有学习障碍和其他残疾的人提出的歧视指控

IF 1.2 Q3 REHABILITATION Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.3233/jvr-230003
Mykal J. Leslie, Emre Umucu, P. Rumrill, B. Mcmahon, Aundrea Gee Cormier
{"title":"有学习障碍和其他残疾的人提出的歧视指控","authors":"Mykal J. Leslie, Emre Umucu, P. Rumrill, B. Mcmahon, Aundrea Gee Cormier","doi":"10.3233/jvr-230003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Workers with learning disabilities (LD) report many barriers to employment, including discrimination on the part of employers. OBJECTIVE: To compare the workplace discrimination experiences of workers with LD to those of people with other disabilities. METHOD: The comparison of the two groups, people with LD and people with other disabilities, concerned three factors: Characteristics of Charging Parties, Prominent Issues involving the nature of the discrimination allegation, and the outcomes of EEOC investigations at the time of case closure. An ex post facto, causal-comparative quantitative design was used to examine allegations closed following the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAA). RESULTS: Results revealed statistically significant differences in characteristics of the Charging Parties in the two groups. The LD group was significantly younger, more Caucasian, and more male than general population disabilities (GENDIS). The LD group was less African American, Latina/o, or Asian than GENDIS. Regarding the nature of allegations, the substance of allegations made by the LD group was more likely to involve matters of disability harassment, discipline, hiring, constructive discharge, training, and promotion. The LD group was less likely to file allegations involving reasonable accommodation, assignment, and layoff. CONCLUSION: Workers with learning disabilities experience high rates of employment discrimination, and the types of discrimination they experience are different than those experienced by people with other disabilities.","PeriodicalId":47208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in Americans with Disabilities Act Title I discrimination allegations filed by people with learning disabilities and other disabilities\",\"authors\":\"Mykal J. Leslie, Emre Umucu, P. Rumrill, B. Mcmahon, Aundrea Gee Cormier\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/jvr-230003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND: Workers with learning disabilities (LD) report many barriers to employment, including discrimination on the part of employers. OBJECTIVE: To compare the workplace discrimination experiences of workers with LD to those of people with other disabilities. METHOD: The comparison of the two groups, people with LD and people with other disabilities, concerned three factors: Characteristics of Charging Parties, Prominent Issues involving the nature of the discrimination allegation, and the outcomes of EEOC investigations at the time of case closure. An ex post facto, causal-comparative quantitative design was used to examine allegations closed following the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAA). RESULTS: Results revealed statistically significant differences in characteristics of the Charging Parties in the two groups. The LD group was significantly younger, more Caucasian, and more male than general population disabilities (GENDIS). The LD group was less African American, Latina/o, or Asian than GENDIS. Regarding the nature of allegations, the substance of allegations made by the LD group was more likely to involve matters of disability harassment, discipline, hiring, constructive discharge, training, and promotion. The LD group was less likely to file allegations involving reasonable accommodation, assignment, and layoff. CONCLUSION: Workers with learning disabilities experience high rates of employment discrimination, and the types of discrimination they experience are different than those experienced by people with other disabilities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47208,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/jvr-230003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/jvr-230003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:学习障碍工作者(LD)报告了许多就业障碍,包括雇主的歧视。目的:比较残障人士与其他残障人士的工作场所歧视经历。方法:对残障人士和其他残障人士两组进行比较,涉及三个因素:指控方的特征、涉及歧视指控性质的突出问题以及案件结案时平等就业机会委员会的调查结果。事后,因果比较定量设计被用于审查2008年《美国残疾人法修正案》(ADAA)后关闭的指控。结果:两组患者充电方特征差异有统计学意义。与一般人群残疾相比,LD组明显更年轻,更多的高加索人,更多的男性。与GENDIS相比,LD组的非裔美国人、拉丁美洲人或亚洲人较少。就指控的性质而言,劳工处小组提出的指控的实质内容更可能涉及残疾人士骚扰、纪律、雇用、建设性解雇、培训和晋升等事项。LD组不太可能提出涉及合理住宿、分配和解雇的指控。结论:学习障碍者就业受歧视的比例较高,且受歧视的类型与其他障碍者不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Differences in Americans with Disabilities Act Title I discrimination allegations filed by people with learning disabilities and other disabilities
BACKGROUND: Workers with learning disabilities (LD) report many barriers to employment, including discrimination on the part of employers. OBJECTIVE: To compare the workplace discrimination experiences of workers with LD to those of people with other disabilities. METHOD: The comparison of the two groups, people with LD and people with other disabilities, concerned three factors: Characteristics of Charging Parties, Prominent Issues involving the nature of the discrimination allegation, and the outcomes of EEOC investigations at the time of case closure. An ex post facto, causal-comparative quantitative design was used to examine allegations closed following the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAA). RESULTS: Results revealed statistically significant differences in characteristics of the Charging Parties in the two groups. The LD group was significantly younger, more Caucasian, and more male than general population disabilities (GENDIS). The LD group was less African American, Latina/o, or Asian than GENDIS. Regarding the nature of allegations, the substance of allegations made by the LD group was more likely to involve matters of disability harassment, discipline, hiring, constructive discharge, training, and promotion. The LD group was less likely to file allegations involving reasonable accommodation, assignment, and layoff. CONCLUSION: Workers with learning disabilities experience high rates of employment discrimination, and the types of discrimination they experience are different than those experienced by people with other disabilities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
33.30%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation will provide a forum for discussion and dissemination of information about the major areas that constitute vocational rehabilitation. Periodically, there will be topics that are directed either to specific themes such as long term care or different disability groups such as those with psychiatric impairment. Often a guest editor who is an expert in the given area will provide leadership on a specific topic issue. However, all articles received directly or submitted for a special issue are welcome for peer review. The emphasis will be on publishing rehabilitation articles that have immediate application for helping rehabilitation counselors, psychologists and other professionals in providing direct services to people with disabilities.
期刊最新文献
Needs of human resource professionals in implicit bias and disability inclusion training: A focus group study. Effect of company-driven disability diversity initiatives: A multi-case study across industries Vocational rehabilitation applicants, the services they receive, and their employment outcomes Discovering ME: An innovative planning tool for students with significant disabilities ABLE account use among supplemental security income recipients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1