APPENDIX 23
Memorandum submitted by the Association
of Disabled Professionals (EDP 32)
These are the thoughts we were able to collate
in a response. The issues the enquiry is expected to include are:
Do the high numbers claiming Incapacity Benefit
represent hidden unemployment?
No, but some disabled people want to work but
cannot because of inflexibility around working times, eg some
disabled people need to rest during the day. Some work but find
they cannot continue to work in the capacity they are in post
to do despite the efforts of the company to find other work. Some
people are medically retired. We also have to remember the technological
changes over the years which may have contributed to increasing
expectations by employers in some cases without possibly considering
the impact in the workers output.
Medical science works to an ethic of prevention
and has advanced over the years. There have been many more impairments
identified eg ME.
Having said this there may be some spurious
reasons for awarding incapacity benefit. As the benefits integrity
project of 1997 showed there were very few people not genuinely
claiming benefits.
However GPs should not unilaterally take the
decision to sign people off as long term sick for fear of backlash.
The decision should be verified by someone independent of the
GP with consideration for the alternatives that may be available.
What is, or should be, the role of Jobcentre Plus?
Assisting people to get into work. Making access
to work from day one once the employee starts work. As an employer
the support required for the disabled person from AtW is not available
on day one and the disabled person is immediately not performing
on an equal basis with the next person. The employer has to make
temporary adjustments under the DDA but this may cause ill feelings
as many requests for equipment and support take more than six
months to resolve. As an employer we have had to wait six weeks
for a handset which was available on the market. Surely this could
be improved by an assessment being carried out on day one and
the employer could be authorised to get these things available
on the market .
Retention of disabled people in employment;
an employer recently we had an incidence where an employee who
has been employed for five years had a reassessment of his equipment
from AtW as his visual impairment had deteriorated and his equipment
was no longer appropriate for his requirements.
The new equipment cost £5,500 and because
the employee concerned had been with the employer more than six
weeks the employers had to pay 20% of the cost (£1,300).
The employer had money to fall back on and so could pay the dues
but many small employers could not afford this kind of money.
When the issue was raised with AtW locally we were told to find
the money (£1,300) from other sources which could take months
and deprive the employee of vital equipment he needs for doing
his job effectively.
Unfortunately currently the lack of support
for disabled people, due to lack of employers funds, may prevent
the clause being effective. Many small employers have not got
£1,300 to spend on one person's equipment, in particular
those employing less than 15 employees.
In parallel with the progress of the DDA amendment
bill the funding and provision of AtW requires reviewing to make
it equal for all disabled people in employment. I believe self-employed
disabled people get 100% support from AtW but not those disabled
people who have been employed for more than six weeks.
The concern is around the cost of equipment
and support to disabled people working for small employers when
the disabled person requires a piece of equipment and the employer
has no money to pay the 20% contribution. I was informed by reliable
sources that this was a genuine reason for an employer to make
an employee sick under the reasonable adjustment section of the
DDA.
Are they doing enough to actively to engage people
with disabilities in finding suitable work?
This may be so for some people but in most cases
no, because of not understanding the jobs the disabled person
can and cannot do.
Are initiatives such as WorkStep successful?
No, as supported employment initiatives are
being phased out limiting the placement available to five years
There are some disabled people who can work but could not work
in normal employment conditions and are in supported employment
placements for this reason. Eventually they will be pushed out
of work adding to the incapacity benefits numbers figures. Sheltered
employment places are not suitable for everyone.
The New Deal for Disabled People: Have the lessons
been learned from earlier pilots? How might it be made more effective?
It may be more effective if people had no fear
of losing benefits and someone somewhere could give the answer
to a request for information and whether he/she would be better
off on benefits or otherwise.
Role of the private sector in delivering employment
services for people with disabilities. Private as in non statutory—ie
not for profit sector—if so, they have always done this
eg Enham.
Private as in the for profit sector—we
haven't seen any evidence of this—although there is room
for working with the private sector to develop job retention services.
Private job agencies appear to be successful
and have reason to think that they could be just as successful
in finding work for disabled people.
The private sector as an employer has a huge
role to play as they have the jobs disabilities and health problems.
Are the needs of particular groups of people with
disabilities and health problems adequately catered for?
All disabled people should be treated the same.
Should employment projects be more inclusive and
adapt to individual need rather than be aimed at people with specific
disabilities?
Yes because everyone's disability is different.
The tax credit and benefits system: is it too
complex for the circumstances faced by people with disabilities?
Yes, this is applicable to everyone who works,
not just disabled people. Having said this disabled people are
having to make complex calculations as to whether they should
work. This includes housing benefits and non work benefits etc.
Should it be reformed to reduce financial disincentives
to find work?
Yes, means-testing should be abolished for benefits
and social services. Not only is this a disincentive as has been
argued in our county for other social services, eg direct services
and direct payments, it stops people from saving for their retirement
or a rainy day, some equipment required is very expensive and
the disabled person may choose to buy it with their savings.
How does discrimination hinder the employment
of people with disabilities?
Plain peoples attitudes. Flexible working hours
may not be available, failure of recognition of some issues for
a disabled person may be the same for other people, eg breakfast
meetings may be a nightmare for some disabled people but also
for parents with schoolchildren.
Disabled people have the same issues as others
eg kids, marriage, mortgage but they have to battle with additional
issues such as access to buildings etc.
There are a few disabled people who can work
20 days a year for quangos but are barred from doing so because
of therapeutic earnings rules. Many quangos pay a daily rate more
than the rules permit.
What effect does the Disability Discrimination
Act have?
One cannot always prove they have been discriminated
against in the application process.
90% of employers have fewer than 15 employees,
this needs to be abolished.
What experience do other countries have in tackling
the growth in the numbers claiming incapacity-related benefits
I do not know what other countries policies
are.
Other comments:
Disabled people volunteering get nothing in
the way of equipment, and the equipment needed is often so costly
that disabled people cannot practise or perform adequately in
working environments, eg hearing aids etc.
Jane Hunt
Chair
3 January 2003
| 
