"Does not discriminate on the basis of disability"
Plutonian_Persona
Deinonychus
Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 348
Location: Somewhere In The Kuiper Belt
Many of the jobs, such as teaching DD kids and library jobs, that I have tried applying for require a driver's license, which is literally the only requirement that I do not meet for candidacy. I have applied for them anyway on the off chance that someone would forego this prerequisite and interview me, but to no avail.
My problem is that driving is very hazardous duty due to my seizures (which are stress-based) and depth perception issues. It seems to me that requiring a driver's license is a subtle form of discrimination based on disability, if a person would otherwise be able to perform the necessary functions of the job in another manner. For example, the library jobs that require a DL are outreach positions that travel to various branches, which I could do very easily by bus.
Does anyone else share my viewpoint that requiring a DL is discriminatory when one can find another, reliable mode of transportation?
_________________
"I love those who yearn for the impossible":Goethe.
"For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure": Emerson.
My problem is that driving is very hazardous duty due to my seizures (which are stress-based) and depth perception issues. It seems to me that requiring a driver's license is a subtle form of discrimination based on disability, if a person would otherwise be able to perform the necessary functions of the job in another manner. For example, the library jobs that require a DL are outreach positions that travel to various branches, which I could do very easily by bus.
Does anyone else share my viewpoint that requiring a DL is discriminatory when one can find another, reliable mode of transportation?
Yep, it is. You could request accommodation under the ADA, but you have to get hired to do that. Chances are that they'll unofficially screen your ap out if you self-identify a disability. Yes that's illegal, but that appears to be the way it works. You'd have a hard time proving it.
Wish I could contribute something more positive.
Plutonian_Persona
Deinonychus
Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 348
Location: Somewhere In The Kuiper Belt
My problem is that driving is very hazardous duty due to my seizures (which are stress-based) and depth perception issues. It seems to me that requiring a driver's license is a subtle form of discrimination based on disability, if a person would otherwise be able to perform the necessary functions of the job in another manner. For example, the library jobs that require a DL are outreach positions that travel to various branches, which I could do very easily by bus.
Does anyone else share my viewpoint that requiring a DL is discriminatory when one can find another, reliable mode of transportation?
Yep, it is. You could request accommodation under the ADA, but you have to get hired to do that. Chances are that they'll unofficially screen your ap out if you self-identify a disability. Yes that's illegal, but that appears to be the way it works. You'd have a hard time proving it.
Wish I could contribute something more positive.
It definitely is a vicious circle and one that makes absolutely no sense at all.
Nan, I love your avatar by the way!
_________________
"I love those who yearn for the impossible":Goethe.
"For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure": Emerson.
Plutonian_Persona,
Try going to the "department of motor vehicles" whatever that is called in your area. It could be called BMV, DMV, etc... Ask them for a state identity card. They offer them in California, so I imagine they must elsewhere. They should in EVERY way be as legitimate as a drivers license. They require the SAME backup, and checks, and are issued by the SAME place. If that fails, try to get a passport from the postoffice.
That will likely cost $20-$35 and could take up to 3 weeks, BUT.... this would remove any reasonable claim they could make against you.
Plutonian_Persona
Deinonychus
Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 348
Location: Somewhere In The Kuiper Belt
Try going to the "department of motor vehicles" whatever that is called in your area. It could be called BMV, DMV, etc... Ask them for a state identity card. They offer them in California, so I imagine they must elsewhere. They should in EVERY way be as legitimate as a drivers license. They require the SAME backup, and checks, and are issued by the SAME place. If that fails, try to get a passport from the postoffice.
That will likely cost $20-$35 and could take up to 3 weeks, BUT.... this would remove any reasonable claim they could make against you.
I have my Colorado State ID card, but not the passport. The problem is that these places actually want one to have the ability to drive. Another example would be the gifted and talented school that I interviewed at in August. I did not fit with the needs of 2 of the 3 teachers that needed T.A.s, but I was perfect for the third teacher except that he needed someone to drive his class around on field trips.
_________________
"I love those who yearn for the impossible":Goethe.
"For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure": Emerson.
Plutonian,
The outreach job would probably not fall under the ADA. It would really depend on whether driving was considered an essential part of the job function, why it was considered an essential function and how it was worded on the Job Description. In the case of Library Outreach, I know that the Librarians here at work have to transport boxes of materials to the schools and branches when they do outreach. They also take props with them when doing story-times. This would not be practical with public trans. Sometimes they also have to be at several places in quick succession, which you cannot always do with public trans.
As for the T.A. this one seems a little more fuzzy to me. If that is an essential function of the job, then yes, but I cannot for the life of me see how driving is an essential function of being a T.A. Sounds more like he needed a bus driver.
I know here at my library we have some job descriptions that state that a driver's license is required and some that just state reliable transportation. The guards, for instance, drive the van to make deposits and to City Hall to pick up paperwork. They are required to have a valid driver's license. The library assistants on the other hand just need a reliable means to get to work because they are not required to do any driving on the clock.
_________________
And the world is queer
And the human is strangest of all
Plutonian_Persona
Deinonychus
Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 348
Location: Somewhere In The Kuiper Belt
Thanks Brooks! Your explanation of why Library Outreach assistants need a driver's license actually makes a lot of sense. I know that I wouldn't want to be transporting three or four boxes of materials to different schools/libraries on the bus or light rail within a constrained time period. I'm just hoping that the "Educational Library Assistant" position for which I am applying, and didn't have a DL as a requirement, wasn't a misprint!
_________________
"I love those who yearn for the impossible":Goethe.
"For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure": Emerson.
Try going to the "department of motor vehicles" whatever that is called in your area. It could be called BMV, DMV, etc... Ask them for a state identity card. They offer them in California, so I imagine they must elsewhere. They should in EVERY way be as legitimate as a drivers license. They require the SAME backup, and checks, and are issued by the SAME place. If that fails, try to get a passport from the postoffice.
That will likely cost $20-$35 and could take up to 3 weeks, BUT.... this would remove any reasonable claim they could make against you.
I have my Colorado State ID card, but not the passport. The problem is that these places actually want one to have the ability to drive. Another example would be the gifted and talented school that I interviewed at in August. I did not fit with the needs of 2 of the 3 teachers that needed T.A.s, but I was perfect for the third teacher except that he needed someone to drive his class around on field trips.
In some, probably ALL, states in the U.S., it is ILLEGAL to drive many strangers around! That is true of California and Indiana. You need a special class license, or HOV classification, and may need special insurance or a waiver.
Heck, SOMETHING sounds off there. They will pass up a good teacher because s/he can't drive!?!?
BTW the state ID card is good enough. I'm not suggesting that a passport would help after that. The passport was simply a fallback if you couldn't get the ID.
ANYWAY, I wish you luck.
Plutonian_Persona
Deinonychus
Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 348
Location: Somewhere In The Kuiper Belt
Heck, SOMETHING sounds off there. They will pass up a good teacher because s/he can't drive!?!?
ANYWAY, I wish you luck.
Tell me about, a lot of the interviews that I have had lately have had very thin excuses not to hire me, even though I am a very highly qualified candidate. I don't understand it, especially since having 26 interviews over the past two years has FINALLY gotten me used to being around people and the things that go with it (eye contact, gestures, etc.). The entire job process is just one big headache: I'm Sisyphus rolling his rock up the hill!
Thanks for the luck, any little bit coming my way is appreciated.
_________________
"I love those who yearn for the impossible":Goethe.
"For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure": Emerson.
For better or worse, the ADA is written only to prohibit discrimination against people that can do the job with reasonable accomodation. So someone that can program or do computer art but who is in a wheel chair must be given reasonable accomodation (ramps, bathroom, elevators, special desk). But if a person can't perform the listed responsibilities, then ADA probably won't cover it.
The trick is to find something you can do, and show that you do it so well that they want to hire you. Easier said than done, I know. Hang in there buddy, something is coming your way.
WOW, I have used that SAME idea about MY life!
BTW Monty is wrong! The idea is that they are not supposed to discriminate unless you can do the job. I have seen SLOW students that where given INCREDIBLE accomodations! And some businesses have gone BANKRUPT providing accomodations for handicapped people like wheelchair bound. WHEN is the last time a teacher drove a bus? Frankly, I don't remember it EVER happening with me! I haven't even had that many field trips, and NONE were really educational.
I saw one student that could probably take a DAY to write a line of code. I mean if you have to look at like 196pt fonts(NOT an exageration, in fact that was because he used a magnifying lens(With an ocular lens on it)), FORGET IT! LOST CAUSE! How many worthwhile students were denied access?
BTW Monty is wrong! The idea is that they are not supposed to discriminate unless you can do the job. I have seen SLOW students that where given INCREDIBLE accomodations! And some businesses have gone BANKRUPT providing accomodations for handicapped people like wheelchair bound. WHEN is the last time a teacher drove a bus? Frankly, I don't remember it EVER happening with me! I haven't even had that many field trips, and NONE were really educational.
I saw one student that could probably take a DAY to write a line of code. I mean if you have to look at like 196pt fonts(NOT an exageration, in fact that was because he used a magnifying lens(With an ocular lens on it)), FORGET IT! LOST CAUSE! How many worthwhile students were denied access?
Um - I think you have gotten the concept backwards. They are not supposed to discriminate against a person unless they can do the job? That makes no sense. Discrimination against unqualified applicants is ok. A blind person is not qualified to pilot an airplane, and can't use the ADA to try to get a pilot's job. A person that has a CPA certificate and walks with a limp cannot be discriminated against for that reason - they are qualified, and should be hired if they are the most qualified.
The law prohibits discrimination against qualified employees:
* Making existing facilities used by employees readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities.
* Job restructuring, modifying work schedules, reassignment to a vacant position;
* Acquiring or modifying equipment or devices, adjusting or modifying examinations, training materials, or policies, and providing qualified readers or interpreters.
http://www.eeoc.gov/types/ada.html
In the short run, some expensive modifications needed to be made to accomodate our wheelie citizens. In the long run, the ADA will change how buildings and other infrastructure are designed, and it eventually won't add much in the way of cost.
BTW Monty is wrong! The idea is that they are not supposed to discriminate unless you can do the job. I have seen SLOW students that where given INCREDIBLE accomodations! And some businesses have gone BANKRUPT providing accomodations for handicapped people like wheelchair bound. WHEN is the last time a teacher drove a bus? Frankly, I don't remember it EVER happening with me! I haven't even had that many field trips, and NONE were really educational.
I saw one student that could probably take a DAY to write a line of code. I mean if you have to look at like 196pt fonts(NOT an exageration, in fact that was because he used a magnifying lens(With an ocular lens on it)), FORGET IT! LOST CAUSE! How many worthwhile students were denied access?
Um - I think you have gotten the concept backwards. They are not supposed to discriminate against a person unless they can do the job? That makes no sense. Discrimination against unqualified applicants is ok. A blind person is not qualified to pilot an airplane, and can't use the ADA to try to get a pilot's job. A person that has a CPA certificate and walks with a limp cannot be discriminated against for that reason - they are qualified, and should be hired if they are the most qualified.
The law prohibits discrimination against qualified employees:
* Making existing facilities used by employees readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities.
* Job restructuring, modifying work schedules, reassignment to a vacant position;
* Acquiring or modifying equipment or devices, adjusting or modifying examinations, training materials, or policies, and providing qualified readers or interpreters.
http://www.eeoc.gov/types/ada.html
In the short run, some expensive modifications needed to be made to accomodate our wheelie citizens. In the long run, the ADA will change how buildings and other infrastructure are designed, and it eventually won't add much in the way of cost.
OK, I GIVE! I got that backwards.(I slipped up) As for the "won't add much", it will. People pay for real estate in terms of square feet. The BASIC accomodations for wheelchairs over time are possibly dozens of square feet. the short term costs can be substantial, and are even higher when you take downtime into account.
No problem. I occasionally glitch up, and read a sentence I wrote several times, not understanding it when it is right (or not spotting a glaring difference between what I meant and what I wrote).
We'll just have to disagree on the costs. I read a number of case studies dealing with compliance with various laws (US vs. Japan), and the industry in the US tends to get dramatic about the cost. Whether its reducing exposure to vinyl chloride, adding safety belts to cars or improving mpg, or whatever, the US lobbyists scream about how it will drive prices up incredibly high, and at the end of the day, it doesn't.
And ultimately, I see architectural accessibility as a civil rights issue. One argument against ending slavery was the economic cost that would be imposed on the economy of the South. Rather than accept that cost, the southerners insisted on adding a devastating war to their bill. Architectural exclusion of the handicapped is maybe not as severe as that peculiar institution of old, but the costs are a tiny fraction of one percent of our economy.
We'll just have to disagree on the costs. I read a number of case studies dealing with compliance with various laws (US vs. Japan), and the industry in the US tends to get dramatic about the cost. Whether its reducing exposure to vinyl chloride, adding safety belts to cars or improving mpg, or whatever, the US lobbyists scream about how it will drive prices up incredibly high, and at the end of the day, it doesn't.
And ultimately, I see architectural accessibility as a civil rights issue. One argument against ending slavery was the economic cost that would be imposed on the economy of the South. Rather than accept that cost, the southerners insisted on adding a devastating war to their bill. Architectural exclusion of the handicapped is maybe not as severe as that peculiar institution of old, but the costs are a tiny fraction of one percent of our economy.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate some of that. I even got a taste of the problems. I had to be pushed, in a wheel chair, in the airport about 4 different times. And I was exposed to ****IDIOTS****! ONE moron even kept hiting my leg, and saying I should move. My leg was STIFF, almost one big clot, and I was in an area that was set aside for people with such problems, etc... One guy even kept pushing me into a door as I kept yelling for him to stop. WHY is it so hard for them to understand that STOP means STOP, and that they are pushing me because I can't walk, and I can't walk because I can't move my leg, and it is in PAIN!?!?
Of course, some laws are STUPID! I once had to park over a block away from a hospital(and FORGO parking in the handicaped spot because I didn't have a plate). It took like an hour to walk to the hospital. You see, I have arthritis, and had SEVERE sciatica! Both WERE diagnosed, by the way, and the arthritis showed up on XRAY, and I had physical therapy for the sciatica(Cervical and Lumbar vertebra proved THAT also), just so I don't look like a hypocondriac.
I almost pride myself on having a taste of almost every situation you could name. You might be hard pressed to find one that hasn't affected me.
As for the autistic things, I've probably had about 1/3rd to 1/2 of the ones people here talk about. SPD/ APD/ NVLD/ OCD/ ADD/etc... Even my MOTHER remembered how I spoke of "sensory skewing" when I was SIX. I was diagnosed with ADHD. Anyone that knew me as a kid would tell you I had OCD. My "body language" is off, and I openly dispute its existence(as far as arm folding, etc...). As for the APD? I have a hard enough time when things are quiet. if I am in a noisy restaurant, 5 people could communicate around my table freely, and I hear practically NOTHING from them. I wouldn't even mention it if others here haven't. And YEP, I believe I have AS, but that is more involved than these others.
I've been lucky in that I survived the stupidity of the "pushers", and eventually healed to a degree, and the autistic problems can be hidden, but can appreciate the need for the ADA.
It sounds like the OP is applying for jobs that are looking for someone who can drive as part of the job description.
If a job just says, "reliable transportation" and doesn't discuss driving, this means it's a way of "threatening" applicants that they must be punctual and not give excuses.
As far as "driving strangers", where I have lived, you don't need a special license but adequate insurance. This is also not really kosher because if you're driving as part of your job then any accident or liability should the job's responsibility. My son's school has field trips and doesn't employ the school buses for them, they ask parents to drive. and then they ask for insurance.