[Ohio-talk] Wall Street Journal: When It Comes to Hiring, Blind Workers Face Bias

[Eric Duffy]

Well, this is certainly not a shock nor a "terrible surprise.".  It confirms
what we already know.  It does, however, remind us why the work we do is so
vitally important.  The blind who think that we don't face real
discrimination labor under just as much misconception about blindness as the
sighted public.  


When It Comes to Hiring, Blind Workers Face Bias
The Wall Street Journal
.	March 18, 2013, 10:27 AM

By Leslie Kwoh
When it comes to hiring blind employees, many employers remain skeptical.
Bosses often assume blind workers cost more and produce less, according to a
new study. They also believe blind workers are more prone to workplace
accidents and less reliable than other workers.
The study, scheduled to be released this week by the nonprofit National
Industries for the Blind, polled 400 human-resources and hiring managers at
a mix of large and small U.S.-based companies. The group commissioned the
survey, in part, to shed light on why roughly 70% of the 3.5 million people
working-age Americans are not employed. (Legally blind Americans are
eligible for Social Security disability, according to NIB.)
NIB president and chief executive Kevin Lynch described the survey results
as a "terrible surprise." With the exception of certain jobs that require
driving or steering, "there are very few jobs that a person who's blind is
not capable of doing," he says.

The findings reveal a disconnect between what employers say and what they
do. While the majority of executives claim they want to hire and train
disabled workers, many view blind workers as an inconvenience.
Hiring managers tended to be slightly more negative than human-resources
managers, but overall results were similar.
.	Among hiring managers, most respondents (54%) felt there were few
jobs at their company that blind employees could perform, and 45% said
accommodating such workers would require "considerable expense."
.	Forty-two percent of hiring managers believe blind employees need
someone to assist them on the job; 34% said blind workers are more likely to
have work-related accidents.
.	One-quarter of respondents said blind employees are "more sensitive"
than other employees; the same percentage said they were "more difficult to
supervise."
.	Twenty-three percent of hiring managers said blind employees are not
as productive as their colleagues, and 19% believe these employees have a
higher absentee rate.
Blindness is largely absent from corporate conversation about employees with
disabilities with the exception of sporadic lawsuits: Last August, Hawaiian
Electric Co. agreed to pay $50,000 to settle a discrimination suit by a
partially blind employee, the AP reported. And in December, Bloomberg
reported that a blind ex-banker at the Royal Bank of Scotland Group lost a
suit seeking disability benefits.
Rarer still is news about companies like apparel business SustainU, based in
West Virginia, which hires blind and visually impaired employees to man its
factory, according to the New York Times. The company said there was no
difference in the cost and quality of its goods when compared to that of
other U.S. manufacturers.
Companies may have to invest some money to provide "reasonable
accommodations" for a blind employee, as required by the Americans with
Disabilities Act. However,  says NIB's Lynch, many computers and smartphones
already have built-in features that enable users to change font size and
light intensity. Installing voice technology that allows computers to "read"
text to a blind employee costs just $1,500 to $2,000, he says. The American
Foundation for the Blind has estimated that 88% of employee accommodations
cost less than $1,000.
As for health insurance, company rates are determined by the number of
incidents among the entire group - not individual employees - no evidence
suggests that blind employees incur more costs than other workers, Mr. Lynch
says.
Blind employees may also be more loyal than most, he adds. A DePaul
University study from 2007 found that employees with disabilities were
likely to stay on the job four months longer, on average, than employees
without disabilities.
The study also found that workers with disabilities took 1.24 fewer
scheduled absences than non-disabled workers during a six-month period. But
they took, on average, 1.13 more days of unscheduled absences.