Obama Signs an Executive Order to have 100,000 Disabled People Hired by Federal Gov't

[Foxrac]

I agree with you here. I'm reminded of a quote by Lao Tzu "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime". If the people being hired are qualified for the job fine but if they are just going to put disabled people in the office it is a waste of money.

Welcome back to AD, haven't seen you in long time.

I think that federal is hiring people with disabilities to work for federal and they would still require to meet job qualification like education with few exempt that are conflict with disability, such as skilled oral language so deaf applicant wouldn't have follow that or require fully visually that is conflict with blind people.

People with completely disabled and unable to work so they shouldn't hired by federal because of nothing and waste of money.

 

[TWA]

Welcome back to AD, haven't seen you in long time.

I think that federal is hiring people with disabilities to work for federal and they would still require to meet job qualification like education with few exempt that are conflict with disability, such as skilled oral language so deaf applicant wouldn't have follow that or require fully visually that is conflict with blind people.

People with completely disabled and unable to work so they shouldn't hired by federal because of nothing and waste of money.

By god, Foxrac gets it and some of you nuts don't. Hell has frozen over!!!!!!!!!

 

[posts from hell]

any frame work on this thus far?

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Look man, you know I like you, but you are clearly out of touch on this one. How many disabled people do you know? How many disabled people do you know that have tried to get jobs and couldn't just simply because the employer looked at their wheelchair, heard their "strange" voice, or their otherwise abnormal behavior?

I might be going out on a limb here, but until you have experienced job discrimination first hand because of your hearing loss (as I have, and as I'm sure many people on this board have), you really shouldn't make jokes about this. This EO is a good thing. It's not pandering, and I think very few disabled people would see it that way.

I would like to add something else. Discrimination is only one aspect to this. Insurance is another. People like me are often on SSI and Medicaid. Employment would be great, but, not at the expense of getting our medicare benefits cut. I, myself, have held volunteer jobs over the years, but has never been gainfully employed? Why? Because, if I worked and made over a certain amount, they'd start cutting benefits. If I lost Medicaid, I'd lose the only health insurance I had. I have very complicated medical issues and often need hospitalization. So, while I applaud Obama, I would like to see changes made in the laws that would allow us to work AND also keep our benefits.

 

[jillio]

I would like to add something else. Discrimination is only one aspect to this. Insurance is another. People like me are often on SSI and Medicaid. Employment would be great, but, not at the expense of getting our medicare benefits cut. I, myself, have held volunteer jobs over the years, but has never been gainfully employed? Why? Because, if I worked and made over a certain amount, they'd start cutting benefits. If I lost Medicaid, I'd lose the only health insurance I had. I have very complicated medical issues and often need hospitalization. So, while I applaud Obama, I would like to see changes made in the laws that would allow us to work AND also keep our benefits.

Those are in the works. In the meantime, he is doing something to advance the cause of functional limitations that can be accommodated for.

 

[TXgolfer]

 

[TWA]

When I spoke with a Workforce Recruitment Program coordinator back in October, he said that there are going to be reviews as to why the Fed keeps missing the target mark in hiring disabled workers every year (the goal is to have 8% of the Federal workforce be classified, but the number is currently 1-2%). He said there's more pressure now than ever for government agencies to hire disabled applicants.

Of course, this was before the election and Obama's spinal realignment that made him bend over backwards for the GOP. We'll see what happens in the near future...

 

[jillio]

When I spoke with a Workforce Recruitment Program coordinator back in October, he said that there are going to be reviews as to why the Fed keeps missing the target mark in hiring disabled workers every year (the goal is to have 8% of the Federal workforce be classified, but the number is currently 1-2%). He said there's more pressure now than ever for government agencies to hire disabled applicants.

Of course, this was before the election and Obama's spinal realignment that made him bend over backwards for the GOP. We'll see what happens in the near future...

Not just pressure...financial incentive as well.

 

[DURAY]

OPM and EEOC have no incentives to bravo agencies for complying with this order. Section 501 is weak. Plus diversity and disability are two competing groups....

 

[Steinhauer]

Yeah people actually thought I was faking Menieres



I guess we will see how it goes..... I would rather see money go to the schools for the disabled that are folding......just feel that is a better approach.

People think I am faking my hearing loss .... Its like "Dude, just because you can understand my voice, does not mean I can understand yours ...."

and then, they still don't get it.

 

[jillio]

OPM and EEOC have no incentives to bravo agencies for complying with this order. Section 501 is weak. Plus diversity and disability are two competing groups....

What are you talking about?:roll:

 

[Daredevel7]

OPM and EEOC have no incentives to bravo agencies for complying with this order. Section 501 is weak. Plus diversity and disability are two competing groups....

Why do you say that Section 501 is weak?

Does anyone know about Schedule A?

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/lead/upload/abc_ada_prog_mngr.pdf

Cliff Notes:

It's an incentive to allow hiring managers to hire people with disabilities. If I remember correctly, this is how it works. You can apply for a job through the normal way (such as usajobs.com) which has an open period of 3-6 months, or apply for a job through Schedule A. Only people with disabilities can apply via Schedule A.

Now, the hiring manager has to look through Schedule A first, find someone who is qualified to do the job. If he finds one, he can hire one as soon as 2 weeks. If he doesn't find one, he throws away the list and looks at the list from the normal way. But he must go through the whole list and wait until the application period ends.

Technically, the manager can still technically dismiss Schedule A and always find someone via the normal way. (But hey, who says that you cannot apply in both ways?)

To be quite honest, I don't know if it's helping, but at least it's a step.

I've applied to many jobs and got shut down for most of them. I don't know if it's because it is from discrimination ("omgwtfbbq a deaf girl, I dont know what to do with those type of people") or simply I am not qualified.

But somehow I suspect that most of the time it is because they are scared of me.

 

[Jiro]

I've applied to many jobs and got shut down for most of them. I don't know if it's because it is from discrimination ("omgwtfbbq a deaf girl, I dont know what to do with those type of people") or simply I am not qualified.

why? potential sexual harassment lawsuit.

 

[Daredevel7]

This sounds really bad, but...

doesn't anyone wonder if it is ultimately cheaper to hire people with disabilities?

Basically, it's a simple business tactic to hire them?

Hiring people with disabilities may have a high initial cost, but they may be so grateful for their job and stay with it that you can have them at a salary lower than usual. They can do what anyone else can do, but again most of them would have a lower salary because they are less likely to leave, stay longer than most employees, more grateful for the job, etc.

Food for thought....

 

[Daredevel7]

why? potential sexual harassment lawsuit.

Well.... my left boob DID fall out once during an interview.

Whoops.

 

[Jiro]

Well.... my left boob DID fall out once during an interview.

Whoops.

oh I was thinking it's cuz you make a lot of innuendos and all

 

[jillio]

Why do you say that Section 501 is weak?

Does anyone know about Schedule A?

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/lead/upload/abc_ada_prog_mngr.pdf

Cliff Notes:

It's an incentive to allow hiring managers to hire people with disabilities. If I remember correctly, this is how it works. You can apply for a job through the normal way (such as usajobs.com) which has an open period of 3-6 months, or apply for a job through Schedule A. Only people with disabilities can apply via Schedule A.

Now, the hiring manager has to look through Schedule A first, find someone who is qualified to do the job. If he finds one, he can hire one as soon as 2 weeks. If he doesn't find one, he throws away the list and looks at the list from the normal way. But he must go through the whole list and wait until the application period ends.

Technically, the manager can still technically dismiss Schedule A and always find someone via the normal way. (But hey, who says that you cannot apply in both ways?)

To be quite honest, I don't know if it's helping, but at least it's a step.

I've applied to many jobs and got shut down for most of them. I don't know if it's because it is from discrimination ("omgwtfbbq a deaf girl, I dont know what to do with those type of people") or simply I am not qualified.

But somehow I suspect that most of the time it is because they are scared of me.

Exactly why I asked what he was talking about. And I agree with you about the "scared" reaction.

 

[jillio]

This sounds really bad, but...

doesn't anyone wonder if it is ultimately cheaper to hire people with disabilities?

Basically, it's a simple business tactic to hire them?

Hiring people with disabilities may have a high initial cost, but they may be so grateful for their job and stay with it that you can have them at a salary lower than usual. They can do what anyone else can do, but again most of them would have a lower salary because they are less likely to leave, stay longer than most employees, more grateful for the job, etc.

Food for thought....

You are absolutely correct. It has been shown that employees with a disability, once accommodated, are long term and dedicated employees. That initial cost varies with disability. Actually, the deaf have the least expensive accommodations, the blind the most expensive.