29

Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 26 (2007) 29–37 IOS Press

Public views on employment of people with intellectual disabilities Philip Burgea,b,∗ , H´el`ene Ouellette-Kuntza,b,c and Rosemary Lysaght b,d a

Department of Psychiatry, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada South Eastern Ontario Community-University Research Alliance in Intellectual Disabilities, Canada c Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada d School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada b

Accepted /Revised October 2006

Abstract. Understanding the views of the public is an important factor in building effective programs that promote integrated employment. This article presents the results of a study conducted by an alliance of researchers and community partners to elucidate public perceptions regarding work inclusion of people with an intellectual disability. The study consisted of a telephone poll conducted throughout a large region of the Province of Ontario, Canada. A majority of the 680 respondents believed that some form of integrated work is best for most adults with an intellectual disability. About 87% of respondents believed that hiring people with intellectual disabilities would not negatively affect the image of workplaces. Respondents indicated that a lack of employment training programs for people with intellectual disabilities was a major obstacle to increased inclusion. Keywords: Employment, work, attitudes, intellectual disabilities, developmental disability, mental retardation, integration, inclusion

1. Introduction Employment is a central feature of life for the majority of adults. Work provides an opportunity for economic self-sufficiency, fosters social connectedness to others in society, contributes to a sense of dignity and self worth, and serves as a means of self-expression [3, 6]. Research indicates that the perceived benefits of work for persons with intellectual disabilities 1 (ID) are similar to those of the non-disabled population; namely, the sense of feeling productive and staying busy, having relationships with co-workers, feeling important, increased income, and having opportunities for continued growth and advancement [7,11,14]. There are also ∗ Address for correspondence: Philip Burge, Queen’s University, c/o Ongwanada, 191 Portsmouth Ave, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7M 8A6. Tel.: +1 613 548 4417; Fax: +1 613 549 7387; E-mail: [email protected]. 1 ID is increasingly the term which is replacing developmental disabilities (Canada), learning disabilities (UK) and mental retardation (USA).

economic benefits to society of employment for persons with disabilities, reflected in lower support costs and income from tax revenues paid by those earning over the minimum wage [15,29,35]. In most western economies, however, people with ID are under-represented in the labour market. Reported employment rates for the general populations of the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom range from 75% to 95% [24,32,33], while rates for persons with ID in those countries, are reported at anywhere from 9–28%, depending on the location, sample composition and definition of “work” [25,28,36]. Few of these employees work full time [10,28,36] and the majority work in service occupations, which offer low wages and little opportunity for advancement [9,10,17, 18,36]. Research has yet to report on rates of adults with ID who are potentially employable and seeking work. While a number of sheltered employment options remain for people with ID, the trend over the past 30 years has been to move people into mainstream employment

1052-2263/07/$17.00  2007 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved

30

P. Burge et al. / Public views on employment of people with intellectual disabilities

settings [19]. Supported employment has offered opportunities for increasing the number of workers with disabilities who otherwise could not enter mainstream employment. The movement towards integrated employment suggests that the general public will come into increasingly greater contact with people with ID as potential employers, supervisors, or as co-workers. Given the predominance of persons with ID in service sector jobs, the public may also be provided services by people with ID. Public attitudes toward the integration of workers with ID are salient on several levels. Successful employment outcomes depend on the availability of suitable employment options, the willingness of employers to hire, and the presence of adequate support systems in the workplace [5,18]. In addition, for true inclusion to occur, workers with special needs must become part of the workplace and interact meaningfully with other workers [14,18,21]. Despite the growing recognition of the role of attitudes in employment, research on attitudes towards workers with ID in particular has been rather limited. Several studies have addressed employer views, and have revealed that favourable attitudes towards hiring are associated with previous contact with people with disabilities, larger company size, and female gender [5,16,22,26,27]; however there remains a paucity of research examining the attitudes of co-workers or the general public towards people with ID in mainstream jobs. A number of questions addressing attitudes towards employment were included in a poll of the general public on attitudes toward the inclusion in society of people with ID conducted in the fall of 2004. Results relating to the public’s views on employment for people with ID, including perceived impacts and barriers, were analyzed and are reported here.

2.2. Instrument The questionnaire, used in the Multinational Study of Attitudes toward Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities and originally developed by researchers at the Center for Social Development and Education at the University of Massachusetts at Boston [31], was modified for use in Ontario. Developed for administration by telephone, the interview measured public perceptions of the competence of individuals with ID and beliefs about their inclusion in the workplace, community, and schools. Modifications were made to better reflect Canadian concepts and common terms. Items were added to the employment section and a social distance scale [2] was included. The concept of social distance expresses a willingness to recognize, live near, or be associated with persons belonging to different groups. The modified survey was pilot tested with five adults and completion required about 16 minutes. 2.3. Participants A stratified random sample of adults residing in the six county area of Southeastern Ontario, population 519,200 [12], was obtained. Following stratification of the region into 27 geographic areas, a random telephone contact list of individuals to be called was created using InfoCanada’s electronic databank of telephone white pages residential phone numbers (i.e., Select Phone Canada). To ensure representation from each area, sampling across strata was based on the following quota rule: 1 in 440 households or a minimum of 25 households per geographic area. In total 2949 potential respondents were contacted. The final sample included 680 respondents and the proportion from each county very closely approximated the proportion of citizens living within each county of the region. The actual completion rate was 23%. The margin of error for a sample of 680 is ± 3 percentage points for most responses, 19 times out of 20. 2.4. Analysis

2. Method 2.1. Objectives The objectives of the study were to determine the public’s perception of the best type of employment for adults with ID, and to explore views on the perceived effects of integrated employment and barriers to such inclusion. We also examined whether opinions were associated with respondent characteristics.

Responses were tabulated to reflect the public’s perception of (a) the best type of employment for most adults with ID, (b) the impacts of people with ID working alongside workers without ID, and (c) barriers to workplace inclusion. The relationship between perceptions and respondent characteristics was examined using proportions, Chi square statistics, odds ratios and confidence intervals. A significance level of 0.05 was set a priori for all analyses conducted. All statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS version 12 for Windows.

P. Burge et al. / Public views on employment of people with intellectual disabilities

3. Results Respondents were presented with four types of employment and asked to indicate which was best for most adults with ID. Of the four options presented to respondents, an “unskilled job with workers without ID” was most often identified as the best type of employment for most adults with ID (43.7%). Less than 1% believed most adults with ID should not work (see Fig. 1). To better understand the characteristics of those who did not favour integration, further analyses were conducted. Respondent surveys were divided into two groups based on the response concerning the “best type of employment for workers with ID”: integrated employment and segregated employment. Respondents who favored a segregated workplace for most adults with ID (34.1%) differed from those favouring an integrated workplace on a number of sociodemographic characteristics. They tended to be male, older, have a lower level of education, and not be employed (see Table 1). No significant differences were observed based on level of income, geography, or having a family member with ID. Those who favoured segregated employment were also more likely to perceive most adults with ID to function at a moderate to severe range of disability, and to report a higher degree of social distance (see Table 2). When presented with seven potentially negative impacts when people with ID are hired into jobs and working alongside individuals without ID, the majority of respondents (72%) believed that workers with ID would likely require more monitoring to ensure the job is correctly completed. However, a minority of between approximately 12–45% rated the other six as “likely” or “very likely” to occur (Table 3). Respondents who favoured segregated employment were two to over three and a half times more likely to identify these potential impacts as likely or very likely, and all between group differences were significant at the 0.01 level (Table 4). Respondents were also asked about views on four possible major obstacles to hiring people with an ID. The two possible major obstacles most frequently endorsed were “there are no job training programs in the community to prepare them for work” (71.7%) and “bosses thinking people with ID don’t have the required job skills” (69.2%) (Table 5). Approximately half of respondents endorsed the view that negative attitudes of other employees would be a barrier to hiring.

Skilled Job w ith Should not w ork 0.5% Workers w ithout ID 21.7%

31

Special Workshop w ith Other People w ith ID 34.1%

Unskilled job w ith w orkers w ithout ID 43.7%

* Excluded were 55 individuals out of 677 respondents who did not know how to respond (47) or refused to answer (8).

Fig. 1. Views on best type of employment for most adults with ID (n = 622).

Differences in perceptions among respondents on the four potential major obstacles were analyzed according to respondents’ preferences for integrated or segregated employment for most adults with ID (Table 6). Only views on one obstacle, “people with ID have difficulty doing their job because of their ID”, were found to be significantly different between groups. Respondents who viewed segregated work as appropriate for most adults with ID were 1.51 times more likely to view this as an obstacle (df = 1, p = 0.04), although only 30% of that sample perceived it as a potential problem.

4. Discussion Measurements of public perceptions of integrated employment for people with ID can point to potential sources of societal support, as well as indicate specific challenges which must be considered when promoting inclusive employment. Never before has a level of support for integrated employment of people with ID been reported from a sizable sample of the Canadian public. Furthermore, the finding of the high level of support for integrated workplaces was not anticipated and can act as a baseline against which to compare subsequent similar investigations. The study also met its other objectives regarding exploring the respondents’ views of the impacts of integrated employment and possible barriers to achieving this. Nevertheless, the opinion poll results should be cautiously considered in light of potential limitations presented by the slight over-representation of female respondents, a group often reported to have more pro-social views.

32

P. Burge et al. / Public views on employment of people with intellectual disabilities Table 1 Differences in attitudes towards employment of adults with ID according to respondent characteristics Respondent characteristics

Gender (n = 617) Female Male

Best type of employment for most adults with ID1 Segregated2 Integrated3 n (%) n (%)

Odds ratio (95% confidence interval)

Significance value

χ2 = 9.875 d.f. = 1 p-value = 0.00

121 (58%) 89 (42%)

286 (70%) 121 (30%)

1 1.74 (1.23–2.46)

Age category (n = 601) 18–24 years 25–44 years 45–64 years 65+ years

11 (5%) 47 (23%) 80 (39%) 67 (33%)

27 (7%) 145 (37%) 153 (39%) 71 (18%)

1 0.79 (0.37–1.73) 1.28 (0.61–2.72) 2.31 (1.06–5.02)

Education level4 (n = 614) Low Medium High

94 (45%) 77 (37%) 38 (18%)

145 (36%) 156 (39%) 104 (26%)

1.77 (1.13–2.79) 1.35 (0.85–2.14) 1

84 (43%) 120 (57%)

266 (66%) 136 (34%)

1 2.64 (1.87–3.72)

Income level (n = 520)