The Dilemma of Disclosure for Accomodations

In this compelling episode, we explore the world of disability disclosure in professional settings. As we all strive for success, the question arises: Should one have to reveal a disability to receive necessary support?

We dissect the term "reasonable accommodations" and its subjective nature, exploring how it can vary widely from one organization to another. Discover the challenges rooted in prejudice, discrimination, and stigma that persistently affect individuals with disabilities, even when they possess the skills required for the job.

Join us in envisioning a world where proactive accommodations are the norm. In this episode, we challenge the status quo, questioning why disclosure is necessary when universal design principles can be readily applied today. Together we reevaluate whether disclosure should be a prerequisite for workplace support, pushing organizations to prioritize inclusivity and create environments where everyone can thrive. 

Transcript

Hi everyone. I’m glad to be here with all of you as we head into fall, and I hope you are on track as we begin the final push to year-end. Over the summer, we’ve extended our podcast episode releases to every three weeks – giving us time to balance and focus on family, helping more organizations support neurodivergent individuals, while continuing to provide all of you with the latest insights. We know that 2023 has seen significant developments in the diversity space, and the pace of change continues. And in a world where we're striving for more diversity and inclusion, we're finding more and more barriers and obstacles to realizing inclusion at work and in life. We are also finding more solutions to overcome them. 

 As you know, I often discuss the needs of disabled and neurodivergent individuals and how leaders can help them realize their potential by emphasizing strengths and providing opportunities for success. Yet there is one question that is always asked: “When should I disclose a disability to my employer? And the answer isn't simple and what our episode today is all about. The decision hinges on an organization's culture, the level of psychological safety it provides, and whether you need support at work to be successful. And the challenge lies in the varying interpretation of reasonable accommodations and impacted by biases.

 Let me break down the dilemma and problem with reasonable accommodations.  Starting with the word. Reasonable. The ADA requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for disabled employees. This sounds good until we consider who gets to determine what is reasonable. 

 That's really problematic because the organization may not agree with what the employee or student thinks is a reasonable accommodation for success. The law is that it's up to the leader’s interpretation. So, what one company deems reasonable, another may not. The second part that's highly problematic, and why I think there's a dilemma of disclosure for accommodations, is there is a lot of prejudice, discrimination, and stigma regarding people with disabilities. So, if an employer believes people with disabilities are less capable, even when they have all the required skills, they are less likely to be considered for employment nor receive needed accommodations. 

 Imagine how this can be a huge dilemma for an employee who may need a little extra time to complete their work. They have ADHD, and maybe more structure and reminders would be helpful in keeping them organized. This might look like having a colleague or manager capture notes and deliverable dates and share the minutes after a meeting. When you break it down this way, this type of accommodation seems reasonable. But for this to be put in place, a person would have to disclose their disability to get it. And once you disclose that information, it can't be retracted. 

 While the accommodation is quite simple, what perceptions and other biases are triggered now that your boss, and perhaps your colleagues, know you have ADHD?  Now, when you make a mistake, they may attribute it to your disability and not just human error. Perhaps you will not be seen as capable as you once were. 

 This is why people with hidden disabilities ask the question: We're in this culture of promoting psychological safety, employee diversity, and bringing your whole self to work, but how safe is it really to bring your whole self to work? And the bigger question is, should you have to disclose a disability to get support in the workplace? 

If you have physical disabilities, commercial organizations are required to make their buildings. We know that technologically, more assets are readily available for text-to-speech and captioning. It's not perfect, but more organizations have this technology ready. And there's less need to request one-off accommodations for these issues because buildings and technology are becoming more universally accessible to everyone. When we think about other disabilities, we know those with autism and other neurodivergences sometimes need additional time to complete work. We know they may need support with organization and executive functioning. They may be quieter work areas. We could also incorporate these types of structures if we were focused on creating a company that is flexible and ready to support the variances of our employees' needs. 

 But what pains me is why, as companies, if we know that it’s less costly today to implement accommodations because the technology, buildings, learning, and talent practices are more universally designed, why are we still requiring disclosure and accommodations on an as-needed basis? 

 And the things that we talk about in terms of neuro-divergent accommodations are known. These are not mysteries anymore. It's just really a willingness to provide them and redesigning our structures so that they're standardized. Changes like having questions before an interview and, having an opportunity to demonstrate your skills, and not basing hiring decisions on presentation skills alone.

 If we want to reduce unconscious bias and prejudicial action, then why do we require disclosure for accommodations? And it's a circular conversation because we require disclosure for accommodations to justify an employer's requirement to provide their employees' support. To meet people where they are. 

 The question we really should be asking is why aren’t employers willing to support their employees' needs to help them be successful. Why are they only willing to modify their approach when required by law?  Why are they so afraid of differentiation in approaches to work?  So often, they talk about collaboration and teamwork – yet they hung up on all employees working the same way with the same resources. How many of your requisitions say you must be collaborative and good at teamwork? Why do we want teams – usually, because we know people have varying strengths and abilities – they are strong together. So why are we hung up on differentiation of supports and ways of working? 

 Why can’t an employee ask for executive support, like a note taker or meeting minutes, and a leader believes that implementing the request would help productivity? Why do we have to disclose a disability or deficit to get help when we need it? But no, a person has to disclose a disability or deficit for you to be willing to help them. So, the dilemma with disclosure is not that people don't need accommodations because we lack access in our organizations. But what I’m questioning is why do leaders need a doctor’s note to do the right thing for their employees. What is the risk of doing that? 

 By creating accommodations only for those with documented disabilities, we increase inequities because we treat people as exceptions – perpetuating ableist attitudes and prejudicial mindsets. 

 So we really need to think about the predicament we're putting ourselves in. Because if we say we want to increase the diversity of individuals and increase the diversity of thought and abilities, we need to think about the structures and cultures we are creating. Are we providing solutions or creating new, unintended intended problems? Almost every employer requisition I've seen in a long time asks candidates: Do you have a disability? In an ideal world, you should be able to disclose you have a disability at the beginning. The truth is that disability disclosure could eliminate you from jobs you're qualified for because of people's preconceived beliefs and stigmas of who belongs - who will be successful. 

 There's a real fear here. As I talk more about neurodiversity and celebrating our differences, some people say, I would love to tell my employer that I have ADHD. I would love to tell my employer that I'm dyslexic. Many notable celebrities have these issues, and people feel proud of their identity. 

 But the truth is we are striving to create psychologically safe workplaces; we are striving to create neuro-inclusive and diverse workplaces. We do not live in the future state yet. So, while we should be able to bring our whole selves to work – to disclose our disability, it is not a safe place for most of us to do so today. This is why we have these conversations. And this is why I'm telling you we must get past the accommodation dilemma. The ADA needs to rethink reasonable accommodations and start getting more to universal design principles for inclusion at work. Because too much has changed since the law was put in place. There is no reason organizations are not working past providing reasonable accommodations and building universally accessible structures. 

 We are still creating barriers to equitable opportunities. We create divisions and perpetuate exclusion by making somebody disclose their disability to obtain basic support.  Employees have the greatest risk in this exchange. We need to shift the focus towards accessible solutions. If we're going to combat stigma and assumptions, we must eradicate the mechanisms of othering and ableist structures that put people with disabilities at a counter to those who don't typically need accommodations. And when we can dismantle the structures that create divisions, then we can achieve inclusion and acceptance. 

 So, this is an area that will continue to be up for debate. But I want everyone to consider whether you should have to disclose to get support at work. It is on organizations to rethink why they create barriers to success and access. It is up to organizations to determine why they think people with disabilities must prove themselves worthy to be part of the organization. And when we can start to unpack those thought processes, we can begin the real work. Get the ADA to be more consistent with how accommodations are provided and not solely leave it to leaders who may or may not be pro-disability inclusion to make those decisions. We need to stop focusing on justifications for support. We need to start appreciating we all have different needs and paths to success. Meaningful change starts with a willingness to support individuals as they are without requiring them to justify why.