Fluent Essays

1. Read the articles on assistive devices, and universally design which can benefit persons with disabilities and help them to integrate into mainstream society, both in school and at work.  Provide an account of the key takeaways that you felt were most important, mentioning in particular barriers and possible solutions for a more enabled community or workplace. 2. What unique assistive device can you come up with? From example, my father made a device to aid his sister who had lost her vision in putting on her socks and stockings. I have noticed that the bus shelter near me is not deep enough to allow a person using a wheelchair to be protected from the elements.  Note: You might want to confer with a persons with a disability to find out what would make their lives easier.) 3. What examples of universal design do you use or have used in the past? Class Resources https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/pubs_p/docs/poster.pdf https://www.ted.com/talks/ron_mccallum_how_technology_allowed_me_to_read ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY Assistive technology is a relatively new term used to describe devices and services that lessen or remove barriers faced by persons with disabilities. Although the term is contemporary, the use of assistive tech- nology is not new. For centuries, individuals with disabilities have used a variety of assistive devices to help them overcome demands in the environment. For example, years ago individuals with a hearing loss realized that placing a horn to their ear ampli- fied sounds and consequently created a primitive version of today’s hearing aid. Unfortunately, until the 1970s it was up to individuals to find appropriate devices to help them ameliorate their disabilities. In 2002, with support from federal legislation, schools and businesses are required to help individuals with disabilities identify and use appropriate assistive technologies and services. The first piece of such leg- islation was Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Pub. L. 99-506). This law prohibits discrimi- nation of persons with disabilities in places of federal employment. Section 504 mandates that federal em- ployees with disabilities must have the necessary ac- commodations to enable them to access databases, telecommunications systems, and other software programs, to contribute to work-related tasks, and to communicate with others in their system. Subsequent to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Technology-Related Assistance for Individ- uals with Disabilities Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-407), better known as the Tech Act, was passed into law. This piece of legislation provided financial assistance for states to plan and implement a consumer- responsive system of assistive-technology services for individuals of all ages with disabilities. The provi- sions of the Tech Act required states to identify exist- ing assistive-technology services and ensure that persons with disabilities acquired access to assistive- technology services, including assessment, funding for devices, training, and technical assistance. Following on the heels of the Tech Act was the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-336). This legislation is designed to pre- vent discrimination against persons with disabilities in four major areas: employment, public facilities, transportation, and telecommunications. Many of these accommodations are made through the use of assistive technologies, such as modified worksta- tions, ramps at the entrances to buildings, and tele- communications devices for persons who are deaf. The Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA) Amendments of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-476) officially changed EHA to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). At this time, assistive tech- nology was added to the list of special education ser- vices that must be included in a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP). IDEA de- fines assistive-technology services as ‘‘any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the se- lection, acquisition, or use of an assistive technology device.’’ Under IDEA, assistive-technology services in- clude: • the evaluation of the needs of a child identified with a disability, including a functional evalua- tion of the child in the child’s customary envi- ronment; • purchasing, leasing, or otherwise providing for the acquisition of assistive-technology devices; • selecting, designing, fitting, customizing, adapt- ing, applying, maintaining, repairing, or replac- ing of assistive-technology devices; • coordinating and using other therapies, inter- ventions, or services with assistive-technology devices, such as those associated with existing education and rehabilitation plans and pro- grams; • training or technical assistance for a child or, where appropriate, the family of the child; and • training or technical assistance for professionals (including individuals providing education and rehabilitation services), employers, or other in- dividuals who provide services to, employ, or are otherwise substantially involved in the major life functions of a child with an identified disability. IDEA defined an assistive-technology device as ‘‘any item, piece of equipment or product system, wheth- er acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities of children with disabilities.’’ The use of assistive-technology devices and ser- vices by students with disabilities is further sup- ported in the amendments to IDEA (Pub. L. 105- 17). The law mandates that, beginning in July 1998, assistive technology must be considered for all stu- dents eligible for special education services. Al- though the regulations do not elaborate on how ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY 149 assistive technology must be considered, the law states that the IEP team must be involved in the deci- sion-making process. It further states that outside evaluators must be used when the IEP team lacks the expertise to conduct an evaluation and make an in- formed decision regarding assistive technology. In addition, it is the responsibility of the school system to secure funding for the device and to provide training to school personnel, family members, and the student as educationally appropriate. Assistive Technology and Human Functions As of 2001, thousands of different assistive technolo- gies have been developed to provide a broad array of support to individuals with disabilities. These as- sistive technologies have been categorized into seven functional areas: (1) existence; (2) communication; (3) body support, protection, and positioning; (4) travel and mobility; (5) environmental interaction; (6) education and transition; and (7) sports, fitness, and recreation. Following is a short description of each of the seven functional areas, with examples of assistive-technology devices and services available to support individuals with disabilities. Problems in the existence area are associated with the functions needed to sustain life, including eating, grooming, dressing, elimination, and hy- giene. Some assistive technologies in this area are adapted utensils, dressing aids, adapted toilet seats, toilet training, and occupational therapy services. Students with communication needs have diffi- culties associated with the functions needed to re- ceive, internalize, and express information, and to interact socially, including oral and written expres- sion and visual and auditory reception. Solutions may include hearing amplifiers, magnifiers, point- ers, alternate computer input, augmentative com- munication devices and services, social skills training, and speech/language therapy services. Body support, protection and positioning issues are associated with the functions needed to stabilize support or protect a portion of the body while sit- ting, standing, or reclining. Assistive technologies may include prone standers, furniture adaptations, support harnesses, stabilizers, head gear, and physi- cal therapy services. Travel and mobility needs are associated with the necessity to move horizontally or vertically, in- cluding crawling, walking, navigating, stair climbing, and transferring either laterally or vertically. Tech- nologies to assist with travel and mobility include wheelchairs, scooters, hoists, cycles, walkers, crutch- es, and orientation- and mobility-training services. Difficulties in environmental interaction are as- sociated with the functions needed to perform activ- ities across environments, including operating computer equipment and accessing facilities. Assis- tive-technology solutions may include the use of switches to control computers, remote-control de- vices, adapted appliances, ramps, automatic door openers, modified furniture, driving aids, and reha- bilitation services. Problems in education and transition are associ- ated with the functions needed to participate in learning activities and to prepare for new school set- tings or postschool environments. Assistive technol- ogies may include educational software, computer adaptations, community-based instruction, and ser- vices from an assistive technologist. Persons needing assistive technology for sports, fitness, and recreation require assistance with indi- vidual or group sports, play, and hobbies and craft activities. Those individuals may benefit from modi- fied rules and equipment, adapted aquatics, switch- activated cameras, and braille playing cards, and may participate in adapted physical education ser- vices. Employing Assistive Technology Federal law mandates that assistive technology must be considered for all individuals served under IDEA. When assistive technologies are being considered, it is important to remember that the consideration must be based on the needs of the individual rather than on the type of disability. Factors of human function must guide any decision as to the appropri- ateness of assistive technology. Every individual with a disability faces a unique set of challenges and de- mands, and the successful use of assistive technology means that these challenges and demands can be lessened or removed. The power and promise of as- sistive technology can be realized only when the needs of a person with a disability are identified and the assistive technology is designed to meet those needs. If this is not done, the potential power of as- sistive technology will not be realized. See also: Adapted Physical Education; Special Education, subentries on Current Trends, His- tory of, Preparation of Teachers. 150 ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY B I B L I O G R A P H Y Alliance for Technology Access. 2000. Comput- ers and Web Resources for Persons with Disabili- ties: A Guide to Exploring Today’s Assistive Technology, 3rd edition. Alameda, CA: Hunter House. Blackhurst, A. Edward, and Lahm, Elizabeth A. 2000. ‘‘Technology and Exceptional Founda- tions.’’ In Technology and Exceptional Individu- als, ed. Jimmy D. Lindsey. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Chambers, Antoinette C. 1997. Has Technology Been Considered? A Guide for IEP Teams. Res- ton, VA: Council of Administrators of Special Education and the Technology and Media Divi- sion of the Council for Exceptional Children. Cook, Albert M., and Hussey, Susan M. 1995. As- sistive Technologies: Principles and Practice. St. Louis, MO: Mosby. Flippo, Karen F.; Inge, Katherine J.; and Barcus, J. Michael, eds. 1995. Assistive Technology: A Resource for School, Work, and Community. Bal- timore: Brookes. Galvin, Jan C., and Scherer, Marcia J. 1996. Evaluating, Selecting and Using Appropriate As- sistive Technology. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen. Golden, Diane. 1998. Assistive Technology in Special Education: Policy and Practice. Reston, VA: Council of Administrators of Special Education and the Technology and Media Division of the Council for Exceptional Children. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997. U.S. Public Law 105-17. U.S. Code. Vol. 20, secs. 1400 et seq. I N T E R N E T R E S O U R C E National Assistive Technology Research In- stitute. 2001. ‘‘Assistive Technology Funda- mentals.’’ <http://natri.uky.edu>. Ted S. Hasselbring Margaret E. Bausch ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES The Association of American Colleges and Universi- ties (AAC&U) is the national association that works to advance and strengthen undergraduate liberal ed- ucation for all college students, regardless of their academic specialization or intended career. Since its founding in 1915, AAC&U’s membership as of 2001 included more than 735 accredited public and pri- vate colleges and universities of every type and size. AAC&U functions as a catalyst and facilitator, forging links among presidents, administrators, and faculty members who are engaged in institutional and curricular planning. Its mission is to reinforce the collective commitment to liberal education at both the national and local levels and to help indi- vidual institutions keep the quality of student learn- ing at the core of their work as they evolve to meet new economic and social challenges. In 1995 the AAC&U board of directors ap- proved five priorities that guide AAC&U’s work: (1) mobilizing collaborative leadership for educational and institutional effectiveness; (2) building faculty leadership in the context of institutional renewal; (3) strengthening curricula to serve student and societal needs; (4) establishing diversity as an educational and civic priority; and (5) fostering global engage- ment in a diverse but connected world. Educational Vision AAC&U advocates for excellence in liberal educa- tion as an equal opportunity commitment—to all students regardless of where they study, what they major in, or what their career goals are. Although liberal education has always set the standard for ex- cellence in higher education, the content of a liberal education has changed markedly over time, and the educational vision and nature of AAC&U’s pro- grammatic work has changed accordingly. Since AAC&U’s founding, however, liberal education at American colleges and universities has consistently fostered the development of intellectual capacities and ethical judgment and the attainment of a sophis- ticated understanding of nature, culture, and society. AAC&U believes that liberal education prepares graduates better for work and for civic leadership in their society. As it has evolved over the last few decades of the twentieth century and the first years of the twenty- first century, liberal education has come to place new emphasis on diversity and pluralism. In a board statement approved in 1998, AAC&U asserted that, ‘‘by its nature, liberal education is globalistic and pluralistic. It embraces the diversity of ideas and ex- ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES 151 Universally Designing the Public Sector Workplace: Technology as Disability Access Carrie Griffin Basas More than twenty years after the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, people with disabilities continue to face discrimination in society, particularly in employment. At the same time, workers with disabilities often seek shelter in public sector employment settings where job benefits and stability are perceived to be greater. Understanding that employees with disabilities are an increasing and desirable part of the American workforce, unions, particularly in the public sector, have increased outreach to this population. Their collective bargaining agreements will have to reflect this inclusion, however, to be successful in hiring and retaining worker-members with disabilities. Building on her earlier study of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)’s collective bargaining agreements and their disability provisions, the author provides a foundation for how unions might adopt proactive, partnership-based disability policies, particularly in the area of technology-based reasonable accommodations. We are hearing about many people being let go [at the Veterans Affairs Admin- istration]. There was a surge of hires to do that work, and now we are getting reports of people being fired in their probation periods. Many of these are vets and disabled vets. (Marilyn Park, legislative representative for the American Federation of Government Employees [an AFL-CIO union, February 10, 2012])1 Introduction Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides for the elimination of disability discrimination in the workforce, particularly through its mandate that employers implement “reasonable accommodations”— modifications to or variations in workplace policies, schedules, and tasks—when they do not eliminate the essential functions of the job or pose undue hardships (administratively or financially).2 The ADA also provides guidelines for imple- menting respectful hiring practices when it comes to disability-related inquiries.3 It frames itself as a tool for eradicating a long history of bias and stigma against people with disabilities, as well as serious underemployment and unemployment of that population—with rates to two to three times that of the nondisabled.4 bs_bs_banner WorkingUSA: The Journal of Labor and Society · 1089-7011 · Volume 16 · March 2013 · pp. 69–86 WorkingUSA: The Journal of Labor and Society © 2013 Immanuel Ness and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. While efforts to hire people with disabilities, particularly in public servant positions, are critical to the diversification of the American workplace and the elimination of disability discrimination, hiring is only one step in the process and needs to be bolstered by comprehensive plans and support for reasonable accommodation post-hire. Without such support, veterans and disabled veterans such as the ones described by Marilyn Park may see just another brief line item added to their work histories. To understand the preparedness of the public sector for workers with dis- abilities, I have undertaken a systematic study of AFSCME’s current contracts database, with an interest in seeing how public sector unions address (or do not) disability issues in their collective bargaining agreements and in the workplace, generally.5 Are people with disabilities actively recruited and retained into the unionized workforce? What protections can they expect to see once they arrive? The relevance of these questions is far from narrow in its reach. The U.S. workforce continues to grow older,6 work itself is a risky enterprise,7 and gov- ernment is increasing efforts to people with disabilities in hiring, arguably making the workforce more representative of disability in the coming years.8 Even with this increasing presence of disability in the workforce itself and in the conscience of employers, particularly in the public sector, the collective bargain- ing agreements in this study have not kept pace. They reflect a highly medical- ized approach to disability, in which they frame it not as civil rights and access, but more as an injury or impairment that happens to an individual worker.9 This kind of medical problem sometimes can be addressed effectively through insur- ances of various kinds, workers’ compensation, and sick leave, which are the most prominent provisions in the agreements.10 However, these medical provi- sions, however useful on the practical level, are not tied to plans for inclusion, such as those envisioned by the ADA’s drafters. It is not surprising that, under this approach, there is relative weak representation of workers with disabilities in the economy over time, as contract workers or able-bodied substitutes replace people with disabilities.11 If medical-oriented resources fail to be effective, the worker with a disability might perceive a failure in the system. He or she will find few enumerated resources in the collective bargaining agreements acknowledging a civil rights- based approach to equal access and opportunity, as embodied by the Americans with Disabilities Act.12 While those rights exist outside the collective bargaining agreements, even if they fail to acknowledge them, their representation is both symbolically and pragmatically important in demonstrating a commitment to disability civil rights and a procedure for exercising and enforcing them. Their inclusion can also serve as an important form of worker self-education. Very few (n = 17 out of 100) current contracts, for example, discuss reasonable accommo- dations, and even fewer provide any details about procedures for asking for or making accommodations.13 Failure to include accommodation in collective bargaining agreements could result from a number of factors, including avoidance of complexities, resistance to the mandate, limited energies in the bargaining process, and the prioritization 70 WORKINGUSA: THE JOURNAL OF LABOR AND SOCIETY of other needs above detailed descriptions in the agreement. Indeed, the rea- sonable accommodation mandate of the Americans with Disabilities Act was perhaps its most controversial when the law was enacted.14 Fears, however, about undue costs and administrative burdens on employers have been gradually offset by the affordability and ease of society-wide technological improvements that are stand-ins for specialized assistive technology for people with disabilities.15 With technology’s increasing relevance as access for workers with disabilities, one might therefore expect to observe some discussion of it as accommodation in the collective bargaining agreements. These provisions are rare, however; the most prominent technology-based accommodations discussed in the agreements have to do with making training materials and policies accessible in alternative formats.16 At the same time, unions, particularly in the public sector, seem very inter- ested in obtaining new members with disabilities and retaining current members with disabilities. Their websites and organizing materials reflect greater aware- ness about disability as a workplace diversity issue.17 Pragmatically speaking, however, one of the chief concerns of workers with disabilities—new to the workplace or existing members—is how their disabilities will be accommodated at work.18 While not all workers with disabilities need or ask for accommoda- tions, approximately 10 percent do ask for accommodations that are technology or equipment based, such as screen-reading software, voice dictation software text-messaging cell phones, reaching devices, and screen magnification soft- ware.19 Therefore, as unions consider what their commitments to technology will be, and simultaneously consider the needs of workers with disabilities or anyone who could become disabled in the course of work, a consistent, thought- ful technology action plan will be of great importance. Through this article, I hope to provide strategies for unions to implement their disability-inclusive vision in ways that will continue to be timely as technology advances. Simply enhancing technology in the workplace—“keeping up” with the neighbors in the private sector—might not be enough. With new technology come new difficulties for people with different access needs. For example, increased website design complexity has multiplied access barriers for visually impaired users, and telephones without video conferencing or text capabilities pose barriers to deaf people. In this article, I will discuss how efforts to respond to the needs of workers with disabilities and integrate and update technological approaches in the workplace can be complementary. The first section of the article addresses briefly some of the pipeline issues for public sector unions, such as the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), as they consider attracting and retaining members with disabilities. The next part of the article provides an overview of assistive technology and universal design and how those issues become part of the reasonable accommo- dation process and the responsibilities inherent to it. Then, I offer insights into the special concerns of unions, particularly in the public sector when it comes to these technology accommodations, and close the article by providing resources and suggestions to address these concerns. This final section, through its action Basas: Technology as Disability Access 71 plan, goes beyond the narrow question of technology and accommodations in the unionized public sector workforce, charting a way for the labor and disability rights movement to have effective collaboration. Pipeline Issues To understand how to attract and retain workers with disabilities, unions will have to gain an understanding of the historical and current barriers keeping their employment suppressed. People with disabilities remain the largest unemployed minority population in the U.S.20 Even two decades after the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act and its employment provisions, the situation of unemployment has not changed greatly for this population.21 Many labor and disability scholars attribute this problem to attitudinal barriers that prevent people with disabilities from being hired into the workforce commensurate with their skills, and issues of retention within the workplace, if employers fail to effectively accommodate employees with disabilities.22 Over time, public sector employment has become regarded as a safe place for workers with disabilities because of consistent benefits, clear leave policies, flexible schedules, and other health-friendly approaches.23 However, no one has done a comprehensive study of how workers with disabilities are actually treated within public employment, or how issues of accommodation are addressed. Much of the allure of the public sector could be a reality or myth. Regardless, people with disabilities do tend to gravitate toward these work settings, and their treatment within them should be a significant research question because it could shape not only that sector, but also strategies in the private sector for greater workforce participation by people with disabilities.24 Unions, in general, have been regarded by workers, disabled or not, as places of protection and assistance, as well.25 Thinking about these issues synergisti- cally, one might expect that people with disabilities might not only gravitate to federal, state, and municipal kinds of employment, but also to unionized pro- tection in those settings. (Unions, however, have not been consistent about tracking disability identity in the workplace.)26 If stable, consistent jobs are what are sought, then unionization’s promises of representation and fairness offer expanded benefits of working in the public sector for people with disabilities—if and only if, unions begin to understand the demands that disability poses in the workplace. This perception of demand should not be a deterrent but rather a realization that disability poses its own set of issues, and ones that if they are addressed effectively, will provide benefits to any worker that might have similar health care, flexibility, and equality concerns, disabled or not.27 Universal Design vs. Assistive Technology One barrier to implementing the vision and requirements of disability non- discrimination law has been employers understanding what is required of them. Title I of The Americans with Disabilities Act provides that all employers, 72 WORKINGUSA: THE JOURNAL OF LABOR AND SOCIETY including those that are public sector and unionized or are labor organizations themselves, must provide “reasonable accommodations” to job candidates and qualified employees with disabilities.28 Reasonable accommodations are modifi- cations to a job, the workplace, or processes and policies that enable a qualified individual with a disability to experience equal employment opportunity and the benefits and privileges of employment—essentially, a “ramp” to similar job performance and benefits that a similarly situated employee without a disability might enjoy.29 Accommodations allow employees with disabilities to perform the essential functions of the job and become integrated into the workplace and the productivity stream. The accommodation process is described as “interactive,”30 where employers and employees discuss what the needs and possibilities are, and arrive through dialogue, at a solution that is not an undue burden (financially or administratively) on the employer and yet meets the needs of the employee.31 Some examples of reasonable accommodations include job restructuring, adjusted work schedules, changing job or training materials, providing qualified readers or interpreters, reassignment to vacant positions, and purchasing or modifying equipment.32 This last example is the focus of this article. In acquiring or modifying new equipment, primarily these days— technology—an employer is wise to consider these acquisitions from the view- points of both universal design33 and assistive technology.34 Assistive technology is equipment that enables people with disabilities to perform various tasks; its design is focused on the physical or mental impairments that limit the individual. Universal design (“UD”), in contrast, takes a broader perspective, considering the ways in which all technology purchases, workspace decisions, and “improve- ments” to workplace processes, might affect all users.35 The goal of universal design is to create social communities and physical spaces where the need for individual accommodation is reduced because the greatest number of people has access from the beginning without the need for special interventions. Universal design encourages flexible spaces and thought processes in advancing everything from adjustable desks and chairs to time and stress-saving software for all employees to use.36 Assistive technology’s rightful place, in an environment focused on UD, should be as a gap filler as employers move toward workplaces that work for everyone.37 Universal design focuses not just on physical environments but also on company processes and the accessibility of them. 38 Assistive technology becomes, then, the focus of reasonable accommodations or personal vocational rehabilitation. In looking at technology decisions, employers may sometimes be concerned that any acquisitions or modifications to equipment are for “personal,” not professional use by the employee.39 The Equal Employment Opportunity Com- mission (EEOC), in interpreting the ADA’s requirements, also makes this dis- tinction, requiring employers to make accommodations that serve a purpose in the workplace and asking employees with disabilities to provide their own technology that has a personal purpose, such as a cane, electric wheelchair, ventilator, hearing aid, or prosthetic limb.40 If any item is specifically designed to Basas: Technology as Disability Access 73 meet job-related needs or used primarily on the job to accomplish the essential functions of the job, then it falls into the category of a potential workplace accommodation.41 In a recent study by the Job Accommodation Network, a program of the U.S. Department of Labor, researchers found that about 25 percent of employers were considering an accommodation solution that involved buying a product or equipment, such as software or a tool.42 About 10 percent were considering modifying a product or equipment, while a smaller number were considering doing both. JAN’s largest set of inquiries (32%) came from federal, state, and local government serving everything from executive to legislative functions.43 (Service, finance, health care, education, and manufacturing industries also presented a large number of JAN’s information and assistance requests). JAN notes that less than half of 1 percent of its yearly contacts come from people identifying themselves as union leaders (number in FY 2010–2011 was 40,554).44 While they did not track specific inquiries from unions or provide any breakdown between private and public sector unions, for that matter, they do note a few interesting findings. Most of their calls and e-mail inquiries were from public sector employ- ers about reasonable accommodations.45 Of those requests, most of them related to motor and mobility impairments (42 percent), closely followed by sensory accommodations (36 percent). The remainder of the accommodations related to disabilities that were cognitive, neurological, psychiatric, or classified as “other.”46 The Special Concerns of Public Sector Unions Employers, public sector or private, unionized or not, often feel daunted by the ADA and the perceived complexities of its provisions and the burdens that it might pose on their administrative and financial resources.47 Employers, at the very base line, want to hire workers that can do the job efficiently and effectively with minimal intervention and individual expenditures. The accommodations approach of the ADA assumes that employers will have to spend more money to hire and retain an employee with a disability, in contrast to one without.48 This assumption is not universally true, however. Only about 20 percent of employees with disabilities require accommodations, and 89 percent of those accommoda- tions are one-time expenditures of $500 or less.49 This kind of situation is comparable to all kinds of other lifespan and health considerations that enter the workplace, such as pregnancy, temporary injury, paternity leave, and retrain- ing.50 In some ways, disability can be less expensive, and seen as more of an investment in the long-term productivity of the employee and the enterprise. JAN’s research on universal design and assistive technology supports this posi- tion, as well, claiming that most employers reported direct and indirect benefits from purchasing or modifying technology, including the retention of a qualified employee, increases in individual and company productivity, the elimination of the costs of hiring a new employee, improved interactions with coworkers, and increased company morale.51 74 WORKINGUSA: THE JOURNAL OF LABOR AND SOCIETY The concerns of employers, particularly public sector unions, are real, how- ever, and require strategies for addressing them effectively. In this tough economy, employers are worried about financial constraints and the costs of accommoda- tions.52 As federal, state, and local budgets experience hardships, resources for accommodation in the public sector might become particularly limited. Employ- ers might worry that initial accommodation requests could become a slippery slope to less control over the workplace and their budgets. They lack expertise with the ADA and can find it to be threatening and confusing.53 In the public sector, these kinds of concerns might be exacerbated by the interest of people with disabilities in finding perceived safe refuge in that form of employment.54 Even without asking for accommodation, people with disabilities might provide a stress on government budgets with increased health-care costs and needs.55 At the heart of this tension is the struggle between individual interests, which the ADA seems to represent, and the collective good position of union representation where individual interests are subsumed to the needs of the whole. Workers with disabilities undeniably pose issues when it comes to senior- ity, job reassignment, job restructuring, and flexible scheduling.56 Perhaps, it is no surprise that unions seem interested in recruitment but have not sufficiently expressed preparedness for disability and accommodation processes in their collective bargaining agreements.57 It is all the superficial upside of disability as diversity without a great handle on the logistics, which have daunted employers in all sectors since the ADA’s passage. Unions might be concerned that they cannot sufficiently represent the issues of people with disabilities, or that in doing so, they might have to sacrifice other members’ interests or even those of the citizens of the locales they serve through their government employment.58 One seemingly forgotten perspective in this mix of concerns is the manner in which unions historically have gotten to know and understand disability as an experience. Because efforts to infuse disability into a larger diversity agenda are relatively new in all employment sectors, disability, for most of the industrialized period, has been an impediment that results from workplace injuries. Those individuals with preexisting disabilities simply did not work or did piecemeal work from home.59 While unions have stood ready to assist colleagues disabled by the workplace, they seem less prepared to embrace disability as socially disabling and a civil rights and diversity experience. The fact that AFSCME’s collective bar- gaining agreements (CBAs), for example, are replete with provisions for workers’ compensation, sick leave, and injury, and yet lack a broader vision of disability, supports this position.60 One step forward for unions is to gain understanding about the disability civil rights movement and locate its place among other civil rights movements that unions have supported as they have changed the face of their operations and values.61 Resources to Address Access and Expertise Gaps: A Way Forward If employers and unions tend to overlook the needs of workers with disabili- ties, as I have surmised, because of fears62 and gaps in knowledge, education is Basas: Technology as Disability Access 75 the way forward for greater inclusion in the unionized workforce. Rather than expecting each union—at the local or national level—to become stand-alone experts in disability law and reasonable accommodation principles, efforts should be directed at encouraging dialogue between the labor and civil rights movements. Through this exchange, both can better appreciate the needs of the other, while mapping resources that will assist in realizing disability integration at work. No Need to Become Stand-Alone Experts The first strategy to infusing more of an accommodations vision in public sector unionized workplaces is to dispel the concern that unions and unionized employers need to become stand-alone experts in the ADA and reasonable accommodation solutions, particularly emerging technologies.63 One missing aspect of the disability rights movement and the execution of the ADA was knowledge about an array of community-based services to assist both workers with disabilities, their employers, and unions.64 These resources range from the Department of Labor (DOL)-sponsored Job Accommodation Network to state assistive technology projects.65 The work of making workplaces more tech and disability friendly will need to happen in three complementary intersecting streams, however: policy, worker self-advocacy, and community assistance. Process and Policy as Universal Design The collective bargaining agreements sampled in my study largely lack a detailed process for raising disability issues, requesting accommodations, or securing ADA rights. The first step to having an accommodations process that works for everyone is to identify a contact person or office for accommodations and include that information in the CBA, as well as other relevant documents such as the employee handbook, union website, and human resources brochures. The principal importance of its inclusion in the CBA is that all employees can access it with ease, and the agreement has binding effects. If mechanisms for accommodation are too dense or unwieldy to be in the CBA, they should at least be encapsulated somewhere else and revisited with consistency, just as technol- ogy is also constantly evaluated for the access needs it addresses and the new barriers it might pose. Unions and employers, as part of their documentation process, should look at their websites and social networking tools, too, to ensure that they meet accessibility standards because they might be the first stop for workers with concerns.66 These ideas of process, therefore, are twofold: creating a thoughtful, under- standable process for dealing with disability issues in the workplace when it comes to accommodation or other discrimination concerns, and making univer- sal design considerations at the heart of any evaluation of the suitability of new technology procurements or modifications. When size and resources allow, both the employer and local union should have an accommodations coordinator of 76 WORKINGUSA: THE JOURNAL OF LABOR AND SOCIETY some kind that keeps up to date on disability law, perhaps as a larger set of duties relating to health insurance, leave, and EEOC compliance.67 Worker Self-Advocacy My suggestions so far seem to point in the direction of the onus being on employers and unions. Workers with disabilities, however, have critical roles in increasing knowledge about the ADA, disability as a lived experience, and the potential relevance of disability issues to all workers—currently disabled or not. Depending on the length of their impairment and their social environment, workers with disabilities might not have extensive knowledge about their legal rights, disability as a civil rights movement, or opportunities for brainstorming with other similarly situated workers.68 One way to increase worker knowledge is to ensure the transparent processes suggested earlier, combined with including disability as a valued issue in all diversity efforts (e.g., training, materials, vision statements), and providing outlets, such as affinity groups, for workers with disabilities.69 They should have access to a list of local and national disability resources, such as the Department of Justice’s ADA Information Line,70 the Job Accommodation Network’s reasonable accommodation assistance service and database,71 the state assistive technology project,72 the state’s protection and advocacy organization,73 state vocational rehabilitation services,74 and any local independent living centers for people with disabilities.75 The crafting of this kind of short, accessible document that is updated regularly is also a valuable resource for human resources, union leaders, and others with a stake in promoting workplace harmony. Workers with disabilities will become better self-advocates, as they are encouraged to share their disability perspectives, to “be out,” and to lead in the union and the workplace.76 While one worker should not be considered to speak for everyone, changing the face of shop leadership on the ground can make a difference in general comfort and acceptance levels among coworkers when it comes to disability issues.77 Through the development of relationships with community groups that are experts on disability, employers and unions can encourage workers with disabilities to attend technology expos and assistive technology demonstrations so that they can be valuable, current resources on the best accommodation solutions to increase their comfort and productivity at work.78 Becoming self-experts ensures that workers will better understand what they need and can then communicate those needs clearly to unions and employ- ers. Finally, in partnering with community organizations that have technology readily accessible to disabled workers, all individuals concerned can form a team to reduce the costs and delays associated with accommodations. In adopting these accommodations, they might find themselves promoting the advancement and refinement of technology that could be useful to nondisabled workers, too.79 One excellent example of this phenomenon is the “mainstreaming” of speech recognition software, formerly used by people with vision, learning, or physical disabilities as a substitute for typing. Basas: Technology as Disability Access 77 Community Collaboration As technology becomes of increasing importance to guaranteeing the inclu- sion of people with disabilities in society, particularly at work, unions, and employers should not feel as if they are signaling, or admitting to, ineptitude by seeking the assistance of disability specialists. Many free resources exist in the community, and consultants can advise on a range of matters from financial assistance with accommodations to emerging technologies and their accessibil- ity. Rather than being strained, these community supports …