Miss-Delectable
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2004
- Messages
- 17,164
- Reaction score
- 5
Do deaf employees face firing faster than non-deaf? (Part 1) | Fulton Sun
It seems that most non-deaf employers tend to terminate or demote deaf employees quicker and easier for any unprofessional acts than non-deaf employees.
I believe that most deaf people will agree with what I write in this article. The non-deaf employers, especially those acting as administrators in fields such as deaf education, deaf services or rehabilitation services for the deaf, are more likely to demote or terminate deaf staff than the non-deaf staff.
However, deaf clients/students usually prefer deaf staff to non-deaf staff. One reason non-deaf employers may have a tendency to demote or fire deaf workers may be to help save their own prestige.
As I mentioned in my previous articles, the year 1880 is an important year for deaf education in the U.S. and around the world. It also had a major impact on employment opportunities for deaf adults. Prior to 1880, deaf people were more autonomous. There were deaf newspaper editors and deaf writers. Deaf people held a variety of professional positions. Since 1880, though, deaf employees have suffered demotions and job loss due to the development of negative stereotypes about deaf people.
In reality, the skills and abilities of non-deaf employees and administrators cannot compare with those of the deaf. We see the deaf as being outstanding and absolutely better than the non-deaf are.
I believe that the deaf professionals have the very same empathetic intuition as the deaf students, even better than the non-deaf professionals do. Most deaf clients and students feel comfortable when they see deaf professionals, because our cultural and communication needs are the same. Unfortunately, non-deaf professionals have often purposefully assigned us to non-deaf professionals who many non-deaf consider “superior.”
As mentioned in previous articles, many deaf students received inferior educations which included limited ASL and English skills. This is partly due to having non-deaf teachers who were not fluent in ASL. It is very unfortunate. Many non-deaf professionals repeatedly fail to reach their required level of ASL ability but continue to work with deaf students and deaf staff. Unfortunately, it is not popular and well hidden or covered up by those who knew they would fail. Fair?
Of the Deaf People, By the Deaf People for the Deaf People
It seems that most non-deaf employers tend to terminate or demote deaf employees quicker and easier for any unprofessional acts than non-deaf employees.
I believe that most deaf people will agree with what I write in this article. The non-deaf employers, especially those acting as administrators in fields such as deaf education, deaf services or rehabilitation services for the deaf, are more likely to demote or terminate deaf staff than the non-deaf staff.
However, deaf clients/students usually prefer deaf staff to non-deaf staff. One reason non-deaf employers may have a tendency to demote or fire deaf workers may be to help save their own prestige.
As I mentioned in my previous articles, the year 1880 is an important year for deaf education in the U.S. and around the world. It also had a major impact on employment opportunities for deaf adults. Prior to 1880, deaf people were more autonomous. There were deaf newspaper editors and deaf writers. Deaf people held a variety of professional positions. Since 1880, though, deaf employees have suffered demotions and job loss due to the development of negative stereotypes about deaf people.
In reality, the skills and abilities of non-deaf employees and administrators cannot compare with those of the deaf. We see the deaf as being outstanding and absolutely better than the non-deaf are.
I believe that the deaf professionals have the very same empathetic intuition as the deaf students, even better than the non-deaf professionals do. Most deaf clients and students feel comfortable when they see deaf professionals, because our cultural and communication needs are the same. Unfortunately, non-deaf professionals have often purposefully assigned us to non-deaf professionals who many non-deaf consider “superior.”
As mentioned in previous articles, many deaf students received inferior educations which included limited ASL and English skills. This is partly due to having non-deaf teachers who were not fluent in ASL. It is very unfortunate. Many non-deaf professionals repeatedly fail to reach their required level of ASL ability but continue to work with deaf students and deaf staff. Unfortunately, it is not popular and well hidden or covered up by those who knew they would fail. Fair?
Of the Deaf People, By the Deaf People for the Deaf People