THE HIDDEN MAJORITY
Disclaimer: This document has been supported by the European Commission. The content of this document is the sole responsibility of its publishers and represents in no way the views of the Commission and its services.
A study of economic inactivity among blind and partially sighted
people in Sweden, Germany and Romania
A report to the Board of the European Blind Union
By: Fred Reid and Philippa Simkiss
2008-2009
RNIB
Preface
We wish to acknowledge the support of the European Blind Union in seeking
funding to defray the expense of our study visits to Sweden and Germany,
which form the basis of this report. We are grateful to the Commission of
the European Union for providing a start up grant. Completion of the report
would not have been possible without the generous financial assistance of
the Royal National Institute of Blind People, which is here gratefully
acknowledged.
We are deeply indebted to the staff of the organisations who gave so
generously of their time and listened so patiently to our probing questions.
The organisations are: the Swedish Public employment Service; the Swedish
Association of the Visually Impaired; the German Federal Ministry of
Employment and Social Affairs; the Office of Integration (Munster, Germany);
The Vocational Training Centre for the Blind and Visually Impaired at Soest,
Germany; the German Federation of the Blind and Partially Sighted; the Royal
National Institute of Blind people. We regret that the methodological
condition of anonymity prevents us from acknowledging these contributors by
name.
We are especially grateful to Mrs. Anne Rigby for her skilful translations
from the German. Dr. Roger DuClaud-Williams of the Department of Politics,
Warwick University, England, read early drafts of chapters two and three and
offered valuable comments for which we are grateful. Lord Colin Low,
Chairman, Royal National Institute of Blind People, read a late draft of the
report and we are grateful for their comments. Responsibility for any errors
of omission or commission is entirely ours.
We cannot forbear to express our gratitude to our spouses, who put up with
our inconvenient absences from home and family. We could not have done the
work without their support.
Finally a note as to terminology: we have used the term ‘client’ from time
to time to refer to blind and partially sighted people engaged in the labour
activation process. We are aware that many regard this term as politically
incorrect, but feel driven to use it where the available alternatives seem
coldly bureaucratic.
Dr. Fred Reid and Dr. Philippa Simkiss
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 Introduction
Purpose of the Report 1.1-1.2
Unemployment and economic inactivity 2.1-2.6
The Propensity to Work 3.1- 3.11
The Hidden Majority 4.1-4.6
Study of Sweden, Germany and Romania proposed 5.1-5.3
Methodology 6.1-6.8
Appendix I
Appendix II
Appendix III
2 Sweden
Introduction 1.1-1.8
Special Employment Services FOR Visually Impaired People 2.1-2.5
Support for Visually Impaired people in Employment 3.1-3.19
Evaluation 4.1-4.8
Rehabilitation 5.1-5.6
Labour Activation Programmes 6.1-6.6
Further evaluation: The Swedish Association of the Visually Impaired 7.1 -
7.13
Conclusion 8.1- 8.3
Appendix I
Appendix II
3 Germany
Introduction 1.1-1.12
Evaluation 2.1-2.4
Further Evaluation 3.1-3.3
Discussions at Soest 4.1-4.6
The Office of Integration 5.1-5.2
Discussions at Munster 6.1-6.7
Vocational Rehabilitation and Training for Adults 7.1-7.16
Appendix
4 Romania
Introduction 1.1-1.3
Blind And Partially Sighted People In The Romanian Labour Market 2.1
Historical Overview 3.1-3.4
The Romanian association of the blind 4.1-4.11
The Beginnings Of Recovery 5.1-5.5
Labour Activation Programmes 6.1-6.7
Education As Preparation For Work 7.1-7.7
Rehabilitation 8.1-8.11
Call for New Legislation 9.1
The National Advisory Council on Disability 10.1-10.8
Statistics 11.1-11.2
Conclusion 12.1-12.8
5 Conclusion
Introduction 1.1-1.2
Employment services in Sweden and Germany ‘the Trusted Troika’ 2.1-2.10
Retention Legislation 3.1-3.4
Methods of Delivering Rehabilitation Services Compared 4.1-4.8
The German Quota System 5.1-5.2
Economic Inactivity and Propensity to Work 6.1-6.10
List of Recommendations
Appendix: Sheltered
Employment in France
Bibliography
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
This report is concerned with the operation of employment services for blind
and partially sighted people in Sweden and Germany, and with their impact on
that target population. It is based on two study visits made by the authors
In 2008. Each visit lasted three working days, during which they carried out
fairly structured interviews with senior staff managing the services. The
results were cross checked, as far as possible, by interviewing
well-informed observers, including representatives of organisations of blind
and partially sighted people. Following each study visit the authors drafted
the relevant chapter of this report and showed it to the participant
interviewees on a basis of personal anonymity. The interviewees then
commented in writing. Chapter two on Sweden and chapter three on Germany
are, then, the outcome of applying this methodology.
As formally stated in the Introduction, the aims of the study visits were:
(i) To investigate labour activation measures and employment support
services in each country.
(ii) to estimate the rate of economic inactivity prevailing among blind and
partially sighted people of working age in Sweden and Germany.
(iii) to report on these matters to the European Blind Union (EBU),
recommending good practice found in either country, which might be
disseminated throughout the EUROPEAN UNION by the activities of EBU and its
member organizations.
The study visits were commissioned by the European Blind Union (EBU), funded
by research grants from the Commission of the European Union and the Royal
National Institute of Blind People, United Kingdom (RNIB, UK).
The authors’ conclusions are presented in chapter four. Recommendations made
there have been added to the report as a separate list.
Section two of the introduction begins by acknowledging the wide range of
occupations carried on by blind and partially sighted people throughout the
EU. But this is a sort of ‘blind elite’. Between 2001 and 2007, Evidence was
accumulated by EBU that high levels of economic inactivity prevail among
blind and partially sighted people of working age in member states of the
European Union, ranging from about 40 to about 80 percent. Throughout the EU
as a whole they are said in this report to constitute a ‘hidden majority’.
It is important to distinguish ‘economic inactivity’ from ‘unemployment’.
For the purposes of this report, the rate of unemployment is the ratio
between the number of people actively seeking employment and the number of
people in employment. The rate of economic inactivity is the ratio between
the number of people in employment and the number of people not in
employment and not seeking work.
The main question for investigation Is whether any of this economic
inactivity is involuntary, or whether blind and partially sighted
individuals are making a rational decision that it is pointless to seek
entry to the labour market, since social security benefits are available for
those who do not work and jobs are scarce at best - extremely scarce in
times of economic recession.
The authors wished to test their hypothesis that some at least of this
economic inactivity is involuntary. Evidence from research recently carried
out in the UK suggests that it is and this is reviewed in section three. See
also appendices to chapter one.
It was in the light of this evidence that the authors proposed study visits
to Sweden and Germany with the aims stated above. Sweden was selected
because, in 2001, EBU had reported from different sources two rates of
unemployment, about 5 percent and about 50 percent. We think this was due to
failure to distinguish between ‘unemployment’ and ‘economic inactivity’.
Germany was selected because of the very high rate of ‘unemployment’
reported in 2001.
The methodology, as explained above, was devised to meet the paucity of
evidence for blind and partially sighted people in public domains, such as
the worldwide web, specialised literature on visual impairment, etc. The
report is not presented as the last word on the subject. The authors hope
that it will stimulate further study and, above all, action in the UK,
Sweden and Germany, to do even more to reach and incentivise the ‘hidden
majority’ of economically inactive people who are blind and partially
sighted.
CHAPTER TWO SWEDEN
The Swedish Public Employment Service (SPES) is outlined in section one. As
described by staff responsible for its delivery, It begins with assessment
of the capacity to work of anyone who has been absent from work through
illness for more than 180 days. The outcome will be a decision either that
the client is capable of work with appropriate support, or that he/she is
not. In the latter case income substitution, in the form of disability
pension, and disability compensation, in the form of an additional
allowance, will be provided.
For those assessed as capable of work a range of impairment specific support
services is available, within a matrix of services for disabled people.
Speaking generally, for blind and partially sighted people, there are three
main services:
* Investigating working skills and ability to work.
* Investigating what adjustments are needed at work and/or in the work place
to meet the individual’s need.
* Vocational/study guidance.
Attention is drawn to the fact that people who acquire sight loss at work
are protected by retention legislation. This is aimed at ensuring that they
cannot be summarily dismissed or encourage to retire on account of sight
loss. Its operation is outlined at section 3.19.
In evaluating these services the authors concluded that they have made a
very significant contribution to the participation of many blind and
partially sighted people in a remarkably wide range of occupations. These
are listed in appendix II to the chapter.
Yet concern remained about evidence of a long tail of economic inactivity.
Of almost as much concern was that staff of SPES were unable to say what
this rate of economic inactivity was.
The Swedish Association of the Visually Impaired (SRF) presented written
evidence from the website of the Swedish National Office of Statistics that
30,000 people report that sight loss affects their working capacity. Among
these the rate of economic inactivity is about 43 percent and the rate of
unemployment is about 10 percent.
This indicator of the rate of economic inactivity raises the hypothesis that
some of the people concerned would express a propensity to work if SPES were
to seek them out and investigate the barriers which they might think exclude
them from the labour market. Staff of SPES agreed that such a hypothesis was
tenable.
Returning to the employment services for visually impaired people, section
five reviews the rehabilitation service offered by thirty-three low vision
clinics (LVCs), Mainly connected with eye hospitals of the state health
service. The authors were told that these clinics provide training in
independent living skills for people with serious sight loss and that those
who leave the clinics are ready to avail themselves of the vocational
rehabilitation and training services of SPES, to whom they can be referred.
In written evidence SRF criticised this description as too favourable. They
stated that LVC’s do not always provide in practice such a seamless service
of social and vocational rehabilitation. They regret that residential social
rehabilitation was abandoned in Sweden in the 1980s and are lobbying for the
reintroduction of some residential courses.
In section six the authors commend the impairment specific character of
employment services as described in section one. Especially worthy of note
are the teams of staff in SPES who specialise in sensory impairment. The
list of occupations undertaken by deafblind people is a remarkable outcome
of this (see appendix I to the chapter). The dedicated sensory impairment
service is an example of good practice to be noted.
Services and employment for visually impaired people with complex needs,
such as intellectual disabilities, are not very well developed in Sweden.
However progress is beginning to be made through the work of specially
trained coaches, known as SIUS coaches. They are hired by SPES to provide
counselling, job introduction and training on the job. This service is
intended to substitute for sheltered employment, and provide support for
inclusion in mainstream employment, through the method of ‘place and train’
now favoured by such organisations as the European Union of supported
Employment.
Section seven presents further evaluation of SPES, based on written comment
from SRF. Their job introduction activity, delivered by a not-for-profit
company called IrisBemanning, is noted, as is their concern that recent
governmental policy changes may lead to dilution of employment services for
visually impaired people. In this connection the authors conclude that ‘a
robust system of impairment-specific employment support should be maintained
in Sweden, alike for blind and partially sighted people and for visually
impaired people with complex needs.’
CHAPTER THREE GERMANY
Section one of this chapter outlines the employment services for blind and
partially sighted people delivered by the Federal Ministry of Employment and
Social Affairs (FMESA) and certain associated bodies, such as the Federal
Employment Agency (FEA). As in Sweden they begin with assessment of capacity
to work, which is required to be undergone by anyone who has been absent
from work for a given period of time. The outcome of assessment is either
that the client is occupationally disabled but can be supported in the
labour market, or that the client is not able to return to work. In the
latter case he/she is supported by income substitution - disability pension
– and disability compensation, available only to blind people in the form of
blindness allowance (blindengeld).
As in Sweden, people assessed as having an occupational disability are
eligible for a range of employment support services. These are listed from
paragraph 1.5. a notable difference from Sweden is that social and
vocational rehabilitation are delivered on a residential basis. Like other
people with disabilities, blind and partially sighted people in Germany are
supported in the labour market by a quota system and an associated levy on
employers who do not comply with it, known as the ‘compensation charge’.
Besides residential rehabilitation, blind and partially sighted people, who
are assessed as occupationally disabled, are entitled to impairment specific
training, support at work (e.g. by a sighted support worker) and work
experience. In Germany there are many sheltered workshops for disabled and
other disadvantaged people, but FMESA believes that most visually impaired
people can be supported into mainstream employment.
This range of services is evaluated first in section two, where they are
judged as ‘elaborate and impressive’. As with Sweden, it is recognise that
they contribute significantly to the participation of many blind and
partially sighted people in a wide range of mainstream occupations.
On the question of economic inactivity, however, the situation was found to
be even more obscure than in Sweden. FEA keeps no statistics showing the
number of blind and partially sighted people in employment, nor even the
number who report that sight loss affects them at work. FMESA expressed very
great scepticism that any blind person in Germany who really wanted a job
could not get one.
Very great doubt was cast upon this judgment by several witnesses consulted.
INFAS - Institute of Applied Social Sciences - a commercial research
organisation based in Bonn, drew attention to the ‘EVASA’ survey, published
in 1995 (par. 3.2.1 et seq.). It showed a rate of economic activity among
blind and partially sighted people of 33 percent. No similar survey has
since been made. INFAS expressed the view that the rate is unlikely to have
improved since 1995 and that it could have declined, though the situation is
‘obscure’.
Even stronger opinions were offered by agencies active on behalf of blind
and partially sighted people in North-Rhine Westphalia. Staff consulted at
the vocational training centre at Soest offered evidence in depth to argue
that the situation has recently grown worse. This is presented in sections
two and three. Their argument was supported in general by leading members of
the German Federation of the Blind and Partially Sighted.
Corroboration was also offered by the Office of Integration, an agency which
is independent of FMESA and exists to support disabled people in employment.
It provides a form of job protection for them which is not as strong as the
statutory retention measures provided in Sweden. Its services are described
in section five.
The Office of Integration is also responsible for administration of the
quota system. The question arose whether the system contributes to a higher
rate of economic activity among blind and partially sighted people in
Germany, relative to comparable states of the EU. Sweden has no quota
system, so evidence comparing Germany and the UK is presented at paragraph
6.3. Discussion of this between the participants proved inconclusive, but
reasons are given in chapter 4 for regarding this inconclusiveness as
significant.
Evidence presented at paragraph 6.6 shows that Germany is well ahead of
Sweden and indeed the UK in promoting social enterprise as a means of
delivering employment to visually impaired people with complex needs. This
should be noted as good practice.
Residential social and vocational rehabilitation for blind and partially
sighted people is a striking feature of the German employment service.
Provision is reviewed in section 7 on the evidence available at the website
of the centre at Dueren.
CHAPTER FOUR: ROMANIA
To turn from employment services for blind and partially sighted people
in the UK, Sweden and Germany to those in Romania is to be sharply reminded
of uneven economic and social development in the European Union. The EU
report, Employment in Europe, 2008, highlighted Romania’s labour market
problems. The national rate of employment was 59 percent. It had not risen
since 2000 and was well below the EU’s Lisbon target of at least 70 percent
throughout the Union by 2010.
Paradoxically the report shows that, between 2000 and 2006, Romania was
among the three member states of the EU achieving the highest rates of
productivity growth. This combination of high productivity growth
accompanied by a high rate of economic inactivity is not inevitable, the
report argues. In the long run both should be growing and the challenge is
to know how to bring this about. The report recommended that labour market
policies should encourage transfer to new jobs rather than protect old ones
against productivity growth. The policies recommended were:
* ‘the modernisation of labour laws that allow for sufficiently flexible
work arrangements and reduce labour market segmentation and undeclared work;
* the provision of adequate active labour market policies;
the promotion of lifelong learning throughout the lifecycle;
the implementation of modern social security systems that combine the
provision of adequate income support with the need to facilitate labour
market mobility..
The report was optimistic that such policies could be implemented during a
period of recovery from the present economic recession. It drew attention to
the implications for women, older people and youth. It was, however,
absolutely silent on the problems of people with disabilities, which we
critique as contrary to the current EU strategy of ‘mainstreaming
disability’.
In sections 2-5 we summarise the evidence presented to us by the Romanian
Association of the Blind (RAB). It shows how Romania under Communist
government developed very small blind elite, mainly in the medical sector of
the labour market, and a small blind working class employed in sheltered
workshops under state control. With the fall of Communism in 1989 the market
for sheltered workshops all but disappeared. Training for blind masseurs in
the medical sector underwent overall reorganisation and many blind masseurs
went into early retirement, along with manual workers in the workshops.
From about 2000 the productivity growth identified by Employment in Europe
set in, but blind and partially sighted people benefitted very little from
it. Their rate of economic inactivity stood at 86 percent in 2008.
Productivity growth permitted expansion of medical services in the private
and public sectors and blind physiotherapists have benefitted somewhat from
this. But no comparable development has taken place in other professional
occupations undertaken by visually impaired people in U.K., Sweden and
Germany. This is due, we think, to the almost complete absence of impairment
specific employment services of the kind identified in chapters 2 and 3 (See
chapter 4, sections 6-8). Section 9 of this chapter sets out the service
development which RAB considers essential for progress to be made. Its views
are broadly supported by our interview with the Director of the National
Advisory Council for Disability (ch. 4, section 11).
In section 12 we try to offer some conclusions. As we write, the evidence
presented in this chapter shows that blind and partially sighted people have
suffered dramatically and disproportionately from the problem identified in
the report Employment in Europe, 2008 (see par. 1.1). The problem was there
stated to be that, between 2000 and 2007, high productivity growth was
accompanied by low employment growth. Whereas the general rate of economic
inactivity in the population as a whole was around 40 percent, the
corresponding rate for blind and partially sighted people is nearly 90
percent. * There is excessive labour market segmentation of blind and
partially sighted people in physiotherapy, as compared to, say, law,
financial services social work or public administration, which have all
recruited numbers of blind and partially sighted people in countries like
the UK, Sweden and Germany. Indeed, it is not an exaggeration to say that
The whole range of white collar employment associated with possession of ICT
skills in these three countries is terra incognita in Romania. Furthermore,
young blind and partially sighted people who have acquired such skills are
driven to the informal economy to find employment of their knowledge and
skills (see sections 4 and 5).
As regards a modern, flexible system of social security, Evidence was
presented to us of inflexibility in the arrangements for people with
disabilities. Legislation restricts wages paid to workers to 50 percent of
the minimum wage (par. 6.3). With disability benefits exceeding the minimum
wage, this is a recipe for ensuring a high level of economic inactivity. The
abilities of blind and partially sighted people, which have been proven over
and over again in other countries, are simply wasted by this kind of
inflexibility. In the long run employers carry the burden of such benefit
dependency, along with other tax payers.
Again the 2008 report pointed to the need for lifelong learning to promote
flexible participation in the labour market. We agree and wish to stress
that rehabilitation should be viewed in this light. The onset of a major
disability such as sight loss clearly involves a major process of learning
to live with it. For this reason it is imperative to develop provision for
rehabilitation in Romania and we would urge the EU Commission to look again
at the rules of the European Social Fund with a view to forwarding the
development of the proposed RAB centre at Bucharest.
A matter not touched upon in the 2008 report remains of very great
importance to blind and partially sighted people. This is the accessibility
of the built environment. A blind visitor to Bucharest must be shocked to
find that all pavements in the city centre are completely covered by parked
cars, forcing pedestrians to walk on the carriage way. It is equally
shocking to find that the city is infested by feral dogs, which prey upon
domesticated animals. For this reason, we were informed, guide dogs for the
blind are unknown in Romania. The accessibility of the environment and
systems of transport within it is as necessary to improve the rate of
economic activity as the provision of rehabilitation, vocational training
and support at work.
Such services are expensive to put in place. Nevertheless we would argue
that there is nothing to be gained from delay pending economic recovery. If
the task is put aside until the world recession is over it will only be
larger and more difficult to address when that time comes. As the 2008
report put it: In these uncertain times we must not lose sight of our
overall long-term aim of creating more and better jobs. ‘Promoting job
quality can rhyme with job creation and productivity.’
In welcoming this positive expression by the EU Commission, we can only
regret that the opportunity was missed to address in the same report the
needs of people with disabilities, who suffer even higher rates of economic
inactivity than the female, older and younger citizens actually mentioned.
We hope that this chapter has gone some way to redress the balance and that,
in all future reports, disability will be placed where it ought to be – in
the mainstream thinking of the Directorate-General for Employment and Social
Affairs.
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION
This chapter attempts a general comparison of the employment services in
Sweden and Germany, with reference to issues concerning recent UK
developments, rose in the introduction. This comparison bears in mind the
impact of the services both on blind and partially sighted people who are
active in the labour market and on those who are economically inactive. The
recommendations of the authors to EBU are presented in the text and again as
a list at the end of the report.
The first conclusion (par. 2.1) is that ‘Both Sweden and Germany have
developed over many decades an impressive array of services which aim to
ensure that people of working age who experience serious sight loss may be
able either:
(i) to retain the job which they were in or
(ii) be assisted to find another job, either in the same firm or in another.
Both member states have achieved a notable level of inclusion of blind and
partially sighted people in a wide range of jobs in the mainstream labour
market. Crucial to this has been timely intervention to assess the capacity
of individuals for such employment, the provision of impairment specific
services to move them towards the labour market and to support them in their
jobs after they obtain them. Impairment specific programmes of
rehabilitation, vocational training and support at work are here dubbed ‘the
trusted troika’ which has successfully conducted many blind and partially
sighted people on the journey from sight loss to mainstream employment. EBU
is recommended to undertake specific activities aimed at spreading this good
practice to every member state of the European Union, and especially the new
member states of Eastern Europe like Romania.
In addition to ‘the trusted troika’, EBU is recommended to promote the
enactment of retention legislation in every member state, broadly on Swedish
principles.
As to rehabilitation, the Swedish system of relying on low vision clinics is
contrasted with the German system of residential rehabilitation. It is too
early to form conclusive judgments on their relative advantages or
disadvantages and EBU is recommended to promote further study of this
question.
A similar view is taken of evidence on the value of a quota system as a
measure of labour activation for disabled people. EBU would be advised to
respect the historical and other circumstances which have produced quota
systems in various member states. It would also be advised to accept that
evidence does not exist to justify lobbying for a quota system in every
member state of the EU.
Turning again to Romania, The absolute under-development of the ‘trusted
troika’ in that member state is, we think, the chief reason for the 86
percent rate of economic inactivity found among blind and partially sighted
people. We very much regret that opportunity was not taken in the EU report
Employment in Europe, 2008, to explore this problem and we recommend EBU to
take this up with the DG employment and Social Affairs to ensure that such
an omission does not recur. After all the European Employment Strategy
insists on ‘mainstreaming disability’, a concept which applies as much to
policy development as to social formation. EBU should also take up with the
Directorate the problem of facilitating the new rehabilitation centre in
Bucharest, which is fundamental to the construction of modern, flexible
social security.
Dealing finally with economic inactivity and propensity to work we conclude
that there is evidence to support the hypothesis of a significant rate of
involuntary economic inactivity in every member state of the EU. They
recommend EBU to publicise this in every possible way and to lobby for
research on the lines of Work Focus UK. Such research should be more than
empirical ‘bean counting’. It should be designed to establish the level of
need for programmes such as ‘place and train’ and state support for social
enterprise, illustrated throughout chapters one to 3 of this report. In
doing so, EBU should be careful to maintain the distinction between
‘unemployment’ and ‘economic inactivity’ which as used throughout this
report. This is necessary because the term ‘economic inactivity’ does not
appear to be well understood by some Swedish or German practitioners. This
is probably a problem of translation mainly, and may well appear in other
member states.
To sum up, these recommendations aim at promoting participation in the
labour market both by people whose impairment is constituted
(i) by simple sight loss, and
(ii) by people whose impairments are complex, i.e. whose sight loss is
compounded by additional difficulties such as intellectual disability,
physical impairment or what is termed ‘aging’. In trying to implement them,
EBU would be promoting its long adopted ‘twin track’ solution to economic
inactivity
THE HIDDEN MAJORITY
A study of economic inactivity among blind and partially sighted people in Sweden, Germany and Romania
Part 1: Sweden and Germany
Chapter One
Introduction
1 Purpose of the Report
1.1 This report presents the findings of the authors arising from two study
visits they paid to Sweden and Germany in 2008. During these visits they
inquired into the employment services for blind and partially sighted
people. Their aim was threefold:
(i) To investigate labour activation measures and employment support
services in each country,
(ii) to estimate the rate of economic inactivity prevailing among blind and
partially sighted people of working age,
(iii) to report on these matters to the European Blind Union (EBU),
recommending good practice found in either country, which might be
disseminated throughout the European Union by the activities of EBU and its
member organisations.
1.2 The project arose from the Working Group on Rehabilitation, Vocational
Training and Employment, set up in 2003 by the European Blind Union. The
Working Group met frequently between 2003 and 2007 and the authors of this
report participated in these meetings. A main task of the Working Group was
to ascertain the extent of ‘unemployment’ of blind and partially sighted
people in the labour markets of the EU.
2 Unemployment and Economic Inactivity
2.1 The Working Group recognised from the outset that blind and partially
sighted people have to overcome many barriers to their participation in
European labour markets. In the United Kingdom, for example, an RNIB report,
Beyond The Stereotypes: published in 2004, highlighted the difficulties
blind and partially sighted people have in navigating through the
recruitment process, often struggling with inaccessible job advertisements,
application forms and selection procedures. The same report detailed
government research findings, that 9 out of 10 employers rate blind and
partially sighted people as either "difficult" or "impossible" to employ.
2.2 Despite these barriers, blind and partially sighted people are to be
found in a remarkable range of occupations in every member state of the EU,
from security guard to sales assistant, from lawyer to finance manager. The
range of occupations is extensively listed and described on the EBU website,
www.euroblind.org.
2.3 Throughout the discussions of the Working Group, however, the question
arose whether, in any member state, such people are more than a minority of
talented people, a sort of 'blind elite' composed of those whose exceptional
commitment has enabled them to overcome the daunting barriers which make the
labour market so difficult to penetrate for blind and partially sighted
people. That this was true was strongly suggested by evidence that, in all
European countries, there are a great many blind and partially sighted
people who are not in work. 'The Employment of Blind People in Seventeen
Countries', a report produced by EBU in 2001 cited the following rates of
‘unemployment’ in some member states:
France 39%
Italy 40%
Sweden 5%**
Germany 72%
Poland 87%
2.4 A major weakness of the 2001 report was its failure to distinguish
between ‘unemployment’ and ‘economic inactivity’. The rate of unemployment,
for the purposes of this report, is the ratio between the number of people
actively seeking employment and the number of people in employment. The rate
of economic inactivity is the ratio between the number of people in
employment and the number of people not in employment, and not actively job
seeking.
2.5 Between 2003 and 2007 the Working Group gathered evidence on economic
inactivity from the member organisations of EBU. A senior director of the
Association Valentin Haüy reported that two thirds of the legally blind
people in France are inactive in the labour market. A recent report in Spain
found it to be over 62 % among women and 38 % among men. The Pancyprian
Organisation of the Blind reported that "more than 56.59% of blind people of
working age do not work". In Italy, information supplied in March, 2007 by
the Italian Union of the Blind shows that there are about 14,000 blind
people in employment out of about 25,000 of working age - a possible rate of
economic inactivity of about 40 percent. In the United Kingdom the Network
1000 report (of which more will be said below) discovered a rate of economic
inactivity among registered blind and partially sighted people of 66
percent.
2.6 From the foregoing the Working Group concluded that economically
inactive individuals constitute a majority of blind and partially sighted
people of working age in most member states and no state is without a
substantial minority. A further conclusion must be that they constitute a
majority of blind and partially sighted people of working age throughout the
whole European Union.
3 The Propensity to Work
3.1 The main question addressed in this introductory chapter is whether
these rates of economic inactivity are inevitable or whether they could be
reduced by appropriate labour activation measures. In the course of our
study visit to Germany, for example, it was suggested to us that economic
inactivity may be a matter of choice, which seems rational to the
individuals concerned in the light of provision of relatively generous
social security benefits and relative scarcity of jobs suitable for blind
and partially sighted people.
3.2 In the United Kingdom, on the other hand, recent research suggests that
a significant amount of economic inactivity is involuntary. The report
produced in 2006 by Birmingham University, 'Network 1000', shows that 66
percent of registered blind and partially sighted people of working age are
economically inactive. It may be noted that this is a higher rate than that
of 32 percent economically inactive indicated in the UK Labour Force Survey
(LFS). However the two populations studied are not strictly comparable,
since Network 1000 studied ‘registered blind and partially sighted people’,
while the LFS relied on self-reporting by people who acknowledged a ‘seeing
difficulty’.
3.3 Network 1000 throws a flood of light on the circumstances of economic
inactivity. It is strongly associated with ageing - the highest rate, 79%,
exists among those aged 50-64. In addition people who are registered as
blind (i.e. with little or no sight) are far more likely to be economically
inactive than people registered as partially sighted. Then again, a high
percentage of blind and partially sighted people have additional disability
or sickness. This is highest within the 50-64 age group, at 45%, but even
the age groups 18-29 and 30-49 reported similar percentages.
3.4 The report shows that people who are inactive for up to ten years are
mostly resigned to their situation. No fewer than 75% of the sample said
they thought it unlikely or very unlikely that they would find work within a
year. Their situation is worse than the question suggested. Evidence
confirms that virtually none of the long term inactive will ever work again.
In these circumstances it is noteworthy that 20 percent of the sample
described themselves as ‘unemployed’ and of these 24 percent said they were
actively seeking work.
3.5 There is further evidence of a “hidden” propensity to work among people
with visual impairment. In a major survey of blind and partially sighted
people in the UK (Bruce and Baker, 2003) only 3% of blind and partially
sighted people under 60 years were found to be officially unemployed
(defined as looking for work or a place on a government training scheme in
the last four weeks). However the survey asked two further questions which
revealed a much larger group of potential job seekers. First a further 22%
were not seeking work but would like to have it. Second, Bruce et al
constructed a question to try and factor out low expectations, namely, “If
you had a magic wand would you like to have a job?” The answer was, “yes”
for 60% of respondents.
3.6 Such statements cannot, of course, be taken at face value. Blind and
partially sighted people, like others, may say that they want to work as a
general aspiration but will prove unwilling to stay the course when they
discover what is involved in reality. People who have been out of work for
up to ten years often find reskilling is too demanding and, even after
reskilling, give up when faced with the long and frustrating search for an
employer willing to recruit them. On the other hand, the question must be
asked whether employment services in a given country are well designed to
seek out and incentivise those people who could be drawn into the labour
market by appropriate counselling, training and other forms of support. Even
in member states of the EU whose employment support services for blind and
partially sighted people are of long standing and of some proven
effectiveness, it may be that these services succeed only for those who
happen by one means or another to find their way through to them.
3.7 Evidence that this is the actual state of things in at least one member
state comes again from the United Kingdom. In 2001 RNIB instituted a
programme specifically aimed at blind and partially sighted people who had
been out of work for more than a year. This programme runs under the name of
‘The Trainee Grade Scheme’ (TGS). Recruits to TGS are offered a twelve month
period of paid work experience, with on the job development and support to
assist them into permanent sustainable employment. The precise working of
the Trainee Grade Scheme is indicated in Appendix I to this chapter. Here it
is relevant to note that 80 people have left the programme since it started
in April 2001. Of these, 54 have progressed into permanent employment, a
success rate of 68 percent. This suggests that there is in the UK a
significant number of jobless blind and partially sighted people whose wish
to work is not being met by the regular employment services available for
them through the Department of Work and Pensions.
3.8 Recruits to the Trainee Grade Scheme are mostly people whose loss of
sight is uncomplicated by additional problems, such as other physical
impairments or intellectual difficulties. It may be thought that a large
proportion of economically inactive people are those with complex needs who,
arguably, will never reach the mainstream labour market. The report entitled
"The Employment Continuum", published by RNIB in 2003, challenged this
assumption as unjustified. It argued that people with complex needs could be
employed in a labour market which provided a spectrum of employment
arrangements through which people might progress as far as possible towards
the mainstream, and it drew attention to the potential role of social firms
in providing for this.
3.9 Following this report, in 2006 RNIB established a social firm named
CONCEPT. Its aim is to develop the firm into a commercially sustainable,
stand alone enterprise offering conferencing and catering services. CONCEPT
currently has 6 staff (3 in the kitchen and 3 administrative staff), and of
these 4 have sight loss.
CONCEPT also provides work experience and training opportunities for those
furthest from the labour market in a wide range of vocational areas
including administration, marketing, event management, catering, hospitality
and business administration. Trainees have real jobs and receive a real
salary and also develop life skills in cooking, budgeting and healthy
eating. They receive training and job search support so that at the end of
their trainee contract they are supported into a permanent job outside
CONCEPT. To date CONCEPT has supported 27 people with sight loss and
additional disabilities through its own training initiatives through
volunteering and work experience placements or linked to other RNIB
employment programmes. Of these, 14 have progressed into permanent
employment. Ten of these trainee posts were funded by Birmingham City
Council and each was filled by a person with sight loss and additional
disabilities. Of these 7 went into employment.
3.10 CONCEPT strives to develop links with mainstream training providers
such as Birmingham College of Food and Tourism. Some of the trainees attend
courses there and the College has made a commitment to increasing the
numbers of blind and partially sighted people into this vocational area.
3.11 Finally, we should note in this connection the recent reorganisation of
Remploy in the United Kingdom. Remploy is a state supported company, founded
after the Second World War to run sheltered workshops for people with
disabilities. It has recently transformed itself into an agency for
promoting its workers into supported mainstream employment. The aim is to
close many of the sheltered workshops and devote resources to job
introduction and job coaching in the mainstream. In the first year of the
project Remploy promoted over 100 blind and partially sighted people into
mainstream employment.
4 The Hidden Majority
4.1 There is, then, evidence from the UK that blind and partially sighted
people (including many with complex needs) who have been economically
inactive for a considerable period of time can be enabled to reach the
labour market given support services that are specifically designed with
their needs in mind. Even so, there is a major difficulty to be overcome.
Such people are, in a very real sense, ‘hidden’. Typically, in their
isolation, frustration, resignation and pessimism they do not present
themselves to the regular employment programmes run by the state. Unless
programme providers actively seek them out, most will continue to languish
in economic inactivity. It may be that the state employment services,
understandably preoccupied with those who come through their doors looking
for work, fail many economically inactive people by neglecting to develop
proactive measures for seeking them out and incentivising them. Once again,
recent evidence from the UK suggests that this is so.
4.2 In 2007 RNIB sent 4,200 questionnaires to registered blind and partially
sighted people of working age in selected locations. 670 questionnaires were
returned, a response rate of 16 percent.
4.3 The questionnaire was designed to meet the following objectives:
(i)) To estimate the level of economic inactivity amongst blind and
partially sighted people
(ii) To estimate the propensity to work of blind and partially sighted
people who are not in employment
(iii) To identify barriers faced by blind and partially sighted people in
gaining employment
(iv) To identify what services blind and partially sighted people want from
RNIB to help them into work
(v) To gather contact details from respondents so that follow up support
could be provided to job seekers if given the go ahead
4.4 Respondents supplied their contact details and employment status. They
also commented on their propensity to work, challenges faced and support
required from RNIB.
4.5 The results of this survey were drawn together in an internal RNIB
report entitled ‘Work Focus’. Its findings confirm the statement in Network
1000 that around one-third of registered blind and partially sighted people
of working age are in employment, with two-thirds not in paid work. Of the
two-thirds that are out of work, roughly one half would potentially like to
return to work. This represents over 22,000 working age blind and partially
sighted people across the UK who could potentially join the labour market.
4.6 Appendix II to this chapter presents a fuller account of the findings of
‘Work Focus’. The point to be emphasised here is that this confirms the
evidence of earlier reports that economic inactivity is extensive among
blind and partially sighted people in the UK, though many of these people
indicate a propensity to work and that the state employment services which
exist to help them either do not reach them at all or have failed to help
them if they have. It remains to be seen whether the Employment Support
Allowance, introduced in October 2008, which brings mandatory contact with
government employment services for new claimants of incapacity benefits,
will result in delivery of appropriate support to this group of people.
5 Study of Sweden, Germany and Romania proposed
5.1 The authors of this report wished to know whether a similar state of
affairs exists in other member states of the European Union. Extensive
investigations of sources in the public domain failed to disclose any data
comparable to those presented in Network 1000 and Work Focus. Conference
reports shed little light upon it. The websites of national employment
agencies were silent about it. A rapid survey of printed literature
concerned with visual impairment also failed to produce relevant data (for
countries other than the UK) of the desired depth and scope.
5.2 Accordingly the authors proposed that EBU should seek funding to enable
them to carry out a preliminary study of the situation in three member
states of the European Union. They suggested two countries in particular,
Sweden and Germany. Sweden was chosen because the 2001 EBU report had
indicated a rate of ‘unemployment’ of around 5 percent, while the Swedish
Association of the Visually Impaired had estimated (in an appendix to the
same report) that more than half its members were economically inactive.
Germany was chosen because of the high rate of ‘unemployment’ reported by
EBU in 2001.
5.3 The Commission of the European Union offered some funding for such study
visits and suggested visiting Romania in addition to Sweden and Germany.
This was welcome, but it must be added that none of the study visits could
have been carried out but for generous additional funding by RNIB.
6 Methodology
6.1 Visits with duration of three days in each case were made to Sweden and
Germany in September and October, 2008. For reasons beyond the control of
the authors it was not possible to visit Romania until end of January, 2009.
Accordingly Romanian findings will be presented in part ii of this report,
which is expected later in 2009.
6.2 The three aims of the study visits, as already stated, were:
(i) To investigate labour activation measures and employment support
services in each country.
(ii) to estimate the rate of economic inactivity prevailing among blind and
partially sighted people of working age in Sweden and Germany.
(iii) to report on these matters to the European Blind Union, recommending
good practice found in either country, which might be disseminated
throughout the European Union by the activities of EBU and its member
organisations.
6.3 The methodology of the investigation can be briefly stated. It was our
intention to conduct fairly structured interviews with people responsible
for delivering the state employment service for blind and partially sighted
people and to cross check the results as far as possible by interviewing
well informed observers as to the way in which the services impact on blind
and partially sighted people of working age, both in and out of employment.
In this latter category the most important stakeholders are the major
organisations representing blind people themselves. In Sweden this is the
Swedish Association of the Visually Impaired, known by its Swedish initials
as 'SRF'. In Germany the corresponding organisation is the German Federation
of the Blind and Visually Impaired (Deutsher Blinden und
Sehbehindertenverband). We obtained access to leading members of both
organisations, who gave valuable oral and written testimony.
6.4 In Germany, we were fortunate to gain access to the Institute of Applied
Social Sciences (is INFAS), whose testimony shed a flood of light on the
statistical extent of economic inactivity among blind and partially sighted
people in that country.
6.5 The interviews were loosely structured around a list of eight written
questions, which we submitted in advance to all the interviewees. These
questions are reproduced in Appendix III to this chapter. Most of them were
very broadly designed and this was intended to give interviewees an
opportunity to supply both detailed information and broad reflections. We
believe the interviews worked well in this respect.
6.6 The interviews conducted on each visit extended over two and a half
working days and each interview lasted between one and three hours. They
were conducted in successive sessions before and after lunch. On each day
there were less structured conversations over lunch, which often added
valuable information, as did informal meetings over dinner in the evenings
of the first two days.
6.7 These interviews, added to previously supplied written evidence, provide
the basic content of chapters two and three of this report. Under a
guarantee of personal anonymity, a first draft of each chapter was shown to
all the participants in the interviews and many came back to us with
valuable corrections, supplementary evidence and comment. In general we
think this process resulted in broad agreement between us and the
participants that the chapters give a balanced account of the employment
services and their impact on blind and partially sighted people in each
country. Differences of emphasis and occasionally of interpretation remain,
however, and we have disclosed them as objectively as we can in the contents
of chapters two and three.
6.8 We do not claim that our report forms anything like the last word on the
questions we raised. What we hope is that it will stimulate further study
and, above all, action in the UK, Sweden and Germany to do even more to
reach and incentivise the ‘hidden majority’ of economically inactive people
who are blind and partially sighted. In furtherance of this we have added to
our conclusions a list of recommendations for the consideration of EBU.
Appendix I
RNIB’s Trainee Grade Scheme
The Trainee Grade Scheme sits neatly within RNIB's strategic direction,
supporting the work to campaign for positive change and specifically,
increasing employment of blind and partially sighted people.
The aim of the Scheme is to provide a period of paid work experience with on
the job development and support to assist blind or partially sighted people
into permanent sustainable employment. The Scheme has been running for five
years.
As at end of January, 2009, 80 people had left the programme since it
started in April 2001. Of these 54 had progressed into permanent employment,
a success rate of 68 percent. An additional benefit of the scheme has been
the development of a database of applicants to trainee places who were
unsuccessful. There are about 100 people on record and RNIB continues to
support them through telephone contact.
Structure of the Scheme
The model includes:
.gif){kind=small}
A dedicated officer
Individual development plans for each trainee tailored to their needs
Regular reviews
Job search support
Salaried positions
Exit strategy and follow up
Finance
On average the cost of funding each trainee post is £17000 per year. Income generated from statutory provision is about £5000 per person via the Workstep scheme
Key Lessons
The experience gained over the years has not been without its challenges and
we have realised that it is important:
To have a dedicated officer to drive the initiative forward and provide
support.
To provide a loan stock of equipment for new trainees, to reduce the
impact of delays waiting for equipment delivered via the government's Access
to Work Scheme
That training and development must be tailored to the needs of each
trainee
To have real, paid jobs as this encourages people to apply (rarely do we
have difficulty recruiting to this programme)
To have knowledge of statutory provision available to alleviate some of
the costs
To have a proper matching process to ensure that the right trainee is
selected for the available positions
To ensure line managers are committed to the trainees development and
allocate appropriate resources to this
Developing external partnership has been slower than hoped
Appendix II
Paper presented at Vision 2008 conference by John Slade and Philippa Simkiss
Work focus: Creating an employment marketplace for blind and partially
sighted people
Abstract
Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) undertook research to
investigate the employment of blind and partially sighted people in the UK.
Questionnaires were sent to 4,200 people aged 18 to 64 who were registered
as seriously sight impaired. A response rate of 16 per cent was achieved.
Thirty percent of respondents were in paid employment, 17 percent were
'unemployed', and 53 percent were economically inactive. Respondents
identified their sight problem, poor health, lack of confidence and a lack
of job related skills, as challenges to getting a job. Forms of support
highlighted by respondents included information on the range of jobs carried
out by people with sight problems, and advice on the support available in
work.
More sharing of good practice between organisations in Canada, Australia and
USA is required to assess the best approaches to helping blind and partially
sighted people into work.
Introduction
In July 2006 Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) hosted a group of Chief Executive Officers and Human Resource Directors from leading private sector companies to discuss the challenge faced by RNIB to increase employment of blind and partially sighted people. The group's recommendation was that RNIB should lead a programme to create an employment marketplace for blind and partially sighted people and their potential employers. They recommended a three stage project comprising market research, pilot testing of new models to demonstrate a marketplace of supply and demand in a local area and creation of a web based market place. A project team was established to carry out the first stage market research with a view to calculating the level of unemployment of blind and partially sighted people, estimating their propensity to work, identifying barriers to gaining employment and the services that can help. This paper presents the results of the market research.
Methodology
The target group for the questionnaire was anyone of working age who had
some degree of sight loss. In order to limit the sample local authority
registers of blind and partially sighted were used. This allowed access to
registered (seriously sight impaired) people from the age of 18-64. The
sample was then refined by geographic area, with a number of areas selected
as they were possible locations for future service pilots. Factors
influencing this decision were the number of blind and partially sighted
people, presence of a number of large employers, a desire to achieve a
mixture of urban and regional areas, the quality of links with local service
providers and the availability of transport or other support. The areas
chosen were London (five boroughs), Leeds, Nottinghamshire and Aberdeenshire.
A total of 4200 questionnaires were distributed in April and May 2007. Of
these 3428 were sent to registered blind and partially sighted people, via
the register holders, with a covering letter from them enclosed. An
additional 772 were sent to RNIB customers selected from customer databases.
The questionnaires were sent in N16 point print, along with an accompanying
letter. A Braille card was also enclosed, which outlined the purpose of the
mailing and a telephone number to either request alternative formats or
complete the questionnaire over the phone. A freepost return envelope was
also enclosed.
The overall response rate was 16 percent (493 from registered blind and
partially sighted people and 177 from RNIB customers). The responses in the
two subgroups highlighted recurring themes and we have combined the data for
analysis.
Findings and analysis
When asked to describe their employment status, 30% of respondents stated that they were in paid employment (which includes full-time, part-time and self-employment). 17% of respondents described themselves as 'unemployed', with the remaining 53% indicating various forms of economic inactivity (see Table 1)
Table 1: Employment status of respondents (n=670)
In paid employment 30%
Unemployed 17%
Retired from paid work 17%
Looking after family and home 4%
Student - full or part time 3%
Long term sick or disabled 26%
Other (e.g. complex needs, vol. work, supported employment) 3%
There was little difference between the employment status of respondents who
were from the registers or from RNIB databases. Variation between these two
samples was at most +/-2%.
Respondents who were not in paid employment were asked if they wanted work
(see Table 2). 10% of all respondents were currently job seeking, and this
is the figure for 'active jobseekers'. 31% of all respondents were either
currently looking for a job, wanted to look for a job or would like to
discuss their options. These 'potential job seekers' are people who with
varying degrees of support could potentially join the labour market. If this
percentage is applied to the number of working age blind and partially
sighted people in the England (as indicated by the Register of Blind and
Partially Sighted People, Department of Health, 2003 ) there are
approximately 22,000 blind and partially sighted people that could be
supported to join the labour market.
The percentage of people not wanting paid employment may appear high, but
this figure is in line with other research in this area (Douglas, Corcoran &
Pavey, 2006).
Table 2: Propensity to work of all respondents (n=670)
In paid employment 30%
Yes, currently job seeking 10%
Yes, but not currently job seeking 10%
Maybe, would like to discuss options 11%
No, would not like paid employment 39%
Factors effecting propensity to work
When respondents were asked what challenges they faced in getting a job, 54%
cited their visual impairment. The other most significant barriers were
'attitudes or lack of awareness of employers' (24%), 'poor health' (23%) and
'unemployed for a long period of time' (22%). These percentages all
increased among the active job seekers and potential job seekers with 'lack
of job opportunities', 'lack of appropriate skills or experience',
'confidence issues' and 'difficulty finding out about jobs' highlighted as
well.
When potential job seekers were asked what five forms of support would help
them into a new job, the two most frequently cited responses related to:
• information on the range of jobs carried out by people with sight problems
(67%)
• advice on the support available to blind and partially sighted people in
work (66%)
The next most sought after support was practical elements of job search such
as 'help finding vacancies' (49%), 'help filling out application forms'
(39%) followed by 'help finding work experience' (36%) and 'face to face
careers advice' (34%). Amongst the active job seekers these practical
elements of support were ranked much higher.
Key findings from research with blind and partially sighted people
• 30% in paid employment
• 10% actively job seeking
• 10% would like work but not actively job seeking
• 11% not sure but would like to explore options
• 39% do not want work
Challenges to Securing Work
Visual Impairment
Attitudes and lack of awareness of employers
Poor health
What Would Help Job Seekers
• Info on range of jobs blind and partially sighted people do
• Advice on support available when in work
• Practical help -finding vacancies, filling out forms
• Help finding work experience
The number of respondents selecting 'interactive website for job seekers' in
their top 5 choices was low. This could be because of their lack of access
to technology, lack of computer skills or low levels of awareness and
availability of access technology.
Conclusions
Around one-third of blind and partially sighted people responding to the
survey were in employment. Of the remaining two-thirds who are not in work,
one half want to be and the other half do not. Respondents identified a
variety of challenges to getting a job, including their sight problem, 'poor
health', lack of confidence and lack of job related skills. Forms of support
that respondents considered would help them into employment included
information on the range of jobs carried out by people with sight problems,
and advice on the support available in work.
Further research needs to investigate what interventions can be made to help
people move along the employment spectrum from 'not interested in
employment' to 'potential jobseeker' to 'active jobseeker', and moving
active jobseekers into employment.
RNIB has established a number of projects to engage blind and partially
sighted people of working age and support them into work. Some are funded
through government contracts with restrictions on who can participate and
the range of services provided; others are funded from charitable donations,
with no such restrictions. These pilots will be subject to independent
evaluation and the subject of further reports.
This research indicates that the employment status of blind and partially
sighted people is similar in the UK to that in the US, Canada and Australia.
More and better sharing of good practice should take place between
organisations in these countries in order to assess the best approaches to
helping more blind and partially sighted people into work.
References
Department of Health (2003). Registered Blind and Partially Sighted People:
Year ending 31 March 2003. London: Department of Health. ISBN: 1 84182 7983.
Douglas, G., Corcoran, C., & Pavey, S. (2006). Network 1000: Opinions and
circumstances of visually impaired people in Great Britain: report based on
over 1000 interviews. Birmingham. University of Birmingham. ISBN: 0704426048
/ 9780704426047
Appendix III
List of written questions submitted in advance to interviewees.
1. Legal definition of blindness and partial sight
2. Number of blind and partially sighted people in employment by age, gender and additional impairments. Average annual income
3. Range of occupations held
4. Number actively seeking work by age, gender and additional impairments
5. Number not wanting to work
6. Social security benefits information
7. Labour activation programmes in open employment and special employment
8. Legislation or schemes aimed at employers
CHAPTER TWO
SWEDEN
1 INTRODUCTION: THE SWEDISH SYSTEM OF SOCIAL INSURANCE.
1.1 The social insurance system in Sweden was described to us as ‘on the whole comprehensive’. Its general aims are to provide income replacement during unemployment, to promote the health and medical care of unemployed people and to facilitate their return to the labour market. The system includes unemployment insurance schemes run by labour unions.
1.2 GENERAL ENTITLEMENT TO SICKNESS BENEFIT In accordance with these general principles, an employee is legally entitled to sick pay from the employer for the first 14 days of absence from work due to illness, exclusive of the first day (the “waiting period”). Thereafter the employer will notify the Swedish Social Insurance Agency of the illness and the employee may be awarded sickness benefit for up to 90 days. At the end of this period, if the employee is still unable to return to his job, the employer must try to find another suitable job in the firm. If this cannot be achieved within 180 days the employee must undergo assessment as to capacity for work in some other occupation. If this proves unsuccessful the sick worker is transferred to disability pension after one year.
1.3 FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR COSTS OF DISABILITY Sweden provides compensation for the extra cost of living with a disability, including sight loss. This is provided for by two cash benefits. The older is disability allowance (DA). It is a tax free benefit paid to people between 19 and 65 years of age. It is paid at three levels, according to severity of disability, namely 36%, 53%, or 69% of retail price index. Blind people are always assessed at 69%. Visually impaired people are sometimes assessed at one of the two lower rates. There is a system of appeal from the decisions of first instance.
1.4 In addition to DA Sweden has recently introduced a personal assistance allowance (PAA). This benefit is paid to people with severe functional impairment who have to depend on others to provide personal care for more than 20 hours per week. It was introduced to support people with severe impairments who do not go to work. As the administration of PA is not the responsibility of SPES, staff were uncertain whether it could be used to support such people in employment.
1.5 It is sometimes said that generous provision of income replacement plus compensation act as a disincentive to return to work. We sought the views of SPES staff on this question. They acknowledged that return to work sometimes results in reduction of income for visually impaired people, but stated that ‘This is not an issue for our clients.’ A client, they further observed, can refuse only three job offers, after which benefit is reduced.
1.6 ASSESSMENT the award of sickness benefit automatically triggers an assessment process aimed at identifying what work a person might do compatible with his/her disability and what kind of support might enhance their capacity for remunerative work. This is in conformity with the general principle that work is regarded as desirable from the point of view of health as well as remuneration.
1.7 As far as people with disabilities are concerned, the aim of Swedish labour activation policy is to include them in mainstream employment and to ensure the removal of barriers to participation in the labour market. In trying to deliver these outcomes the focus is on the needs of the individual in his/her environment and current legislation provides 'statutory rights to [labour activation] measures' specifically designed for the individual concerned. 1.8 The Social Insurance Agency is responsible for the assessment. If it demonstrates that an individual has a capacity to work but needs work orientated rehabilitation, the Swedish Public Employment Service (SPES) will be asked to provide this support.
2 SPECIAL EMPLOYMENT SERVICES FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED PEOPLE
2.1 SPES) is a state funded agency with responsibility for helping unemployed people to find work. It is divided into 68 labour market regions and the labour market regions are in turn brought together in four market areas. Each region has a network of employment offices situated in the municipalities.
2.2 A general service for unemployed people with disabilities is delivered mostly by staff from these offices. It is important to note, however, that there are also specialized employment offices with teams serving people with visual impairment, hearing impairment or deafness located in the four regions – North, West, East and South. For people with visual impairment thee specialist service is delivered through 9 ‘offices’. The teams consist of Low Vision Specialists, Employment- and Study Counsellors, Psychologists, SIUS- counsellors (see below par. 3.13) Eye Consultants and Opticians.
2.3 A visually impaired person who has been assessed as capable of work is referred to the local Employment Office in the first instance, and is allocated to an employment officer in the regular placement service. The employment officer can then refer his/her client to one of the nine specialist offices and the client is set up for a meeting and assessment on a consultative basis. If assessed as capable of working with support, the client is then referred back to the local employment officer as a job seeker. The employment officer is responsible for matching such job seekers to vacancies in the area and for filling the vacant post. If necessary, the employment officer can call upon support from staff of the specialist office.
2.4 VISUAL IMPAIRMENT SERVICE AND LEGAL DEFINITIONS The special service for people with Visual Impairment is available to people whose sight loss causes reduced work capacity. A medical certificate describing the visual limitation, diagnosis etc from an eye doctor is needed and within SPES two categories or ‘codes’ are recognized, as follows: Code 31 implies reduced work capacity as a consequence of useful vision and the person compensates this by using other senses. Visual acuity less than 0, 05 (5 % of normal vision) or limitations in the vision field 10 degrees or less from the centre. Code 32 implies reduced work capacity as a consequence of low vision with visual acuity less than 0,3 (30%) of normal vision with best correction. People with sight problems with visual acuity higher than 0, 3 can also be included – if the problem affects their ability to work in different ways. For example someone might have difficulties orientating in the dark but not in daylight.
2.5 In general, we were told, SPES tries to meet the needs of everyone with all kinds of serious sight loss, affecting their ability to work, ‘but our priority is with the two groups described above. Dyslexia may be involved with a sight problem, but our services are not for persons with dyslexia without diagnosed visual impairment.’
3 SUPPORT FOR Visually impaired people IN EMPLOYMENT
3.1 SPES staff supplied the following list of programmes aimed at supporting
people with disabilities in open and special employment.
3.2 FLEXIBLE ADAPTATION MODULES (FAM) is a complementary programme to the
ordinary employment training programmes. Besides training, it can also be
used to facilitate job introductions and agreements. It targets people with
a disability and a reduced work capacity. The modules are delivered by an
education/training organizer in a private company, e.g. IrisHadar, linked to
SRF. Education/training takes place on their own premises, that is to say,
not on the job. A person can be referred to FAM from the employment office
for preparation courses.
3.3 Flexible action modules take two forms. (a) A preparatory and introductory programme offers a wide range of activities, delivered by specialist tutors, who guide and support the client through the programme. This programme can be taken even when there is no particular job in view.
3.4 (b) A second programme supports activities implemented in an ordinary employment training course. It aims to give full access on equal terms as far as possible. The FAM tutors give support to the client, to the regular teachers and, if required, to other participants in the programme. This module can also be taken when there is no particular job in view – but the program’s goal is that 70 % of the participants should have found a job within 3 months after the program is ended.
3.5 VOCATIONAL TRAINING COURSES. Certain courses are directly aimed at people with vision impairment. The client can receive help with technical aids and material if he/she has sight problems. These are specialized courses purchased by the employment service and delivered by a private education/training organizer who can meet the special conditions set by the buyer. They are open to clients within the employment services. Examples include: vocational training to become a masseur; starting up in business; preparatory training leading to further training in a chosen branch of the care field; sound technician; preparatory training before becoming a nurse.
3.6 WAGE SUBSIDIES. An employer hiring a person with a disability and reduced work capacity can receive financial compensation in the form of a wage subsidy. The disabled job seeker can find the work him/herself or can be referred by the Employment Service. The purpose of the wage subsidy is to enable people with occupational disabilities to obtain employment where the competence and skills of the individual are utilized, allowance being made for functional impairment and reduced work capacity. The employee receives the same (or comparable) wages and benefits provided by collective agreements in the economic sector concerned.
3.7 SHELTERED EMPLOYMENT WITH PUBLIC EMPLOYERS. The target group consists of unemployed people who have a socio-medical occupational disability, people with long-term mental illness and unemployed people covered by `The Assistance and Service to People with a Functional Impairment Act`. The aim is to give certain groups of occupationally disabled people the opportunity to have a job which is rehabilitative in nature, and from which, in the long run, the disabled worker can progress to employment in the mainstream labour market.
3.8 THE SAMHALL GROUP. Samhall is a state owned company and its mission is to produce articles and services which are in demand and by so doing create meaningful employment for people with disabilities. It works in a wide range of fields and has factories and plants all over Sweden. 27,000 individuals are employed within Samhall and 93% of these have a disability. Approximately 5% of the workforce leave Samhall annually, progressing to a job, with or without wage subsidy, in the mainstream labour market. A job guarantee scheme operates to enable anyone who leaves Samhall for a job on the open labour market and who then subsequently “fails” at the job to return to work at Samhall within a period of one year.
3.9 SUPPORT FOR ASSISTIVE DEVICES AT THE WORK PLACE. The purpose of support for assistive devices is to enable persons with occupational disabilities to obtain employment, to start up in business on their own, to take part in labour market policy programmes or to take part in courses on practical working life orientation. Support for assistive devices refers both to devices allotted to a client with an occupational disability, and to special devices allotted to the employer.
3.10 support worker. The purpose of a support worker is to enable someone with an occupational disability to obtain and retain employment, or to take part in a labour activation programme, or a course in practical working life orientation. This support is intended to provide an employer with financial compensation for the additional cost entailed in allocating personnel resources to support the disabled employee at work. This financial support can also be paid to another person incurring expenditure through the provision of a support worker.
3.11 SPECIAL ASSISTANCE WHEN STARTING UP A BUSINESS. This refers to the financial contribution given to people with a functional impairment who start their own business. The financial contribution is to be used for the purchase of machinery, tools and other costs of starting up as self-employed. Assistance is given to someone who is unemployed, who has a business idea judged to be profitable and capable of making a considerable contribution to his or her livelihood. Assistance can also be given to several people who together establish a business.
3.12 SECURED EMPLOYMENT. This is a type of job introduction that can be
seen as an alternative to sheltered employment. It is the third and final
step in a new model that starts with a comprehensive assessment of the
client’s capabilities. The second step is the Development of Employment
which is the offer of a job , when it is considered that the client’s
ability can be developed through work experience. The third step is
employment with a high wage subsidy and extra allowance for assistance.
These supports also last for a longer period of time, up to four years. The
employee receives wages and other benefits provided for or comparable to
collective agreements in the branch of economic activity concerned.
3.13 SUPPORT INTO MAINSTREAM EMPLOYMENT – SIUS coaching. SIUS is an
individual pre-hiring supportive arrangement for job seekers with severe
occupational disabilities, who can work in the mainstream. The coach gives
special support, both to the job seeker and to the employer with special
knowledge of introductory methodology. Previous to hiring the SIUS
consultant can provide special support with job matching. He or she
co-operates with the employer in planning the introduction and provides the
job seeker with personalised support in accordance with a plan of action.
This can mean the SIUS consultant working for a time together with the job
seeker at the tasks concerned. Support through a SIUS consultant is
generally not expected to continue beyond six months.
3.14 WORK EXPERIENCE. During a period of work experience the job seeker can try out a job, also giving the employer the chance to try things out before making a final decision. the job seeker receives no payment from the employer, but receives ‘activity support’ from SPES - the same amount of money as when unemployed or under a rehabilitation Programme.
3.15 People with sight loss can benefit from most of these programmes. The ‘supported worker’ programme, for example, can help to overcome the restrictions of limited vision. For example, sight loss may debar an employee from driving, or may make it difficult to fast read or scan text. Accordingly, an employee may need the help of a chauffeur, someone to read or someone to act as secretary. The Employment Service can grant the employer a small amount of financial support to provide a support worker
3.16 Similarly the equipment programme can provide assistive technologies such as speaking computers, Braille displays, magnification devices, etc. Equipment can be provided before a job is found and it is claimed that there is little delay in providing additional equipment when a job is commenced (but see below, par. 7.9).
3.17The local employment office funds assessments and assistive technology etc. The support can be given for the first year of employment (without wage subsidy) but continuously for those who have a job that includes a wage subsidy. All equipment is personal and belongs to the vi employee. For those vi employees without wage subsidy, the employer or the social security office is financially responsible for technical aids after one year of employment. The SPES staff is often used as consultant here when it comes to dealing with assessment in the workplace.
3.18 Speaking generally, the three main services for people with a visual
impairment are:
* Investigating working skills and ability to work.
* Investigating what adjustments are needed at work and/or in the work place
to meet the individual’s need.
* Vocational/study guidance.
3.19 RETENTION MEASURES. It should be noted that Sweden has statutory
measures to ensure RETENTION Of STAFF WHO Acquire a disability, including
sight loss, AT Work. Employers cannot dismiss such a person, but must draw
up an action plan for retaining him/her in the job or transferring them to
another appropriate job in the firm. * * 4 EVALUATION
4 EVALUATION
4.1 JOBS UNDERTAKEN BY VISUALLY Impaired PEOPLE. Modern technology and personal support at work have helped greatly to expand the range of occupations which visually impaired people are able to undertake. Appendix II provides an illustrative list.
4.2 This is an impressive list, no doubt due in part at least to the good
practice in Sweden of maintaining a strong system of impairment-specific
training and support for people with serious sight loss, which helps them to
remain in or return to employment.
4.3 RATES OF EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC INACTIVITY. Yet, when all
due recognition is accorded to Swedish successes, we remain concerned at
evidence of a long tail of economic inactivity persisting among blind and
partially sighted people of working age in Sweden. Staff of SPES stated that
gaps in the statistics available to them make it very difficult to estimate
the size or causes of this phenomenon with a tolerable degree of accuracy.
4.4 A biennially updated survey shows that there are 65,000 people of working age who report that they have problems with their vision. How many of these are currently in employment and how many are economically inactive cannot be ascertained because SPES has data only on vi people who have registered themselves with the Service as job seekers. SPES staff observed that this is common to all job seekers – disabled or not. The latest survey data available show that the number of visually impaired people registered is 3323. 1442 of these are working with a wage subsidy. 292 are in ‘secure’ employment. The number of job ready unemployed is 333 and 35 are registered as part time unemployed. The rest are either in training, on assessment, work placement or taking part in other measures. It was pointed out that people with a wage subsidy are registered because SPES is responsible, without time limitation, for technical aids during their employment.
4.5 In discussion with SPES staff we pointed out that the report on the employment of blind people in 17 countries, published by EBU in 2001, gave an unemployment rate in Sweden of about five percent. We also pointed to the appendix to the report in which a member organization of EBU, the Swedish association of the Visually Impaired (SRF) estimated that more than half of its members were ‘unemployed’. We observed that this discrepancy arose from failure to distinguish between ‘unemployment’ and ‘economic inactivity’, as discussed in the introduction.
4.6 However, the question of the rate of economic inactivity does not end here. When we showed the first draft of this chapter to staff of SRF, they commented as follows: ‘Recent figures show that 65,000 persons in the whole country claim that they have some kind of visual impairment affecting daily life, and around 30,000 say that it affects their working capacity. Among these 30,000 47% are at work, 10% are registered with SPES as unemployed … The remaining 43% are on disability pension and not seeking work.’ The source of these figures was given as the Swedish National Office of Statistics.
4.7 SPES staff made no comment on the significance of these statistics. With reference to the number of job seekers mentioned in par. 4.5, however, they agreed that this falls well short of the number of visually impaired people of working age who are likely to be economically inactive. They agreed that research into economic inactivity in Sweden would be likely to reveal a proportion of people who would like to work, as reported in UK research. They also agreed that research was required to ascertain the existence and size of such a group in Sweden. 4.8 In general, it is our opinion that the percentages from the Office of Statistics seem to confirm SRF’s 2001 estimate of the rate of economic inactivity. This suggests that the assessment process in Sweden, as described above (par. 1.6 et seq.), results in many people with serious sight loss being regarded as incapable of work in mainstream, sheltered or supported employment. As in the UK, we think that research into economic inactivity in Sweden is likely to reveal a number of blind and partially sighted people who wish to work and who could be helped to reach the labour market.
5 REHABILITATION
5.1 Closely related to the question of economic inactivity is the existence or absence of a robust system of impairment-specific rehabilitation for employees and job seekers who have experienced serious sight loss. They need support to acquire mobility skills and skills of personal care such as cooking, etc. This is commonly known as ‘social rehabilitation’. Most people who acquire sight loss in adult life need to acquire these skills as well as occupational skills, a process usually known as ‘vocational rehabilitation’.
5.2 It is widely recognised that a major problem for disability employment services is timely intervention. It is undesirable that people should leave eye hospital, go onto disability pension and be left to find their way through to those who can help them with social and vocational rehabilitation. A long gap can be demoralising and jeopardise success.
5.3 The Swedish solution to this problem is striking. There is a network of 33 “Syncentraler”, low vision clinics (LVCs) situated within the health care system. Visiting a clinic is normally free, but some clinics make a small charge. They are open to people with low vision, defined by standards set by the World Health Organisation: low vision is defined as visual acuity of less than 6/18, but equal to or better than 3/60, or corresponding visual field loss to less than 20 degrees, in the better eye with best possible correction. Blindness is defined as visual acuity of less than 3/60, or corresponding visual field loss to less than 10 degrees, in the better eye with best possible correction. Vision below 0,3 or other difficulties with vision that affects their daily living.
5.4 Patients need a letter of referral from an eye-specialist. After the first referral they are free to contact the clinic at need. None is discharged nor is attendance limited to a fixed period of time.
5.5 As would be expected, most patients are over retirement age. We were told that there are about 16,000 patients of working age attending. The staff of the LVCs form multi-disciplinary teams, able to offer optical rehabilitation and training in low vision techniques, mobility and daily living skills, emotional counselling etc. The LVCs collaborate with SPES, informing their patients as to the help which this service can offer when advice on returning to, or seeking work is needed. They cannot refer patients directly to SPES, only inform them about the service and how to contact it. It should be noted, however, that, in some parts of Sweden, there are regular collaboration meetings between the SPES and the LVC. Thus Sweden, in contrast to Germany, does not rely on residential rehabilitation services. Everything is done at a fairly local level. Besides the LVCs communities can offer the services of an occupational therapist.
5.6 We are intrigued by this evidence of a ‘joined up’ rehabilitation service which begins within the health service and offers a continuous pathway through the sight loss experience with support towards independence in personal care and employment. Unfortunately staff of SPES were unable to supply statistics relating to outcomes: how many people go on from the LVC to mainstream or sheltered employment; what proportion of them are male/female; how are these distributed by age; how many of them have complex needs such as additional physical impairments, intellectual difficulties or ageing? We think that any future research into economic inactivity in Sweden should find answers to such questions.
6 LABOUR ACTIVATION PROGRAMMES
6.1 As shown in section 3, labour activation programmes for blind and partially sighted people exist in Sweden and may be shown to have had a relatively high level of success. They are commendably impairment-specific even though they are delivered by an employment service agency whose remit covers all disabled people. We consider this to be a model of good practice.
6.2 DEAFBLIND PEOPLE The provision of a service specializing in ‘sensory impairment’ should also be noted as good practice. It has yielded striking employment results for deafblind people, as can be seen in the list of jobs they do (appendix I).
6.3 On the other hand, there appears to be much less support for people with complex needs. We were informed that sheltered employment has almost disappeared for visually impaired people. Samhall, the Swedish agency for sheltered employment is said to have refocused its work away from jobs suitable for them. Without doubt mainstreaming is a matter for congratulation as far as many blind and partially sighted people are concerned, but it should be complemented by special support for blind and partially sighted people with complex needs, perhaps along the lines of the social firm, CONCEPT, cited in the introduction.
6.4 Our attention was drawn to some interesting recent developments. The 'place and train' method) advocated by the European Union of Supported Employment) is provided by 'Sius' coaches. Sius coaching started out as support for persons with mental disabilities but is now a service/program delivered by SPES to people with complex needs. Some of the specialized teams within SPES for people with low vision, hard of hearing or deafness have a special Sius counsellor attached to them.
6.5 We would like to see further strategic thinking in all member countries of the EU as regards the creation of an ‘employment continuum’ in the labour market for disabled people. This should aim at the promotion of economic activities which can support people with complex needs to gain remunerative employment. Such establishments should trade for profit on revenue account and should include able bodied as well as disabled employees in equal proportions. Examples are cited in The Employment Continuum, (see chapter one). They include reformed sheltered workshops, social firms and enterprises which employ labour on the ‘putting out’ system.
6.6 This kind of thinking and good practice derived from it seems to be more advanced in Germany (see Chapter Three) than in Sweden or UK.
7 FURTHER EVALUATION: THE SWEDISH ASSOCIATION OF THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED
7.1 the Swedish Association of the Visually Impaired (srf) agreed to be interviewed by us and followed up with valuable written evidence, most of which we reproduce below.
7.2 SRF is an association which has existed for the purposes of mutual support and lobbying since 1889.
7.3 From the beginning, employment for blind and partially sighted people was one of its central concerns. During the 20th century SRF set up a number of companies producing services for VISUALLY IMPAIRED PEOPLE, which created employment for many of them. These were in industrial production (e.g. brush making) as well as Braille printing, production of talking books, purchase of technical aids and other equipment.
7.4 In recent times these activities have changed and the number of VISUALLY IMPAIRED PEOPLE employed has declined. Since the 1980s the focus has shifted to support for job seekers such as training to improve self-esteem and capacity to work in the mainstream.
7.5 2006 saw a new departure with the establishment of IrisBemanning Bemanning. IRISBEMANNING is a company which offers a job matching service for people with disabilities. A data base of job seekers and their CVs is maintained. These are supplied to employers recruiting staff. The aim is to interest them in disabled candidates with good qualifications and capacity for work. By this means IRISBEMANNING has had some success. The process in outline is as follows. Initially IRISBEMANNING is the employer and handles applications on behalf of the client for SPES support at the work place. IRISBEMANNING monitors the client's work situation as it develops, keeping in touch both with the employer and the employees who work alongside the client. //// The aim is for the employer to take over as employer of the disabled recruit.
7.6 IRISBEMANNING has also been able to arrange direct recruitment of people with disabilities by some companies. It also employs visually impaired people directly at the telephone switchboard, running customer services, such as complaints, for other companies. The aim here is partly to create jobs for disabled people and partly to spread knowledge of the skills of VISUALLY IMPAIRED PEOPLE at work. 7.6 SRF considers that IRISBEMANNING has proved its value in overcoming barriers to employment caused by employers' unfamiliarity with disabled people and their real abilities. ‘After some time with a VISUALLY IMPAIRED person in the workplace most of this is gone and no one thinks it is big trouble to employ such a person.’
7.7 The fact that some visually impaired people have turn to IRISBEMANNING to obtain employment may be further evidence that SPES is not reaching all those who are capable of employment in mainstream occupations and that this is contributing to the rate of economic inactivity described above (par. 4.2 et seq.]
7.8 SRF Also commented on employment services for blind and partially sighted people as follows.
7.9 EQUIPMENT SUPPORT ‘It often works out well. In many cases, however, there are delays in handling which jeopardise the chance of employment. SRF has argued for improved management of the process and for immediate availability of equipment at the workplace when a client finds a job. Similar complaints are heard about the ‘access to work’ programme in the UK. In Sweden, staff of SPES acknowledge that delays sometimes occur. There may be regional variation, they say, and delivery time may vary depending on how close to the client the supplier is . They would be interested to hear how long the delays are and the reasons why.
7.10 On employment support services, SRF commented: ‘A VISUALLY IMPAIRED person, on obtaining a job, may have access to a subsidised taxi service to and from the work place through the municipality.’ With regard to the new personal allowance discussed at par. Yyy above, SRF believes that ‘This allowance may also be used for support at the workplace. The basic idea is that the recipient alone decides how and when he/she uses it.’ On the disincentive effect of benefits SRF disagreed that reduction of income on taking a job was never a question for SPES clients (see 1.5 above).
7.11 On widening the range of jobs undertaken by visually impaired people: ‘Mainstream education and robust vocational training has long been the main focus for both the government and the disability movement in Sweden. In general we do not talk about blind jobs today, as growing knowledge, improving attitudes and technical innovations afford access to most types of job. Obstacles remain and there is still need to remove negative attitudes among employers and even blind people. It remains true that certain jobs are very appropriate for blind people and specific training courses for these jobs still exist e.g.: secretarial and switchboard work, physiotherapy, computer programming and sound technician. But the numbers coming forward have declined in recent years, due to lower demand, and/or more complex work processes that make tasks more difficult for a blind person to carry out. It is worth noting that, in recent years, training courses have been offered in massage. A number of visually impaired people are working as self-employed masseurs and self-employment is increasing in other fields.’
7.12 Summing up, SRF commented: ‘Nevertheless a level of 47% in employment is a remarkably good result and has been achieved by the whole system of legislation for job retention, rehabilitation and support for job seekers and employers.’
7.13 Especially noteworthy, SRF considers, is retention law: ‘Those laws have kept many people who lost sight in their employment, albeit with more or less change in work situation or tasks.’
8 CONCLUSION
8.1 We were told that Sweden, like many other member states, is experiencing many pressures for change. Globalisation has meant that many simple manufacturing processes suitable for disabled people have been transferred off shore. The recent change of government is encouraging the reform of the social insurance system, in part along lines of market approaches similar to those being discussed and implemented in other member states. On the occasion of our study visit it was too early to give a detailed account of this process, but we may note some concern over contracting out of some employment services to private firms. Recent reorganization of SPES may or may not improve its efficiency in supporting visually impaired people. Downward pressure on public expenditure is said to have meant delay in rolling out the whole programme envisaged for paid personal assistance.
8.2 In relation to the above we cite the opinion of SRF: ‘This process seems to emphasize the individuals own responsibility and in some way limit the responsibilities of government and other authorities given to them by legislation. Provision of training and rehabilitation has grown to be a business market and SPES is now buying these services from private companies on annual or other time schedules. We shoed this comment to staff of SPES, who responded: ‘We are not quite there yet. we are certainly changing, so that services – health care, social security, SPES, etc. - are hardening the borders between their responsibilities and at the same time are forced to collaborate more.’ SPES did not comment on SRF’s statement that ‘There is doubt concerning the quality of the services and concern that a low incidence group such as the visually impaired may not be involved in the development of these schemes directed to disabled people in general.’ There is doubt concerning the quality of the services and concern that a low incidence group such as the visually impaired may not be involved in the development of these schemes directed to disabled people in general.’
8.3 It is beyond our remit to comment on these matters other than to emphasise the general conclusion of this chapter that a robust system of impairment-specific employment support should be maintained in Sweden, alike for blind and partially sighted people and for visually impaired people with complex needs.
APPENDIX I
Examples of jobs undertaken by deafblind people.
1. Administrative work for an association
2. Market researcher, telemarketing
3. Administrative tasks for the County Administrative Board.
4. Social welfare officer who works with deaf people.
5. CNN-operator who works for The Samhall Group p
6. Person working at the University of Örebro
7. Compulsory school teacher/school for deaf children.
8. Machine constructor
9. Computer teacher
10. Administrator (governmental)
11. A self-employed person
12. Sign language teacher 12. Consultant for an association.
13. Network technician/support
14. Assistant in group home
15. Group-leader, the ”Activity House for deaf-blind people”
16. Assistant clerk at an association
17. Engine fitter/stockroom worker
18. Assistant clerk/administrator
19. Assistant nurse/geriatric care
20. Film/video producer
21. Space observatory coordinator
22. Computer system developer
23. Network technician [Source: The Swedish Employment Service
affischafrehabsraustryrken.indd 1 2007-09-14 10:13:18
APPENDIX II
List of Jobs Undertaken by Visually impaired people In Sweden
1. Orientation & Mobility Instructor
2. Lawyer
3. Administrator
4. Foreman
5. Baker
6. Child minder
7. Librarian
8. Car salesman
9. Farmer
10. Brushmaker
11. Boat builder
12. Boat engine minder
13. Bicycle repairer 1
4. Computer training - teacher
15. Computer enginer
16. Computer technician
17. Lay (welfare) worker
18. Dietitian
19. Write from someone´s dictation
20. Works manager
21. Entrepeneur
22. Economist
23. Office caretaker
24. Caretaker
25. Photo lab assistant
26. Recreation leader
27. Author
28. Storekeeper
29. Preschoolteacher
30. Insurance office employed
31. Salesman
32. Guide
33. Rubber worker
34. Person in charge of matter in office
35. Head of hotel
36. Indusatrial worker
37. Information officer
38. Informant
39. Journalist
40. Cantor
41. Manufactory keeper
42. Cook
43. Consultant
44. Clerical work
45. Proofreader
46. Cultural worker
47. Curator
48. Social welfare officer
49. Kitchen staff
50. Laboratory assistant
51. Technician (sound)
52. Speech therapist
53. Cleaner
54. Medical secretary
55. Teacher
56. Metal worker
57. Guide museum
58. Keeper of music store
59. Musician
60. Ombudsman
61. Pastor
62. Staff manager
63. Piano-tuner
64. Police
65. Politician
66. Radio man
67. Psychologist
68. Reporter
69. Rahabililtation worker
70. Restautrant owner
71. X-ray assistant
72. Physiotherapist
73. Waiter
74. Nurse
75. Keeper at school
76. Actor
77. Carpenter
78. Low vision therapist
79. Singer
80. Study counselling
81. Telemarketing
82. Translater
83. Interpreter
84. Web designer
85. Web teacher
86. Hostess
87. Switchboard operator
88. Head of old peoples home
89. Messenger
90. Doorman
91. Caretaker
Chapter Three
Germany
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The German Federal Ministry of Employment and Social Affairs (FMESA)
greatly facilitated the work of the study visit by providing in advance a
detailed written description of employment services in Germany. This
outline, translated into English and slightly abridged, is presented in the
remainder of this section.
1.2 Germany is a Federation of sixteen states (Bundesländer). Federal and
state agencies each provide services aimed at promoting the participation of
disabled people in the labour market. A person whose employment is
interrupted or threatened by disability is entitled to social security
benefit, arising either from a previously insured employment or other
provision. It may be noted here that all legally blind people are entitled
to a 'Blindness Allowance' (Blindengeld), a compensation benefit for the
additional costs entailed by the impairment. This is paid in addition to
salary or income substitution such as unemployment benefit. Depending on the
state (land) in which a person lives, it may amount to between 300 and 600
Euros per month. No other disabled people are entitled to a compensation
allowance of this kind.
1.3 A person who applies for unemployment benefit on account of disability
may be offered assessment of his/her disability and need for support in
employment as a severely disabled person.
1.4 Assessment is undertaken by the Federal Employment Agency (FEA), acting
on the decisions of specially qualified advisors, usually medical and
psychological experts. The assessors must establish, not only that a client
has a disability but, more importantly, that the disability is so severe as
to have implications for the person's productivity in employment. If a
person is assessed as ‘severely disabled’ his/her specific needs for
employment support services will also be assessed. Support is based on the
basic principles of accuracy and appropriateness, certainty of success and
the likelihood of sustainability. The aim is, where possible, sustainable
integration of the recipient into open employment.
1.5 A person assessed as severely disabled is entitled to a rehabilitation
programme, the costs of which, as well as living costs, will be granted, and
help with retaining or obtaining employment, which includes support with
advice and placement, training programmes (e.g. training in the work place),
help with mobility, and technical aids in the work place.
1.6 There are Specific programmes designed to support blind and partially
sighted people. Basic skills training will be provided as part of their
initial, and further, rehabilitation into employment. This includes the
teaching of skills and abilities which are essential for their independence
for training, employment, and their personal lives (e.g. techniques for
reading and writing Braille, mobility training and instructions in daily
living skills).
1.7 These services are provided on a residential basis at four vocational
rehabilitation centres for blind and partially sighted people, situated in
Düren, Halle/Saale, Mainz and Würzburg.
1.8 Blind and partially sighted school leavers are entitled to participate
in training programmes offered at vocational training centres situated in
Chemnitz, Soest, Stuttgart and Nürnberg. They receive careers advice and
opportunity to prepare for employment.
1.9 Another employment service for all severely disabled people seeking work
is the administration of an employment quota under legislation. Employers of
20 or more staff have a legal duty to allocate at least 5% of their posts to
severely disabled people. An employer who does not allocate the obligatory
number of posts to severely disabled people must pay a compensation charge
for each post not so allocated. The level of this charge is set by law. A
severely disabled person can be counted for more than one allocated post,
but no more than three posts. This can be applied when their participation
in employment proves particularly difficult.
1.10 Employers are legally obliged to check whether any of their vacancies
can be filled by severely disabled people, particularly those registered
with the Agency for Employment as unemployed or looking for work. For a
fuller description see the Appendix to this chapter.
1.11 The following support for the participation of severely disabled people
can be given to an employer:
Training allowances, for the provision of training support from the
employer
Rehabilitation courses, for the integration into open employment of
severely disabled people. For people over 55 years of age, up to 70% of the
appropriate salary can be granted for up to 96 months
Support for assistance in work (disability-related, additional costs for
the design of the work place for a trainee or professional will be
reimbursed)
Work experience (for disabled people, the costs for a time-limited work
experience placement can be reimbursed for up to three months)
1.12 Sheltered workshops provide employment opportunities to those visually
impaired people who are unable to manage a professional training course or a
professional occupation in the open market. Workshop for disabled people (WfbM)
provide individually designed work places and other services to promote
skills and abilities of an employment-related nature.
2 EVALUATION
2.1 It will be understood from the foregoing that the range of employment
support services for blind and partially sighted people in Germany is
elaborate and impressive. This no doubt accounts in some measure for the
wide range of occupations pursued by them. (see below par. 3.3.7). We wished
to know, however, whether these services contributed to a larger or smaller
rate of activity in the German labour market by blind and partially sighted
people, relative to comparable member states of the EU, such as the UK or
Sweden. Evaluation of this kind is very difficult owing to the fact that the
employment statistics of the Federal Employment Agency at Nuernberg (FEA) do
not explicitly show the individual types of disability. It seems that it is
therefore impossible for the Agency to state or estimate the current rates
of employment, unemployment and economic inactivity among blind and
partially sighted people. In discussions with staff of FMESA we referred to
the evidence of involuntary economic inactivity in the UK, as rehearsed in
chapter one of this report.
2.2 In response FMESA staff expressed their belief that any blind or
partially sighted person in Germany who wanted to work and who was assessed
as able to do so would find employment. Almost all people who become
disabled apply for social security benefit and such application always
results in assessment of disability and employability. People therefore
would ‘always show up’. It was acknowledged that assessment could have a
negative outcome, but it was pointed out that a person so assessed was
registered as ‘unemployed’ and continued to be regarded as a job seeker. We
formed the opinion that the concept of ‘economic inactivity’ was virtually
alien to FEA thinking. Staff were unwilling to believe that unemployment
could last so long in individual cases as to induce resignation to economic
inactivity among blind and partially sighted people. In discussion FMESA
staff acknowledged that this could not be demonstrated convincingly in the
absence of statistical data.
2.3 FMESA staff also pointed out that blind and partially sighted people who
rejoin the labour market are never economically disadvantaged. Where the
rate for the job falls below the level of benefit paid during preceding
unemployment, social security will continue to top up the wage to the
previous level of benefit. They also suggested that the German Federation of
the Blind organised a very strong lobby in Germany, and if there were a
serious problem of economic inactivity, the Federation would certainly have
raised the issue. ‘You are the first to have raised it’, we were told.
2.4 We also raised with FMESA staff the question of provision for blind and
partially sighted people who are assessed as unable to obtain employment in
the mainstream labour market. They pointed out that sheltered workshops
continue to offer employment for blind people in Germany. However, the aim
of FMESA was to maximise employment of blind and partially sighted people in
the mainstream labour market wherever possible. Sheltered workshops are
provided for disabled people who could not achieve this. Recently research
had shown that there were disabled people whose potential was intermediate
between mainstream employment and sheltered provision. These were people
with intellectual difficulties or mental illness. They preferred mainstream
to sheltered employment, but could enter it only with a high level of
support. ‘Supported employment’ in mainstream firms is, therefore, the
subject of a new law currently under discussion, which would fund such
employment for people with intellectual difficulties or mental illness. In
response to our questions FMESA staff stated that no consideration had been
given to the use of this law to provide supported employment for blind or
partially sighted people with additional impairments. However such an
application was not ruled out in principle.
3 Further Evaluation
3.1 In a study visit scheduled to last three working days it was impossible
for us to gather evidence from the whole of Germany, a large territory
populated by some eighty million people. We decided, therefore, to focus
mainly on services and organisations in North Rhine-Westphalia. This State
was chosen partly because we had contact through the European Blind Union
with staff of the vocational training centre at Soest and partly because
there are, at Soest and Düren, vocational training and vocational
rehabilitation centres which service a large number of blind and partially
sighted people from North Rhine-Westphalia and other states of the
Federation. We were able to hold discussions with staff of two organisations
in the region: the Office for Integration at Munster and the Vocational
Training Centre at Soest. In addition we met with staff of INFAS at Bonn.
INFAS - Institute of Applied Social Sciences - is a commercial organisation.
While in Bonn we had lunch with two leading members of the German Federation
of the Blind and Partially Sighted, who have long standing experience in
that organisation. With all these we took up the issues raised in discussion
with FMESA staff and invited comment on the views they had expressed to us.
3.2 Economic Inactivity
3.2.1 INFAS agreed that there is no means of ascertaining current rates of
employment, unemployment or economic inactivity of blind and partially
sighted people in Germany. This is "a blank box". The most recent
statistical survey was published in 1995 . Known as the EVASA project, it
was based on interviews with just over 1000 ‘legally blind’ aged 18 to 60.
Those questioned came mainly from Cologne, Bonn and Dusseldorf and were all
in receipt of Blindness Allowance (Blindengeld). It showed that 33 percent
of legally blind people of working age were in employment. The percentages
vary with age: under 30 years of age, 35 percent; age 30-39, 47 percent;
40-49, 42 percent; 50 and above, 23 percent. Of the others, 7 percent were
reported as ‘unemployed’ (i.e. actively seeking work), and 8 percent in
training for employment. 48 percent, therefore were economically active and
52 percent economically inactive. Of the economically inactive, 32 percent
were reported as in '(early) retirement', of whom the largest group, 76
percent, were over 50. There was a difference in the employment rate between
totally blind people and those reported as ‘severely visually impaired’: 38
percent of totally blind in employment compared to 29 percent of the latter.
This was said to be due to many of the totally blind people having received
specialised education/training in childhood and youth that prepared them for
employment.
3.2.2 Classification by gender revealed a significant discrepancy. The
Percentage of males in employment was 39 and of females 25. 25 percent of
the unemployed women were reported as ‘in the home’.
3.2.3 Concerning those who were in ‘(early) retirement’, the 1995 survey did
not ask questions aimed at distinguishing between those who said they still
wanted to work and those who said they accepted or were resigned to
permanent economic inactivity. Nor did it disclose the incidence/rate of
people with additional impairments, though the study reported 6 percent as
‘sick’.
3.2.4 In the light of the foregoing, it is impossible to compare directly
the situation of economically inactive people in the UK and in Germany.
Given the view expressed by FMESA, it would be interesting to know how many
of the 52 percent who are economically inactive in Germany would say, like
their counterparts in UK, that they wanted to work if appropriate jobs and
support were available. Members of the German Federation of the Blind told
us that many unemployed blind and partially sighted people in Germany “want
to work’, but cannot do so ‘because of inactivity of Federal and local
Employment Agencies.” A German citizen living in UK said that, in her
experience, many blind and partially sighted people in Germany held the same
opinion. The validity of these statements cannot be tested in the absence of
reliable up-to-date statistics. We think that the German employment service
has a responsibility either to confirm or disprove them by the production of
reliable evidence.
3.2.5 INFAS did not think that the position of blind and partially sighted
people in the labour market was likely to have improved since 1995. Rather
it was likely to have worsened. They admitted this is hard to assess but
highlighted some developments which were capable of prejudicing the
employment and economic activity of disabled people in general and blind
people in particular. For example there were legislative changes in 2005,
which reformed provision of unemployment benefit. Employment agencies for
recipients of basic financial security (Grundsicherungsempfänger) are
responsible for long-term unemployed and people without unemployment
insurance (for example people without any insurance history, such as
students and housewives). Every recipient must be assessed as able to work
three hours per day. The employment agencies then try to support these
people into employment, but this has proved difficult for many disabled
people, including blind and partially sighted people. In the opinion of
INFAS, the new employment services, which administer the basic financial
security (Grundsicherung), are not well adapted to support them.
3.2.6 Again, in the opinion of INFAS, a second development concerns the
cost-oriented culture of the companies. Employers have been shown to be
sceptical about employing blind people. Part 2 of the EVASA project asked
employers if they would be willing to employ a blind person. Most said they
would not because they did not think they would be sufficiently flexible.
Most said their attitude would not be affected by availability of wage
subsidies as they were looking for well qualified people. Given all this, in
combination with the absence of statistics for blind and partially sighted
people, the opinion of INFAS is that the employment needs of disabled
minorities such as blind and partially sighted people have been obscured.
3.2.7 It may be noted here that the rate of employment of blind and
partially sighted people disclosed by the 1995 survey corresponds exactly to
the rate for the UK disclosed by Network 1000 in 2006. It is possible that a
new survey of Germany would produce a different result, but the comment of
INFAS that the position of blind and partially sighted people is the same,
if not worse, as in 1992 should be noted. So should the similar comments
made to us by members of the German Federation of the Blind and partially
sighted. We conclude that there is a pressing need for at least a pilot
study of the position of blind and partially sighted people in the labour
market of a given region. Such a pilot study should be designed to establish
whether employment services could be augmented or enhanced in such a way as
to stimulate economic activity by blind and partially sighted people. The
senior official of the German Federation of the Blind queried the value of
yet another survey. After discussion of this point we all agreed that it
would be valuable only if designed to develop services that can reach
economically inactive people and incentivise them.
3.3 Vocational Training Services
3.3.1 As stated above, there are three vocational training centres sponsored
by the Federal Employment Agency, at Chemnitz, Soest and Stuttgart. We
visited Soest in Westphalia and held discussions with staff. The following
description is drawn from an information document issued by the Centre.
3.3.2 The Vocational Training Centre for the Blind and Visually Impaired at
Soest is an establishment of the Landschaftsverband Westfalen Lippe (LWL).
LWL is a municipal association that provides services to the 8.5 million
people in the Westphalia-Lippe region. Services provided include social
welfare, psychiatry, hospital treatment orders, youth/schooling and culture,
and the association has 13,000 staff.
3.3.3 LWL runs 35 special schools for disabled children, including seven
special schools for blind and visually impaired children. It also supports
blind and partially sighted children in mainstream education.
3.3.4 The special school for the blind and visually impaired in Soest is the
only one in Westphalia-Lippe that offers vocational education after school
grade 10, as well as highschool education. While the primary school at Soest
offers its services only to pupils in its region, vocational education in
Soest is offered not only for visually handicapped students from Westphalia-Lippe
but also for students from other states of the Federal Republic of Germany.
3.3.5 Vocational education in Germany is organised in the so called dual
system, divided between academic and practical. Hence there are two
educational institutions responsible for the vocational education of
visually impaired persons, which work hand in hand: The LWL-Berufskolleg is
a vocational school and is mainly responsible for the academic part of the
vocational education. The LWL-Berufsbildungswerk is mainly responsible for
the practical part of the vocational education.
3.3.6 LWL-Berufskolleg Soest (Vocational College for Visually Impaired and
Blind Persons) has mainly two tasks: It offers full-time-classes for
visually impaired adolescents, who want to prepare themselves for a
vocational education in the dual system or intend to reach a higher level of
education. This might be required, for example, for university entrance. The
LWL-Berufskolleg offers classes at all academic levels. In addition to the
full-time-classes the LWLBerufskolleg also offers part-time-classes for
vocational students participating in dual system programs. They visit the
vocational school either one day per week or twice per year for 6 weeks.
3.3.7 LWL-Berufsbildungswerk Soest - Vocational Training Center for Visually
Handicapped Persons prepares visually handicapped young adults (age 18 - 25)
for competitive employment. Vocational education is offered in the following
programs:
Commercial occupations including switchboard operator and telemarketers,
transcriptionist as well as bookkeeper and sales personnel.
Metal working occupations including computerised shaping and lathe
operating as well as welding.
Housekeeping occupations including cooking, sewing, laundry and room
cleaning.
Craftsmanship for the blind as basket and chair caning and broom making.
The programs last from 2 to 3.5 years. They are financed by the Federal
Employment Agency via the Local Employment Agencies.
3.3.8 The Institute also offers programs for assessment and adjustment to
visual impairment. A special unit offers low vision counselling and training
for the students and for blind and partially sighted employees. There are
courses in orientation and mobility, daily living skills and social skills.
Included in the programmes are periods of practical training in companies
and administration in the clients’ home communities. Participants are also
part-time- students of the LWL-Berufskolleg.
3.3.9 Currently the main vocational education of LWL-Berufskolleg and the
LWL-Berufsbildungswerk Soest is in the field of business. It is based on
electronic data processing. There is a personal computer at every student’s
workplace and every computer is in a network. The standard software used is
the Microsoft Office Package and special business software. In addition to
their vocational training students obtain the European Computer Driving
Licence (ECDL).
3.3.10 In 1999 the LWL-Berufskolleg and the LWL-Berufsbildungswerk Soest
started a research project on the vocational education of visually impaired
young adults in their local communities. The project has been funded by the
Federal Ministry of Labour, Berlin (Now FMESA). The findings of the project
led to a new program, ‘MobiliS’ - Support and Counselling for Mainstream
Vocational Education for the Blind and Visually Impaired. This program is
being offered in addition to those in house and can be combined with them.
Now it is regularly funded by the Agency of Labour as the in house programs.
3.3.11 For all students individual education programs are worked out by
teams, including the students themselves. Seeking to meet the interests of
students and to improve their chances of vocational integration, the
LWL-Berufsbilldungswerk Soest increasingly combines elements of special
education in the institute with practical experience in administration and
companies in the mainstream labour market.
4 Discussions at Soest
4.1 We asked whether it was considered that the three centres supported by
FEA were adequate to meet the need of young blind and partially sighted
people for vocational training throughout Germany. Taking into account
provision by some additional centres, staff at Soest thought it adequate to
deal with the numbers of blind and partially sighted people assessed as
‘severely disabled’. “In Germany we cannot complain of lack of support
services. It is lack of suitable jobs that is the problem”, we were told.
4.2 However, in further discussion it appeared that this remark was not
intended to cover assessment and placement services. Given the putatively
high rate of economic inactivity discussed above (Par. 3.2), we wished to
know whether a blind or partially sighted person who had a negative outcome
on first assessment could apply later to be assessed again. We were informed
that this was possible in theory, but very unlikely to happen in practice.
Administrative practice, it was said, has changed in recent years. Local
Employment Agencies are instructed to differentiate between 3 categories of
client: (a) ‘market’ clients, who sell themselves; (b) ‘encourage’ clients,
who are near to the labour market but need some motivation or support; and
(c) ‘attending’ clients, who are too distant from the labour market to be
integrated within one year. "Their application," we were told, "has to be
put into the lowest drawer. After one year the local employment agency pays
10,000 Euros to the Social-Code-2-Agency, and the unemployed person gets
social benefit."
4.3 Elaborating on this, it was said that, under the old system, each
visually impaired person had a responsible member of staff in the employment
agency, to arrange assessment, vocational training, employment integration
and grants to employers. Under the new system, by contrast, responsibility
is divided. One member of staff is responsible for vocational counselling in
school, assessment and vocational training. After vocational training has
been completed, another member takes responsibility for placing in
employment. This responsibility lasts for one year only, a time limitation
which applies to all unemployed people. It is considered too short to place
many blind and partially sighted people. In practice nothing is done by the
employment agency for people who have not obtained employment after one
year. At that point responsibility for them transfers to a hybrid
organisation, ‘the Social 2 agency’, responsible for unemployment plus
social welfare. Its basic support for unemployed persons is driven by
numerical targets. It must place 20 percent of clients in employment per
annum. Targets vary for people below 25 years of age and older than 50.
Targets also vary according to cost of placement. At most, 930 euros per
case are paid upon placement. In the opinion of Soest staff to whom we
spoke, this is a very inadequate amount of money for difficult clients.
Certain groups cost much more to place in employment. We understood that
there is no target or budget for these disabled people, including, of
course, blind and partially sighted people.
4.4 The effect of all this, it was said, is that, after the prescribed year,
the FEA has no responsibility to tackle the unemployment of disabled people
who are difficult to place, such as many blind and partially sighted people
are. "There is one year," we were told, "and after that, no one cares
because it is too expensive". The solution, it was suggested, would be a
special target number/budget for placing unemployed disabled people who are
difficult to promote into jobs.
4.5 Staff at Soest believe that the complete lack of statistics concerning
the employment situation of blind and partially sighted people makes it
impossible to highlight this problem and work for improvement. It was
suggested that Eurostat should be made aware of the problem. We understand
that Eurostat is currently updating its model for gathering statistical
information about disabled people in the European Union. No doubt there is
much that could be done in this way, but we reaffirm our view that a pilot
study of employment, unemployment and economic inactivity among blind and
partially sighted people in Germany is urgently needed.
4.6 We were given evidence that recent changes in employment policy and
administration have adversely affected blind and partially sighted people
who graduated from vocational training. A telephone follow up of graduates
since 1988 has tracked their rate of success in obtaining employment.
Records show that, over eight years until 2004, the proportion of each
annual cohort who obtained employment increased over a three year period
from completion of training. ‘Success’ was defined as obtaining a job on
March 1st in a given year and the rate of success was approximately 80
percent. Since 2004 it has dropped below 60 percent. The study reports, with
concern, that in 2004 – 2006 the success rate has not increased annually
after graduation. It was suggested to us that this decline is mainly the
result of the policy and administrative practices outlined above (par.
4.2-4.5).
5 The Office of Integration
5.1 This is the short name for an agency whose full legal name may be
rendered in English as Office for the Safeguarding of the Integration of
Severely Handicapped Persons in Working Life. It forms part of the
administration of the sixteen German states, i.e. it is not an arm of
federal government. The Federal Employment Agency and the
‘Social-Code-2-Agencies’ are together responsible for unemployed people. The
Office of Integration is responsible at ‘county’ level for helping employees
(and self-employed people) with disabilities to maintain there jobs.
5.2 In pursuing its general aim, the Office of Integration relies heavily on
the policy known as ‘Company prevention’. This policy helps to:
Identify and eliminate any difficulties in employing a severely disabled
person at an early stage or to ensure that they never occur in the first
place.
Discuss and apply all means, from counselling to financial support, with
which the employment relationship can be secured in the long term.
In practice the aim is to ensure that employers become active as early as
possible when,
(a) Personal, behavioural or work-related difficulty becomes noticeable that
could jeopardise the working relationship, or
(b) Employees - whether disabled or not – are incapable of work for more
than six weeks within a year. The statutory regulations make provision for
Company Integration Management in such cases.
Employers are supported by the Integration Office if the affected parties
are severely disabled people as defined by employment law.
Besides company prevention, the Office of Integration is responsible for:
(a) collection and administration of the compensation charge levied under
the quota system
(b) supporting employers, for example, by reimbursing costs where a severely
disabled employee produces less than the output of the average of the work
force, or needs personal assistance from other employees
(c) supporting the employer in prevention and Company Integration Management
(d) the special termination protection for severely disabled people, which
requires the agreement of the Integration Office in the event of termination
(e) training the integration team.
6 Discussions at Munster
6.1 We were able to hold discussions with staff of the Integration Office at
Munster, which has responsibility for Westphalia-Lippe, concerning its role
in employment services.
6.2 We were interested in its task of supervising termination of employment
of severely disabled employees. [See 5.2.5(d) above, and Appendix for fuller
description]. An employer may not dismiss a person who has been assessed as
severely disabled without first referring the question to the Integration
Office for ratification. If ratification is denied, the employee is entitled
to financial compensation, though not to continuation of employment.
Employees and employers can appeal from the decision of the Integration
Office to the Court for Administration and also to the Labour Court. It
should be emphasised that this does not amount to retention legislation as
currently discussed in the UK. The company prevention policy comes into play
only if an employer dismisses a person already assessed as severely
disabled.
6.3 We sought the views of the Integration Office on the putative advantages
and disadvantages of a quota system, referring to written evidence supplied
to us in advance by the FMESA (see Appendix to this chapter) We rehearsed
with them the arguments for and against a quota system before and after its
abolition in the UK in 1995.
6.3.1 Argument for: A quota system boosts the number of disabled people who
obtain employment.
Argument against: If this were true one would expect to find a higher rate
of employment of disabled people in Germany than in the UK. Such a
differential does not exist. According to the Integration Office at Munster
There are 2.2 million severely disabled people of working age in Germany, of
whom 1.1 million are at work or job seeking, an employment rate of about 50
percent. This is also the employment rate of disabled people in the UK,
according to the official Labour Force Survey.
6.3.2 Argument for: A quota combined with a compensation charge as in
Germany enables the raising of more revenue to support disabled people in
employment with assistive technology, modification of work places, etc.
Argument against: The UK in comparison with Germany can be shown to raise a
comparable fund from general taxation. The website of the Department for
Work and Pensions shows that, in 2004 UK provision for special disability
employment programmes amounted to £277 million. As mentioned in the Appendix
to this chapter, the German compensation fund in 2005 amounted to 500
million Euros, about £350 million at the then rate of exchange. Thus the UK
raised approximately three quarters of the German fund, which corresponds
approximately to the different size of population of each country (UK, 60
million, Germany 80 million).
6.3.3 For: A quota system can protect a disabled employee against unjust
dismissal as in Germany.
Against: Such protection can be provided by anti-discrimination legislation,
which avoids the complex bureaucracy of administering a quota system.
6.3.4 For: A quota system provides a moral incentive to employers to employ
disabled people.
Against: Some employers in Germany (e.g. airline companies) complain that
the quota system impacts unfairly upon them, since they have relatively few
jobs suitable for disabled employees, yet must pay the compensation charge
just the same.
6.3.5 For: A quota system gives moral as well as practical encouragement to
disabled people, sending a signal that society is ‘on their side’.
Against: Registration under a quota system is seen as stigmatisation by some
disabled people in the work place, especially by younger disabled people.
6.4 Staff of the Integration Office acknowledged some of the objections
mentioned above, Viz: bureaucracy, complaints of German employers,
resistance of some disabled people (e.g. those with mental illnesses) to
registration. But they were sceptical as to the existence of empirical data
to support arguments against quota. They pointed to its existence in other
European countries, including France and the Netherlands. They defended the
German quota system against the charge that it was merely a way of making
employers pay for employment support services. “The clear aim of the law is
motivation,” we were told. “it creates equality between employers.” It was
acknowledged that many employers did not attempt to meet their employment
duty to recruit five percent of their staff from severely disabled people,
but many employers did not have enough suitable posts and paying the
compensation charge was a way of sharing the burden with those who could.
6.5 We discussed the complete absence of statistics relating to the
employment situation of blind and partially sighted peple after 1995 (INFAS'
"blank box"). Staff of the Integration Office wished to point out that they
were under a legal obligation to present pan-disability statistics only.
Similarly employers were under a legal obligation to report the number of
disabled employees in their organisation, but not to report details of
employees’ impairments.
6.5.1 Nevertheless, staff were willing to discuss possible sources that
could throw light on the current position. They pointed out that the
agencies in the states (Lander) which are responsible for registration of
blind people should be able to supply numbers of people between 18 and 65
years of age who are ‘legally blind’. They observed that there are
restrictions on authorities from disclosing this information imposed by data
protection legislation. We pointed out that such legislation exists in the
UK but it had proved possible to carry out research with anonymity (Network
1000 and Work Focus) and local authorities, responsible for registration of
blind and partially sighted people, had found ways to cooperate.
6.5.2 In this connection it was noted that the Integration Office in
Westphalia Lippe knows how many people are in receipt of Blindness Allowance
and has a specialised task force to support blind people at their work
place. It was suggested that comparison of these two statistics would yield
a tolerable estimate of economic inactivity in the state of North
Rhine-Westphalia. After our return from Germany, the Integration Office
supplied the following estimate: around 2000 people between the ages of 20
and 60 are entitled to Blindness Allowance. Approximately 100 of these are
thought to be employed in the mainstream labour market.
6.5.3 It was noted in discussion that funds may be obtainable from sources
outside government to finance a pilot research project in North
Rhine-Westphalia, conducted, for example, by INFAS.
6.6 Sheltered and Supported Employment
6.6.1 Staff of the Integration Office informed us that there are 260,000
severely disabled people employed in sheltered workshops throughout Germany
and 26,000 in Westphalia-Lippe. As mentioned above (par. 2.4), a new law is
under consideration to promote supported employment in mainstream firms for
people with intellectual difficulties and mental illnesses. The Integration
Office anticipates that it will have responsibility for promoting supported
employment under this law in two years time. We pointed out that, until
recently in the UK, very little effort had been made to include within
supported employment programmes blind and partially sighted people with
additional difficulties. This is beginning to change and government is
looking to voluntary agencies like RNIB to offer training. However this is
expensive, as one or two years are not enough to establish such people in
mainstream jobs. Five years is more realistic. Social firms may also be able
to help.
6.6.2 Staff of the Integration Office indicated that they help to promote
supported employment projects, including social firms which employ severely
disabled people, running hotels, etc. The Office provides funding to help
with start up and operational costs.
6.6.3 We were introduced to the member of staff responsible for promoting
supported employment from the Integration Office. In discussion he informed
us that the agency first introduced services for supported employment in
1988. These were not intended for blind and partially sighted people, but
for people with psychiatric disorders. At end of the 1990s the services were
extended to people with any disabilities.
6.6.4 Supported employment services now exist in all labour market regions –
in every county and city - in Westphalia-Lippe. At present there are 20
services supported by 113 staff. A job counselling qualification for blind
people has been introduced. These 113 supporting staff cooperate with 2
specialist staff in the Integration Office. They work with firms to find
jobs that severely disabled people can do.
6.6.5 We were informed that there are 70 social firms in Westphalia-Lippe in
some of which blind and partially sighted people have obtained employment,
but "not many, perhaps 20 altogether."
6.6.6 We drew attention to the social firm, ‘CONCEPT’, described in the
introduction to this report. The vocational training centres in Germany have
also been active in this field. About ten years ago the centres at Stuttgart
and Chemnitz set up ‘integration firms’ for their graduates. Until recently
the centre at Soest felt no necessity to go down this road”. However the
declining success rate mentioned above (par. 4.6) had stimulated exploratory
discussions with a blind organisation in Westphalia concerning such an
enterprise.
6.6.7 We consider that these developments are working, and to a lesser
extent they are in Sweden, in the direction advocated by EBU as the ‘two
pronged’ i.e. twin track solution to the inclusion of blind and partially
sighted people in the mainstream labour market. This policy argues that for
blind and partially sighted people with additional difficulties
mainstreaming must be supported by strong provision of impairment-sensitive
support. The work of the Integration Office in Westphalia may be regarded as
a case of ‘good practice’ which should be encouraged in all member states of
the EU. In this connection it is very interesting to note that the
Integration Office can assist social firms with start up and operational
costs, providing finance from the compensation charge fund. We were informed
that social firms employing severely disabled people are "increasing
steadily" in Germany. Integration Office statistics show that there are 517
social firms all over Germany, employing 13,694 people of whom 6,800 are
disabled and of these 5,500 have complex needs. In Westphalia there are
approximately 65 social firms, employing approximately 5,500 people, of whom
roughly half are severely disabled.
6.7 As already stated, the new law will aim at mainstreaming severely
disabled people, “steering them away from sheltered workshops”. In future it
is expected that employment in a sheltered workshop will more often be
considered after attempts have been made to ‘place and train’ in mainstream
occupations.
7 Vocational Rehabilitation and Training for Adults
7.1 As mentioned above (par. 1.7) there are four centres for residential
vocational rehabilitation for the blind and visually impaired in Germany.
One of these is situated in North Rhine-Westphalia, at Düren, near Cologne.
Lack of time prevented us from visiting it. Its website, which can be found
at http://www.bfw-dueren.de/english, offers a fairly clear picture of its
vision and programmes. The following points may be noted for the sake of
completing this impression of employment services for blind and partially
sighted people in Germany.
7.2 The Berufsförderungswerk Düren (BFW) was founded in 1975. In addition to
its centre at Düren it has two branches at Hamburg and Mainz.
7.3 The main task of BFW is the vocational training of people who are no
longer able to continue in their profession because of their visual
impairment. It offers vocational rehabilitation and training for
approximately 200 blind and visually impaired adults and has an
administrative and training staff with about 114 employees. The hall of
residence can take up to 200 participants. Each person has a single bedroom
with bathroom and toilet and three meals a day are on offer. There is a wide
range of recreational activities in the areas of sports, creativity and
social engagements, which are on offer in the evenings and at the weekends.
7.4 BFW Düren offers an all round service for blind and partially sighted
people, their relatives and employers. All these services are separated in
modules and can be combined according to the needs of individuals.
7.5 The following services are provided:
daily living skills
mobility training
using optical and electronic devices
job assessment
advising employers
vocational training
training on the job
customized IT training, on the job
job placement
disability management
7.6 Until the year 2000, we are informed, the vocational rehabilitation
centres offered a standard residential rehabilitation course lasting one
year, followed by in house training programmes. We understand that pressure
from government agencies and insurance companies has led to less
standardisation and, as stated above, ‘services … separated in modules and …
combined according to the needs of individuals.’ In other words the centre
has moved to some extent from the older model of ‘train and place’ to the
modern practice of ‘place and train’.
7.7 We wish we had had time to meet with staff of BWF Düren to explore these
issues in depth. Here we can only note with satisfaction the statement on
the website that the training-courses for blind and visually impaired adults
are integrtional and both customer and process orientated.
7.8 The emphasis on recognised qualifications is also to be commended. Next
to functional competence the training for key qualifications is a major
feature of the vocational training, including 'working responsibly, spotting
problems and developing solutions'. There is a strong interrelation between
theoretical and practical training areas. The motto is, to offer vocational
training and further qualification which is both individual and labour
market orientated. In cooperation with the Labour Office, the
Berufsförderungswerk offers active support towards finding a job after the
vocational training. This includes the area of technical equipment of the
work place.
7.9 Nevertheless its website appears to suggest that BWF Düren still
provides its clients with a strong grounding in Basic Rehabilitation.
According to the website, the basic rehabilitation course lasts 12 months
for severely visually impaired and 13 months for blind adults. Again, in the
absence of statistics relating to blind and partially sighted people in the
German labour market, it is impossible to say whether these longer courses
are more or less successful in promoting blind and partially sighted people
into employment.
7.10 The website also suggests that, on completion of basic rehabilitation,
clients can still undertake vocational training at BWF Düren. The following
courses are advertised on the website under the heading, ‘Apprenticeship:
Vocational Training’.
Skilled Office Worker exam with the Chamber of Commerce, vocational
re-training 24 months, first time vocational training 36 months
Office Training for blind or severely visually handicapped; exam with the
Chamber of Commerce, vocational re-training 24 months, first time vocational
training 36 months
Basic Office Clerk exam with the Chamber of Commerce, vocational
re-training 18 months, first time vocational training 24 months
Office worker for participants without previous qualifications exam with
the Chamber of Commerce 36 months
Administrative Clerk exam with the study institute for communal
administration in Aachen, 36 months
Telephone Operator exam with the Chamber of Commerce 6 months
Skilled Industrial Worker, Recycling exam with the Chamber of Commerce and
internal exam 18 months
Industrial Worker with Basic Skills - internal exam 12 months
7.11 It would be interesting to know in detail what degree of work
experience and training in the work place accompanies these courses. It
would also be interesting to know how clients transfer work experience
gained with firms around BWF Düren (assuming this is made available) to
employment in the vicinity of their homes to which, presumably, they return
fully trained and qualified.
7.12 In this connection we note that BWF Düren offers support with job
placement (often called 'integration' in Germany). This includes:-
Support with job seeking activities
Applying for financial support for the technical equipment
Finding new work offers
Help with the equipment and the organisation at the new work place
Orientation and mobility training for the future work place
Initial training at the new work place
7.13 We would have welcomed an opportunity to discuss with staff at BWF
Düren the relative merits of training blind and partially sighted people at
what seems to amount to a specialist residential college, as opposed to
supporting their inclusion in mainstream vocational colleges close to their
homes. The latter model is practiced in the UK, where RNIB College,
Loughborough, offers such support, as well as providing residential courses.
7.14 We would also have welcomed an opportunity to discuss any provision
that is made there for blind and partially sighted people with additional
difficulties. The website gives the impression that the centre prides itself
on preparing blind and partially sighted people to obtain those high
qualifications which mainstream employers said they were looking for (see
above 3.2.4). It is to be hoped that such employers would be open to recruit
someone like Katrin Bölsche, whose story is highlighted on the website:
‘When Katrin Bölsche first began her vocational training as skilled office
worker in the Berufsförderungswerk Düren, she would not have imagined to be
later working for a computer company which sells software for legal
professions. She got convinced during a longer probation time at the company
AnNoText. She liked the young company, and the managers liked her
uncomplicated and highly motivated work attitude. Katrin Bölsche was born in
Hamburg in the North of Germany, and due to a genetic impairment of her
eyesight she is visually handicapped by 70%.
‘Immediately after she finished her vocational training she was employed as
sales assistant. She is responsible for the co-ordination between customers
and sales representatives of the company.
‘Recently her areas of responsibility have increased: because of her good
knowledge of the French language she is now contact person for the French
affiliated company of AnNoText.
‘Dr. Josef Schaefer, managing director of AnNoText speaks very well of his
employee: "Katrin Bölsche is very well integrated in our team, both because
of her qualifications and because of her personality. She is highly
motivated and we can’t imagine to be without her anymore.”’
7.15 We note with interest that BWF Düren has an R&D section which focuses
its work on two main topics:
(a) Labour market research and developing new strategies for vocational
training and job placement
(b) IT development which includes the development of IT or e-learning
training courses and software.
7.16 The website should be consulted for a list of such projects which
includes, for example, developing a knowledge management and training system
for trainers who educate visually impaired people, elderly people and
immigrants.
Appendix
Dr. Peter Mozet
German Federal Ministry for Health and Social Security
Bonn
Training day on social employment quota for disabled people
Brussels, 21. November 2005
The situation in Germany
Ladies and gentlemen,
I would now like to explain to you the system of employment duty and
compensation charge which is in operation in Germany.
1. Historical background
I will begin at the time when this system was first introduced.
The development of disability legislation in Germany started after the first
world war. In 1919, an employment duty for disabled ex servicemen was first
introduced, and the "Legislation for Employment of disabled people" came
into operation in 1920. This legislation mainly recommended the folowing
rules:
1. Every employer had to allocate 2% of their posts to disabled people. These were disabled ex servicemen whose ability to work had been reduced by at least 50%. People who had had an accident at work which had restricted their ability to work by at least 50% also fell under these rules.
2. Dismissal of a disabled person was dependent on the approval by the authorities.
The three strands of this legislation – Employment duty,
representation of disabled people and special protection from dismissal
remain distinct characteristics of the legislation on participation of
disabled people in employment.
The compensation charge was introduced in 1953: Any employer who did not fulfil their employment duty had to pay a monthly charge of 50 dm for each
post not allocated to a disabled person. This equates to about 25 Euros
In 1974, the area of application of the rules for the protection of disabled
people was extended. Until then, the only beneficiaries were victims of war
and of accidents at work. From now on, all disabled people whose ability to
work was reduced by at least 50% were included, irrespective of the cause of
their disability. At the same time, the System of employment duty and
compensation charge was re-organised. Every employer in the public and
private sector who had at least 16 employees was obliged to allocate at
least 6% of their posts to disabled people, or to pay a monthly compensation
charge of 100 DM (about 50 Euros) for each post not allocated to a disabled
person.
In 1986, the compensation charge was increased from 100 DM to 150 DM for
each post not allocated to a disabled person. In 1990, along with German
reunification, this charge was increased to 200 DM. This level was set
in-between the 150 DM in the old federal republic of Germany, and the 250
Mark charge which had been operated in the former GDR.
Since 2001, employers with at least 20 staff have been obliged to allocate
5% of their posts to disabled people. At the same time, the compensation
charge was graded. I have now arrived in the present, and I will shortly
come to the current legislation.
The historical background in summary:
In the beginning, it was all about creating employment opportunities for
victims of war. This was based on the knowledge that a person's contentment
and satisfaction is significantly dependent on being in employment. Due to
the large number of disabled ex servicemen, it was also felt to be the
responsibility of the state to support these people. In 1974, This view was
extended to all disabled people, irrespective of the cause of their
disability. The system of employment duty and compensation charge now
constitutes just one part within the set of measures which aim to achieve
equal participation of disabled people in employment and society in general.
2. Current legislation
As promised, I will now come to the current legislation.
We have a quota of 5% zin Germany today.
Which employers are affected by the employment duty?
The employment duty applies to employers with at least 20 staff.
Trainee posts do not count in this calculation. An employer's willingness
to make trainee posts available must not be affected by an increase of posts
which the employer is obliged to allocate to disabled people. Part time
posts of less than 18 hours per week also do not count in this calculation.
No difference is made between public and private sector employers.
No difference is made between different industries.
This means: All public and private sector employers with at least 20 staff
must allocate 5% of their posts to disabled people.
Below are some figures to illustrate this:
There are approximately 130,000 employers with at least 20 staff in
Germany. This means that 7% of German employers have the duty to employ
disabled people.
Among this group of employers, there are approximately 1 million posts
affected by the employment duty. This amounts to 5% of all posts in Germany.
Which group of people are we talking about?? In Germany, we distinguish
between disabled people and severely disabled people.
A person who has a disability is considered as disabled, irrespective of
the severity of their disability. A person can apply for an assessment of
the severity of their disability by the authorities. The statement is based
on the "evidence for the medical assessment process" which is issued by the
federal ministry for Health and Social Security, based on decisions made by
the advisory board of Medical Experts. The statement of the level of
disability is graded in intervals of 10 between 10 and 100.
Severely disabled people constitute a sub group of the group of disabled
people. These have a level of disability of at least 50. Severely disabled
people are the target group for the employment duty.
Under certain circumstances, disabled people with a level of disability of
at least 30 can be treated as severely disabled people.
There are a few particularities when counting the group of severely disabled
people.
Disabled people who work Part time for at least 18 hours per week make up
for a full place allocated to the disabled person by the employer.
A severely disabled employer also counts for an allocated post.
A severely disabled trainee counts for two allocated posts.
Severely disabled people whose participation in employment proves
particularly difficult can be counted for up to three allocated posts. This
might be the case for a disabled person who is over 50 years of age, or who
has not completed any professional training. Such decisions are made by the
local agency for employment (equivalent to Jobcentre Plus).
The employer fulfils their employment duty by employing severely disabled
people and exchanging contracts of employment with them. The decision on the
post allocated to the disabled person is up to the employer. No post is
specially allocated to a disabled person. Employment contracts are mainly
covered by Employment legislation, as well as some special rules for
severely disabled people.
This particularly includes the rules designed to protect severely disabled
employees from discrimination in employment.
Every employee is oblige to assess whether vacancies can be filled by
severely disabled people. There are some special obligations which apply to
public sector employers.
The disabled people's representative must be involved in applications from
severely disabled people.
The employer must not discriminate against a disabled person with regard
to their employment, promotion, order or dismissal on grounds of their
disability.
In case of a breech, the person concerned is entitled to claim adequate
financial compensation of up to three months' earnings. However, there is no
entitlement to a contract of employment.
I would also like to talk about the termination of an employment contract.
Within the legal framework, the employer can also terminate their employment
contract with the severely disabled person. However, they need to consider
two points:
Firstly, the legislation for the protection against dismissal, which
contains the general protection against dismissal which applies to all
employees.
Secondly, the particular protection against dismissal for severely
disabled people. This means that, prior to dismissal, approval from the
Office for Integration has to be sought. The primary task of the Office for
Integration is to support severely disabled people in employment. If the
Office for Integration is advised of an impending dismissal, it can, in
collaboration with the employer, explore ways to retain the job of the
severely disabled person. Naturally, this can only be considered if there is
a job for the person. In cases of company closures, the Office for
Integration can therefore do very little. However, nearly a quarter of all
proceedings end in the retention of the job.
the compensation charge, which the employer must pay for each post not
allocated to a severely disabled person, corresponds with the employment
duty. This charge is graded as follows:
105 Euros where 3 – 5% of the employees are severely disabled;
180 Euros where 2 – 3% of the employees are severely disabled,
260 Euros where the proportion of severely disabled employees is below 2%.
the closer an employer is to their required quota of 5%, the less they are
charged. Conversely, the further away an employer gets from the required 5%
quota, the more they must pay.
The compensation charge fulfils two functions, that of a motivator and that
of a compensator.
"Motivator function" means that the employer can save money by employing
severely disabled people. This prospect is meant to encourage the employer
to employ severely disabled people.
"The compensator function" is based on the thinking that, by employing a
severely disabled person, the employer may incur some extra costs. For
example, a severely disabled person is entitled to five additional days
annual leave. This charge is therefore designed to create a balance between
those employers who fulfil their employment duty with any resulting extra
costs, and those employers who don't fulfil their duty and avoid betterment.
We could come to the conclusion that employers can buy their way out of
their employment duty. However, the law expressly disagrees with this:
Payment of the compensation charge does not relieve the employer of their
employment duty. Breaches of the employment duty can be treated as an
administrative offence which can carry a penalty of up to 10,000 Euros, even
if the compensation charge has been paid. However, the purpose of the
compensation charge is not to raise money, but to support severely disabled
people into work – motivator function and compensator function. When
supporting severely disabled people into employment, the Agency for
Employment relies on employers' responsiveness with regard to the issues
affecting this group of people. In achieving this, fines tend to be seen as
counterproductive. In considering this, many cases o not result in an
administrative offence, and this is seen to be more beneficial to longer
term co-operation.
An employer who has to pay the compensation charge can reduce this by
commissioning work to workshopartially sighted for disabled people. These
kinds of workshopartially sighted employ people who cannot function in open
employment, due to the type or severity of their disability. The
commissioning of work to such a workshop also promotes the employment of
severely disabled people. Because of this, part of the invoiced amount from
such a workshop can be counted towards the compensation charge.
3. Operation of the system
The system of employment duty and compensation charge operates as
follows:
By 31 March of every year, each employee who falls under the employment
duty must provide all the information for the previous year which is
relevant to this duty.
A web based system is available to the employers for this purpose. Each
employer can enter their entire number of posts, the number of severely
disabled employees, any multiple allowances, etc. This system then informs
the employer as to whether they have fulfilled their employment duty, or how
much compensation charge they must pay.
This information is then sent to two offices: the Agency for Employment
and the Office for Integration.
The Agency for Employment monitors compliance with the employment duty.
The Office for Integration monitors the receipt of payments, if necessary,
up to their enforcement.
Payment of compensation charges in 2004 amounted to approximately 530
million Euros. These funds are exclusively allocated to special grants for
the promotion of the participation of severely disabled people in
employment. All the details on this are set down in a decree from the German
Federal government.
The funds are distributed as follows:
70% remain with the Offices for Integration. These funds are used to
finance support in employment. This includes support to the employer for an
accessible work place, Technical equipment or a Support Worker for the
disabled employee. Organisations for disabled people can also be supported.
This includes workshopartially sighted for disabled people who employ those
people who, due to their disabilities, are unable to operate in open
employment.
26% go to the federal Agency for Employment who utilise the funds for
rehabilitation grants for employers. Employers can reclaim up to 70% of the
salary paid to a severely disabled person, and they can do this for up to
eight years, depending on the age and severity of the disability of their
employee. These types of grants can be made available to any employer, not
just those who fall under the employment duty.
4% go to the compensation fund in the Federal Ministry for Social Affairs.
These funds can pay for such things as time-limited, national programmes for
the reduction of unemployment of severely disabled people and national pilot
projects for the participation of severely disabled people.
A project called "Job – Jobs without Barriers", is such an initiative
established by the Ministry for Social Affairs. It is an initiative to
promote more training and employment for severely disabled people as well as
prevention on the part of the employers. Half of the funds for this is
provided by the compensation fund, while the other half comes from the
European Social Fund. In order for you to get an impression of this
initiative, I would like to mention the project of so-called "Geared
Training". This is about young people who cannot undertake training with an
employer because of their disability, but who require a vocational
rehabilitation centre. In these vocational rehabilitation centres, these
young people are trained to a high standard. However, even after a
successfully completed training course, they often find it hard to gain
employment because they have no contact with potential employees. An
employer tends to take on their own trainees before considering anyone who
has trained elsewhere. This is where this project comes in: The last year of
the training course is not carried out in the rehabilitation centre but with
a partnering employer. This helpartially sighted reduce prejudice against
disabled people and increase their chances of being taken on by these
employers after completing their training course. At the end of the project,
a brochure is produced for the employers in order to encourage other
employees to follow this good example.
4. Views of the social partners and the employers' organisations
The employers' organisations consider the compensation charge to be an
additional burden, and they would be in favour of the charges being more
voluntary. The views of individual employers, however, are very varied. I
have just mentioned the initiative "Jobs without barriers" for more training
and employment for severely disabled people. With the help of projects,
events and the Internet, examples of employers' positive experiences of
employing severely disabled people are to be publicised. Such employers are
proud of their social involvement and are therefore happy to talk to the
public about their commitment to severely disabled people. These employers
who usually fulfil their employment duty don't mind the fact that other
employers in breach of this duty have to pay the compensation charge.
I mentioned earlier that the compensation charge applies equally to all
industries. In the past, this was also discussed widely among employer
representatives. Employers in the aviation industry argued, for example,
that they could not employ disabled people due to international security
regulations. They therefore requested to be exempt. However, this has since
been resolved through two decisions by the Federal Constitutional courts
from 1981 and 2004. According to these decisions, even employers, who cannot
fully employ severely disabled people because of the nature of their work,
may be covered by the employment duty. The reason for this is that this
argument only applies to the motivator function, which is only one of the
functions of the compensation charge. Even if this is practically non
existent, the compensator function is still effective. It is therefore
considered to be constitutional to also apply the employment duty to those
employers who have to apply stringent health criteria to some of their
posts.
The organisations of disabled people and the trade unions are in favour of
the System of employment duty and compensation charge. However, last year,
the quota of allocated posts was discussed again. Some organisations
demanded for the quota to be returned to the pre 2001 level of 6% instead of
the current 5%. This was debated as part of a legislative procedure.
However, the government did not adopt this. By cutting the quota and
therefore easing the burden of the duty to the employer, these were supposed
to be motivated to employ more severely disabled people. By 30 June 2007,
the Federal government has to produce a report which, among other things,
reviews the quota for the employment duty. Then, this issue will again be
discussed. In this discussion, the successes of the above initiative "job –
Jobs without Barriers" will be an important factor.
5. Evaluation
To conclude, please let me say a few words about the evaluation of our
system.
The employment duty of 5% for the employers concerned has to date not been
achieved.
Only 20% of the 130,000 employers covered by the employment duty fulfil
this duty,. i.e. at least 5% of their staff are severely disabled people.
50% of employers partially comply with their employment duty.
30% do not fulfil their employment duty at all, i.e. they do not employ
any severely disabled person at all.
However, a steady increase of the employment quota is noticeable. In 2000,
it was at 3.7%, 2001 and 2002 3.8% respectively and in 2003, it reached
4.0%. The number of employers who do not employ any severely disabled people
has also come down. This is partly due to the introduction of graded
compensation charges in 2001. Let me remind you: Proportional to the
employment quota achieved by an employer, an employer has to pay between 105
Euros and 260 Euros per month for each post not allocated to a severely
disabled person. This means that the grading of the charge presents an
effective incentive to the employers to employ a higher number of severely
disabled people.
Over the same period of time, the rate of unemployment among severely
disabled people (the proportion of severely disabled people among all
unemployed people) has come down from 4.7% in 2000 to 3.8% in 2003. The
campaign for "50,000 jobs for severely disabled people" which was carried
out from October 1999 to October 2002, has also contributed to this downward
trend. This campaign was partly paid for by the compensation fund, which
means that it received funds from the compensation charges paid by
employers.
Overall, the system of employment duty and compensation charge has proved
itself in the opinion of the federal government.
However, this system is quite complex, as is often the case with systems
which have been developing over a considerable period of time. New
components have been introduced over time, which, by themselves, are very
sensible but which contribute to the complexity of the whole system.
In this context, the multiple allowances ought to be mentioned. Depending on
the type or severity of the disability, a disabled person can count for up
to three allocated posts. Trainees generally count for two allocated posts.
This makes sense because the vocational training of disabled people is
particularly important. However, this means that the employers cannot simply
report the number of severely disabled employees but that they have to
distinguish between the different cases.
Even though the grading of the compensation charge is sensible and
effective, it does not contribute to a simplification of the administration.
I have not yet mentioned the financial balancing process between the Offices
for Integration. The aim of this is to have a similar level of funding for
each supported disabled person in all the Offices for Integration,
irrespective of the level of compensation charge which the employers in a
particular area have had to pay. This balancing process is carried out by
the Ministry for Social Affairs. The calculation of this is based on the
general population in the catchment area of an Office for Integration, the
number of severely disabled people, the number of severely disabled people
in employment and the level of unemployment among severely disabled people.
This formula resulted from a political compromise, and because it is about
money, it cannot be changed all that easily. However, this financial
balancing process has resulted in some more employment opportunities over
the last few years.
At the end of the day, we will have to put up with these difficulties which
have developed over time, in the interest of the whole system. At least
information technology has eased some of the burdens over the last few
years. The new Federal Government has no intention to change the system.
Thank you for your attention.
Chapter Four
ROMANIA
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 To turn from employment services for blind and partially sighted
people in the UK, Sweden and Germany to those in Romania is to be sharply
reminded of uneven economic and social development in the European Union.
The report, Employment in Europe, 2008, presented to the Directorate-General
for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities of the EU Commission,
highlighted the country’s labour market problems. The national rate of
employment was 59 percent. It had not risen since 2000 and was well below
the EU’s Lisbon target of at least 70 percent throughout the Union by 2010.
At the time of accession to the EU (2007) income per capita was less than
one third of the EU average And in 2008 average gross hourly wages/salaries
were only 10 percent of the EU average.
1.2 Paradoxically the report shows that, between 2000 and 2006, Romania was
among the three member states of the EU achieving the highest rates of
productivity growth. This combination of high productivity growth
accompanied by a high rate of economic inactivity is not inevitable, the
report argues. In the long run both should be growing and the challenge is
to know how to bring this about. The report recommended that labour market
policies should encourage transfer to new jobs rather than protect old ones
against productivity growth. The policies recommended were:
* ‘the modernisation of labour laws that allow for sufficiently flexible
work arrangements and reduce labour market segmentation and undeclared work
* the provision of adequate active labour market policies
* the promotion of lifelong learning throughout the lifecycle
* the implementation of modern social security systems that combine the
provision of adequate income support with the need to facilitate labour
market mobility.’
1.3 Such policies should aim, the reports suggested, at increasing economic
inactivity among women, older people and youth. It is striking that the
report is silent about people with disabilities, though the policy of
creating an inclusive society by ‘mainstreaming disability’ is also an
established aim of the Lisbon strategy. It is a major purpose of this
chapter to relate evidence concerning economic inactivity of blind and
partially sighted people in Romania to the analysis of Employment in Europe,
2008.
2 BLIND AND PARTIALLY SIGHTED PEOPLE IN THE ROMANIAN LABOUR MARKET
2.1 Sources we consulted before visiting Romania suggested that the rate of economic inactivity among blind and partially sighted people could be as high as 90 percent. This was confirmed [see below par. 11.1) in our discussions with the President of the Romanian Association of the Blind (RAB), Mr. Sergiu Radu Ruba, and the Director of the National Advisory Council for Disability (NACD), Mrs. Monica Stancio.
3 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
3.1 The President of RAB set the history of the association in the general
context of Romanian history in a way which we found most illuminating. What
follows is our own understanding.
3.2 Romania had an predominantly agricultural economy in 1878, when the
country was guaranteed independence by a Congress of the European ‘great
powers’. Around that time the West was embarking on its second industrial
revolution, the age of oil, electricity and assembly line manufacturing. In
Romania this kind of industrial development began around 1910, based on the
country’s mineral resources, including oil. A modern urban economy burgeoned
between the two world wars and Romania gained a high reputation as a centre
of European culture.
3.3 The second world war - invasion by Nazi Germany, followed by Soviet
occupation - cut Romania off from the west. Communist rule lasted until
1989, when the dictatorship of Nicolae Ceauºescu was overthrown.
3.4 A decade of turmoil and economic recession ensued. Stability was not
achieved until 2000 when a period of growth began, which lasted until the
beginning of the current world financial crisis in 2007. This economic
diversification was built on the resource of a highly educated population, a
positive legacy of the Communist period. Romania opened up to tourism,
international finance, air transport and internet communication. In 2007
accession to the EU was accompanied by high hopes of continuous development,
including much needed renewal of the internal transport infra-structure.
Then the global financial crisis struck. The report Employment in Europe,
considers that this will present a major setback to development in Eastern
Europe generally and Romania in particular, but also considers that, in the
long run, high productivity growth should return.
4 THE ROMANIAN ASSOCIATION OF THE BLIND (RAB)
4.1 RAB today is an organisation controlled by visually impaired people. It
has thirty-three branches situated in most of Romania’s 41 counties and aims
to support all blind and partially sighted people in Romania, of whom there
are approximately 80,000
4.2 Its foundation dates from the beginning of Romania’s modernisation.
Queen Elizabeth of Romania established it under her patronage in 1906. From
the first she was interested in the employment of blind people. Advised by
U.S. President, Theodore Roosevelt, she bought 26 hectares of land to
develop services for blind people on the outskirts of Bucharest. President
Roosevelt assisted personally with the funding. The site had Accommodation
for families, a primary school for the blind, and a sheltered workshop,
whose products were sold in Bucharest.
4.3 The direction of the Queen’s marketing strategy, at least in part,
towards luxury consumption is indicated by her attempt to develop silk
production. She planted mulberry trees on the site for the cultivation of
silk worms. Between the 2 world wars blind people worked at silk production
in co-operation with sighted people.
4.4 After 1945 the new Communist state took a different tack. In 1949 a
programme of vocational training was introduced for the whole country. This
was an attempt to diversify an economy that was still over-dependent on
agriculture. Eighty % of the population lived in the countryside, but land
Reform before and after the war left too many poor peasants on very small
farms. Under the new policy industrial training was provided for young
people from rural districts. Severe loss of manpower during the war ensured
that blind people were included in this programme. Silk production was
abandoned and sheltered workshops were set up to train blind people in the
making of brushes, cardboard boxes, etc. Such goods were in demand from
sheltered workshops at a time when modern methods of factory production were
scarcely in existence.
4.5 The expansion of sheltered workshops led to blind workers demanding
trade union organisation and a say in their conditions of employment. The
Communist regime had to take account of this pressure, since many of the
workers were war blinded ex-servicemen, influential in left-wing
organisations and in the state apparatus. It was necessary to make
concessions without surrendering too much control. This took the form of
reviving RAB. The constitution of the new RAB was copied from the old
Association, but with fewer branches and a system of administration that
allowed for Communist party control.
4.6 For some years blind workers were satisfied to have employment in these
special workshops. But Romania could not be wholly insulated from the growth
of assembly line production. Some modernisation of the economy went ahead
and, by the 1960s, the need to adapt vocational training to the new systems
of production was clear. But appropriate changes were not made in the
sheltered workshops for the blind. For years the state subsidised their
backwardness, even as the economic recession of the 1980s undermined their
viability. This was exposed by the overthrow of Communism in 1989. Romania
was opened up to market competition. Post-Communist government did not
attempt to maintain or modernise the workshops for blind people. Instead
they were privatised. Most succumbed quickly to the icy wind of competition.
4.7 In the mainstream economy economic modernisation was left to private
firms. These were made responsible for training their own workforce in the
application of new technologies. Access to such training depended on high
educational attainments. For many Romanians this had been available under
Communism, but few blind people were in this state of job readiness. Since
the 1950s some had benefited from high (secondary) school education but
professional employment outlets were very scarce. Most high school students
who were blind went on to train as masseurs.
4.88 On the collapse of Communism, the President of RAB was an inspector of
special schools for the blind. Mr. Ruba advocated a policy of upgrading
education in the high schools for the blind. Physiotherapy was then emerging
as a profession based on a post-secondary qualification. He wanted blind
students to be able to qualify for this new profession. This was achieved
and blind students were able to graduate through a three year course
beginning at age nineteen.
4.10 In the difficult 1990s, however, this progress was countered by the
collapse of medical massage as a profession for blind people. In 1989 there
were 1100 blind masseurs and physiotherapists. By 2000 there were about 400
physiotherapists. Many masseurs were forced out of employment onto
retirement pension. Often they continued to eke out a living by practising
massage in the informal economy.
4.11 Matters fared even worse with blind people who did not possess, or
could not acquire, higher secondary education and training. As sheltered
workshops for the blind disappeared, RAB lobbied successfully for
legislation to grant such workers full pension rights after 15 years of
employment. The unintended outcome has been the creation among blind people
of a large pool of economic inactivity. Today the number of blind people of
working age who are in employment is estimated by RAB at around 3000. Most
of the others, perhaps 27,000 (see below, par. 11.1) are economically
inactive and languish in isolation and benefit dependency. Only a tiny elite
of highly educated blind people work, mostly in physiotherapy. A very few
work in other professions such as university teaching and research.
5 THE BEGINNINGS OF RECOVERY
5.1 The Romanian economy began to recover in 2000 and saw a period of
sustained high productivity growth from that year until the onset of the
current global financial crisis in mid-2007. The blind elite benefited from
this. The number of blind physiotherapists in employment doubled, from about
400 in 2000 to about 800 today. Sighted people employed in the new modern
sector needed and could pay for treatment. Many blind physiotherapists work
for the private sector or in their own businesses. Others work part time,
supplementing their retirement pensions. RAB now receives regular requests
from private companies seeking to recruit physiotherapists. Other
opportunities for employment have been found in tourist resorts or health
centres in spa towns with mineral springs.
5.2 Employment in professions requiring high levels of ICT skills also grew
during this period. So far very few blind people have benefited. There are
about 20 blind people employed in this kind of work, mainly by RAB,
producing talking books recorded on CDs. However, employment in the private
sector is severely restricted, because employers, in Mr. Ruba’s words,
‘”cannot imagine how blind people can use computers.” Recently staff of RAB
took part in a television show to demonstrate how a blind person uses the
computer with adaptive software. One company in the town of Cluj, capitol of
Transylvania, turned to RAB to recruit a blind person to work on computers.
RAB was able to nominate one who had lost his sight in an accident but who
had been well trained in computing before that event.
5.3 Nevertheless progress here is an uphill struggle. The Queen Elizabeth
School for the Blind in Bucharest offers a two-year post-graduate course in
computer technology, which this year has no students because their prospects
of employment are so poor.
5.4 In an effort to move on, The Queen Elizabeth School for the blind, which
is run by RAB in Bucharest, has introduced new types of vocational training,
supported by the Ministry of Education. They include training for jobs in
the growing tourism sector. Inclusion of blind people in this industry
requires assisted access to the specialised computer networks which it uses.
RAB is investigating the specialist software for this purpose which has been
developed in France and elsewhere. Again, the school has started to work
with a company in Bucharest to employ blind people in call centres. Four
people with low vision have been trained and will start work in March, 2009.
5.5 The evidence reviewed in this and the previous section reveals an
alarming degree of labour market segmentation of blind and partially sighted
professionals. Almost to a man (and we found no evidence regarding women)
they are crowded into one profession, physiotherapy. While this must be a
satisfying outcome for some, the extreme lack of alternative professional
outlets must mean that there are many square pegs in these round holes.
There is then, an urgent need to diversify professional and white collar
employment for well qualified blind and partially sighted people.
6 LABOUR ACTIVATION PROGRAMMES
6.1 RAB is doing what it can in difficult circumstances. At the same time it
is very dissatisfied with existing labour activation policies of the state.
We discussed the following:
6.2 SUPPORT FOR DISABLED PEOPLE AT WORK. There is a law which requires
employers to adapt the work place and providing for government to compensate
for the cost. This is not working well, as the Director of NACD confirmed
(see below, par.10.5)
6.3 QUOTA SYSTEM. A law was passed that employers should employ a quota of
disabled people in the work force at the national minimum wage. An amendment
in parliament reduced this to 50% of the minimum wage.
6.4 Before 2000 this had little effect, as there were practically no jobs.
After 2000, the supply of jobs expanded and RAB would like visually impaired
people to take advantage of this legislation, but blind people will not come
forward. There is more than one reason for this. In the first place there is
a lack of impairment specific vocational training. In the second, companies
resist employing blind people.
6.5 RAB has lobbied along with the organisation of deaf people for
government investment in sensory specific training, but so far
unsuccessfully.
6.6 We asked RAB to say what prevented blind people from taking advantage of
quota legislation, applying for jobs even at 50% of minimum wage. The reply
was that disability benefits, though low by comparison with the EU average,
are high enough to act as a disincentive to participate in the labour market
on such poor terms. Disability allowance is not means tested and is higher
than the minimum wage. We consider this reveals a need for modernisation of
the benefit system, accompanied by opportunities for training and support to
find and maintain employment. The benefit system should be flexible. As in
other countries, benefits could be linked to wages in such a way that blind
people need suffer no loss of income by going to work.(See Ch. 3, par. 2.3)
6.7 RAB was at pains to stress that there is evidence of propensity to work,
especially among young blind people in the urban sector. In the countryside
the disability allowance of a young person who is blind tends to be added to
the family income and the recipient remains at home to work in whatever way
the family may require. By contrast, students in the Queen Elizabeth School
in Bucharest aim at physiotherapy as a first option. Training for other jobs
is now under consideration, e.g. radio journalism, computer operations. This
is related to the perception that well qualified blind students have found
work in the Informal economy, e.g. trading software for access technology.
In this way blind people can support each other in obtaining and maintaining
work.
7 EDUCATION AS PREPARATION FOR WORK
7.1 At fourteen all pupils in Romania must leave school unless they qualify
to go on to higher secondary school. 65% of all visually impaired children
in education are in special schools. 35% are educated in mainstream schools.
It is official policy that children with 30% of normal sight are orientated
towards special schools.
7.2 There are six special schools for primary education of blind children,
and one for children with partial sight.
7.3 Theoretically, then, there is a system of universal education for
visually impaired children to age fourteen. RAB considers that this must be
qualified, however, in regard to the countryside. The law allows a parent to
teach/care for a disabled child, supported by a wage from the local
authority. Government is said to be determined to change this provision –
withdrawing the wage for the parent - so that all will go to special school.
But there is also provision that parents who live in the countryside, very
distant from a special school, may send a blind child to the local village
school. RAB considers that the standard of education there may be
compromised by lack of expertise in teaching blind children.
7.4 We were informed that there is no educational provision for Children
with multiple disabilities. “They are kept at home with their parents”.
There appear to be no statistics to show the prevalence of ‘complex needs’
among visually impaired people in Romania. We consider that this is a
question which should be researched, to create an evidence base for
development of appropriate education and care of such children. Beyond that
lies the question of developing social enterprise to meet their employment
needs, as discussed in our chapters on Sweden (par. 6.4 and seq.) and
Germany (par. 2.4 and 6.6 et seq.)
7.5 RAB estimates that 30% of blind children go to high school at age
fourteen. The Queen Elizabeth School in Bucharest, run by RAB, has 300
pupils aged 15-26 yrs. Students can take the International Bacalauriat and
go on to training in physiotherapy. At present the latter is not considered
higher education, but the government has issued a decree to raise
physiotherapy training to university level. RAB considers that this will
increase the chances of blind students finding employment.
7.6 In the opinion of Mr. Ruba, mainstream education in Romania is not
always the best solution for a blind student aiming at professional
employment. He stressed the value of education by visually impaired
teachers, who are to be found in special, but rarely in mainstream schools.
He also pointed out that assistive equipment is not subsidised by the state.
Even low tech equipment may be out of reach of students from poorer
families. RAB imports equipment that people need, e.g. white canes, Braille
slates, and subsidises their sale. Some equipment is even provided free of
charge, e.g. slates and stylus for children at school. Once again RAB
struggles to take the strain, but provision of equipment necessary for
education should, in our opinion, be a right for all blind and partially
sighted children.
7.7 The question of opening mainstream education to visually impaired
children is not one we can go into here, beyond pointing to the comment of
the Swedish Association of the Visually Impaired that it has been one factor
among others in raising the rate of economic activity of visually impaired
people to the current rate of 47 percent (ch. 2, par. 7.1).
8 REHABILITATION
8.1 The Queen Elizabeth school also functions as a rehabilitation centre for
young people. Rehabilitation is available at only one other centre in the
city of Arad.
8.2 PLANNING FOR AN ADULT REHABILITATION CENTRE
8.3 Since the 1990s RAB has aimed to provide rehabilitation for adults who
lose their sight after school leaving age. It hoped to build a new
rehabilitation centre for this purpose on land owned by the Association
before 1945. However it failed to establish legal title to this land.
8.4 In 2008 the Bucharest City Council made over another site to RAB.
Building work began immediately, even though no financial support was
forthcoming from the state, and the work had to be funded by the resources
of RAB and donations from the public. This was done in order to comply with
a time limit for commencement laid down by the Council. Funds ran out,
however, before the foundations could be completed, because the site [proved
to be in an earthquake zone, which involved costly reinforcements.
8.5 RAB considers that further work on the new centre depends greatly on
financial support from government, which has not been forthcoming so far.
Every legal means is being explored to see if government can be required to
provide this.
8.6 Blind people’s Organisations in some other European countries have come
to the assistance of RAB. In Spain, for example, the National Association of
the Blind (ONCE) has offered printing equipment for the Queen Elizabeth
School, but there is no money for the construction of a printing shop.
8.7 Another potential source of finance is the European Social Fund (ESF).
Under the current rules, however, it cannot be of help for the
rehabilitation centre. Its grants are not available for construction of new
buildings, only for renovation of existing ones.
8.8 RAB is aware that ESF money has supported renovation of old military
facilities for disabled people elsewhere in Eastern European that ESF money
could be made available in Romania to adapt former Soviet military
installations. RAB refused to go down this road, however, on the grounds
that it would create “a new ghetto”. Rehabilitation, in RAB’s view, must
take place near to mainstream life. We think this is realistic and is
supported by practice in Sweden and Germany. (See Ch. 2, par. 5.1 et seq.
and ch. 3, par. 1.6, 7.1 et seq.)
8.9 Meanwhile RAB works on to raise voluntary funds, using the television
contacts of Mr. Ruba, who is a frequent broadcaster, to appeal for funds,
with the support of celebrity musicians.
8.10 It should be noted that all this takes place against the background of
the current global financial crisis. There is real anxiety that government
may reduce its contribution to RAB’s annual budget. So far 25% of this
budget has been contributed by government and the maintenance of this in
2009 was announced during our visit.
9 CALL FOR NEW LEGISLATION
9.1 We ASKED Mr. Ruba to sum up on behalf of RAB the legislative innovations
which would do most to improve the rate of economic inactivity in Romania.
He offered the following list:
* Public subsidy to provide assistive technology.
* State finance for building the Rehabilitation centre.
* Full access for all blind and partially sighted people to mainstream AND
specialist services
* Mainstreaming of policy for people with disabilities
* More opportunities for blind and partially sighted people to take high
profile jobs, e.g. in journalism or teaching, to act as encouraging role
models.
9.2 Mr. Ruba stressed that the government should invariably consult with RAB
before introducing legislation concerning blind and partially sighted
people. “Unfortunately”, he said, “the principal ‘nothing about us without
us’ is often forgotten by our authorities.”
10 THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON DISABILITY (NACD)
10.1 We were fortunate to obtain a four hour interview with the Director of
NACD, Mrs. Monica Stancio. NACD was formed to promote measures for the
social inclusion of people with disabilities; to monitor their
implementation; and to develop general co-ordination across all services for
people with disabilities. It is an autonomous division of the Ministry of
Labour and Social Protection.
10.2 Mrs Stancio outlined existing legislation for the support of people
with disabilities. It distinguishes between four levels of disability:
(a) Severe -
(b) Pronounced
(c) Average
(d) Light.
Totally blind people are included in the ‘severe’ category. Partially
sighted people count as ‘average’.
10.3 NACD considers that people in the ‘average’ category of disability can
work in many types of employment. Despite this, her office had noted that
the percentage of such people who are economically active has not increased
very much. They had tried to identify the reasons for this and had arrived
at the following answers:
* lack of impairment specific vocational training;
* lack of social rehabilitation to improve social skills where required
* unadapted work premises.
10.4 We consider that this list points in the right directions, but would
add that many totally blind people, although rightly considered to be in the
‘severe’ category, could be enabled by such supportive measures to overcome
the barriers to employment.
10.5 In respect to these shortcomings, NACD has devised and published a
strategy which proposes the following improvements:
* Thorough enforcement of laws on accessibility of public spaces and
buildings. There are many anomalies here, including inaccessibility of
pavements, which are unavailable to pedestrians because they are completely
covered by parked cars.
* The law on accessibility should be improved to discriminate between the
needs of people with different disabilities, e.g. needs of blind people are
not the same as those with locomotors disabilities. NACD is working on this
with the Ministry of Transport.
* A campaign to inform employers as to the real impact of the ‘reasonable
accommodation’ required by disability discrimination legislation. Many do
not know what it involves. They think it will be very expensive to apply.
They should be informed that reasonable accommodation is often tax
deductable. They should also know that it may simply involve changes in work
patterns rather than costly reconstruction. Too few employers are aware of
this.
* Provision of re-training programmes to enable people to change their jobs
if required by onset of disability.
* Provision of support services to enable people with disabilities to
acquire essential skills of daily living, e.g. Mobility
* Personal support at work where required by people with disabilities.
* Information campaigns to educate the public about disability, e.g.
‘disability is not contagious’
* Measures to enable people with disabilities to participate in the
community. Their own activities for mutual support should be stimulated
* Modern vocational training should begin in schools and care homes
* Confidence raising courses should be available for disabled people who
have lost their jobs.
10.6 Mrs. Stancio said that NACD had been lobbying the Romanian government
to sign the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. She
was please to say during the course of our interview that the new government
had announced that it was ready to do so.
10.7 Mrs. Stancio added that, when the new president is in office, NACD will
start a project, with support from the ministry of education to provide
training for those who need basic training.
10.8 We raised the problem of the adult rehabilitation centre with Mrs.
Stancio. She said she was in complete agreement with RAB that it ought to be
situated in Bucharest. She thought it mighte be possible to get funding for
it by including it in a programme run by the national authority. This was
being explored.
11 STATISTICS
11.1 During our discussions staff of NACD produced the following statistics
(to which some reference has already been made) regarding people with
disabilities in Romania:
Registered disabled persons in Romania - 600,000 of all ages.
Disabled persons age 25-60 - 200,730
Visually impaired persons aged 25-60 yrs - 36,500
Visually impaired and economically active - 3,155
We calculate that this yields 86 percent as an approximate rate of economic
inactivity among blind and partially sighted people.
11.2 EDUCATIONAL STATISTICS VISUALLY IMPAIRED PEOPLE
26 percent have gymnasium level.
11 percent Vocational training
31 percent High secondary school
17 percent Post high secondary school
12 CONCLUSION
12.1 The evidence presented in this chapter shows that blind and partially
sighted people have suffered dramatically and disproportionately from the
problem identified in the report Employment in Europe, 2008 (see par. 1.1
above). The problem was there stated to be that, between 2000 and 2007, high
productivity growth was accompanied by low employment growth. Whereas the
general rate of economic inactivity in the population as a whole was around
40 percent, the corresponding rate for blind and partially sighted people is
nearly 90 percent.
12.2 We consider that the causes of this disproportionality are rooted more
in social policy than in economic factors. The disappearance of sheltered
employment was perhaps inevitable. The failure to put in place robust
services to support visually impaired people in the labour market was not.
12.3 Again and again our evidence has highlighted instances of such failure.
Thus the good intentions of laws to protect people with disabilities have
been frustrated by failure to put in place impairment specific measures of
support. Evidence presented to us by RAB and NACD highlighted this. It may
be summed up as follows:
* There is excessive labour market segmentation of blind and partially
sighted people. The evidence of this is the overwhelming preponderance of
visually impaired people in physiotherapy, as compared to, say, law,
financial services social work or public administration, which have all
recruited numbers of blind and partially sighted people in countries like
the UK, Sweden and Germany. Indeed, it is not an exaggeration to say that
the whole range of white collar employment associated with possession of ICT
skills in these three countries is terra incognita in Romania. Furthermore,
young blind and partially sighted people who have acquired such skills are
driven to the informal economy to find employment of their knowledge and
skills (see sections 4 and 5 above).
12.4 Looking away from the professions to the wider labour market,
Employment in Europe, 2008, called for ‘the implementation of modern social
security systems that combine the provision of adequate income support with
the need to facilitate labour market mobility.’ Evidence was presented to us
of inflexibility in the arrangements for people with disabilities.
Legislation restricts wages paid to workers to 50 percent of the minimum
wage (par. 6.3 above). With disability benefits exceeding the minimum wage,
this is a recipe for ensuring a high level of economic inactivity. The
abilities of blind and partially sighted people, which have been proven over
and over again in other countries, are simply wasted by this kind of
inflexibility. In the long run employers carry the burden of such benefit
dependency, along with other tax payers.
12.5 Again the 2008 report pointed to the need for lifelong learning to
promote flexible participation in the labour market. We agree and wish to
stress that rehabilitation should be viewed in this light. The onset of a
major disability such as sight loss clearly involves a major process of
learning to live with it. New daily living skills such as use of guidance
devices must be acquired. New methods of access to information, by Braille,
audio or digital methods are essential and require impairment specific
training. Emotional challenges have to be faced, requiring both expert
counselling and peer support. For such reasons it is imperative to develop
provision for rehabilitation in Romania and we would urge the EU Commission
to look again at the rules of the European Social Fund with a view to
forwarding the development of the proposed RAB centre at Bucharest.
12.6 A matter not touched upon in the 2008 report remains of very great
importance to blind and partially sighted people. This is the accessibility
of the built environment. We were glad to learn that NACD is taking this up
in its new strategy (see par. 5.6 above). A blind visitor to Bucharest must
be shocked to find that all pavements in the city centre are completely
covered by parked cars, forcing pedestrians to walk on the carriage way. It
is equally shocking to find that the city is infested by feral dogs, which
prey upon domesticated dogs. For this reason, we were informed, guide dogs
for the blind are unknown in Romania. The accessibility of the environment
and systems of transport within it is as necessary to improve the rate of
economic activity as the provision of rehabilitation, vocational training
and support at work.
12.7. In chapter 5 of this report we have pointed to rehabilitation,
vocational training and support at work as the ‘trusted troika’ of services
which do most to assist blind and partially sighted people on their journey
to the labour market. We were deeply saddened by their virtual absence in
Romania. We understand the complex historical causation that underlies this.
A century of uneven development, interrupted by war and distorted by
ideologies, presents Romania, like other countries in Eastern Europe, with a
daunting challenge to make adequate provision for its disabled citizens. The
present global financial crisis only adds another dimension to the enormity
of the task. Nevertheless we would argue that there is nothing to be gained
from delay in building the required employment services for visually
impaired people. If the task is put aside until the world recession is over
it will only be larger and more difficult to address when that time comes.
As the 2008 report put it: In these uncertain times we must not lose sight
of our overall long-term aim of creating more and better jobs. … Promoting
job quality can rhyme with job creation and productivity.’
12.8 In welcoming this positive expression by the EU Commission, we can only
regret that the opportunity was missed to address in the same report the
needs of people with disabilities, who suffer even higher rates of economic
inactivity than the female, older and younger citizens actually mentioned.
We hope that this chapter has gone some way to redress the balance and that,
in all future reports, disability will be placed where it ought to be – in
the mainstream thinking of the Directorate-General for Employment and Social
Affairs.
CHAPTER FIVE
Conclusion
1 Introduction
1.1 As stated in Chapter one (pars. 1.1 and 6.2) the study visits were
carried out with three aims in view:
(i) to investigate labour activation measures and employment support
services in each country
(ii) to estimate the rate of economic inactivity prevailing among blind and
partially sighted people of working age in Sweden and Germany
(iii) to report on these matters to the European Blind Union (EBU),
recommending good practice found in either country, which might be
disseminated throughout the European Union by the activities of EBU and its
member organisations.
1.2 Accordingly in this concluding chapter we attempt to compare the
services as they were described to us in each country. We then try to form
an impression of their impact on blind and partially sighted people in
Sweden and Germany, with particular reference to the scope of involuntary
economic inactivity. Finally we offer some recommendations for the
consideration of EBU which, in our opinion, would help to disseminate the
good practice we found in Sweden and Germany throughout the member states of
the European Union, and thus help to bring down the rate of economic
inactivity.
2 Employment Services in Sweden and Germany: ‘The Trusted Troika’
2.1 Both Sweden and Germany have developed over many decades an impressive
array of services which aim to ensure that people of working age who
experience serious sight loss may be able to:
(i) retain the job which they were in, or
(ii) be assisted to find another job, either in the same firm or in another.
2.2 These services in Sweden are listed in chapter 2, 1.6 et seq. and for
Germany in chapter 3, 1.11 et seq. It will be seen that there are many
differences of detail relating to each service. Here we wish to offer a
general comparison, bringing out some major points of similarity and
difference.
2.3 Dealing first with similarities, both countries ground their services on
the principle that most blind and partially sighted people should be
included in the mainstream labour market. Both recognise as crucial to this
outcome the need to intervene as early as possible in the sight loss process
and the need to provide services that are designed specifically with the
needs of people with serious sight loss.
2.4 It is worth noting the way in which each system seeks to ensure early
intervention. Under the rules of the social insurance system in each
country, award of an income substitution benefit or ‘pension’ leads
automatically to an assessment of the client’s capacity to work. This
assessment is carried out by a multi-disciplinary team, able to draw up an
individualised programme of rehabilitation, vocational training and support
in finding and maintaining a job.
2.5 Both systems recognise that such services should be impairment specific,
i.e. designed with the needs of blind and partially sighted people in mind.
People with serious sight loss have needs that are not shared by disabled
people who are sighted. They need to acquire skills of independent personal
care, such as cooking meals, and skills of independent mobility, such as
handling a guide dog or a long white cane. They must be trained to use
appropriate assistive technology at work, such as a speaking computer or a
magnification device. They may also require the support of a sighted
assistant to carry out parts of the job for which eyesight is essential.
2.6 To assess the appropriateness of these means of support to any given
individual and to deliver the related training, the intervention of experts
is required. Both systems provide such expertise, employing
multi-disciplinary teams at all stages of the journey to the labour market,
from initial assessment through social and vocational rehabilitation to
training and job introduction.
2.7 For people who complete that journey successfully, the systems in both
Sweden and Germany fund a range of support services at work. This includes
the provision of assistive devices, sighted support workers and modification
of the environment. Support is also given to people who set up their own
businesses.
2.8 None of these measures will come as a surprise to anyone familiar with
the needs of blind and partially sighted people in the labour market.
Impairment specific programmes of rehabilitation, vocational training and
support at work are familiar to everyone concerned as the trusted troika
that has carried blind and partially sighted people through to the wide
range of mainstream occupations revealed in this report and on the website
of EBU. The point which must be emphasised here is that the troika is not
universally available throughout the European Union. Even the most advanced
countries reveal surprising deficiencies. The United Kingdom, for example,
has no national vocational rehabilitation service for blind and partially
sighted people, or indeed for disabled people in general. As will be shown
in part ii of this report, the deficiencies are even more glaring in
Romania.
2.9 Recommendation: EBU should seek to ensure that the EU Directorate of
Employment and Social Affairs exerts its full influence to promote the
universalisation of the troika throughout the Union. To this end it should
utilise its powers of monitoring national action plans, targeting finance
from the European Social Fund, funding conferences of experts and service
users for the dissemination of good practice.
2.10 Recommendation: We further recommend EBU to publicise this report
vigorously among its member organisations. These will then have an
opportunity to lobby in their own member states for universalisation of
services. It hardly needs saying that EBU and its member organisations
should press for urgent ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, Article 27, which recognises the rights of
persons with disabilities to work, on an equal basis with others. EBU should
also lobby the Directorate of Employment and Social Affairs of the EU
Commission to utilise its powers to spread good practice equally among
member states. Among these powers are the monitoring of National Action
Plans, which should be scrutinised with the needs of blind and partially
sighted people in mind.
3 Retention legislation
3.1 Besides the ‘trusted troika’, there is one measure of employment
protection for people with disabilities which exists in Sweden and should,
in our opinion, be universally provided. We refer to Sweden’s ‘retention’
legislation. Its aim is to ensure that someone who experiences serious sight
loss while in employment will be able to retain their job or if necessary
transfer to another job in the same firm. Employers may not dismiss such a
person, but must draw up an action plan for retaining him/her in the job or
transferring them to another appropriate job in the firm. In drawing up the
plan employers may call upon the Swedish Public Employment Service. (Ch. 2,
3.18)
3.2 A lesser degree of protection is offered in Germany by the ‘company
prevention’ work of the Office of Integration (Ch. 3, 5.2.1 to 5.2.4). The
main difference from Sweden is that protection from dismissal applies to
employees only after they have been assessed by the Federal Employment
Agency as severely disabled in relation to employment. There seems to be
nothing to prevent a German employer dismissing (or encouraging the early
retirement of) an employee threatened by serious sight loss. Nor is their
any law requiring the employer, as in Sweden, to prepare a plan for
retaining such an employee if at all possible, either in the same or another
job.
3.3 Retention legislation is by no means universal in the European Union. In
the United Kingdom organisations of blind people have long campaigned for
it, so far without success. We think a retention law affords a robust means
of bringing to the attention of employers the abilities, and achievements at
work, of blind and partially sighted people. There is evidence at several
places in this report (e.g. Ch. 3, 3.2.5) that most employers have an
unrealistically low estimate of these abilities and achievements and it is
right that they should have to turn to experts, such as the specialised
staff of the Swedish Public Employment Service to learn what can be done,
before dismissing someone threatened with serious sight loss, or easing such
a person out of their employment.
3.4 Recommendation: We recommend that EBU and its member organisations seize
every opportunity to press for retention legislation in every member state
of the EU.
4 Methods of Delivering Rehabilitation Services Compared
4.1 A striking difference between Sweden and Germany is the way in which
social and vocational rehabilitation is delivered to blind and partially
sighted people. As chapter three shows, these services are delivered in
Germany mainly on a residential basis at four state funded centres. Each
centre delivers its services to blind and partially sighted people recruited
from groups of states (lander) around it (Ch. 3, 1.5, 1.7, and 7.1 et seq.).
As the website of the Düren rehabilitation centre seems to show, Germany
still relies heavily on a one-year course of basic rehabilitation. This
seems a long time for people to be absent from their homes, families and
communities. It is also expensive and we were informed that it has drawn
criticism on this ground from insurance companies and others. In oral and
written communication with staff of the Düren Centre we gathered that
measures have been taken to customise vocational training courses for
individuals, but the ‘basic’ course in social rehabilitation still seems to
be recommended (Ch. 3, 7.4).
4.2 By contrast the Swedish employment system offers no residential courses
in this field. For someone threatened with serious sight loss the journey to
the labour market begins in the low vision clinics (ch. 2, 5-3 to 5.6).
These appear to be sufficiently numerous for a significant proportion of
patients in eye hospitals to be referred to them. They offer specialised
counselling and training in social rehabilitation, with the hope that a
patient of working age will emerge from the clinic equipped with the basic
skills of independent living, ready to proceed on the journey by utilising
the services of the Swedish Public Employment Service. Although the LVCs
have no power of referring patients to SPES, it is noteworthy that liaison
committees have been formed between the two agencies in some regions.
4.3 We are aware that, in the United Kingdom, there has been some
development of LVC’s, as yet on a much smaller scale. The principle of
‘joining up’ the health and rehabilitation services has been strongly
advocated by a government backed report in Scotland. In the ‘UK Vision
Strategy’ recently adopted by Vision 2020, a coalition of eye health
professionals and voluntary organisations has called for a similar approach.
4.4 We wish to emphasise our understanding that rehabilitation services in
Sweden and Germany have developed under different historical, political,
geographical and cultural conditions. It is too early to form a view as to
which is the better approach. The Swedish reliance on LVCs seems to offer
the benefit of delivery in the client’s locality. The German model of one
year basic residential rehabilitation seems to allow for the slow
development that some people evince, e.g. in Braille reading.
4.5 We were very interested in a late comment from SRF in Sweden: "First I
would like to say that this picture of a tight and fluent collaboration
between LVCs and SPES is not rightly true. It varies very much, and many
LVCs pay way to little attention to job preparation. In addition, the
provision for mobility, Braille and other training varies very greatly
between LVCs and is often insufficient for the needs of working life today."
4.6 "Furthermore," SRF continue, "it is really difficult to find answers to
questions about throughput, costs, etc. The LVCs are based in the county
health authority and they often do not keep adequate statistics on their own
clients. Consequently nothing is available on the national level. Strange
but true."
4.7 All in all, it seems to us too early to take a view as between these two
models of delivering social rehabilitation. The Swedish system seems to need
further development. The German system may be undergoing change. It may be
that an effective system requires both components, local LVCs delivering
basic rehabilitation in the client’s locality, boosted by short residential
courses.
4.8 Recommendation: We recommend both agencies to endorse the principle that
the journey from diagnosis of serious sight loss to the labour market should
be made as seamless as possible. As we have already said, early intervention
of impairment specific services is crucial to successful outcomes. The
advantages and disadvantages of the Swedish model, beginning in the health
service and proceeding through courses of personal development that are
non-residential, should be a matter for further comparative study. The
results of such study would be of great value to a country like Romania,
where rehabilitation services urgently await development.
5 The German Quota System
5.1 Another striking difference between Sweden and Germany is the existence
in the latter country of a quota system, backed by a compensation charge or
levy on all employers who do not achieve the stipulated proportion of people
with disabilities in their work force. The working of the German quota
system was fairly fully described in the appendix to chapter three. In
discussions with FMESA, INFAS and the Office of Integration, we pointed out
that the United Kingdom had abolished its own quota system in 1995 and we
canvassed some of the main arguments for an against quota which had then
been advanced (Ch. 3, 6.3.1-6.4). As has been seen the discussion with
German colleagues was inconclusive. This fact is not without significance,
however. Many people in EBU member organisations argue for the adoption of a
quota system for employment of disabled people, backed by a levy on
employers, in their own countries. The evidence we presented in chapter
three, though it failed to win full assent from German colleagues, seems to
suggest that the existence of a quota system in Germany does not in itself
raise the number of blind and partially sighted people employed to a level
any higher than that achieved in the United Kingdom since its quota system
was abolished. Moreover the rate of employment in Sweden is probably higher
(see below, 6.1) with no quota system in existence there. Nor does the
German compensation charge seem to yield more funds to support people with
disabilities into work than the United Kingdom method of applying funds
granted by the ministry of finance out of general taxation.
5.2 Once again it is important to stress that the quota systems which exist
in Germany and some other member states of the EU are the outcome of their
own historical, political and cultural conditions. As a means of raising
finance to support disabled people in employment the German compensation
charge seems to work as well as the general taxation method employed in the
United Kingdom, whatever its alleged disadvantages may be. We would not
recommend that EBU tries, under present circumstances, to seek the abolition
of quota systems in any member state. On the basis of the evidence we have
presented, however, we are personally sceptical of arguments for the
introduction of a quota system in every country that does not have it at
present. We think this would be politically very contentious. Certainly the
Directorate of Employment and Social Affairs would be barred by the
principle of subsidiary from doing anything beyond exhortation to spread the
use of the quota and even exhortation is unlikely to come from that quarter,
where there is strong opposition to anything that smacks of setting targets
for the employment of people with disabilities. Of course there is nothing
to prevent a member state without a quota system from introducing one, and
it may be that a quota system would have value in the new and candidate
member states, where economic inactivity is very high, as a standard for
employers to aim at. Nevertheless we conclude that the building up of
impairment specific services for rehabilitation, vocational training and
support in employment is the key strategy in trying to increase the rate of
economic activity among blind and partially sighted people. As we have
already stated, the main task of EBU, its member organisations and the
Directorate of Employment and Social Affairs is to work in every practical
way to universalise best practice in these services, rather than any
particular method of funding or of coercing or exhorting employers.
6 Economic Inactivity and Propensity to Work
6.1 We thus come, by way of comparing employment activation measures in
Sweden and Germany, to the question of economic inactivity among blind and
partially sighted people in these countries. We were rather surprised to
find how little attention is paid to this issue by the state employment
services of either nation. We were puzzled at first by the silence of staff
of the Swedish Public Employment Service concerning the evidence available
from the National Office of Statistics, which seems to reveal a rate of
economic inactivity of about 43 percent (ch. 2, 4.6). Some light on their
silence appears to be afforded by a very late comment which reached us from
SRF. "The lack of data from SPES on economic inactivity is because we have
not used the term. I wonder a little what is meant by it. Is it unemployment
or what? In Sweden the pensions aim to keep people in a reasonable level of
economic activity, in the sense of consumers and so on."
6.2 This SRF comment leads us to think that we have here a problem of
translation between different languages and discursive practices. As in
Germany (Ch. 3, 2.2) there seems to be some difficulty in grasping the term
‘economic inactivity’. The state employment services in Sweden and Germany
tend to regard everyone who is not in work as ‘unemployed’. This seems
logical to them, since their system regards everyone not in work as
potentially employable. It has the disadvantage, in our opinion, of ignoring
the possibility that the assessment system rules out people as incapable of
work at the time of the assessment, and then fails to keep them in sight by
reaching out at appropriate times and trying to incentivise them. We think
it is important to do this because their general outlook often changes over
time, their propensity to work grows and new programmes such as supported
employment develop.
6.3 We were encouraged that SPES staff acknowledged the likelihood that
careful investigation on the lines of Work Focus (Ch. 1, Appendix II) would
be likely to reveal a degree of involuntary economic inactivity in Sweden
(Ch. 2, 4.7). Correspondingly we were rather staggered by the profound
scepticism among staff of FMESA as to the existence of any significant
degree of involuntary economic inactivity among blind and partially sighted
people in Germany Ch. 3, 3.2-3). Staff of INFAS, of the Office of
Integration and senior members of the German Federation of the Blind and
Partially Sighted all expressed a contrary view. Given the close
correspondence between the findings of the EVASA project in 1995 and the
findings of Network 1000 in 2006, that is, an employment rate in Germany and
the United Kingdom of 33 percent, a similar pattern of propensity to work
among blind and partially sighted people in both countries is surely to be
expected (Ch. 3, 3.2.7). It will be recalled that Work Focus reveals a
propensity to work among economically inactive people of 50 percent.
6.4 In chapter one, we discussed the possible unreliability of subjective
expressions of propensity to work. It is likely that not all those who
express such propensity would stay the course of training and job seeking,
which is arduous at best, and extremely arduous in conditions of economic
recession. Nevertheless there seems to us no justification for a state
employment service under-estimating the value of such expressions without
providing some means of putting them to the test. We consider that
involuntary economic inactivity is much more likely to be caused by social
barriers than by any concealed commitment to idleness.
6.5 It was interesting to note that both Sweden and Germany are already
moving some way in acknowledging this. The evidence for this is to be seen
in the introduction of measures to support blind and partially sighted
people who are less productive than workers who can meet the normal demands
of employment in their firms. Sweden not only has a system of wage subsidy
to support such people in mainstream employment, but is applying the methods
of ‘place and train’ through the intervention of ‘SIUS’ coaches to support
blind and partially sighted people with complex needs to work in mainstream
employment (Ch. 2, 3.1.3).
6.6 At all levels of the German employment service there is interest in this
kind of advance. Recent legislation has provided for it and FMESA told us
that consideration is actively being given to the participation in its
programmes of visually impaired people with complex needs (Ch. 3, 2.4). In
North-Rhine Westfalia the Office of Integration has a section specifically
devoted to supported employment of this kind and seems very alive to the
inclusion of visually impaired people with complex needs (Ch. 3, 6.6.1-7).
6.7 By contrast with Sweden, Germany seems much farther ahead in the
development of social firms as a means of labour activation for people with
complex needs. It is encouraging, however, that both countries have moved
away from traditional sheltered employment (though neither completely rules
it out as an employment outlet for blind and partially sighted people).
6.8 Summing up, we think that propensity to work among blind and partially
sighted people (including those with complex needs) is likely to be just as
prevalent as research now suggests it is in the United Kingdom. We are
encouraged by the interest we encountered in Sweden and Germany (albeit
outside FMESA) in investigation of economic inactivity and the propensity to
work. We agree with those who expressed scepticism about the value of
repeated national surveys which demonstrate what most experts believe, that
involuntary economic inactivity is prevalent. What is needed is something
more like the market research that a business undertakes before deciding to
develop a new product. The first step is to scope the possible causes of
economic inactivity and the extent of propensity to work. The second step is
for employment services to reach out to those who express a wish to work and
ascertain the kinds of services that would further incentivise them and
enhance their potential for employment. A third step is to design and set up
such services. Finally (using the expression in a logical rather than a
necessarily chronological sense) efforts should be made to build an
‘employment continuum’ in the labour market (Ch. 1, 3.8), as exemplified by
the development of social firms in Germany, by SIUS coaching in Sweden, and
by the reorganisation of sheltered employment for people with disabilities
recently undertaken by REMPLOY in the United Kingdom.
6.9 Recommendation: We recommend EBU to do everything possible to publicise
the extent of economic inactivity among blind and partially sighted people
in member states of the EU. It has already done valuable work in publicising
the remarkable range of jobs undertaken by the ‘blind elite’. The time has
come to recognise fully that such people have had to win their way to the
labour market by dint of arduous effort and endurance of barriers that would
discourage most sighted people. The existence of these barriers, and lack of
appropriate support to overcome them, has, we believe, resulted in an
unacceptable rate of economic inactivity, as exemplified in two advanced
member states, Sweden and Germany. Evidence from the United Kingdom shows
that there is a propensity to work among such people and that they can be
incentivised by employment services specially designed to reach them and
meet their needs. Work on supported employment and social firms, especially
(though not exclusively) in Germany is beginning to yield results even for
blind and partially sighted people with complex needs.
6.10 Recommendation: We recommend EBU and its member organisations to
campaign for public resources devoted to rapid development of an employment
continuum that extends from rehabilitation, through special provision to
supported employment in mainstream labour markets. The development of such a
continuum in every member state of the EU would go a long way to fulfilling
the ‘two pronged’ or ‘twin track’ solution to economic inactivity long
advocated by EBU.
List of Recommendations in Chapter Four
1 (2.9) Recommendation: EBU should seek to ensure that the EU Directorate of
Employment and Social Affairs exerts its full influence to promote the
universalisation of the troika throughout the Union. To this end it should
utilise its powers of monitoring national action plans, targeting finance
from the European Social Fund, funding conferences of experts and service
users for the dissemination of good practice.
2 (2.10) Recommendation: We further recommend EBU to publicise this report
vigorously among its member organisations. These will then have an
opportunity to lobby in their own member states for universalisation of
services. It hardly needs saying that EBU and its member organisations
should press for urgent ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, Article 27, which recognises the rights of
persons with disabilities to work, on an equal basis with others. EBU should
also lobby the Directorate of Employment and Social Affairs of the EU
Commission to utilise its powers to spread good practice equally among
member states. Among these powers are the monitoring of National Action
Plans, which should be scrutinised with the needs of blind and partially
sighted people in mind.
3 (3.4) Recommendation: We recommend that EBU and its member organisations
seize every opportunity to press for retention legislation in every member
state of the EU.
4 (4.8) Recommendation: We recommend both agencies to endorse the principle
that the journey from diagnosis of serious sight loss to the labour market
should be made as seamless as possible. As we have already said, early
intervention of impairment specific services is crucial to successful
outcomes. The advantages and disadvantages of the Swedish model, beginning
in the health service and proceeding through courses of personal development
that are non-residential, should be a matter for further comparative study.
The results of such study would be of great value to a country like Romania,
where rehabilitation services urgently await development.
5 (6.9) Recommendation: We recommend EBU to do everything possible to
publicise the extent of economic inactivity among blind and partially
sighted people in member states of the EU. It has already done valuable work
in publicising the remarkable range of jobs undertaken by the ‘blind elite’.
The time has come to recognise fully that such people have had to win their
way to the labour market by dint of arduous effort and endurance of barriers
that would discourage most sighted people. The existence of these barriers,
and lack of appropriate support to overcome them, has, we believe, resulted
in an unacceptable rate of economic inactivity, as exemplified in two
advanced member states, Sweden and Germany. Evidence from the United Kingdom
shows that there is a propensity to work among such people and that they can
be incentivised by employment services specially designed to reach them and
meet their needs. Work on supported employment and social firms, especially
(though not exclusively) in Germany is beginning to yield results even for
blind and partially sighted people with complex needs.
9 (6.10) Recommendation: We recommend EBU and its member organisations to
campaign for public resources devoted to rapid development of an employment
continuum that extends from rehabilitation, through special provision to
supported employment in mainstream labour markets. The development of such a
continuum in every member state of the EU would go a long way to fulfilling
the ‘two pronged’ or ‘twin track’ solution to economic inactivity long
advocated by EBU.
For EBU, by the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB)
APPENDIX
THE SYSTEM OF SHELTERED EMPLOYMENT IN FRANCE IN RELATION TO BLIND PEOPLE
WITH ADDITIONAL DISABILITIES
REPORT OF A VISIT
TO
SHELTERED WORKSHOPS
15-16 March, 2007
1 BACKGROUND
1.1 In March, 2006, the working group on rehabilitation, vocational
training and employment, set up by the European Blind Union (EBU) discussed
the practicability of supported mainstream employment for blind people with
additional disabilities. Some members were sceptical about its
appropriateness for ‘very slow’ workers and urged the model of the sheltered
workshop, citing France as a case of good practice. Others thought that
mainstreaming might be possible for at least some, if impairment-sensitive
training and job experience could be provided. Noting that the programmes of
supported employment had delivered jobs for only a tiny number of visually
impaired people, the working group agreed that experiments should be
promoted within the European Union (EU). These experiments should take
account of different models of supported employment, including the
establishment of ‘centres’ in an intermediate labour market, where blind
workers with additional disabilities could gain job experience and training
and so have a chance to progress into mainstream employment.
1.2 In this context M. Chazal, Director of Rehabilitation and Training of
the Association Valentin Haouy (AVH), Paris, invited me to visit some ‘good
practice’ examples of sheltered employment in France.
2 THE ECONOMIC SITUATION OF BLIND PEOPLE IN FRANCE.
2.1 Before visiting the workshops, M. Chazal informed me that there are
about 60'000 ‘legally blind’ people in France,of whom about 18,000 are of
working age. Of these 18,000, , 7'000 are in employment. Some 700 of them
are employed in sheltered workshops. These workshops cater for two
categories of worker. Level 1, run under a government programme known as
ESAT (Enterprises or Services of Help by Work caters for workers whose
productivity has been assessed at 5 to 30 percent of normal. The main aim of
the activity is therapeutic rather than economic. Level 2 is called Adapted
Enterprises (E.A), formerly Ateliers Protégés. The productivity of workers
here has been assessed at 30-80 percent of normal and there is no
therapeutic element involved. Of those employed in the mainstream, the
largest groups are: telephonists about 2000; physiotherapists about 1500;
Numbers in other professions/ occupations range from a few hundred each in
teaching, office work, piano tuning to about 50 in the ‘higher professions’.
It should be noted that people registered as ‘legally blind’ are totally
blind or possess very little practicable sight. There are no comparable
statistics for ‘partially sighted’ people, but France is more transparent
than, say, the United Kingdom, in revealing the rate of employment for what
the UK knows as ‘registered blind’ people.
2.2 M. Chazal informed me that French law provides employment for disabled
people on the basis of an assessment of their productive capacity. Those
assessed at 100 percent are regarded as suitable for training for mainstream
employment. Those assessed as having between 5 percent and 30 percent of
productivity are eligible for a form of sheltered employment which is
therapeutic as well as economic in aim. Those assessed between 30 and 100
percent are eligible for more productive sheltered employment.
2.3 Legally blind people unable to work are paid a state benefit of some 700
Euros per month. In addition, they receive a ‘compensation’ for the
additional ‘human’ costs of disability. This amounts to some 550 Euros per
month. There are also additional compensations payable on assessment, eg for
the cost of keeping a guide dog or providing information technology. In the
view of some authorities, there is thus a strong financial disincentive to
seek employment.
3 TWO SHELTERED FIRMS
3.1 M. Chazel suggested that I visit workshops run by two organisations:
1 those of Handi Aide, established at St. Just, in the department of Oise,
and 2 another run by AVH at Lyons. On 15 March I visited Handi Aide along
with M. Chazal and Mlle. Natalie Harar (acting as interpreter and sighted
assistant). St. Just is 70 km. north of Paris, in the region of the river
Somme. The name Handi Aide is said to be a play on ‘handicap’, implying
support for people with very severe difficulties and very low productivity.
The three workshops run by this firm are all in a very rural setting,
surrounded by fields and some distance from Mondidier, the nearest large
town. I will refer to them as workshops 1, 2 and 3.
3.2 workshops 1 is funded mainly from the government programme ESAT already
mentioned. Some 78 workers are employed in a bright, modern factory
measuring about 2'000 sq. metres. On the occasion of our visit they were
making bags, metal support parts for ping-pong tables,, and elementary metal
work such as stamping out small parts from sheet metal, and assembling parts
for electrical transmission systems. Most of the workers were said to have
‘mental problems’. We were told that 4 or 5 are ‘legally blind’ and 12-15
are partially sighted (ambliopes). Able-bodied people are employed in
support roles: technical, sales, etc. The workers in this workshop are said
to be assessed as the most ‘handicapped’, productive capacity 5-30 percent.
The sex balance of the work force looked about 50-50.
3.3 workshops 2 is accommodated in older, rented premises, soon to be
replaced by a new building, which is under construction alongside.
Production here appeared to concentrate on packaging. No blind people are
employed in this workshop because it is said to be unsuitable for them. We
were told that blind people will be employed in the new building, but it was
also said that the firm has few blind people on its waiting list. The
recruitment manager was said to be giving attention to this problem. Once
again, workshop 2 seemed dedicated to employment of workers with severe
disabilities. In accordance with its therapeutic aims, a psychologist is
employed. A swimming pool, archery, gardening, and computer training are
available.
3.4 Workshop 3 offers employment to disabled people with the higher levels
of productive capacity. In the packing department, most of the workers are
blind and envelopes were being packed for the mail. In another packaging
department the work was mechanised to some extent. We were informed that
production here was arranged in two shifts, 06,00-13,00 and 13,00-18,00.
3.5 In workshop 3 there was also a wood work department. We observed
mechanised sawing, producing standardised wooden parts which were then
assembled into basic furniture, eg bed bases. This workshop had a factory
atmosphere, mechanised, noisy and bustling, in contrast to the other
workshops, which were quiet - Perhaps even somewhat subdued. There were no
blind people on view in the mechanised departments.
3.6 Under the leadership of its President, M. Pierre Martin, Handi Aide has
developed over the last fifteen years from a small occupational centre into
a dynamic ‘not for profit’ business. M. Martin has an ambitious plan for
expansion. At the town of Mondidier we were shown a newly purchased factory
of some 3000 sq. metres. A plan for its development as a workshop is in
draft. Meanwhile Handi Aide recruits disabled workers from every part of
France, though most come from the Oise. All of them are said to need support
with daily living. Some can live in the local community, but the firm
provides residential accommodation on site in 70 apartments for single
people. These are located in a small chateau which was the premises of the
original society. Accommodation is in single bedrooms, and groups of six
residents share a kitchen and dining facility. Some residents are able to
prepare their own meals and Bus transport is arranged for them to go
shopping. The median age of residents is 35. It is the policy of the firm to
recruit young people, and it claims to be doing this with some success. Some
of the current residents are said to have been here ‘a long time’ and it is
a planning assumption that new residents will stay for up to twenty years.
3.7 Handi Aide evidently receives a great deal of government subsidy. Though
the system of funding was difficult to follow in detail, the outline seems
to be as follows. The construction of the workshops has been financed by
bank loans, which have been amortised over 12 years. It seems that
government provides for repayment. Each worker is paid according to his or
her output, which in most cases is said to be very low. Government augments
their wages, probably to the level of the state disability pension. It also
pays the full salaries of supervisory and managerial staff. In the case of
disabled workers it is said that there would be no point in raising their
wages, since this would only diminish their disability pension entitlement.
3.8 There is, we were told, very little progression. Eight workers were
cited as employed in a mainstream factory under ‘monitoring’ by a member of
Handi Aide staff. The employer pays the wages of the workers and the salary
of the ‘monitor’. . Mainstream employers, it was said, prefer this
arrangement to inclusion. Providing business for Handi Aide reduces their
liability to levy which they have to pay under French quota legislation.
3.9 It would seem, then, that the firm has to bring in enough business to
pay for a modest total of wages, cost of raw materials and no doubt other
running costs. It was not clear how surplus is generated. The firm claims to
have a turn over of 3 million euros per annum. Any surplus is dedicated to
expansion. Allowance for expansion seems to be built into the arrangements
for government's contribution to wages.
3.10 As to residence costs, all French departments pay a housing allowance
to disabled people. At St. Just each department pays this allowance for its
disabled people in residence. The occupant must pay up to 70 per cent of
wages to defray this allowance
4 THE WORKSHOPS At Lyons.
4.1 On 16 March, we visited the workshop run at Lyons by AVH under the
name of the Centre Odette Witkowska. It seems that, in 1961, Mme. Witkowska
began a small centre in her own house, providing services to blind people.
Employment was on a modest scale. In 1982 AVH took over the Centre and
employment has expanded under a dynamic director, M. Michel Brals. Today it
has become a modern sheltered workshop, employing 85 workers of whom about
40 are blind. Workers are employed at both levels of productivity already
described.
4.2 The Centre differs strikingly from the workshops of Handi Aide in the
character of its situation. It stands in its own grounds, ten minutes drive
from Lyons TGV terminal. No doubt because of its origin and present
association with AVH, it seems to be organised with the needs of blind
people more obviously in mind. It was observed, for example, that Handi Aide
provided no ‘ergotherapist’,
mobility training, Braille lessons etc., which are to be found at Lyons.
4.3 In regard to industrial output, the Centre does not differ markedly from
the workshops of Handi Aide. Production is organised in departments, which
cater for a range of productive capacities. Thus the least productive
workers, as at St. Just, perform very simple, repetitive operations such as
assembly, packing, and construction. Contracts are sought, as at St. Just,
from mainstream industrial and commercial firms, including the French postal
service. Much of the industrial work is obtained from the truck-making
sector of the automobile industry, where volumes are low enough to make this
kind of out-sourcing economical. As at St. Just management devotes a great
deal of effort to pursuit of such contracts. Orders come irregularly and
sometimes there is no work for particular sections to do, while at other
times contracts have to be delivered in a rush.
4.4 Another problem is that blind people are difficult to include in certain
lines of production. Eg it was said that they could not work at sorting and
packing printed texts for mailing. Nor can they operate some of the
machinery. On the other hand they played a prominent part in the braille
transcription department.
4.5 Contract arrangements with mainstream firms are similar to those at St.
Just and employers who place orders with the Centre also reduce their
liability to quota levy. Here also management understands that prices can be
kept competitive because government augments very low wages.
4.6 there are broadly two kinds of work at Lyons: (i) metal work and (ii)
paper work. It was said that people prefer the ‘paper’ to the ‘metal’ work
because it is cleaner and nicer to touch. Management tries to explain to
them that the metal workis crucial for bringing in a lot of money to sustain
the business and operates a policy of rotating all teams through the
departments of the workshop.
4.7 As at St. Just, progression at Lyons appeared to be minimal. It is in
the mission of the organisation, but these workers are thought to be ‘too
slow, too handicapped’ to work in mainstream firms. As at St. Just, a few
have been placed with mainstream employers under supervision by Centre
staff.
4.8 Finally, it may be noted that avh has 3 workshops: at lyons, paris and
in central france. This at Lyons is said to be the most go-ahead. Applicants
wait up to two years after assessment to obtain a place in the work force.
The lack of places is attributed to inadequate state funding of sheltered
employment.
5 GENERAL COMMENTS.
5.1 As stated above, these visits arose from discussions in a working
group appointed by EBU. The discussants had in mind the argument of the
‘mainstreaming’ movement that all disabled people can and should be
supported at work in mainstream firms. EBU has argued that for many,
including blind people with additional disabilities, ‘mainstreaming’ and
‘special provision’ are complementary. This is because they need
impairment-sensitive training in relevant skills and it has not yet been
shown that this can be practically provided for all of them in mainstream
settings. It may be that ‘Centres for supported employment’ in every region
would be a more practical way of delivering skills training and job
experience. From such centres people would progress into mainstream
employment, as is said to be the practice at ‘Blindcraft’ Glasgow. It may
also be that such centres would be able to provide permanent employment for
very slow workers who are unable to progress.
5.2 EBU suggested that such centres might be organised as social firms,
co-operatives or reformed sheltered workshops. It was with this last model
in mind that I wished to become closely acquainted with the practice in
France. During the visit I took the opportunity of discussing these issues
with our French colleagues.
5.3 Though not hostile to ‘progression’ in principle, they were very
sceptical about its possibility for most of the disabled people they
recruit. ‘They are too slow’ was the reason given for their scepticism. As
shown above, a small number have progressed, but they did not think this was
likely to be common.
5.4 Advocates of supported mainstream employment have offered many reasons
why this view is held so tenaciously by those who run sheltered workshops.
The protection they offer from the insecurities of the mainstream labour
market encourages the more disabled workers to cling to it. Again, abler
workers are not encouraged to progress because the workshop management
regards them as key to boosting the workshop's production and so diminishing
dependence on subsidy.
5.5 I encountered no direct evidence of such attitudes at St. Just or Lyons,
but it would be naive to think that they could not exist. In the case of St.
JUST, its very rural setting must, in itself, act as a barrier to
progression. At Lyons it was obvious that the two blind finger proof readers
were key to Braille production and, at both firms, one sensed that the
‘faster’ workers were key to the mechanised production which attracted
lucrative contracts from mainstream firms. The very irregularity of orders,
requiring contracts to be carried out ‘in a rush’ is likely to reinforce
such attitudes.
5.6 It also seemed clear that the very committed and dynamic chiefs of these
firms looked for their success to the French system of sheltered employment,
which is generous with subsidy and penalises, through the sanction of the
quota levy, mainstream employers who do not recruit disabled workers or
contract out to sheltered workshops. As is widely acknowledged, the system
is powerfully entrenched in French culture. M. Chazal, at least, is
confident it is not under threat from any foreseeable change of government.
On the other hand, it is obviously not producing a dynamic expansion of
sheltered employment in France, as far as blind people are concerned. With
only 700 employed in the sheltered sector and just over 6000 out of 18,000
‘legally blind’ of working age employed in the mainstream, France has a long
way to go in reducing the rate of economic inactivity.
5.7 However, this can be shown to be true of practically every member-state
in the European Union. Neither sheltered employment nor reserved occupations
nor supported employment in mainstream, has made significant in-roads into
rates of economic inactivity that range upwards from 40 percent.
5.8 In Britain, the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) has
persuasively argued that this is because employers and employment services
fail to provide adequate resources for impairment-specific training of blind
people who are disadvantaged by additional impairments, long-term
unemployment, advancing age or low skills. The centres at St. Just and at
Lyons have shown that they can take such blind people and turn them into
productive workers. Each admit that blind people present special
difficulties in relation to certain lines of production, eg sorting and
packing printed text, but each acknowledges the need to make special
provision for blind people. This is the positive effect produced by these
two firms.
5.9 Are they, on the other hand, reinforcing the ‘ghetto’ effect of
traditional sheltered workshops. There was a lot of evidence to suggest that
they were, especially at St. Just, with its rural setting and 70-apartment
residential bloc. Neither firm seemed to have gone out of its way to recruit
able-bodied people to work alongside disabled on the basis of equal value, a
major principle advocated by social firms in the UK. On the other hand, each
could argue that it had taken some countervailing measures to mitigate this
effect, such as the arrangement for progression (albeit very limited)
seeking an urban location for the new workshop at Mondidier, and the fact
that employees at Lyons live out. M. Chazal is of opinion that these
‘inclusive’ practises could be extended.
5.10 My own general conclusion is that EBU would be very unwise to turn its
back on the French system on the grounds of ‘mainstreaming’ ideology.
Advocates of supported employment in the mainstream have achieved very
little for blind people. Until they can point to blind workers with
additional/complex needs working in the mainstream, they are in no position
to be dismissive of a system which actually provides employment for such
people. In so providing, these workshops positively demonstrate that it is
not unwillingness to work that keeps the economically inactive at home. Nor
is it the unfavourable ratio of wages to benefits. The workers at St. Just
and Lyons appear to value employment for its non-economic benefits and this
may be not unrelated to the level of ‘protection’ which France offers them.
On the other hand, sheltered employment can be made more inclusive. One way
to demonstrate this is to move closer to mainstream supported employment by
bringing able-bodied workers into the firm and making every opportunity for
disabled workers to progress out of it. This is why Ebu is insisting that
special provision is complementary to mainstreaming. That is the challenge
for every member state of the EU to confront in relation to blind people
with additional difficulties.
Dr. Fred Reid,
25 March 2007.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(A) Published items
I. Bruce and M. Baker, Employment and unemployment among people with sight
problems in the UK, (RNIB, London, 2003)
G. Douglas, C. Corcoran and S. Pavey, Network 1000, Opinions and
circumstances of visually impaired people in Great Britain: report based on
over 1000 interviews (Univ. of Birmingham, Birmingham, 2006)
H. Schröder, Integration of Blind People into Employment: Final Report
(Institute of Applied Social Sciences [INFAS], Bonn, 1995) [the ‘EVASA
project’]
P. Simkiss and M. Baker, Beyond the Stereotypes, (RNIB, London, 2004)
Constructing an employment continuum: Creating jobs by promoting social
enterprise (RNIB, London, 2003)
J. Slade and P. Simkiss, Work focus: Creating an employment marketplace for
blind and partially sighted people, Vision 2008 conference proceedings.
www.opto.umontreal.ca/vision2008
Labour Force Survey (2007), London, Office for National Statistics
(B) Unpublished Items
The Employment of Blind People in Seventeen Countries (EBU report, 2001)
(C) Websites
European Blind Union, www.euroblind.org
German Office of Integration www.integrationsaemter.de
RNIB www.RNIB.org.uk
Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen)
www.socialstyrelsen.se/en
Swedish Social Insurance Agency (Försäkringskassan
www.forsakringskassan.se/sprak/engg
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,
Article 27. www.un.org/disabilities
UK Department of Work and Pensions www.dwp.gov.uk
Vision 2020 www.vision2020uk.org.uk (esp. for text of Network 1000 and UK
Vision Strategy)