Are all Autists unemployed?

Post Reply New Topic

Actually, I'm not saying I deserve disability. I'm not on disability, I'd rather work. I've never even applied. I'm capable of more. I am underemployed currently and am looking for a full time job. I'm also saying it doesn't matter, both liberals and conservatives perpetrate disability discrimination.
And yes, I cannot support liberals only because they may be (arguably) more amenable to disability rights. There are too many other things they believe that I can't swallow.
Also, I disagree that conservatives would take benefits away from those who really, truly do need them. They just want a more stringent vetting process to weed out those who are just being lazy (I know people like this).
As for how to weed out those truly in need from the lazy, I don't have an answer, and I'm not sure anyone does. No system will ever be perfect. I do believe that most everyone can do some type of work, it's just a matter of finding the right job for you.

This is why preventive medicine is a main feature of company-provided medical insurance policies, and also why elective procedures are not usually covered by those same policies.I doubt this statement, because there are enforceable laws mandating reasonable accommodations for handicapped employees.  I am not saying that what you said isn't true, but that it may not be true everywhere and all of the time.People should be hired for their abilities, not their disabilities.  By this, I mean that people with disabilities need not be hired if they lack the skills necessary for the job.Well now, there are people who have tried to defraud employers by claiming disabilities that they either did not have or could not prove they had -- people who "diagnose" themselves as aspies, for example.

There are many companies that reward employees for exposing "Fraud, Waste, and Abuse".  One type of fraud is filing false disability claims.  Thus, if the reward is 10% of the recoverable losses, and the recoverable losses total $100,000 (U.S.), then the whistle-blower stands to receive $10,000 for handing over a video recording of a supposedly disabled co-worker water-skiing at Lake Tahoe (to cite a recent real-world example).It's also a matter of being the only qualified person applying for that job.  As more people apply, the odds of any one person being selected randomly to fill that position decrease.  This is why applicants need to be more than just another warm body in the room -- they need skills, education, experience, and the right attitude.  They simply can not expect an employer to do anything more than provide a safe place to work at the local prevailing wage (with benefits, if any).

This thread

I'm not suggesting that fraud doesn't ever occur, only that it's not common enough to use it as an excuse for gutting programs or making them nearly impossible to qualify for.

As for 'that they couldn't prove', that's often a difficult situation for those who lack resources. I was pretty certain I was autistic years before I had a diagnosis to confirm it. I obviously had it the whole time so I was dealing with all the same issues only with no explanation. Had I not spent my last $2000 on pursuing testing I still wouldn't have a diagnosis, would this mean I don't have those struggles? Obviously not. So if I claimed it, I obviously wouldn't be attempting to defraud, it was true even if I couldn't prove it at the time.

When posters wish to act like they have more insight into what someone else is dealing with than that person themselves, I'm going to call BS. Posters who expect their issues to be sympathized with while slandering others as fakers and leeches will never earn my sympathy, it's hypocritical. If someone wants to claim that malingering is a wide-scale problem they should be able to show evidence of that or accept that they haven't made a point, just a strawman. The only way to actually make that point is to ensure everyone has equal access to diagnostic services to show that's fraud and not just people falling through the cracks in the system.

1. The word reasonable is such a vague and abstract term. Who defines this exactly? And, how effective is the americans with disabilities act anyway? Has it really helped those with disabilities get employed? What is the ratio of those who became employed under it vs those who didn't? Did things really change all that much since the passing of this law?

And, if I'm applying online which most employers require us to do how exactly do I use the disability act when it comes to their BS applications including the personality tests. None of the applications gives the option to invoke it in any kind of way. So, how does the disabilities act help us at all?

2. I assume you were a hiring manager at one point right? Did you just select for skills only? Or, did one's personality count as well? I assume you know they employers use personality tests right? And, employers use them to make their hiring decisions? Do you think the average autistic person has the "right" personality employers want?

What sort of answer was I supposed to put to the question "Do I believe that life is not fair?" Again, the question is to abstract and vague and context determines the answer.

Another thing, a lot of employers today want years of experience in a variety of skills. Let's say one skill they want is C#. They want 2-3 years of experience. I could know C#. I self-studied in the book. And, let's say I take an exam proving I know it. Would that be good enough for employers who not only want the skills but the experience as well?

This was one of the main things I needed guidance on over the years.

3. These are some of the accomodations I would need.

a. If I do anything wrong can you spell out what I did wrong, why was it was wrong and what steps I need to correct it in specific and concrete terms. Don't tell me to be more professional or I need to be more positive.

b. Can you state in specific terms what your performance metric and standards are? In other words, can you lay out in specific terms and concrete what your rules and standards are exactly?

c. You as the employer want me to take initiative. What are my constraints exactly? What is it that I'm required to do exactly? What is it that is not required? What is it that I'm authorized to do? What am I not authorized to do? Let's say I'm a janitor. Are there areas of the building I'm not allowed to go to clean? And, what is optional vs mandatory? If you say "I suggest you do ...." is your suggestion really something your requiring me to do or is it really a suggestion?

Another problem I have with taking initative is the assumption I would be able to see what needs to be done and do it. For one to do this, I would have to be extremly observant. I'm introspective, extremely so. Which means I'm in my own head for the most part. How do I get outside of my own head to be more observant if being observant is not part of my personality type? And, what do I observe to take this initiative? How do I know it is really supposed to be done and that I'm allowed and supposed to do it?

These are some of my issues.

4. Someone who is willing to explain the personality test questions and how to interpret them properly.

5. I've been told I overthink things and quit doing that even by professionals. Ok, and? This is like telling an overweight person they should lose weight. Ok, what methods can I use to quit overthinking? What specifically can I do exactly? Telling me to quit overthinking things is useless without some kind of concrete, specific, step by step plan of action.

Haha! So true

As a former whistleblower, I can tell you that not everything goes in the favor of the whistleblower. It can easily damage your career for life. You have to be very careful in the process if you decide to do so. The good ole’ boys system is still alive and well in some parts of the US. You would be shocked to know what sometimes gets done behind the scenes.

In my case, I had no choice but to do the right thing to protect the health of others. I was fired for it and partially blackballed in that area until I proved to the state that I was correct in doing what I did. I lost financially from the act, not gained. My only real gain was that I could sleep well at night knowing I had ethics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWuQVpBeqLs

I totally agree with you. Anyone who claims malingering is a wide scale issue should be able to prove this. And, malingering is a form of lying, correct? For one to lie there would have to be intent. The intent has to be proven. If anyone claims the other person(s) is lying or malingering then shouldn't they have to prove intent?

I am

I would agree. Even if they can't prove intent, they should at the very least be able to that some portion aren't legitimate to lend credibility to the idea. But, with neither aspect proven I can't pretend that it's a significant concern.

It just occurred to me that I might count as unemployed again. In theory I have an employer and they believe they will have a position for me to return to, but as long as Honda isn't building cars that position is only a hypothetical again.

It's weird to have a job, but not work, not have to go there and to not get paid at all, and to also have a source of income that certainly requires work, but doesn't really represent a lot of my time being tied up like a job and largely is on my own terms.

One of the tests social security does is to test for malingering.

[MOD]

I appreciate that emotions are running high, but let's cool our jets.

There's no need for rudeness or nastiness.

[/MOD]