Employment officers’ perceptions of job prospects for physically impaired people in China and Sweden

Abstract

AbstractIn this study, Chinese and Swedish employment officers’ assessments of physically impaired people and their ability to find jobs are compared. The study is qualitative, and data were collected through semi-structured interviews. The respondents were ten employment officers working full time. The results show that several employment officers in both contexts are skeptical that disabled people will be able to find work, and highlight similar obstacles to entering the labor market related to individual and societal conditions. The results show that, unlike Swedish employment officers, who highlight both types of obstacles, Chinese employment officers consider barriers related to the individual to be most important. The results also show that, compared to their Swedish colleagues, Chinese employment officers view gender and sex as more critical obstacles. The article argues that the results reveal different conceptions of disability and gender or sex that can be linked to the two contexts’ welfare models.Points of interestPrevious studies have rarely examined whether employment barriers for disabled people can be related to the functioning of the employment services.This article compares assessments made by employment officers in China and Sweden of disabled people and their ability to find jobs.This article reveals that employment officers in both countries to some extent negatively assess the employment prospects of women and disabled people, and it is argued that under some circumstances the employment services can function as a barrier for disabled people to get a job.This article shows that employment officers’ assessments differ depending on their perceptions of the applicants’ disability and sex, as well as if the officer works in Sweden or in China.This article argues that the employment officers’ expectations of disabled peoples’ ability to work are in line with the overarching goals of the welfare in the two countries.Keywords: Disabilityemployment officerassessmentgenderbiological sexwelfare state Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.