[Nfbf-l] Job Discrimination

[Beth]

I'm not working in Florida because of these.  But thanks for spilling
your guts, Bill.  Thanks.
Beth

On 10/23/09, Bill Dennis <billiam904 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I haven't posted to this list in well over a year but lately, I've had
> something that really bugs me and I'm just upset enough to spill my guts
> about it.
>
> I am a legally blind computer programmer who happens to also be an amputee.
>
> I have worked all of my life except for a few years when I was on dialysis
> before my kidney transplant.
>
> I've been in the computer industry for almost 25 years.
>
> The company I work for laid me off for 5 weeks and during that time, I
> sought another job.
>
> I've been disabled since 1995 but physically disabled since 2004.  In all of
> this time, I've only had a few employers openly discriminate against me and
> most of those were out of ignorance but apparently, it is now legal in
> Florida for an employer to list "working conditions" in the job posting and
> eliminate people from even applying for the job based on these so-called
> working conditions.
>
> One employer listed "must have eyesight" as a working condition.
>
> Two other that I've seen in the past two weeks places a minimum lifting
> weight of 25 pounds.  Excuse me but computer programmers do not lift
> anything but our laptops when it is time to go home.  That is what I.T.
> people or laborers are for.  The lifting clause eliminates me due to eye
> hemmoraging and of course, the fact that I walk with a prostetic.  For a
> total, it would eliminate them because while you can probably do the
> lifting, how will you be guided to where the items you are lifting need to
> be moved?  I'm sure they won't hire a sighted guide for you and you cannot
> use a guide dog or a cane if both of your hands are full.
>
> One other clause I've seen is "must have valid driver's license".  I used to
> be able to arrange my own travel at my expense but I now no longer have that
> option.
>
> I've been told that all of these "requirements" are perfectly legal and that
> there is no one to validate these conditions to make sure that these are
> actual working condition but simply the employer's way to eliminate
> "uneanted" candidates.
>
> I would like to hear your thoughts on this.
>
> Bill Dennis
> Orlando
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nfbf-l mailing list
> Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Nfbf-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/thebluesisloose%40gmail.com
>