Nobody would think that it is OK to deny someone a job as a result of their sex, race or age, and the same should stand for disabled people, too.
We do deny people jobs because of their age: 14 year olds do not get hired as delivery drivers. We do deny people jobs on the basis of their sex: there are no male wet nurses. As to race: there aren’t that many black models being used to advertise tanning salons.
Disabled means differently abled. We don’t hire the blind to be delivery drivers, the deaf as piano tuners nor the dyslexic as subeditors.
Yes we do, and should, deny people a job on the basis of disability. You know, the inability to do the job in question?
14 responses so far ↓
1 dearieme // Jun 18, 2011 at 10:13 am
“Disabled means differently abled.” But it doesn’t, does it? As in “the techies at Forbes must be intellectually disabled”.
2 PPS // Jun 18, 2011 at 10:17 am
Marvellous.
3 bloke in spain // Jun 18, 2011 at 10:29 am
“We don’t hire…………….. the dyslexic as subeditors.”
No, but the Telegraph does.
4 Grumpy Old Man // Jun 18, 2011 at 10:30 am
“nor the dyslexic as subeditors.” The Guardian g
Group have been way ahead of their time for decades then.
5 JuliaM // Jun 18, 2011 at 1:42 pm
“Disabled means differently abled.”
No, it doesn’t. It means what it implies; something that should work, doesn’t.
6 Andrew Montgomery // Jun 18, 2011 at 4:45 pm
If employers aren’t hiring disabled staff, they’re missing out. The disabled are discriminated against when seeking employment. As a result, once they’ve found a job, they are less likely to leave. For employers that means low turnover; which means lower hiring & training costs. As long as the disability doesn’t interfere with the job, then it’s a win-win.
7 Kay Tie // Jun 18, 2011 at 4:51 pm
As a result, once they’ve found a job, they are less likely to leave.
That’s because no-one has installed an exit ramp.
8 blindcyclists // Jun 18, 2011 at 6:44 pm
“No, it doesn’t. It means what it implies; something that should work, doesn’t.”
I’m afraid Timmy, that JuliaM is correct, and you’ve fallen into a bit of PC there.
I suppose you could say that I see “differently” to the average person, but while technically correct, the difference only arises because I see less well.
Which, as you correctly note, is why no one in their right mind would hire me to drive a bus, except perhaps for a very short distance into the front of a supermarket.
9 Kay Tie // Jun 18, 2011 at 6:59 pm
Which, as you correctly note, is why no one in their right mind would hire me to drive a bus
I am offended on your behalf at the endemic discrimination against the lesser abled.
10 John77 // Jun 19, 2011 at 1:22 pm
@ JuliaM
Any decent definition of “differently abled” includes “not having a particular ability without having any extra abilities to compensate”
Timmy is right – *you* have fallen into the trap that the PC community built specifically to catch you.
11 blindcyclists // Jun 19, 2011 at 3:32 pm
@John77
Oh come on, we don’t say that the runner that came in last in the race ran “differently” from the other runners, or the team that lost the match played “differently” to the one that won.
12 john miller // Jun 19, 2011 at 8:32 pm
I always used to make my judgements on the success of various disabilities legislation based on the number of black lesbian dwarfs on Tony Blair’s bodyguard rota.
Regardless of the fact that these small people would have been perfectly adequate to guard another very small person (armed as they would be now with submachine guns using hollow point ammunition), I never saw a one…
13 John77 // Jun 20, 2011 at 11:22 pm
@ blindcyclist
My last race I pulled a muscle after 2km so I came third-from-last male: that did not make me differently-abled, just an embarrassment to my team manager who waited for me long after the rest of the team had gone back for a shower and led me back to base.
The PC lobby wants us to say just that. You seem blind to their hidden motivation
14 John77 // Jun 20, 2011 at 11:24 pm
Oh, yes, I did run differently – very differently.
Leave a Comment