Australian Network on Disability

During my extended leave, my partner and I spent 7 months in the UK and Europe.  We were very interested in gaining a better understanding of how businesses are responding to people with disability as employees and customers. 

Firstly, we made lots of observations and then spent some time with opinion leaders.  It was during a conversation with Phil Friend, a partner in the UK’s leading consultancy firm on disability, Churchill, Minty and Friend, that Phil remarked – “you are lucky in Australia you only have 200 years of history to change – we are trying to influence and change institutions that have 500 years entrenched culture”.

Phil is right - the youth of our country offers incredible potential to develop an inclusive society that capitalises on individual strengths and accommodates differences.  We have less history to undo and theoretically, should be much more open and responsive to change. 

Sadly, we are lagging behind other OECD countries in employment participation and the numbers of discrimination complaints in federal and state jurisdictions continue to rise.  Australian employers have had no leadership from government and little guidance on what they need to do. 

An overview of outstanding issues that we need leadership on from government

An ‘Acting Disability Discrimination Commissioner for 11 years

Australia has had an ‘Acting’ Disability Discrimination Commissioner for around 11 years!  This can only leave the impression that the role could not possibly be important. 

We are regularly told by diversity practitioners that it is difficult to get ‘business buy in’ to becoming barrier free to people with disability.  This is hardly surprising given the low priority it has been given by government. 

4 years and no resolution between the BCA and DDA

There has been a failure to provide standards for premises to resolve the Building Codes of Australia and the DDA.  Currently, there is no clear way to ensure that a building complies with the DDA. Public consultation was completed at the end of April 2004. 

This leaves businesses in a situation of risk and confusion.  It is easier for business to develop a ‘wait and see’ approach than to proceed with uncertainty.

We are regularly told of organisations that move into brand new buildings that are not accessible – this, -16 years after the DDA.

Amendments to the DDA

The Productivity Commission recommended amendments to the DDA (released in July 2004) have not progressed.  I include below, a key area of confusion for employers in relation to the DDA.  The government accepts this recommendation (in part) but, once again, employers are left with confusion arising from case law.

• Recommendation 8.1
  The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 should be amended to include a general duty to make reasonable adjustments.
  · Reasonable adjustments should be defined to exclude adjustments that would cause unjustifiable hardship.
  · The person or persons on whom the duty would fall should be identified.
  · Examples of how the duty might apply should be included in each area of the Act.

During my time in the UK, I met and interviewed Bob Niven, the CEO of the Disability Rights Commission (DRC) and I asked Bob what he identified as the key contributors to their success.  Bob said that they were able to use their legal powers to clarify and enforce the law.   The DRC funded 216 employment related court actions.  These cases, raised the profile of Disability Discrimination law and clarified aspects of the law.

In Australia, HREOC has no power to refer key cases to the High Court, although Commissioner Innes has requested this power in relation to the Transport Standards.  Bob Niven also told me that British employers who work hard to eliminate barriers to people with disability don’t have much regard for employers who ignore their obligations.  The DRC developed, in collaboration with employers, Codes of Practice to make it easier for employers to understand what is required of them. 

Given the previous government’s lack of action it is easy to understand why many businesses adopt a ‘wait and see’ attitude; doing nothing is an obvious course of action when the environment is full of confusion and there is no leadership.

But  ...... we are Lucky in Australia because there is a promise of change.  Today I will meet with Bill Shorten, Parliamentary Secretary on Disability and Children and working hard too on the Social Inclusion Agenda.

We are lucky in Australia and hopefully more Australians will be lucky with the increased interest in and attention to social inclusion.  Despite the growth in prosperity, the Brotherhood of St Laurence reports that 11 per cent of our potential workforce is either unemployed or underemployed.  They point out that there are one million Australians who are either long-term unemployed, unemployed or under-employed with little work experience or vocational skills and quote 200,000 people on the Disability Support Benefit who, with a small amount of support and flexible work practices, could be productive members of the workforce. 

Social policy and economic policy must work together to help us to make sure we are all Lucky in Australia. 

The federal government has committed to developing a National Strategy for Mental Health and Disability Employment.

If people with disability are to be Lucky in Australia, members of our Employer Network on Disability will need to have full and frank discussions with government to help them build systems that support and encourage business leadership as well as resolving the outstanding issues.

I sincerely applaud our members who, despite the lack of government leadership and clarity, are working hard to ensure a fair go for people with disability. It is their leadership that makes me feel like we are Lucky in Australia.

Suzanne Colbert

Chief Executive Officer

Australian Network on Disability