An Advertising Supplement in the Washington Post
Tuesday, July 18, 1995 A9

Issue Forum
Year Five of the ADA

MEETING THE CHALLENGE
On July 26, 1990, the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) was signed into law by President George Bush. Present were former Congressman Tony Coelho and Senator Bob Dole -- both sponsors of the legislation, and both disabled themselves. Many in wheelchairs, others who could hear but not see proceedings -- some who could see but not hear -- gathered on the White House lawn. In the first five years of the ADA, how well have we met the challenges of disability?

THE ADA HOLDS THE KEY TO EMPLOYMENT FOR THE DISABLED
By Tony Coelho
When I was young, I was pretty sure that I was invincible. Then one day, as I was driving around in a pick up truck with several friends, reality hit. The truck flipped, and I sustained a head injury. I started having headaches and blackouts, and was eventually diagnosed with epilepsy. Although I had been a highly sought-after college graduate, the job offers suddenly disappeared. Businesses didn't want me. Neither did the seminary where I had hoped to become a Jesuit priest.

My seizures were, and continue to be, intermittent and can be controlled with medication. In fact, February 8, 1995 is the first time I've had a seizure in the past 12 years. But in those days, when I was diagnosed, no one wanted to hire someone with epilepsy, and didn't have to -- even if he or she was the best qualified candidate.

I'm only one of 49 million Americans who have a disability. I have a successful career. I'm one of the lucky ones. Unfortunately, most people who have a disability still don't work. It doesn't have to be this way.

Senator Tom Harkin is fond of telling the story about a young man born with Downs Syndrome. His parents rejected medical advice that he be institutionalized. Instead they enrolled him in early-intervention programs, worked with the school system and Vocational Rehab people to get him education and training.

Today he works at a plant where he duplicates and dubs videotapes. He is a contributing member of his community and a consumer who, with his own money, has purchased such items as a color TV, a VCR, a stereo and a compact disk player. The total cost of his education and training: $63,000. If he had been placed in an institution it would have cost $4.8 million to care for him until age 60.

As Chairman of the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities, I hear success stories like this frequently. And, many businesses can share similar success stories. As business leaders have realized that they are running out of qualified people and that demand will increase for qualified workers at all levels over the next 15 years, there has been a positive change in attitudes in the business community.

Hundreds of companies have learned that employees with disabilities are a valuable resource. Like every one else, they want the opportunity to work hard for their wages and take pride in their workmanship.

Business leaders also realize that by eliminating discrimination in employment, we reduce costly dependence and contribute to our nation's economic growth because we turn those who depend on social and welfare programs into tax-paying citizens. Our economy loses between $200 and $300 billion a year in support payments and lost productivity by not using the skills and talents of workers with disabilities.

Many businesses have now recognized that a previously untapped market of 49 million customers exists. According to the Census Bureau, this market controls $188 billion in discretionary income.

The Americans with Disabilities Act is the one piece of legislation that I am most proud of introducing during my 10 years in the House of Representatives. At long last people with disabilities have an equal chance to compete for jobs. The ADA gives us the opportunity to change the way this country has traditionally done business.

Fear of the cost to accommodate disabled workers has proven to be unfounded. For example, Sears, Roebuck recently completed an assessment of accommodation it made between 1978 to 1992. During that time the department store documented 436 accommodations, 301 of which cost nothing. The average cost per accommodation was $121.42.

Data from the President's Committee's Job Accommodation Network (JAN) show similar conclusions. According to employers who have called our toll-free assistance line, 68% of all accommodations cost less than $500. Furthermore, these businesses tell us that for every $1 they spent to make an accommodation, they saved an average of $30 in such ways as being able to retain a qualified employee, eliminating the cost of training a new employee, or realizing savings on worker's compensation and on paying unemployment benefits. For example, a hospital that spent $600 on an accommodation realized $20,000 in benefits. By purchasing an easy to maneuver push/pull cart with ergonomic cleaning tools when a housekeeping worker's mobility was restricted by a back injury, the hospital saved on insurance costs and was able to increase the worker's productivity, which resulted in the $20,000 savings.

Similarly, a construction company spent approximately $500 on an accommodation for a welder who had developed a cervical problem and was unable to wear the standard welder's helmet. By purchasing a lightweight helmet for the worker, the company estimated a savings of $30,000. Both employee and employer benefited in this savings: the employee was able to stay on the job and increase his productivity, and his company didn't have to pay worker's compensation and the cost to train a new employee.

These are only two examples of employers recognizing the value of workers with disabilities. Since 1984, JAN has been providing practical solutions for employees and employers free of charge through a toll-free number. Between January and March, JAN responded to 11,784 calls. Clearly, there are many who recognize the value of people with disabilities in the workplace.

To discard the skills and talents of people with disabilities is a tragic waste our country can't afford. This has nothing to do with the enforcement of laws and regulations. It has to do with recognizing each individual's right to shape his or her own destiny. It has to do with recognizing ability. It has to do with our nation's economic well being.

"PROMISES TO KEEP": DISABILITY POLICY PAST AND FUTURE
By Bob Dole
As we approach the 5th birthday of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the future has never been brighter for people with disabilities. As a nation, we are increasingly committed to an accessible society - not only our buildings and our environment, but our hearts and minds as well.

The ADA is an important part of our nation's commitment to the full participation of people with disabilities. I know many in the disability community are worried about criticism of the ADA. There have been some crazy stories in the press, but some fair concerns as well. In my view, thoughtful debate is always healthy - it means that people are paying attention. In 1973, Congress passed the Rehabilitation Act, which required that federally funded programs be accessible. But for many years little happened. No one can say that's the case with the ADA.

Let us remember the... ADA asks something... most Americans - usually... not a lot, but sometimes a great deal. We should expect questions and concerns will be raised. We must make it our job to make the ADA work for both people with and without disabilities.

A quick tour of disability policy past and future will show how far we have come, and the distance we have yet to go.

FIRST SENATE SPEECH
Twenty-six years ago, I was elected to the U.S. Senate. After several months of careful thought, on April 14, 1969, I rose to give my first speech. I spoke not just about disability, but as a person with a disability myself. During World War II, on another April 14th, I was wounded in combat and joined the disability community.

I talked about values in disability policy - of independence, dignity and security. And how society had shut out people with disabilities. "As a minority, (people with disabilities have) always known exclusion - maybe not exclusion from the front of the bus, but perhaps from even climbing aboard it; maybe not exclusion from pursuing advanced education, but perhaps from experiencing any formal education; maybe not exclusion from day-to-day life itself, but perhaps from an adequate opportunity to develop and contribute to his or her fullest capacity."

BIG CHANGES - AND NEW ISSUES
Since that first speech, there have been big changes. Congress has passed dozens of laws to help promote the full participation of people with disabilities - culminating with the ADA.

But many gains have come from the hard work of people with disabilities themselves. Today, across America there are hundreds of independent living centers and advocacy groups serving people with disabilities.

The issues are changing though, and are, in some ways, tougher. For example, this year is the 20th anniversary of the Federal special education law - the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. It was needed, and I was proud to vote for it. It was unconscionable that thousands of children with disabilities were barred at the schoolhouse door.

Although access in education remains a fundamental issue, new and more complicated issues often dominate the debate - school violence, competing demands on school budgets, and even allegations that students are mislabeled as disabled for financial or other reasons. Such complex problems often require careful arguments and often good data to address them.

Unemployment of people with disabilities also remains a big problem. Despite billions spent by the Federal government over the past decade, the job outlook for many has not improved, and is maybe even worse. In my first Senate speech I also said, "We in America are far from the half-way point of assuring that every (person with a disability) can become as active and useful as his abilities will allow." I believe we will reach that point only when employment among people with disabilities is at least half that of people without disabilities.

THE PROMISE OF TECHNOLOGY
Perhaps the most exciting avenue for progress is technology. On June 15, the Senate passed a sweeping telecommunications bill that will disregulate markets and spur innovation. We did not forget people with disabilities. We asked that all equipment and services consider the needs of those with disabilities. In my view, no ground may benefit more from this legislation than people with disabilities.

The poet Archibald Macleish once wrote, "America was always promises." There still is much work to do, but never have America's promises been within closer reach for people with disabilities.

ABOUT THIS SECTION
This issue forum was prepared by the Advertising Department of the Washington Post and did not involve the editorial staff of The Washington Post.

The material for this section was provided by Brock Brower, a freelance writer and editor. At the Justice Department from 1988-92, he worked on the Bush administration's review of the ADA legislation.

Special thanks are extended to the National Organization on Disability for suggesting this topic. N.O.D. President Alan Reich can be reached at (202) 293-5960.

For more information about this section, please contact Marc Rosenberg, Corporate Advertising Manager, The Washington Post, 1150 15th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20071, (202) 334-7634.

Handwritten note on page: "The GM Mobility Program can help you a lot. I know because my mom is part of it."

[picture of Tammie Groth]

Description under Tammie's picture was cut off to the right.
An active honor roll student, Tammie Groth doesn't believe in obstacles. Neither is Connie, one of the many General Motors employees whose own lives are affected by... It's their valuable insights that help make the GM Mobility Program work. Trans... independence. That's something the people at General Motors know from their own...

Call the GM Mobility Assistance Center. We'll give you: the names of local companies that provide services, adaptive driving devices and vehicle modifications. An informative videotape, "On the Motions for the General Motors cars and trucks that might work best for you. Then, if you buy or lease we'll reimburse you up to $1000 toward the cost of adapting it or reinstalling your own adapter. Call 1-800-323-9935 (TDD users: 1-800-TDD-9935), or contact your Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick Truck dealer to find out more.

LOUIS HARRIS/N.O.D. SURVEY FINDS EMPLOYERS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORT THE ADA - AND JOBS
By Humphrey Taylor
Hopes have always run high within the disability community for improvement in employment with the passage of the ADA, but over the first five years, how has the new law been accepted by those who do the hiring - under its anti-discriminatory provision? To find out, the National Organization on Disability (NOD) commissioned Louis Harris Associates, Inc. to survey 404 employers, operating businesses both large and small, and ascertain what changes the ADA had brought as legal guide or goad to their employing people with disabilities.

The Harris pollsters chiefly concluded that Corporate America strongly endorses the Americans with Disabilities Act and its goals, and has taken some steps to improve its own practices in relation to the employment of people with disabilities.

At the same time, the pollsters found that, even with this staunch support for the ADA, the number of corporations actually hiring people with disabilities has scarcely changed over the last nine years.

Their research also refutes two misconceptions about the ADA that have become politically current. The first misconception is that many companies have incurred heavy additional costs, or have been badly mired in litigation because of the ADA. This is only true of a very small fraction of employers.

The second misconception is that Corporate America is not supportive of the ADA. The reverse is true. The overwhelming majority of senior corporate executives strongly support the ADA and do not favor weakening it in any way.

Since 1986, and a previous Harris survey of employers, the environment for the employment of people with disabilities has improved - although this change has been modest. More corporate programs geared toward the employment of people with disabilities have been put in place, and dramatically more accommodations have been made by corporate employers.

These changes have resulted in some increased costs, though the costs seem to be modest. The employers feel that this effort has been worth it, and in the next three years there is likely to be an increased effort to hire people with disabilities. Whether any of this can be directly attributed to passage of the ADA has not been definitively proved by this survey. Other highlights:

The number of corporate employers with policies and programs for hiring people with disabilities has increased substantially, from 46 percent to a current 57 percent.

One of the most dramatic findings of this survey is that the number of companies that say accommodations have been made in the workplace has almost doubled since 1986. More than eight out of ten (81%) managers now say changes have been made as compared to 51 percent in 1986.

However, the number of companies who have hired people with disabilities has scarcely changed. The number is up only very slightly to 64 percent in 1995 from 62 percent in 1986. While this overall increase is insignificant, among the larger and medium sized companies the change has been more pronounced. On the other hand smaller companies show a decrease from 54 percent to a current 48 percent.

Corporate managers attitudes toward the job performance of employees with disabilities are generally very positive. Very few (3% say only fair) give these employees negative marks. Furthermore, bringing more people with disabilities into the workforce is seen as potential; fully 73 percent of employers see it that way. Comparably large numbers of employers also say that their employees would support policies to increase the number of people with disabilities.

Three quarters (75%) of the managers say they are likely to make greater efforts to hire people with disabilities in the next three years. Almost all corporate managers say that there will be at least the same amount of opportunity for people with disabilities. No one said that these opportunities would lessen.

The picture painted by this survey is not all positive towards employment of people with disabilities. The most important negative result involves costs.

Twice as many managers today as compared to 1986 (27% vs. 14%) say that the average cost of employing a person with a disability is greater than employing a person without a disability. However, by an 82 percent to 5 percent margin, the top managers and EEO managers also say that these costs will be worth it.

It is important to note that the costs of accommodation seem to be fairly modest. Among those executives who could provide figures, the median figure per accommodation is $223 per employee.

The direct impact of the ADA is difficult to gauge. However, the overwhelming majority of corporate employers are strongly supportive of the ADA. Knowledge and awareness of the law are nearly unanimous, as is support for its basic provisions. However, most managers also say that it has had no direct impact on their companies as yet.

A large majority thinks that the ADA should not be changed. Only 12 percent think that the law should be weakened or even repealed. Eight percent say it should be strengthened.

Those surveyed say that because of the ADA their costs to accommodate people with disabilities have increased. However, most say that the costs have increased only a little. This echoes the other results in the survey.

Generally, the corporate managers are strongly supportive of the basic ideas of the ADA even if they also say that the law has had little direct impact. Contrary to some reports in the media, there is no sign of a corporate backlash against ADA. Change has occurred and seems likely to continue to do so in the future.

FALLACY AND TRUTH ABOUT THE ADA
BY JUSTIN DART
All of the current attacks on the ADA pander to one basic fallacy which is seldom spoken but deeply rooted in the attitudinal heritage of every culture.

Fallacy: People with serious disabilities are not fully human. They form a small minority whose fate is only marginally relevant to the concerns of ordinary people. The old approach: They are possessed by devils. Kill them. Banish them. Let them starve. The "enlightened" approach: They are tragic victims. Take care of them through welfare and charity. Give the presentable ones something to do, hire the handicapped. Keep the ugly and the "crazy" ones out of sight.

Truth: Science is creating a new human being. We live twice as long as we once did. Disability used to signal the end of active life. Now it is a common characteristics of a normal lifespan. Sooner or later it will occur in the lives of most people, surely in the life of every family.

Almost all new humans, including those with severe disabilities, have the potential to achieve far greater levels of productivity and prosperity than our strongest, smartest pre-science ancestors. Yet for the vast majority, with and without disabilities, that magnificent potential remains unfulfilled, because we allow obsolete attitudes to limit new abilities.

Fallacy: The ADA costs too much. It will bankrupt businesses and communities.

Truth: There have been no bankruptcies, no serious economic problems caused by the ADA. Not one. There never will be. The ADA specifically states that no public entity or business can be forced to do anything that will result in an undue financial burden. The ADA states that when necessary alternative services can be delivered to citizens with disabilities in ways that are equitable and cost effective.

Seventy percent of working age Americans with disabilities are unemployed. Millions are forced to depend on public or private welfare. President George Bush estimated that this costs our nation almost $200 billion cash every year. Who pays? Who else? Individual tax payers, businesses, families.

Historically, every time America has extended civil rights to another oppressed minority, the entire nation has prospered. The ADA clears the way for the members of our poorest, most welfare dependent minority to work, to pay taxes, to be customers and full, contributing participants in their communities.

Fallacy: The ADA will cause an avalanche of litigation and frivolous claims.

Truth: No avalanche. As of January 1, 1995, less than one fiftieth of one percent of the entities covered by the ADA had actually been sued under the law. Of course there have been a few frivolous claims. Every new law is tested. Every right Americans have is subject to occasional abuse.

Fallacy: The ADA signals "The Death of Common Sense." It imposes rigid, irrational regulations on businesses and communities.

Truth: Written in cooperation with the business oriented Bush administration, the ADA is a model of common sense, free enterprise civil rights law. It provides regulatory guidelines, but gives business owners and local community officials unprecedented discretion to ask and to answer the most important questions: "Can we afford this accommodation?" "Is there another way to provide equality cheaper?" "Is this the most qualified person for the job?"

Fallacy: The ADA definition of disability is "loosely written." All kinds of people are claiming to have disabilities that do not fit traditional definitions.

Truth: The traditional definitions are wrong. There are far more people with real disabilities than Americans thought - 49 million and going up. There are far more kinds of disabilities and discrimination than Americans thought. The major component of the ADA definition of disability is simple and clear: "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities." It allows courts, public officials, businesspersons and ordinary citizens to make common sense decisions based on individual reality.

The truth is that ADA does not need to be trashed - or rewritten. It needs to be implemented. The world is watching. Will we use science and free enterprise to empower the new human? Failure is unthinkable. Success will mean the culture of our dreams.

FEDERAL DISABILITY POLICIES: At Cross Purposes
By Carolyn L. Weaver
Five years ago, proponents of the ADA - the most sweeping piece of legislation in history for people with disabilities - said that the legislation brought the promise of jobs as well as independence, freedom of choice, and access to "mainstream" America. Since work is the key to economic well-being in our society, whether the ADA delivers on its promise of jobs will be critical to its overall success.

While it is too soon to point to any empirical findings, there unfortunately is little reason to believe that the effect of the ADA on the employment and wages of people with disabilities will be nearly as great as envisioned. On the contrary, there is good reason to believe that the ADA will be harmful to the employment opportunities of people who are most disadvantaged in the job market. The reason is quite simple: the ADA imposes costly and uncertain obligations on employers contemplating hiring (or laying off) people disabilities, yet does nothing to enhance the skills disabled people bring to the job market.

People with less severe disabilities, who already have jobs or who are well equipped to get them - especially those who are willing and able to press their claims before the EEOC - will no doubt benefit. But for people with severe disabilities, poor education, few work skills, and little or no work experience - those most in need of a "leg up" in the job market - the ADA runs the very real risk of undermining employment prospects.

This is not to disparage the worthy goals of the ADA. Few would deny that disabled Americans should have the same rights and opportunities as other Americans to compete in the job market. So too, few would question the occurrence of outright discrimination and the potential benefits of a civil rights measure to rectify that discrimination. But there is a hitch in applying traditional civil rights measures to people with disabilities. Unlike race, the minority classification that gave rise to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the condition of disability itself generally (not always) limits work ability. Disabilities tend to reduce productivity on the job, limit the time that can be devoted to the job, or limit the jobs individuals are capable of performing. Without adjustments in the job or the work place, a disabled individual may be unable to perform all the job-related tasks, or even the essential tasks, of the job as well as other workers or applicants.

Congress failed to face this issue head-on, either by measures to enhance the skills or capabilities of people with disabilities, reduce the barriers to part-time or low-wage work, or subsidize employers' adjustment costs. Instead, Congress simply mandated that employers provide "reasonable accommodations" to "qualified individuals with disabilities." (Needless to say, armies of federal bureaucrats, labor attorneys, personnel managers, vocational experts, and a newly emerging industry of ADA consultants, along with more than a few federal judges, are busy trying to sort out the meaning of these terms.) While some disabled workers will surely benefit, there are no assurances that these benefits will exceed the social costs. And sadly, the employment opportunities of low-skilled workers with disabilities - whose employment prospects are already restricted by minimum wage laws and other mandated benefits - will be further diminished.

The early experience at the EEOC is revealing. Of the 45,000 complaints involving employment discrimination under the ADA (filed as of March 31), fully half allege wrongful discharge by people who already had jobs and were attempting to hold onto them. This compares to 11 percent alleging hiring violations and 8 percent alleging pay or promotion violations. In contrast to what in the popular press has become the stereotype of a person with a disability - someone who has, say, blindness or deafness, a mobility impairment requiring the use of a wheelchair, or mental retardation - people alleging back impairments are at the top of the list of complainants, accounting for one out of five cases filed to date. (Interestingly, of the 25,000 cases thus far resolved, one-third were found to have no reasonable cause and close to half were closed for administrative reasons).

Ironically, as private businesses are burdened with the responsibilities attendant to carrying out a law intended to promote employment, the Social Security Administration is busy writing disability checks to ever-growing numbers of people who do not work and, in all probability, never will. In Year Five of the ADA, the number of people who receiving cash benefits from SSA based on a disability stands at 10 million, up from 7 million in 1990, at an annual cost of $64 billion. Including the costs of publicly-funded health care, the federal tab now hovers around $100 billion.

Despite improvements in science and medicine, in technology, in rehabilitation, and in the labor market itself, people are finding their way onto the disability rolls earlier in life (generally on the basis of mental rather than physical impairments) and staying longer. For these people, the ADA amounts to an entitlement to something they will not use - at least not until the gains from work relative to non-work are altered sufficiently.

As it stands, the nation's two biggest commitments to people with disabilities - the ADA and the Social Security disability programs - operate at cross purposes. The ADA is based on the premise that people with disabilities, even severe disabilities, can, if provided the right environment, work and make lives for themselves and their families, and participate in "mainstream" America. SSA's disability programs are based on the premise that people with disabilities cannot work and need to be provided cash assistance, very likely for the rest of their lives. Surely the reality lies somewhere in between.