J E Robinson1. 1. University College Suffolk, UK. jill.robinson@uea.ac.uk
Abstract
PURPOSE: A consumer led initiative which aimed to gather information from local employers and disabled people which might inform future action to improve work opportunities for disabled people. METHOD: (1) A survey of 500 companies with more than 20 employees randomly sampled from 4 locations across Suffolk was undertaken. The survey generated both numerical and verbal data. Response rate was low (25%) but achieved a reasonable spread of organizations in terms of size, type of industry and geographical location. (2) Semi-structured interviews were carried out with nine disabled people. Open-ended questions were used to elicit information about the nature of their disability, experiences of education and experiences of seeking and/or maintaining work. RESULTS: 43% of respondents had one or more disabled employees. Evidence of obstacles to employment included a lack of understanding about the capability of disabled people, lack of knowledge about financial and technical assistance and undifferentiated approaches to access and accommodation. Interview data supported the importance of paid employment to self esteem and quality of life and showed high levels of frustration in their search for work. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the need for better interagency communication and a more effective information distribution strategy for employers, particularly in relation to the availability of systems of support and the capability of disabled employees.
PURPOSE: A consumer led initiative which aimed to gather information from local employers and disabled people which might inform future action to improve work opportunities for disabled people. METHOD: (1) A survey of 500 companies with more than 20 employees randomly sampled from 4 locations across Suffolk was undertaken. The survey generated both numerical and verbal data. Response rate was low (25%) but achieved a reasonable spread of organizations in terms of size, type of industry and geographical location. (2) Semi-structured interviews were carried out with nine disabled people. Open-ended questions were used to elicit information about the nature of their disability, experiences of education and experiences of seeking and/or maintaining work. RESULTS: 43% of respondents had one or more disabled employees. Evidence of obstacles to employment included a lack of understanding about the capability of disabled people, lack of knowledge about financial and technical assistance and undifferentiated approaches to access and accommodation. Interview data supported the importance of paid employment to self esteem and quality of life and showed high levels of frustration in their search for work. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the need for better interagency communication and a more effective information distribution strategy for employers, particularly in relation to the availability of systems of support and the capability of disabled employees.