Disability and employment: a comparative critique of UK legislation

Goss, David; Goss, Fiona; Adam-Smith, Derek

doi:10.1080/09585190050075132

Cited by 66 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The claimant then had to present evidence to prove their disability. This finding is in line with Goss et al (): claimants face a double hurdle as they first must prove disability before they can seek to prove that discrimination occurred.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Justice obtained? How disabled claimants fare at Employment Tribunals

William

Pauksztat

Corby

2019

Industrial Relations Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores disability discrimination cases at British Employment Tribunals. Analysing over 750 judgments, it examines the characteristics of claimants and the factors associated with the failure of cases: restrictive judicial decisions, complex legal tests, inequality of arms between claimant and employer and the stigma attached to claimants with mental impairments, providing some evidence for a hierarchy of impairments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Justice obtained? How disabled claimants fare at Employment Tribunals

William

Pauksztat

Corby

2019

Industrial Relations Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most had spent the majority of their employed life in the UK public sector, an unintentional bias, but one that reflects higher levels of employment of disabled people in this sector. There is also evidence of a link between the employment of disabled people and the presence of professional human resource departments (Goss et al 2000) and high levels of unionization (Hoque and Noon 2004); both features of large-scale state-funded organizations. The information we distributed about our project sought participants willing to talk about their experiences of disability and negotiating workplace adjustments; it did not specify whether these experiences should be negative or positive (Table 1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negotiating ‘Difference’: Representing Disabled Employees in the British Workplace

Foster

Fosh

2010

Brit J Industrial Rel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on qualitative interviews with disabled employees, union officers and disability-related organizations, this article examines employee attempts to negotiate workplace adjustments and associated issues of workplace representation. UK employment law utilizes an individual medical model of disability, which conflicts with traditional collective approaches favoured by trade unions, which has implications for disabled employees and union representation. We explore the different strategies available to unions and conclude that, despite the role played by disability-related organizations in supporting employees, unions are the only workplace actors who are capable of reconfiguring the 'personal as political' and integrating disability concerns into wider organizational agendas.

show abstract

“…These types of organizations were also associated with positive responses toward persons with disabilities, such as changing work systems, providing accommodations, and providing special training (Bruyère et al, ; Dong, Oire, MacDonald‐Wilson, & Fabian, ; Goss et al, ; Harcourt et al, ; Hernandez et al, ; Houtenville & Kalargyrou, ; Lee, ; Morgan & Alexander, ; Richards & Sang, ; Woodhams & Corby, ). Goss et al () suggested that the organizational size is a proxy for having specialized HR managers who can learn about best practices in disability management through professional associations, which can encourage them to develop better practices for disability employment. The favorable findings about public‐sector and unionized organizations run counter to Stone and Colella's () predictions that work organizations with an equity value system that emphasizes standardization and impersonalization will present more obstacles and treatment problems for employees with disabilities.…”

Section: Review Of Empirically Investigated Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2007). Goss et al (2000) suggested that the organizational size is a proxy for having specialized HR managers who can learn about best practices in disability management through professional associations, which can encourage them to develop better practices for disability employment. The favorable findings about public-sector and unionized organizations run counter to Stone and Colella's (1996) predictions that work organizations with an equity value system that emphasizes standardization and impersonalization will present more obstacles and treatment problems for employees with disabilities.…”

Section: Organizational Characteristics and Observers' Treatment Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the treatment of persons with disabilities in organizations: A review and research agenda

Beatty

Baldridge

Boehm

et al. 2018

Human Resource Management

112

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human resource practitioners play a crucial role in promoting equitable treatment of persons with disabilities, and practitioner's decisions should be guided by solid evidence‐based research. We offer a systematic review of the empirical research on the treatment of persons with disabilities in organizations, using Stone and Colella's seminal theoretical model of the factors influencing the treatment of persons with disabilities in work organizations, to ask: What does the available research reveal about workplace treatment of persons with disabilities, and what remains understudied? Our review of 88 empirical studies from management, rehabilitation, psychology, and sociology research highlights seven gaps and limitations in extant research: (a) implicit definitions of workplace treatment; (b) neglect of national context variation; (c) missing differentiation between disability populations; (d) overreliance on available data sets; (e) predominance of single‐source, cross‐sectional data; (f) neglect of individual differences and identities in the presence of disability; and (g) lack of specificity on underlying stigma processes. To support the development of more inclusive workplaces, we recommend increased research collaborations between human resource researchers and practitioners on the study of specific disabilities and contexts, and efforts to define and expand notions of treatment to capture more nuanced outcomes.

show abstract

Disability and employment: a comparative critique of UK legislation

Cited by 66 publications

References 6 publications

Justice obtained? How disabled claimants fare at Employment Tribunals

Justice obtained? How disabled claimants fare at Employment Tribunals

Negotiating ‘Difference’: Representing Disabled Employees in the British Workplace

On the treatment of persons with disabilities in organizations: A review and research agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About