have a shut down option on
the start menu as we do now.
>
> Popular software currently isn't accessible. These include quickbooks,
quicken, as well as Microsoft's Access, publisher, and share point.
> So there are certainly accessibility challenges out there but that
said, I think the paid screen readers give us a lot more flexibility to
access a wide variety of applications and we can customize it as well.
>
> Ashley
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Bill
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 10:22 AM
> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
> Subject: [nabs-l] Getting employed/accessing the workplace
>
> I shutter to think that Apple becomes the standard. The only thing
> they have going for them is a poor screen reader built right into the
> system. Don't forget that VO only works fully with applications
> produced by Apple. MS office experience is not great, support for
> firefox I have heard is not good to not existent. I would imagine the
> third party business applications, though sometimes not accessible on
> windows probably would be less so with VO. Until Apple and the
> software vendors for Mac OS, I think that windows gives us better
> access to a fully capable screen reader with access to a far wider
> viriety of everyday and specialty programs.
> Bill
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Wasif, Zunaira
> <Zunaira.Wasif at dbs.fldoe.org> wrote:
>> It doesn't directly mention web cites, but it has been applied to web
>> cites a long with telecommunications and other such services. There
is
>> a miscellaneous portion as well, I believe its section 5, that may
>> apply. What do you suggest to improve job accessibility? The Apple
>> conversion was just a thought.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>> Behalf Of David Andrews
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 7:00 AM
>> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>
>> Please get your information straight. The ADA does not currently
>> cover web sites. It is likely too in the future but currently
doesn't.
>>
>> Apple stuff is primarily consumer-oriented, and while they should be
>> applauded for their efforts in accessibility, they do not even come
>> close in giving us the tools we sometimes need to make
>> employment-oriented web sites and software accessible.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> At 02:19 PM 6/12/2012, you wrote:
>>> I'm hoping, some what fancifully, that five years from now all
>>> employers will be using Apple products and many jobs will become
>>> accessible. If we sue employers for not having accessible soft
>>> ware, it might push them towards the accessibility conversion. I
>>> have two clients right now who may get fired because JAWS isn't
>>> working well with the employer's technology. This is a form of
>>> discrimination and it violates the ADA in the same way that
>>> inaccessible web cites violate
>>
>>> the ADA. I have a client who was denied a job interview even though
>>> he's worked in the field because he wasn't working with the
Lighthouse.
>>
>>> All of these people should have jobs and probably would if the ADA
>>> were
>> enforced.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>> On Behalf Of Sophie Trist
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 12:40 PM
>>> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> You make some very good points. I did not know that most employers
>>> ask for Lighthouse certification. This is bad for people like me who
>>> are not affiliated with a Lighthouse because they remind oo much of
>>> the schools of the blind. As to the inaccessible computer programs,
>>> maybe we should institute a program where we payed them to install
>>> acessible
>> programs?
>>> I'm not entirely sure, that's just an idea.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Wasif, Zunaira" <Zunaira.Wasif at dbs.fldoe.org
>>> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>> Date sent: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:00:57 -0400
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> Sometimes extreme measures are required to overcome attitudinal
>>> hurdles
>>
>>> such as this one. I haven't made up my mind about the quota but I
know
>>> that it helped African Americans enter the work place. Maybe
>>> the only
>>> way to quickly and effectively remedy this employment issue is
>>> through reverse discrimination. The legislation is there in the
>>> form of the ADA and rehab acts, but it isn't implemented. I work
>>> with clients every day who can't get a job because the employer's
>>> computer system is
>>
>>> running a program that is incompatible with JAWS or Zoom text. The
>>> fact that employers are still purchasing this type of software is
>> discriminatory!
>>> It is the equivalent of not providing an elevator in a multiple
>>> level building. Maybe the best antidote for this type of
>>> discrimination is reverse discrimination. The NFB is advocating for
>>> "more programs," but
>>
>>> the potential applicant shouldn't have to go through a lighthouse or
>>> through any program. They should be able to apply off of the street
>>> like anyone else. A blind applicant shouldn't require a
>>> certification from a Lighthouse saying that they can type before an
>>> employer will even interview them. I'm working in this field and I
>>> see that happen every day. If a visually impaired client calls
>>> Hilton for a customer service job the first question the recruiter
>>> asks is, "are you working with the Lighthouse?" The reason that
>>> companies do this is because they want their corporate tax credit
>>> and they want assurance from the Lighthouse that the blind person
>>> has the skills for the job. My question is, how do they find out if
>>> a nonvisually impaired employee
>> has the skills?
>>> They want an incentive to hire disabled people. The attitude is
>>> "oh, yeh? You want me to hire a blind person? You better give me a
>>> tax break." In other words, they are saying, "Oh yeh? You better
>>> pay me to hire that blind person." This is the current situation.
>>> Our government pays people to hire disabled workers and companies
>>> like Goodwill thrive off of this. In job development exercises we
>>> are taught to market the corporate tax credit, not the client. How
>>> is this
>>
>>> any better than the quota system? I'm not saying the quota system
>>> is perfect, but maybe it's the best option we have right now. Maybe
>>> its an
>> effective way of
>>> proving that "we are worth something." If there is a better
>>> option I
>>> would love to hear it so I can advocate for it in my agency and make
>>> change.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>> [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Sophie Trist
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:26 AM
>>> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> The issue of hiring quotas for minority groups has popped up in the
>>> past, and it has caused nothing but controversy. If there is to be
>>> ahiring quota for disabled people, non-disabled people who were
>>> rejected or whose jobs were taken away and given to the disabled
>>> could argue reverse--discrimination. Besides, we want them to hire
>>> us because
>>
>>> we're worth something, not just because they have to fill a certain
>> quota.
>>> Evem mentally disabled individuals can perform simple factory jobs.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Wasif, Zunaira" <Zunaira.Wasif at dbs.fldoe.org
>>> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>> Date sent: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:57:06 -0400
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> What do people think about a hiring quota for disabled people?
>>> This
>>> would render Good Will's argument, that disabled people need to
>>> settle for subminum wages or no wages, obselete.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>> [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Kirt Manwaring
>>> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 6:03 PM
>>> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> Ashley,
>>> You said there may not be a set corporate policy, and I suppose
>>> you're probably right. But there should be, and that's why this
>>> boycott makes sense to me. If you have some branches paying any
>>> employees below the minimum wage, you really do need a national
>>> policy
>> to set that straight.
>>> Unfortunate, but true. I really think it is that simple...this is
>>> one of those few issues where there isn't much of a grey area, in my
>>> humble
>>
>>> opinion.
>>> Take it or leave it,
>>> Kirt
>>>
>>> On 6/11/12, Ashley Bramlett <bookwormahb at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> Elizabeth,
>>> Perhaps, the figure supports my theory that in fact most employees
>>> are
>>>
>>> paid
>>>
>>> above minimum wage. As Arielle said, most locations vary in what
>>> they
>>
>>> pay. I
>>>
>>> don't think there is a set corporate policy.
>>>
>>> Ashley
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Elizabeth
>>> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 2:24 PM
>>> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> Hi Greg,
>>>
>>> Please forgive me as I did not read through the entire article you
>>> make reference to in your post. However, now that I have read it, I
>>> am
>>>
>>> still wondering how they can come up with an average of $7.47 when
>>> someone is only making $1.44. I am not a math genius by any means,
>>> but
>>>
>>> it would seem to me that if someone is only making $1.44, and the
>>> average is $7.47, then that would mean someone is making a
>>> considerable
>>
>>> amount more than what most people are making to achieve such an
>>> average. Does this make any sense? I am not necessarily questioning
>>> the
>>
>>> information you cited from the article, but rather questioning the
>>> information that was cited in the article itself.
>>> There is just something about it that does not make sense to me.
>>> I am
>>> sorry that I cannot find a better way to explain it.
>>>
>>> Warm regards,
>>> Elizabeth
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Greg Aikens" <gpaikens at gmail.com
>>> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 12:26 PM
>>> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> Hi Elizabeth,
>>> I should have included my sources. The first was the article
>>> recently posted to the list by Anil Lewis:
>>>
>>> http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/208068/189/Goodwill-Pays-Disabl
>>> ed-E
>>> mployees-Less-than-Minimum-Wage This article gives the number of
>>> employees impacted and their average wage. The reason that an
>>> average wage of $7.47 could still be below minimum wage is because
>>> many states
>>
>>> have minimum wage laws that are higher
>>>
>>> than the federal minimum wage. For a quick list of minimum wage by
>>> state, go to:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._minimum_wages
>>>
>>> Please check my facts in case I misread.
>>>
>>> -Greg
>>>
>>> On Jun 11, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Elizabeth wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Gregg,
>>>
>>> I have to say that your numbers to not make much sense to me. If
>>> these employees are making $7.47 as mentioned in your post, , then
>>> how
>>
>>> exactly
>>>
>>> does that constitute as a subminimum wage? Is it possible the
>>> calculated
>>>
>>> average of these employees also includes the outrageously high
>>> salaries of those who may hold management positions which in effect
>>> would cancel out the extremely low subminimum wages paid to the
>>> factory
>>
>>> worker or the
>>>
>>> average employee thus creating an average that appears to be above
>>> the national minimum wage? I am not sure where you found your
>>> numbers, but if
>>>
>>> what you state is true, then I do not see how this would be an issue
>>>
>>> of paying people subminimum wage.
>>>
>>> Warm regards,
>>> Elizabeth
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Greg Aikens" <gpaikens at gmail.com
>>> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 10:46 AM
>>> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Good Will Boycott Etc.
>>>
>>> Sean's post got me thinking about how many employees are actually
>>> impacted by this policy and how much it would cost for them to
>>> actually
>>>
>>> make these changes. According to the article Anil Lewis posted,
>>> 7300
>>
>>> employees are hired on their certificate to pay disabled workers
>>> less than minimum wage, but the average wage paid them is $7.47,
>>> which is actually higher than the federal minimum wage of $7.25. I
>>> can't say what the average minimum wage for these workers
>>>
>>> would be because each state is different, but I wouldn't imagine it
>>>
>>> could be higher than $8.50. So they would have to on average pay
>>> workers with disabilities
>>> $1 more per hour, $40 more per week, $2080 per year. Multiply that
>>>
>>> by the 7300 employees on the certificate and you get $15,184,000.
>>>
>>> I was surprised that the number of workers impacted by this policy
>>> is so
>>>
>>> high.
>>>
>>> Anyway, I thought these numbers were interesting and thought I would
>>> post in case others are interested too.
>>>
>>> -Greg
>>> On Jun 10, 2012, at 6:45 PM, Gmail wrote:
>>>
>>> Good afternoon,
>>>
>>> One of the primary purposes of the boycott is to garner media
>>> attention
>>>
>>> for
>>> the minimum wage issue. The boycott effort and PR/media efforts are
>>> complementary rather than mutually exclusive.
>>>
>>> We "pick on" Good Will because they are one of, if not the, largest
>>> and
>>>
>>> most
>>> visible nonprofits who take advantage of the current law to pay
>>> workers
>>>
>>> with
>>> disabilities subminimum wages. When you're the biggest fish in the
>>>
>>> pond you're going to get noticed and your actions will be
>>> scrutinized
>>
>>> by people in and out of your field. That's just the way it goes.
>>>
>>> Most of these workshops do the vast majority of their business with
>>> the federal government, providing goods and services through
>>> non-competitive set-aside contracts. These goods and services are
>>> frequently provided at costs that exceed their fair market value.
>>> Obviously Good Will has their hands in other activities as well, but
>>> the point stands. If taxpayers are being asked to subsidize
>>> nonprofits to create employment opportunities
>>>
>>> for
>>> blind or otherwise disabled individuals, and we all, in effect,
>>> subsidize the very good, and sometimes exorbitant, salaries of the
>>>
>>> management of
>>>
>>> these
>>> non-profits, why is it a bad idea to subsidize the wages of disabled
>>> individuals, even those who may not be able to produce output
>>> justifying the minimum wage in the market?
>>>
>>> I think that the number of disabled folks in these workshops who are
>>> incapable of truly earning the minimum wage is much lower than
>>>
>>> most people assume. And, again, if there is somebody whose level of
>>> output truly only justifies $1.50 per hour, I am happy to subsidize
>>> the
>>
>>> wage to give them
>>>
>>> the
>>> dignity of equal treatment under the law.
>>>
>>> I myself worked for a time in a shop and was paid less than $4 per
>>>
>>> hour. I'm worth more than that. I saw others in the very same boat.
>>> The law is discriminatory, and the system is corrupt and fails to
>>> achieve its stated goals. Not only should the minimum wage apply,
>>> but organizations wishing to receive preferential treatment in
>>> government contracting should have to
>>>
>>> fill
>>> a stated percentage of their managerial positions with folks with
>>> disabilities and offer true training and upward mobility. As it
>>> stands
>>>
>>> now,
>>> there is no real opportunity in the vast majority of these
workshops.
>>>
>>> While it is true that, generally speaking, the NFB only speaks for
>>>
>>> the blind, on this issue we have over 40 different disabilities
>>> rights organizations standing shoulder to shoulder with us saying
>>> that
>>
>>> it is reprehensible that we, today in the United States of America,
>>> have a law on the books that codifies the inferiority and
>>>
>>> lesser ability of those with disabilities. We, and they, are
>>> completely correct. The boycott of Good
>>>
>>> Will
>>> is but one piece of the larger effort. It is incumbent upon each of
>>> us
>>>
>>> to
>>> keep pressure on our Members of Congress to change the law. Will it
>>> cost Good Will and other non-profits more money to pay all their
>>> workers minimum wage? Yes, it will. Is the tiny increase in cost
>>> realistically going to
>>>
>>> lead
>>> to the loss of job opportunities as many of the workshops claim?
>>> I
>>>
>>> can't see how it would. In fact, it won't. And the argument is
>>> disingenuous and, frankly, pretty disgusting. Say a shop worker
>>> currently makes $1.50 an
>>>
>>> hour.
>>> Say the law is changed and minimum wage now applies. Say the
>>> employee
>>
>>> is now paid $7.50 an hour. That's an extra $6 an hour, an
>>>
>>> extra $240 a week, and $12,480 a year. Say Good Will has 100
>>> employees of whom this is the case (in reality there are fewer).
>>> This would represent an annual cost increase
>>>
>>> of
>>> $1,248,000 to Good Will. That's a lot of money to you or me, but a
>>>
>>> pittance to this giant non-profit. The same can be said of smaller
>>>
>>> shops, just on a smaller scale. The argument that all the poor
>>> unemployable disabled folks will be sent home jobless if the law is
>>> changed is bogus and cynical.
>>> As I
>>> said before, the majority of these shops get the majority of their
>>>
>>> business through non-competitive contracts with the government, so
>>>
>>> the additional labor cost would be built right into the price the
>>> government pays.
>>> And, as
>>> I also said, I am happy to have my tax dollars go to affirm the
>>> dignity, value and legal equality of all individuals rather than to
>>> support the
>>>
>>> 70,
>>> 80, 100k salaries of the management types at these shops who somehow
>>> sleep at night under the illusion, or maybe delusion, that
>>>
>>> they are doing something positive for people with disabilities.
>>> It's wrong, it's disgusting, and, yes, it hits a raw nerve with me
>>>
>>> because I've lived it. If there is a minimum wage it should apply
>>> to
>>
>>> everybody in the employment market, full stop.
>>>
>>> Sean
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nabs-l mailing list
>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nabs-l:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/zunaira.wasif%40dbs.
>> fldoe.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nabs-l mailing list
>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nabs-l:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/cassonw%40gmail.c
>> om
>
>
>
> --
> Bill Casson
> University of New Mexico
> M.S. Computer Science
> Lewis & Clark Alumnus '11
> B.A. Physics and Math/Comp Sci.
> (505) 695-1374
> cassonw at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nabs-l:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/bookwormahb%40eart
> hlink.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nabs-l:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/gpaikens%40gmail.c
> om
_______________________________________________
nabs-l mailing list
nabs-l at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nabs-l:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/zunaira.wasif%40dbs.
fldoe.org
More information about the NABS-L
mailing list