Written evidence Ruth Tarlo (DEG0140)

1.               The following evidence was gathered through my PhD research at University of Nottingham, which was covered by ESRC Grant Number  ES/J500100/1. My thesis was submitted for examination and passed with minor corrections in November 2020. The PhD research was supervised by Professor Rachel Fyson and Dr Simon Roberts of University of Nottingham. My research focused on the experiences of people with mild learning difficulties who were looking for paid work and analysed their experiences in the context of recent government policy on the disability employment gap and on social justice.
2.               The research involved multiple qualitative interviews with 16 people with mild learning difficulties. The participants self-identified as having mild learning difficulties and were able to describe their mild learning difficulties to indicate cognitive impairments. They were all adults and were not eligible for or receiving adult social care. They were all willing and able to give informed consent to participate and were reminded of their right to withdraw from the research at each stage. They were all currently or recently looking for paid employment or self-employment. 14 of the participants were recruited through ‘gatekeeper’ organisations offering employability or wider social support to their local communities. The other two participants were recruited directly from posters in community centres. People with mild learning difficulties are largely neglected in research on employability and are considered to be hard to reach (Simmons et al, 2014).
3.               The conflation of ‘disability’ and ‘long-term health condition’ is apparent throughout government policy documents on the DEG. The central policy focus appears to be on encouraging employers to retain workers who have or develop ‘health conditions’, a focus that is largely irrelevant to people with learning difficulties.
4.               Although ‘learning disabilities’ and ‘learning difficulties’ were mentioned in the 2017 White Paper Improving Lives: the future of work, health and disability (DWP & DoH, 2017) there was no specific consideration of the boundaries or definition of either term. The White Paper acknowledged that people with “learning difficulties or with autism” had a lower employment rate than the average for disabled people and a figure of 24% was quoted. However, government information provided to employers, such as through the Disability Confident scheme, refers to learning disability without reference to medical or health sources or any other evidence base. The minimal information provided risks trivialising the experiences of people with learning difficulties and contributing to the failure to recognise their value. The failure to consider the barriers that people with mild learning difficulties face in looking for work or staying in work contributes to a culture that (wrongly) blames disabled people themselves for failing to obtain or retain employment.
5.               In recent years, a number of high-profile politicians and policy makers from government and opposition parties have suggested that employers be permitted to pay people with learning disabilities less than the national minimum wage (see for example, Private Eye, 2018; BBC, 2017; Bloom, 2017; Lyons, 2014). These proposals are predicated on grounds of weaker productivity or higher business ‘cost’, indicating that employers need “a financial incentive to take ‘the risk’ of hiring [disabled people]” (Ryan, 2019:61). Such pronouncements and proposals, which expose disabled people to a greater risk of exclusion from the labour market or exploitation by employers (Ryan, 2019), are insulting and damaging to disabled people. The disability PAY gap, a measure of inequality not mentioned in any of the policy documents even those directly referring to the DEG, is one consequence of this. The TUC estimates that the disability pay gap is widening, currently standing at 15.5%, equating to over £3000 a year, on average, a major contributor to the “financial stress experienced by disabled workers” (Roache, 2019:2). Office for National Statistics figures show a pay gap of almost 19% for people with “mental impairment” (Romei, 2019).
6.               Epidemiological research consistently indicates a link between mild learning difficulties and poverty, including the increased likelihood of long-term unemployment  (Emerson, 2007). Their increased risk of mental health problems are more likely to be attributable to social factors, such as experiences of bullying and discrimination and a lack of social protection, than to their cognitive impairments (Hatton et al, 2017).
7.               My research explored the some of the complexities surrounding the identification of people with mild learning difficulties relating to issues of diagnosis, boundaries and exclusion. The interviews with the participants revealed a high degree of ambivalence about disclosing their learning difficulties to potential employers, asking for support or identifying themselves as disabled. This ambivalence was clearly related to the negative responses that they had experienced, as well as to wider negative factors that stigmatise disability and penalise disabled people.
8.               I identified three types of ‘gap’ illustrated by the stories my participants told about their experiences of looking for work, being in work and leaving work. These gaps were titled ‘the support gap’, ‘the income gap’ and ‘the respect gap’. Examples presented here are from three participants (pseudonymised): Robbie, Jeff and Lillian.
9.               Robbie gained a temporary contract, with the help of a specialist employment and skills support organisation, to work on a supermarket checkout. His learning difficulties were clearly recognised at the start of the recruitment process, as the organisation was overtly supporting people with learning difficulties into paid work. Robbie also had a visible, facial psoriasis condition, exacerbated by stress, that would have been obvious to the employer.
10.           Robbie was aware of ‘small adjustments’ being made while he was in work, such as supervisors taking additional time to explain things to him and checking up on him. However, he found the work to be mostly straightforward and enjoyable. He was able to recount some stressful customer interactions but none that were overwhelming. He never abandoned his checkout till and was able to call for help from the supervisor when needed. His performance on the job was not only monitored by supervisors but also by the automated processes of his till which produced a regular report of his ‘scan rate’. Robbie described this in these terms: “It wasn’t low enough that they were worrying about firing me, but it was one of the, it was at the low end of acceptable”.
11.           Despite appearing to satisfy the employer’s requirements, Robbie’s contract was not renewed at the end of his three month contract. He said he received an apologetic letter from the employer, indicating, in Robbie’s words: “…on the run up to Christmas they binned me off in the, I think it was the.. September, because they were worried that I wouldn’t be able to cope with the Christmas rush”.
12.           It was clear from Robbie’s story that his disabilities were recognised by the employer, but far from this producing the support he needed to stay in work, such as ongoing reasonable adjustments or the offer of an alternative role, he was left with no job at all. It is probable that other staff would have been taken on to deal with the anticipated Christmas rush. Robbie expressed a fatalistic view of his experience and blamed himself, but there was nothing in his account to suggest that he failed to meet the work standards and expectations set out at the start of the contract. No doubt he would have found, as would anyone, that the pre-Christmas rush was a more stressful time than during the summer months.
13.           Given what the employer knew about Robbie from the start, it appears that he was given a temporary contract during a relatively quiet period with no long-term commitment of support. The employer benefited from being able to claim it was supporting the employment of disabled people. Many retailers make corporate social responsibility claims based on their employment practices. However, the employer had unfettered rights to end the contract after three months and may even have received a wage subsidy or other forms of government funding (Stafford, 2015).
14.           Robbie’s experience reinforced his sense that the employer did him a favour by taking him on, and that what happened was his own fault. Not only was his self-confidence hit, but his retail employability may have been reduced, given that his only paid work experience had ended at the start of the busiest retail period of the year.
15.           One of the ‘income gap’ stories was from Jeff, who was one of the few participants who had experienced periods of paid work lasting more than a few months. Jeff worked for many years as a cleaner. He had always worked part-time, often doing more than one job and always earning no more than the national minimum wage. Jeff experienced low pay, few hours of paid work and precarious contractual conditions, common experiences for people employed in cleaning work. Cleaning work provides very little income for people working an hour here and two hours there, even if they are working every day of the week, especially taking into account travel costs for moving between places of work. Jeff, in his late 50s at the time of the research, described the physical demands of three hours’ cleaning work as “hard”.
16.           One of the ‘respect gap’ stories was from Lillian, who described her experiences of bullying and abuse while working on supermarket checkouts. Lillian focused on the pressures associated with multi-tasking and working at high speed, highlighting personal relationships with co-workers and supervisors. She suggested that she did not have the “emotional capacity” to handle stressful situations. However, she also indicated multiple incidences where co-workers and managers denied that she was disabled and refused to recognise the severity of the barriers she faced. She appeared to conclude that she was not deserving of support and that working with other people was problematic and to be avoided, despite her experiences of working successfully in teams or social settings in other sectors.
17.           Lillian experienced a range of stressful situations at the supermarket checkout, including abuse from customers. She was required to stay at her till and call for help from her supervisor. This standard working arrangement puts the supervisor in a position of power over the checkout operator’s performance and effectiveness. It may provide opportunities for support, as Robbie found, but Lillian recounted with some distress that: “they wouldn’t answer their phones, they’d, you’d ring them and they just ignore you, if they didn’t like you, if they were pissed off with you, they would ignore you”.
18.           The behaviour of supervisors in this situation reflects their individual discretion but also the context of intense monitoring of working conditions. It is not difficult to imagine that Lillian’s calls for help could be miscast as poor productivity or a lack of capability, in the context of high pressure for multi-tasking and working at speed, especially in a culture of negative attitudes towards people with learning difficulties. It is the employer’s responsibility to take active steps to reduce such conflicts by recognising individual support needs and encouraging disclosure of disabilities and health conditions.
19.           These kinds of experience are difficult for people with mild learning difficulties to talk about in part because there are inadequate terms in use. The term ‘bullying’ is inadequate to cover workplace experiences of abuse and mistreatment (Fevre, 2012). The employer’s role in creating or enabling an environment where such abuse can take place is thereby obscured.
20.           These stories, and others presented in my thesis, illustrate how a lack of support, income and respect can cause long term damage for people with mild learning difficulties who are looking for paid work. My research also showed how participants’ efforts to find paid work were influenced by their individual relationships with DWP Jobcentre Plus work coaches and other employability services. Some participants praised the dedication of particular, individual work coaches, especially disability employment advisers, who went beyond the official remit of their role to seek out job opportunities and support for their clients. However, participants also indicated experiences of disrespect and a lack of support from Jobcentre Plus work coaches. They were distrustful of the administration of social security, displaying scepticism about the fair handling of applications, assessments and sanctions, and the timeliness and accuracy of payments.
21.           The participants’ stories presented in my thesis directly contradict the government’s claim to be promoting social justice and to be supporting disabled people and unemployed people into good work. Many of the injustices highlighted in my research are also connected to people with mild learning difficulties being uncounted (Cobham, 2020), whether in research, in policy discussions, in political debates or in wider public and media platforms.
22.           In a blog piece published in 2019 (Tarlo, 2019) I referred to a talk by Adichie (2009) in which she discusses the danger that a single and stereotyping story can reinforce power inequalities. I referred to the inclusion in the Work, Health and Disability White Paper (DWP& DoH, 2017) of one condescending story about a young man with learning disabilities. His success in gaining an unpaid work placement, which is followed by an apprenticeship, is presented as a story of hard work and deservingness. It implies that those who do not achieve are undeserving.
23.           People with mild learning difficulties are facing an increasingly challenging environment, exacerbated by the years of austerity. People with learning difficulties who are looking for work now face a new set of challenges in the era of Covid-19, including an expected sharp increase in unemployment and a deep recession, as well as the devastating impact of the pandemic on health and social care. There is a high risk that the unjust ways in which people with mild learning difficulties are treated by the welfare state and the injustices they experience in the labour market will be further exacerbated under these circumstances, with devastating consequences for their quality of life.
24.           My research highlights the gaps in support, income and respect that obstruct the route for people with mild learning difficulties into sustainable, fairly paid employment. These gaps increase the likelihood that they experience poverty, exploitation and discrimination. Current policy on the disability employment gap fails to address these issues.

References:

Adichie, C N (2009) The Danger of a Single Story, TEDGlobal, available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story/transcript

BBC (2017) Rosa Monckton: Let learning disabled work below minimum wage. BBC News, 2 March. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39138775 (accessed 25 April 2017).

Bloom D (2017) Top Labour MP blasted by his own party’s welfare chief over claim firms could pay disabled people under minimum wage. Mirror Newspaper, 26 September. Available at: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-labour-mp-shot-down-11239835.

Cobham A (2020) The Uncounted. Cambridge, UK ; Medford, MA, USA: Polity.

DWP and DoH (2017) Improving Lives: The Work, Health and Disability White Paper. London: The Stationery Office.

Emerson E (2007) Poverty and people with intellectual disabilities. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 13(2): 107–113. DOI: 10.1002/mrdd.20144.

Fevre R, Lewis D, Robinson A, et al. (2012) Trouble at Work. London: Bloomsbury.

Hatton C, Emerson E, Robertson J, et al. (2017) The mental health of British adults with intellectual impairments living in general households. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 30(1): 188–197. DOI: 10.1111/jar.12232.

Lyons J (2014) Lord Freud says disabled workers don’t deserve minimum wage - but Tories WON’T sack him. Mirror Newspaper, 15 October. Available at: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lord-freud-says-disabled-workers-4445349 (accessed 19 June 2020).

Private Eye (2018) Disability Benefit? Private Eye, 19 October.

Roache Q (2019) Disability employment and pay gaps. Trades Union Congress (TUC). Available at: https://www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/disability-employment-and-pay-gaps-2019.

Romei V (2019) Employment rises for disabled people but pay gap remains large. Financial Times, 2 December. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/5cca6580-150b-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385 (accessed 16 July 2020).

Ryan F (2019) Crippled: Austerity and the Demonization of Disabled People. London: Verso.

Simmons R, Thompson R and Russell L (2014) Education, Work and Social Change: Young People and Marginalization in Post-Industrial Britain. Houndmills, Basingstoke ; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Stafford B (2015) Why are the policies and organisations seeking to help disabled people access work failing? In: Grover C and Piggott L (eds) Disabled People, Work and Welfare: Is Employment Really the Answer? Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 69–86.

Tarlo R (2019) Challenging stories about work and unemployment. In: The Enquire Blog. Unpublished. Available at: http://rgdoi.net/10.13140/RG.2.2.13206.50243 (accessed 3 July 2020).

December 2020