COMPARISONS OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN EMPLOYMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES IN

MALAYSIA AND THE UNITED STATES

COMPARISONS OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN EMPLOYMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES IN MALAYSIA AND THE UNITED STATES

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Rehabilitation

By

Aina Razlin binti Mohammad Roose Universiti Malaysia Sarawak Bachelor of Counseling, 2006

May 2010 University of Arkansas

UMI Number: 1484653

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

UMT Dissertation Publishing

UMI 1484653 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC.

All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346

ABSTRACT

Affirmative action is a step taken by government that formed for the purpose of

removing barriers, past discrimination and avoid present discrimination in every

aspect of life, i.e. employment, education, or contracting with certain groups of people

for services which usually involves minority groups. This research compares the

policies of affirmative action in government and private sectors for employment of

people with disabilities in Malaysia and the United States. The methodology used in

this research is analyzing relevant documents such as journal articles, conference

proceedings, books, government documents, and national data. Affirmative action in

Malaysia is based on a quota scheme, while there is no history of quota scheme in the

United States. Malaysia has specified a 1% employment quota for people with

disabilities in government and private sectors under the legislation of the Service

Circular Letter No. 3/2008 (for government sector) and Code of Practice of

Employment for People with Disabilities in Private Sector 2001 (for private sector).

Implementation of affirmative action in the government sector began in 1988 under

Service Circular Letter No. 10/1988 and was renewed in 2008. In the United States,

affirmative action in employment for people with disabilities is stated in the

Rehabilitation Act 1973, Section 501 (for government sector) and Section 503 (for

private sector). The target of affirmative action in Malaysia has not yet been reached

even though it has been implemented for more than 20 years. The purpose of

comparing both affirmative action policies, Malaysia and the United States, to see

how they are similar and different and to suggest steps that can be taken to improve

the situation in Malaysia. The results of this research show that implementation of

affirmative action requires four vital elements in order to function effectively which

are plans, monitors, services, and consequences. In comparing the affirmative action,

it is realized that affirmative action in Malaysia contains plans, monitors, and

services. The element of "consequences" that involve penalties has not yet been

added. The "consequences" element is as important as other elements for the success

of affirmative action as it causes employers to take serious action to implement

affirmative action. It is suggested that Malaysia include the "consequences" element

such as practicing the quota-levy system instead of a binding quota scheme.

This thesis is approved for Recommendation to the Graduate Council

Thesis Director:

Dr. Brent T. Williams

Thesis Committee:

Dr. Richard Roessler

Dr. Lynn Koch

THESIS DUPLICATION RELEASE

I hereby authorize the University of Arkansas Libraries to duplicate this Thesis when needed for research and/or scholarship.

Agreed

Aina Razlin Mohammad Roose

Refused

Aina Razlin Mohammad Roose

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to record my gratitude to my professor, Dr. Richard T. Roessler for his

supervision, advice, and guidance on each stage of this research that offered me an

extraordinary experience all the way through this research.

I heartily thank my advisor Dr. Brent Williams, and Dr. Lynn Koch for their advice,

supervision, and crucial contributions in preparing this research as well as completing my

master's degree in Rehabilitation Counseling.

My special thanks also go to my family members, Mama (Suhaina Mohamad), Ayah

(Mohammad Roose Mohd Adam), Dik Lan (Mohammad Adlan), Adik (Aina Adilah),

Nana (Aina Syafiqah), and Bie (Mohd Fayruss Yatimin) who have been supporting me

throughout my study in the United States.

Lastly, I offer my regards and blessings to all of those who supported me in any

respect during the completion of this thesis.

vi

DEDICATION

This research is specially dedicated to people with disabilities in Malaysia. It is my

hope that my humble research could contribute to small changes that bring benefits to

people with disabilities.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapl

i. ii.

iii. iv. v.

vi. vii. viii.

ix. X.

xi. xii.

xiii. xiv.

;er One

Introduction - A world wide disease The value of employment People with disabilities in the United States People with disabilities in Malaysia Affirmative Action Quota schemes Type of quota schemes Background of Study Statement of the Problem Research Objectives Research Questions Rational of the Research Importance of Study Operational definitions

3 6 10 13 17 18 20 24 25 25 26 26 27

II. Chapter Two i. History of Rehabilitation Services in Malaysia 29

ii. Rehabilitation Services in the United States 33 iii. Affirmative Action in Employment for People with

Disabilities in Malaysia 34 iv. Affirmative Action in Employment for People with

Disabilities in the United States 37 v. Supporting the Employment for People with Disabilities

- Malaysia's Commitment 44 vi. Supporting the Employment for People with Disabilities

- United States' Commitment 49 vii. Cultural Influences 52

viii. Theories 55

III. Chapter Three i. Introduction 61

ii. Design of the Study 61 iii. Data Collection 61 iv. Data Analysis 62

IV. Chapter Four i. Introduction 63

ii. Results

viii

Chapti i.

ii. iii. iv. v.

A. B. C. D. E. F.

sr Five

RQ1 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 RQ2

Introduction Discussion Summarization Recommendation Suggestion for Future Research

63

64

70

76

80

100

100

104

105

106

VI. Bibliography 107

ix

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

A worldwide disease

The phenomenon of unemployment among people with disabilities is a worldwide

issue. Discrimination against people with disabilities has existed since the dawn of

history and continues to contribute to their high employment rates. Throughout the world,

people with disabilities are among the least privileged and most vulnerable. Their right

to training, employment and job development is often neglected (Salleh, Abdullah &

Buang, 2001). The state of the labour market strongly influenced the job prospect and

opportunities of a person with disabilities to be in a suitable job. Workers with disabilities

are always the last to be hired and the first to be fired though various types of regulations

are implemented in countries around the world (Acton, 1981). People with disabilities in

the United States and worldwide continuously lag behind in term of employment

outcomes (Blanck et al., 2009 in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010).

It is recorded that, in developing countries, the unemployment percentage among

people with disabilities of working age is high, which is 80-90% (Zarocostas, 2005). In

Asia for instance, the unemployment rate among people with disabilities is high which is

at 80% (Perry, 2002). The situation is better in industrialized countries, yet the

unemployment rate among people with disabilities is still between 50-70%, which is at

least twice the rate of those without disabilities (International Disability Rights Monitor,

2004 in Gottlieb, Myhill, & Blanck, 2010). This can be seen in the European countries,

where there are 43% to 54% of people with disabilities who are of working age, but their

1

unemployment rate is two to three times greater than for people without disabilities

(International Disability Rights Monitor, 2004 in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). In

Latin America and the Carribean, the percentage of individuals with disabilities who are

unemployed is around 80-90%, and those that are employed receive fairly low wages

(World Bank, 2004 in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blank, 2010).

In Malaysia, approximately that 1.0% or 210,000 of the total population of 21 million

are people with disabilities (Department of Statistic Malaysia, 1999 in Faridah Serajul

Haq, 2003). Faridah Serajul Haq (2003) mentioned that according to the Public Services

Department, there were 538 people with disabilities employed in the public sector in

1997. In 1998, according to the Department of Labour, 3,309 people with disabilities

were employed in the private sector. This means only 5.24% of people with disabilities

are employed in Malaysia. The rate of employment for people with disabilities in

Malaysia obviously showed that it is radically lower than their non-disabled counterparts

(Faridah Serajul Haq, 2003). After 10 years (December, 2008), the number of employed

people with disabilities showed some improvements by increasing to 581 people in the

public sector and 7,565 in private sector positions (Department of Social Welfare, 2009).

Despite the low number of employed people with disabilities, a wide range of

initiatives exist promoting equal opportunities for people with disabilities in the labour

market.

Many countries are recognizing the potential of people with disabilities as workers and contributors to society as well as their rights to equal treatment and opportunity. As a result, one finds more and more people with disabilities who are educated and competent, and have the tenacity and will to achieve social and economic independence (ILO, 1994 in Salleh, Abdullah & Buang, 2001, p. 78)

2

In all of the industrialised countries and in many developing nations, there are programs to encourage, assist and even require the employment of people with disabilities. Placement in regular industry, commerce, administration and rural pursuits is most often the primary objective. Governmental and voluntary efforts include the provision of training institutions, special placement services, and incentives to encourage employers to hire and train workers with disabilities and to modify the workplace and equipment. There are quota systems requiring that a stated percentage of employees in enterprises of a stipulated size be persons who are classified as disabled. There are laws reserving certain occupations - such as lift operators, telephone switchboard operators and others - for people with disabilities. Extensive public education campaigns have been mounted to create more receptive attitudes towards the employment of workers with disabilities. Also in most countries there are various forms of sheltered employment where special working conditions make provision for limitations of function.

(Acton, 1981, p.4)

Even though the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 has just been enforced, services

for people with disabilities in Malaysia have started long before the Act existed. In

conjunction with the government mission of 2020 for Malaysia to achieve an

economically self-reliant and caring society, the country is ready to move with various

plans, strategies, programmes and activities in order to deliver the basic and relevant

services to people with disabilities in Malaysia.

The value of employment

Most working-age adults (16-64 years) with disabilities want to work, but their

employment rates have been low (Harris Interactive Inc., 2004, in Misra, Orslene, &

Walls, 2010) i.e., three out of four of them are not employed (Misra, Orslene, & Walls,

2010). Bennet et al. (2009) mentioned that nearly two-thirds of adults with disabilities

3

remain unemployed or under-employed or only have access to employment in sheltered

workshops. This is because access to community employment is difficult for individuals

with complex disabilities and behaviour challenges.

The job market nowadays requires advanced training and high standards for

productivity, problem solving, and team work. Hence, there is high percentage of people

with disabilities who work part-time jobs with minimum wages, while many others are

still unemployed (Tomblin & Haring, 1999).

Work is one of the significant elements in an individual's life. Acton (1981) has listed

four important reasons for obtaining employment. The first is related to economics.

Studies in many countries show that there is a high correlation between disability and

poverty. Lai (2000) in Salleh, Mustapha, and Habib (2004) mentioned that about 30% of

people with disabilities in the United States live below the poverty line. It is undeniable

that the existence of disabilities somehow increases a society's basic operating costs due

to medication, transportations, special equipment, and the technologies people with

disabilities need to survive. Governments can help to satisfy certain needs but rarely to

the extent of eliminating the need for the extra income which the family member with

disabilities could produce (Acton, 1981).

In other words, employment provides economic benefits that help individuals to

become financially independent and lessen the dependency of individuals with

disabilities on families and others for economic support (Anthony 1994; Kim &

Morningstar, 2005; Reisman & Reisman, 1993; in Bennet et al., 2009).

4

Secondly, the importance of work is related to the value of most societies towards the

significance of employment in someone's life. Most of cultures put a high emphasis on

work to gain a perfect life. Certain individuals are unable to work due to disabilities, be it

because of their own disabilities or because of discrimination by society; they are judged

as unable to fulfil the principal standards of behaviour in society. The person is perceived

as being inadequate, incomplete - and he or she so perceives self in this way (Acton,

1981).

Because most people spend the majority of their lives working each day, a job

becomes the way adults define themselves (Abrams, DonAroma, & Karan, 1997; Grossi,

Schaaf, Steigerwald, & Mank, 2002; Kolstoe, 1961; in Bennet et al., 2009). Dutta et al.

(2008) in their research mentioned that, as compared to persons who are employed, those

who are not employed tend to experience a higher prevalence of depression and anxiety

disorders, use alcohol more often, and report lower scores on self-esteem and quality of

life measures. For most adults, employment is related to their personal benefits such as

self-confidence, direction, and increased life satisfaction (Griffin, Rosenberg, Cheyney,

& Greenberg, 1996; Skinner, 2003; in Bennet et al., 2009).

Thirdly, the importance of employment is related to the integration of persons with

disabilities in their societies. By working, the individuals would have chances to form

social relationships and develop social skills. Also by being employed, society would

recognize the individual's social status and this would enhance the person's self-esteem.

Without taking part in employment, a person with disabilities might face some barriers to

in social integration in his/her life (Acton, 1981). Mancuso (1990) and Storey (2002) in

5

Bennet et al. (2009) also mentioned that work provides social benefits including the

opportunity to establish meaningful relationships and the opportunity to contribute to

one's community.

Lastly, according to Acton (1981), employment gives a regular structure and

discipline to living. Acton (1981) explained that individuals would be able to be involved

with something they are interested in, mingle with people, and earn money for a period of

time, instead of passing day by day without achieving anything. Studies show that

depression is greater for people who, day after day, experience no challenges or tasks to

be performed. It is much worse for those have a permanent disability where they might

grieve, feel bored, or experience loneliness. Unfortunately, the benefits of employment

have yet to reach many individuals with disabilities, and community employment

continues to be an elusive goal (Brady & Rosenberg, 2002 in Bennet et.al., 2009).

People with Disabilities in United States

Initially, disability received attention in American life mainly through the demands of

veterans who engaged in military duties in World War I. The requests from veterans with

disabilities were managed by the federal government in the War Department and, later,

by the Veterans Administration. Civilians with disabilities at that particular time, were

largely invisible and unserved until the later in the twentieth century. Due to the increase

of awareness in civil rights, the social and physical isolation of people with physical and

mental disabilities became the focus of civil rights legislation. Until that time, society

6

"kept" people with disabilities out of sight in institutions such as nursing homes, asylums,

and homeless shelters to avoid offending the community (Welch & Palames, 1995).

Before the attention given to veterans with disabilities, people with disabilities

witnessed dreadful social treatment. Historically they were viewed as the result of sin and

demon possession. They were punished, separated, locked in dark rooms, chained, and

restricted from mingling with society. As disabilities were seen as the result of possession

"by the Evil One", people with disabilities were treated by monks and priests in

monasteries rather than by physicians (A. Deutsch, 1949 as cited in Rubin & Roessler,

2008).

In addition, people with disabilities faced the impacts of Eugenics and Darwinism.

The restriction on marriage among people with disabilities as well as salpingectomy and

vasectomy based on Eugenics ideology obviously violated people with disabilities in

terms of human's rights. Darwinism philosophy was almost analogous to Eugenics,

where it emphasized the idea of fitness for persons to survive in society. Hence, people

needed to compete to continue to exist. People with disabilities were seen as unable to

compete in this world due to the limitations they had.

People with disabilities were treated better after World War I when the US

government started to respond to the needs of veterans with disabilities. The

rehabilitation legislation and services to protect the rights of people with disabilities

began with the Smith-Fess Vocational Rehabilitation Act which was enacted after World

War I, and amended in 1943, 1954, and 1965. After World War II, the Korean War, and

the Vietnam War respectively, there were changes in how people with disabilities were

7

perceived and the availability of new treatment and rehabilitation protocols.

Rehabilitation services became better from day to day with the implementation of

legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Architectural Barriers Act 1968,

Rehabilitation Act 1973, and American with Disabilities Act (ADA) 1990. However,

America is still facing the same world phenomena of discrimination towards people with

disabilities in terms of employment.

People with disabilities are labelled as having no rights in society since they were

unemployed and did not "play their roles" in contributing to the community. Buchanan

(1990) as cited in Rubin & Roessler (2008) stated that some people in society believe that

the goods of society ought to be shared only by those who make a contribution to that

society. As one of the most significant determinants in our perceived status in our society

is our job (Crewe and Zola, 1983 as cited in Scherich, 1996), possessing the opportunities

to work may help to improve the social status of people with disabilities.

According to the United States Department of Labor in March 2010, the percentage of

people with disabilities in the labor force was 22.5. By comparison, the percentage of

persons with no disability in the labor force was 70.2. The unemployment rate for those

with disabilities was 13.9 percent, compared with 10.1 percent for persons with no

disability.

Baldwin and Schumacher (2002) studied job mobility among workers with disabilities

in the United States and found that the most obvious difference in patterns of job mobility

between workers with disabilities and workers without disabilities is the higher rate of

turnover among workers with disabilities. According to Baldwin and Schumacher (2002),

8

the higher rates of turnover among workers with disabilities are often due to job-

mismatch as the poor job matches caused workers to have greater difficulty in performing

their job tasks. Literature also showed that the turnover rates are correlated to lack of

relevant competencies, attitudinal problems, poor transition programs, lack of

cooperation from employers, and the absence of appropriate laws.

Job accommodation at the workplace is also one of the problems that caused

difficulties for people with disabilities to be employed or to retain their employment.

Scherich (1996) indicated that 20% of people with disabilities encountered physical

barriers in the workplace that hampered them in performing their jobs effectively.

Providing suitable and reasonable accommodations for workers with disabilities was

found to be a significant factor for them to achive success in employment (Moore, 1995

as cited in Scherich, 1996). Becker et al. (1998) mentioned that one of the reasons for job

termination among employees with severe mental illness is unsatisfactory job

accommodations. All participants involved in this study were reported to receive a

variety of accommodations on the job. A study carried out by Gates et al. (2005)

indicated that job loss tends to occur during the first month and at about six months of

employment. Leaving a job because of ineffective workplace accommodation is often the

reason. Even though those who are hired are qualified candidates, they either quit or were

fired due to poor performance basically caused by ineffective accommodations.

Loprest and Maag (2001) mentioned that more than half of the non-working adults

with disabilities who were studied encountered difficulties and were discouraged from

looking for work. Among the reasons were no appropriate jobs available (52%), family

9

responsibilities (34%>), lack of transportation (29%>), no appropriate information about

jobs (23%>), inadequate training (22%), fear of losing health insurance or Medicaid

(20%>), and discouraged from working by family and friends (14%>).

People with Disabilities in Malaysia

Influenced by Eastern culture's emphasis on collectivism, people in Malaysia are

expected to be kind and considerate towards people with disabilities, thus services for

them are mostly viewed as social responsibilities. Khatijah (2002) mentioned that good-

hearted people in Malaysia had viewed disabilities from the charity perspective for a long

time. Hence, the facilities and assistance for people with disabilities most of the time are

based on the charity approach.

The services for people with disabilities in Malaysia historically were based on charity

where people with visual impairments were given attention by religious and voluntary

welfare organizations. Up to this date, many of non-government agencies that provided

services for people with disabilities were supported by on charities.

The advantage of a collectivism culture is that society shares the responsibilities for

the welfare of the public. Malaysians are expected to cooperate and work together in

order to overcome certain issues such as the challenges faced by people with disabilities.

However, this value somehow creates a "hierarchy environment" of "powerless vs.

powerful" or "problem-makers vs. problem-solvers". Society frequently labeled people

with disabilities with pathetic terms such as "special needs individuals", "unfortunate/less

10

fortunate people", or "less capable persons", as well as having a set of belief that people

with disabilities are depending on "normal" people to be success in life. The terms are

used frequently especially to raise society's sympathy towards people with disabilities in

order to collect donations.

Hodges-Aeberhard and Raskin (1997) in their research indicated that, in Malaysia,

people with disabilities most of the time experience barriers to employment due to

society's noble intentions and genuine concerns about their capabilities. A desire to

protect them from harm, injury or embarrassment is formed, and it reinforces the belief

that they are unable to work independently.

According to Kuno (2007), most people's perceptions of people with disabilities are

influenced by the Medical Model. This model is based on the belief that people with

disabilities lack of capability of taking care of themselves, thus they must depend on

normal people to help them head to successful lives. This model is much stronger in

developing countries that are occupied with globalization and competition. Because this

model stresses care, people with disabilities are expected to not become independent or

involved in the world of work.

Due to this collectivist orientation, people with disabilities are not given enough

chances to live independently, including joining the workforce. They are not only facing

the unemployment issue, but also the last-hired-first-fired trend and under-employment

challenges. Their talents, qualifications, and abilities are sometimes overlooked due to the

over-attention to physical appearances or presumed incapacity related to disability.

Ganapathy (1992) in his research indicated in an appeal made by the Ministry of Human

11

Resources between 1990 and 1991, a total of 2,152 jobs were offered by the private

sector. However, only 1,249 were taken by people with disabilities between 1990 and

1993.

The "charity perception" often leads people with disabilities to be associated with bad

images such as beggars, street musicians, or hand-crafted product sellers instead of

holding professional positions even when they have the qualifications. They are also

categorized as a group of people who should be "treated" and taken care of by so-called

"normal people", instead of having the rights to take care of themselves. Hence their

steps towards achievements are blocked by the low expectations of society.

It is undeniable that there are people with disabilities in Malaysia who lead their life

successfully in term of having the opportunities to hold professional positions. Salleh,

Abdullah, and Buang (2001) mentioned some examples of occupations held by people

with disabilities in Malaysia such as university lecturers, tutors, research assistants, chief

executive officers, managing directors, masseurs, sales managers, executive directors,

executive secretaries, teachers, personal assistants, school principals, ballet/dancer school

owner, auditors, cane weavers, musicians, music or radio deejays, translators, artists,

draftsmen, batik designers, salesman, tailors, lawyers, waiters or waitresses, librarians,

businessmen, and telephone operators.

However, Salleh, Abdullah, and Buang (2001, p.78) also stated that in the mid 1980s,

many STPM holders with disabilities commented "why must we waste our time at the

university when there are no jobs available after graduation", while university graduates

with disabilities commented "there were very few jobs available then, and we had to

12

compete with our normal peers. We hid our degrees and showed our potential employers

our STPM certificates instead in order to secure our telephone operator jobs." In another

situation, a blind law graduate was weaving baskets in a sheltered workshop for nearly

six years before a suitable job opportunity came her way. Other educated individuals with

special needs became street musicians and even as bilingual speaking beggars. Research

by Salleh, Abdullah and Buang (2001) which involved 746 individuals with disabilities

showed that the majority of them (67.96%) worked as non-professional skilled

employees.

Affirmative Action

Affirmative action refers to a system of actions or steps taken via government policies

that are designated usually for minorities to eliminate discrimination by the society,

whether in employment, education, or contracting, as well as to attempt to compensate

for the effects of past discrimination.

Affirmative action is necessary to prevent discrimination and to address stereotypical

thinking and biases that still impede employment opportunity (Office of Federal Contract

Compliance Programs, 2002). The main objective of affirmative action is the principle of

equal opportunity, where each person has the right to equal access to self-development

regardless of the body characteristics, race, or sex. In other words, persons with equal

qualifications, talents and abilities should have equal access to employment.

13

Affirmative action is an extension of the notion of equality of opportunity and non­discrimination. It aims to overcome the effects of past discrimination by enabling the person or group discriminated against either to compete on level terms with the favoured group or to achieve equality outright. Affirmative action was first introduced in the United States in 1930s to make up for past unfair labour practices against union organizers and members, and later used to assist war veterans' reinsertion in the labour market. It is later applied for other group with special need such as people with disabilities (Hodges-Aebergard, 2001, p. 441).

In terms of employment, affirmative action for people with disabilities is referred to as...

a set of positive steps that employers use to promote equal employment opportunity and to eliminate discrimination. It includes expanded outreach, recruitment, mentoring, training, management development and other programs designed to help employers hire, retain and advance qualified workers from diverse backgrounds, including persons with disabilities (Office for Institutional Equity (OIE), 2006).

Affirmative action in the United States began basically after World War I when

veterans who were injured came back from the war and fought to be employed. The US

government responded to the needs as well as came out with legislation to protect people

with disabilities' rights. The term "Affirmative Action" however was introduced for the

first time in Executive Order 10925 signed by President Kennedy on March 6, 1961,

although the first affirmative action law signed by President Roosevelt was Executive

Order 8802 in 1941 (Rai & Critzer, 2000).

The legal status of affirmative action was solidified by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This landmark legislation prohibited discrimination in voting, public education and accommodations, and employment in firms with more than fifteen employees (US Legal Definition website, 2010).

14

Next, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 was formed. Following the

Act, Section 501 and 503 in the Rehabilitation Act 1973 were later formed as affirmative

action law related to the employment of people with disabilities. Other than that,

Executive Order 13163 supports the opportunity for people with disabilities to be

employed at all levels and occupations in Federal Government. The American with

Disabilities Act (ADA) 1990 also is among the legislation implemented in the United

States against employment discrimination towards people with disabilities.

Malaysia has practiced a 1% employment quota scheme as affirmative action for

Malaysians with disabilities; it exists for the purpose of accessing job opportunities in the

government sector. Service Circular Letter No. 10/1988 was the first circular by the

government that established the 1% employment quota for people with disabilities in the

civil/government sector. Affirmative action was later expanded to private sector where

the Code of Practice for Employment for Persons with Disabilities in Private Sector was

formulated on November 9, 2001. The service circular for Government sector was

renewed in April 1, 2008 as Service Circular Letter No. 3/2008.

Under this circular, the Malaysian government worked with other private agencies in

order to upgrade the services for employment equalization. There are services for people

with disabilities provided by the government to support the affirmative action as well as

to integrate them into society, but for the purpose of this paper only services related to

training and employment will be discussed.

As early as 1946, after World War II, people with disabilities had the attention from

the Malaysian government starting first with people with visual impairment and then to

15

people with other disabilities. Up to this date, the government had provided a number of

services such as allowances for people with disabilities who work. The monthly

allowance of RM300 for income levels below RM 1,200 is an incentive to encourage

people with disabilities to go to work as a step to live independently. There is also a job

coach service provided by Department of Social Welfare to help people with disabilities

for placements.

To encourage employers to hire people with disabilities, there is a tax relief for the

employers as an incentive. Other than that, the government provides grants for people

with disabilities who plan for self-employment.

The barriers at the workplace are also under consideration by the government. Hence,

public transport companies are encouraged to give concession fares for people with

disabilities. PUTRA-LRT for instance reduced costs for people with disabilities, thus

supporting them by providing cheaper transportation to go to work. Other than that, there

are three Standard Codes of Practice on the accessibility and mobility for people with

disabilities introduced between 1990-1993 which are the Code of Practice for Disabled

Persons to Public Buildings (1991), Code of Practice for Means of Escape for Disabled

Persons (1990), and Code of Practice for Access for Disabled Persons Outside Buildings.

Job placement at sheltered workshops which provide training for people with

disabilities to acquire vocational, technical and educational skills in order to obtain

employment are also provided by the government. The workshops also function as

avenues through which employment could be arranged for people with disabilities. There

is even an online registration for people with disabilities for job applications.

16

The US government has implemented different types of affirmative action to increase

the employment among people with disabilities. Instead of taking the same direction with

other countries in Europe and Asia, the United States prefers plans that they claim are not

"forcing or penalizing".

Different than in the United States, basically the legislation is not based on a quota system, but rather requires employers "to take affirmative action to employ and advance workers with disabilities". The American programme also requires employers to modify their worksites to "reasonably accommodate" persons with disabilities (Hodges-Aeberhard & Raskin, 1997, p. 3).

The United States has no history of a quota system that the employment obligation signals that most people with disabilities are unable to compete for and win jobs on merit. Consequently, the quota is viewed by those critics as an obligation to give preference to people with disabilities on the grounds of pity alone. Sometimes the quota is seen as no more than a punitive law (Thornton ,1998, p. 5).

Quota Schemes

Quota schemes are one type of affirmative action strategy which are aimed at

promoting the integration of people with disabilities in the labour market. Under quota

schemes, employers are obliged to employ a specified minimum number of people to

ensure that a certain percentage of their workforce consists of people with disabilities.

Its origins date back to World War I, with regulations and laws in Germany and Austria to promote the integration of war-injured soldiers. Proposals to reserve jobs for veterans with disabilities were first discussed internationally at the Inter-Allied Conference in 1920 which recommended that national governments adopt legislation which would oblige public and private employers to employ ex-soldiers with disabilities. A committee of experts which met in 1923 under the auspices of the International Labour Office supported the use of legal, obligations to promote employment of ex-soldiers with disabilities and proposed that employers who had a designated number of employees should be covered by legislation, with exemptions for those who experienced certain difficulties. Exempted employers or those who did

17

not meet their percentage target should be obliged to pay a fee or fine (Thornton, 1998).

Quota systems were later extended to cover civilians who were disabled through war,

victims of accidents at work and ultimately non-insured people with disabilities. Majority

countries with compulsory employment schemes in the post-war years including the

United Kingdom and Netherlands introduced quota legislation for the first time.

Subsequently, the quota schemes spread around the world. In 1986, Greece, Spain, and

Luxembourg followed suit. Ireland and Belgium introduced public sector schemes. Japan

had stated its quota scheme in 1960 (the levy-grant scheme was then introduced in 1976),

while Egypt, Turkey and Malaysia have quota schemes extending to the private sector

(Thornton, 1998).

Types of Quota Schemes

Quota schemes can be divided into three basic groups which are a binding quota or

quota-levy system, binding quota, and non-binding quota.

Quota-levy scheme

A quota-levy scheme is a binding quota that involves employers who do not meet their

obligation in affirmative action, thus are required to pay a fine or levy. The money from

the levies usually goes into a fund that supports the employment of people with

disabilities, commonly called the national rehabilitation fund (NRF). The levies can be

collected annually, quarterly or monthly and are usually transferred to the NFR bank

18

account directly (ILO, 2004). Basically, the implementation of quota-levy system in each

country is different from one another.

To increase the effectiveness of the quota scheme in securing jobs for people with disabilities, other options for employers to meet their quota obligation should be considered, in addition to recruiting people with disabilities or paying a levy. Examples include providing for on-the-job training, apprenticeships, introduction of a recruitment plan, and training for workers with disabilities to make technical adaptations to the workplace (ILO, 2004, p.38).

The principle underpinning levy schemes is essentially all employers, above a certain

size, should contribute to the employment of workers with disabilities, ideally through the

direct provision of employment, but if this is not possible, through a financial

contribution. The aim is to maximise employment rather than to collect revenue

(Thornton, 1998).

Binding quota

A binding quota is another type of quota scheme where the requirement of hiring

minimum number of people with disabilities by employers is stated in legislation, yet the

compulsion does not come with any penalties if the employers fail to oblige the

affirmative action effectively.

Under a binding quota system, employers are obliged, through legislation, to employ a quota of people with disabilities, but the obligation is not backed up with any effective sanction - either because the sanction does not exist or the sanction is not enforced. This can be because the legislation establishing the quota does not provide for an effective sanction or because the public authorities have decided not to prosecute in cases where the quota obligation is not met (ILO, 2004, p.p. 38-39).

19

In Malaysia, the compulsion about employers to hire people with disabilities at 1 % of

their employees is stated in Service Circular Letter No. 3/2008. Yet the circular does not

mention penalties that would be faced by employers if they do implement the affirmative

action plan.

Non-binding quota

A non-binding quota is a type of quota scheme that encourages employers to hire

people with disabilities for certain numbers, but there is no legislation that legally

demands such hiring.

Under this form of quota system, employers are not legally obliged to employ a set percentage of workers with disabilities, but it is recommended that they do so. Compliance with the quota obligation is therefore voluntary and there is no sanction in the event that employers fail to meet the recommended quota (ILO, 2004, p. 40).

Background of the Study

The government of Malaysia is concerned that people with disabilities in Malaysia are

facing unemployment and under-employment issues due to discrimination by certain

employers. The number of people with disabilities who work in the private and public

sectors today still does not meet the target.

People with disabilities rarely experience barriers to employment as a result of overt hostility. In fact, the discrimination often takes place with the best intentions, due to genuine concern about capabilities of people with disabilities and a desire to protect

20

them from harm, injury or embarrassment (Hodges-Aeberhard and Raskin, 1997, p.p. 22-23).

Strong comments are made in Malaysian case study on the need to change this attitude of "charity" towards people with disabilities as it reinforces the belief that they are incapable of becoming part of the open labour market. In response to this reality, affirmative action on behalf of persons with disabilities frequently takes the form of quota systems, which require that a certain percentage of jobs be set aside for persons with disabilities (Hodges-Aeberhard and Raskin, 1997, p.2).

Malaysia issued its first legislation regarding employment quota systems in 1988

called Pekeliling Perkhidmatan Bilangan 10 Tahun 1988 (Service Circular Letter No

10/1988), where a quota of 1% of the employment opportunities should be allocated for

people with disabilities in the government / civil sector. Later, the renewal of the Circular

was discussed in October 2007, where Pekeliling Perkhidmatan Bilangan 3 Tahun 2008

Service Circular Letter No 3/2008 was enforced on April 1, 2008 in order to increase the

employment services for people with disabilities as well as the number of people with

disabilities who are working.

Salleh, Mustapha, and Habib (2004) stated that since the 1% employment quota for

people with disabilities in civil service has been gazetted in 1988 (Service Circular Letter

No 10/1988), more technical and vocational schools and polytechnics are open to special

needs learners. Several government agencies and NGOs are involved in the training and

placing of youth and workers with disabilities in the employment sector, and the

Manpower and Welfare Departments have implemented training and placement programs

for individuals with disabilities. Several companies including multinational companies

have hired people with disabilities.

21

In conjunction with the new Circular, government agencies such as the Public

Services Department and Ministry of Human Resources have worked together with non­

governmental organizations (NGOs) to implement some actions in order to achieve the

aim of the circular. The actions include helping clients to select suitable workplaces via

job matching, providing job coaching services for workers with disabilities to help them

learn to perform their jobs, promoting mindset changes involving negative perceptions

towards people with disabilities among employers as well as people with disabilities

themselves, giving special conditions for people with disabilities in term of qualifications

to apply for jobs, and outreaching activity to locate people with disabilities who need

help and services.

Other than that, the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development has

taken a proactive stance by coming out with Borang Maklumat Pencarian Kerja OKU or

Job Seeking Information Form for people with disabilities. The form is used to collect

information about a person with disabilities to help him/her with placement in

government agencies.

SPOku or Sistem Penempatan Orang Kurang Upaya (People with Disabilities'

Placement System) is another effort by the government agencies to help people with

placements. It is an online system that both employers and employees can access for the

purpose of placement. Employers who have vacancies to be advertised can register and

log on to post vacancies online by completing the online form. Job seekers who have

registered in this system can search and apply for jobs from various industries based on

22

their interests and qualifications. Registered employers then can select the appropriate

candidates from a varied resource pool to fit their requirements and needs.

JobStreet.com Malaysia: E-enabling People with Disabilities is another website

exclusively designed for people with disabilities to ease the process of getting a job and

being employed in various industries and sectors. This website plays a role as a platform

for both employers and job seekers to explore the job opportunities. Job seekers with

disabilities can post their resumes in this site in order to be employed. It provides free job

application services to a registered member. Persons with disabilities and those who are

registered with the Malaysia Welfare Department can submit their resume in this website.

As this site has privacy protections and policies, the information in applicants' resumes

will be made searchable only to the employers.

This site also encourages employers who wish to "change the world" to post their job

vacancies to seek candidates who are appropriate for their organizations. The service of

advertising the job is free of charge. This site offers the latest information regarding the

job vacancies that are available in the market, and it is updated daily. Job seekers with

disabilities can easily browse the jobs listed where the latest vacancy information will be

on the top.

The employers who hire more than 5% of workers with disabilities up to 12 months

will receive incentives and appreciation from the government, while special incentives

are available for employers who hire more than 10% up to 12 months. There are also tax

incentives for employers who provide assistive technologies or job accommodations for

employees at the workplace. Job coaching services, introduced by Japan International

23

Cooperation Agency (JICA) in 2006 are also provided to help workers with disabilities

adapt to the world of work and learn about their new jobs.

Campaigns on awareness of the rights of people with disabilities are also

implemented. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Malaysia, for

instance, worked together with the Ministry of Women, Family and Community

Development, SEGI University College, as well as other state agencies to launch a

national advocacy and awareness campaign with "Real Lives, Real Abilities" theme. The

campaign was supported by the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) to fight attitudinal

prejudices and to galvanize public support for the need to ensure full equality of the

rights of disabled persons and to support their full participation in all aspects of society

(UNDP, 2009).

Statement of the Problem

Despite the active efforts implemented by the Malaysian government to increase the

number of employed people with disabilities, Mustapha et. al (2004) reported that, for the

past 13 years (1990-2003), less than 5% of the special needs population has been

employed both in the private and government sectors in Malaysia.

Other statistics from the years 1996 until 2008 showed that there were only 581

people with disabilities working in the civil sector in Malaysia, which is equal to 0.05%

(Department of Social Welfare, 2009). The Service Circular Letter No 3/2008, started in

April 1, 2008, replaced Service Circular Letter no 10/1988, and Pendaftaran Maklumat

24

Pencari Kerja OKU has been launched in July 2008 to enable people with disabilities to

register for jobs in the civil sector. Until March 2009 which is within less than a year, 396

people with disabilities had registered under Pendaftaran Maklumat Pencari Kerja OKU,

and 8 persons have been hired in the civil sector (Department of Social Welfare, 2009).

The number however has not reached the goal of the 1% quota yet.

Research Objectives

The purpose of this research is to compare employment affirmative action policies for

people with disabilities in Malaysia and the United States. Specifically, the objectives of

this study are:

a) to compare the affirmative action and employment services for people with disabilities

in Malaysia and the United States, and

b) to provide recommendations on improving the situation. This comparison is hoped to

help Malaysia achieve the targeted 1% employment quota for people with disabilities in

Malaysia.

Research Questions

a) What are the differences between affirmative action policies for people with

disabilities in Malaysia and in the United States?

25

b) What steps can be taken to improve the employment services for people with

disabilities in Malaysia to achieve the target of 1%?

Rationale of the Research

As the Service Circular has existed over the last 20 years and the goal of placing at

least 1% of people with disabilities in government sector has not yet been achieved, it

would be appropriate for a study to be done in order to improve the current situation.

Failures in providing full participation and equality for people with disabilities to have jobs are not only significant for their impact on the lives of people with disabilities but also for the consequences they produce in the community and the society. Ten percent or more of the potential workforce may be left idle, skills and talents are wasted, and the time and the resources of other persons are deflected from productive activity to caring for and supporting those who are disabled. These losses of productivity are accompanied by economic drains on the nation, which must provide pensions and other benefits for people with disability who are not gainfully occupied (Acton, 1981, p . l ) .

Special populations can be viewed as an asset to the country, instead of a liability.

With proper training and equal job opportunities, it is not impossible that people with

disabilities can become a part of society that contributes to the development of the

country and society (Mustapha te.al, 2004).

Importance of the Study

The purpose of the quota scheme is to encourage wider jobs opportunities for people

with disabilities. This paper will compare the affirmative action policies in Malaysia and

the United States, hoping to offer some suggestions for increasing the job opportunities

among people with disabilities in Malaysia, especially in the government sectors. 26

Operational Definitions

People with Disabilities

According to People with Disabilities Act (2008), "persons with disabilities" include

those who have long term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which, in

interaction with various barriers, may hinder their full and effective participation in

society.

In this research, people with disabilities are defined as individuals who face barriers and

discrimination to employment due physical, health or mental limitations.

Affirmative Action

Affirmative action is an effort to provide equal opportunities for minority groups, such as

women or racial minorities who are facing discrimination based on characteristics such as

sex or race (Mullen, 1988 in Crosby, 1994).

Affirmative action in this research is referred to as affirmative action in employment for

people with disabilities in Malaysia and in the United States.

Quota Scheme

A quota scheme is one of affirmative action where a minimum number of positions in

companies are allocated for minorities including people with disabilities to address the

27

past and present discrimination. In Malaysia, the 1% quota is allocated for people with

disabilities.

28

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEWS

History of Rehabilitation Services in Malaysia

Since 1926, before World War II, services for people with disabilities in Malaysia

particularly for people with visual impairments, were given by individuals, and religious

and voluntary welfare groups for the purpose of providing protection and custodial care

within the family system. After the War, the Department of Social Welfare was

established in 1946 and started providing formal services for people with disabilities.

People with visual impairments were the first people with disabilities who received

Government attention. In the seventies, there was a slow shift to recognize the other

disabilities as having potential that could be developed for their self-reliance, economic

well-being, as well as social functioning in society (Abdul Rahman, n.d).

Since then, Malaysia is committed to improving the rehabilitation services that

involved various aspects and approaches. International Year of the Disabled Person in

1980 and the World Programme of Action Concerning Disabled Persons in 1982 had led

Malaysia to various policies and programmes that emphasized making the world better

for people with disabilities. The Government also publicized a policy of making "Welfare

a Shared Responsibility" (Ismail, 2003).

In 1988, Malaysia had come out with its employment affirmative action for people

with disabilities called Service Circular No. 10/1988. This circular called for a 1%

29

employment quota for people with disabilities in the government sector. The circular was

renewed in 2008. Other than that, the Code of Practice in Employment for Persons with

Disabilities in the Private Sector was formulated in 2001 for the registration and job

placement of persons with disabilities in the private sector.

In 1990, Malaysia formulated its National Welfare Policy that focused on forming a

safe and stable environment, as well as a caring society. Thus, the policies and

programmes for people with disabilities in Malaysia today are parallel with the strategic

goals of the National Welfare Policy that highlighted the attainment of self-reliance,

equalization of opportunities for the less fortunate and fostering the spirit of mutual help

and support towards enhancing the caring culture (Ismail, 2003). However, according to

Abdul Rahman (n.d.), due to ad-hoc projects and lack of co-ordination of implementing

the policies and programmes effectively, the Government had set up an Advisory Panel

on the Disabled in 1990 which involved representatives from key government agencies,

non-government organizations and the members with disabilities who responded to the

following charges:

(i) to look into the problems and needs of people with disabilities,

(ii) to review existing facilities and programmes in both public and private

sectors,

(iii) to identify issues that require immediate attention, and

(iv) to recommend short and long-term programmes to meet the needs of people

with disabilities.

30

The Advisory Panel recommended the National Implementation Committee for the

Well-being of the Disabled and established the committee on August 30, 1990 with the

Secretary-General of the Ministry of National Unity and Social Development as the

Chairman of this Committee. On February 25, 1998 the committee was upgraded to the

status of Council and known as the National Advisory and Consultative Council for

People with Disabilities (Abdul Rahman, n.d).

Parallel with The United Nations Decade for Disabled Persons in Asia and Pacific

Regions 1993-2002, Malaysia has demonstrated its commitment to improving the quality

of life among people with disabilities by signing a Proclamation of Full Participation and

Equal Opportunity for Persons with Disability in Asia and Pacific Regions on May 16,

1994. This Decade of Action Agenda emphasises increasing the awareness of society

toward people with disabilities and providing facilities as equal treatment for persons

with disabilities (Department of Social Welfare, 1998). The Proclamation contained

twelve policy categories pertaining to national co-ordination, legislation, information,

public awareness, accessibility and communication, education, training and employment,

prevention of causes of disability, rehabilitation services, assertive devices, self-help

organizations, and regional cooperation (Abdul Rahman, n.d).

A Technical Working Group (TWG) on Legislation was formed based on the 12 areas

of concern by the Advisory and Consultative Council. The TWG has been entrusted with

the task of preparing the country's Plan of Action for people with disabilities (Abdul

Rahman, n.d.) and has drafted the Persons with Disabilities Act in 2002.

31

Malaysia's first act for persons with disabilities was finally endorsed by the

Parliament on December 24, 2007. The Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 was gazetted

on January 24, 2008 and was enforced on July 7, 2008. This Act stated that, regarding

access to employment, people with disabilities shall have equal rights for employment

with persons without disabilities, and employers should protect the rights of people with

disabilities as well as provide equal opportunities based on the person's abilities rather

than disabilities.

Before the enforcement of the act, Malaysia signed the Convention on the Rights of

Persons with Disabilities at the United Nations headquarters in April 2008. The

Convention's purpose was to entitle people with disabilities with the full enjoyment of all

human rights and ensure full and effective participation as well as inclusion in society on

an equal basis with others.

The eight general principles of the Convention are respect for inherent dignity and

individual autonomy; non-discrimination; full and effective participation and inclusion in

society; respect for difference and acceptance of persons with disabilities as part of

human diversity and humanity; equality of opportunity; accessibility; gender equality and

respect for the evolving capacities of children with disabilities; and respect for the rights

of children with disabilities to develop and preserve their identities. The signing shows

the Government's concern and commitment following the formulation of the Policy on

Persons with Disabilities and its Plan of Action, the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008.

The Act is actively implemented and the efforts to increase the quality of life of people

with disabilities have resulted in progress.

32

Rehabilitation Services in the United States

Rehabilitation services for people with disabilities in the United States were started to

meet the needs of veterans after World War I. Veterans who survived the war, yet who

were injured and facing disabilities due to their national duty, sought employment in

exchange for their service to the nation. It was in the 1930s that the United States made

vocational rehabilitation a permanent program based on advancements in technology and

government assistance that contribute to the self-reliance and self-sufficiency of people

with disabilities.

In the 1940s and 50s after World War II, disability issues became more visible, and

veterans placed increasing pressure on the nation to provide rehabilitation and vocational

training. By the 1960s, the civil rights movement gained strength, and people with

disabilities started to demand equal treatment, equal access, and equal opportunities. The

Civil Rights Act 1964 prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, religion, national

origin, and gender, but people with disabilities were not included under the law. In 1972,

disability rights activists fought for civil rights of people with disabilities and the

Rehabilitation Act was passed in 1973. It was the beginning of the civil rights of people

with disabilities being protected by law. The Americans with Disabilities Act 1990 was

passed after decades of campaigning. The law ensured equal treatment and equal access

of people with disabilities pertaining to employment opportunities and public

accommodations.

33

Affirmative Action in Employment for People with Disabilities in Malaysia

According to Jayasooria and Ooi (1994), the movement of people with disabilities in

Malaysia could be divided into three phases. The first period was the institutional care

period which was between 1940-1960. During this time, institutional services were set up

as residential care and training centers that segregated people with disabilities from

society. The second period was in 1960-1980 in which the emergence of people with

disabilities occurred in self-help organizations. In the 1960s and 1970s, there was a

growing awareness among people with disabilities of their rights, including the

realization of playing a role in planning their return to work. The emergence of this

movement challenged the traditional approaches to welfare provision. The third period

was in the 1980s when community-based services developed, removing the institutional

care approach to community-based rehabilitation programmes. At the end of the 1980s

and the beginning of the 1990s, people with disabilities in Malaysia moved another step

ahead when they started to stress issues concerning their welfare and future.

Responding to these changes, the Government's commitment to provide job

opportunities for persons with disabilities is evident in Service Circular No. 10/1988

whereby a quota of 1% of all job opportunities in the public sector are reserved for

persons with disability. The purpose of this circular is to help qualified people with

disabilities be hired in the government sector.

34

The quota scheme was later extended to the private sector in order to widen the

employment opportunities for people with disabilities. For the Private Sector, a

Committee for the Promotion of Employing Persons with Disability in the Private Sector

was established in 1990 under the Labour Department of Peninsular Malaysia. The Code

of Practice for Employment for Persons with Disabilities in the Private1 Sector was

formulated to provide guidelines to government agencies, employers, employers'

associations, employees, trade unions and associations of persons with disability and

individuals with disabilities, for registration and job placement of persons with disability

in the private sector; the guidelines were put into effect on November 9, 2001. Through

December 2008, the number of people with disabilities registered was 10,332, and 7,565

of them were hired in the private sector (Department of Social Welfare, 2009).

Because these provisions did not achieve the target of the circular, the Government

renewed this circular on April 1, 2008 to Service Circular No. 3/2008. The circular

emphasized the roles of employers and Government in implementing affirmative action.

In this circular, employers in Government agencies are required to inform the

Government and Department of Social Welfare regarding vacancies in departments that

are suitable for people with disabilities. This information would help the Department of

Social Welfare (DSW) do job-matching for applicants with disabilities who registered for

employment. Employers are also required to fill in a special form by DSW regarding the

number of employees with disabilities they have hired, and the number of persons with

disabilities they plan to hire every 6 months. The report will be monitored by DSW until

they achieve the target of 1%.

35

Job seekers with disabilities can register for employment in the Government sector by

completing Borang Maklumat Pencarian Kerja OKU (Job Seeking Information for

PWDs) online. Borang Maklumat Pencarian Kerja OKU (Job Seeking Information for

PWDs) is an online system that helps people with disabilities find employment which

started in July 2008. Until 2009, there were 8 people with disabilities who have been

hired in the Government sector via this system (Department of Social Welfare, 2009).

In addition to providing job seeking support, the Government should also ensure

appropriate work settings for workers with disabilities and provide reasonable

accommodations as needed. Implementation of orientation programs to help people with

disabilities adapt to the workplace, as well as to increase the awareness and

understanding of co-workers towards workers with disabilities, is also one of the

responsibilities of employers. For instance, employers can organize Disability Equality

Training (DET) where members of the agencies would be exposed to training in

understanding disabilities and how they can reduce the barriers faced by their co-workers

with disabilities.

SPOku (System of Placement for PWDs) is an online system for employment in the

private sector. Via this system, registered employers can advertise vacancies that they

have in their companies for people with disabilities. Registered job seekers with

disabilities can find jobs that they are interested in and can fill in the application form on

the website.

The Malaysian government also provides employment programs that support

affirmative action and encourage people with disabilities to go to work such as vocational

36

training centers, sheltered workshops, workers with disabilities allowance, discount

prices on public transportation, and Business Incentives Assistance Scheme for People

with Disabilities (SBGP-OKU). In addition, tax relief incentives for employers were also

introduced by the government in order to encourage job opportunities for people with

disabilities. There are tax reductions for the costs employers incur in making renovations

at the workplace for workers with disabilities which encourage private sector employers

to hire more workers with disabilities. However, there are no consequences mentioned in

this circular if the employers fail to play their roles as proposed. This type of

governmental order is called a binding quota scheme which means that employers are

obliged through legislation to employ a minimum number or quota of people with

disabilities. Unfortunately the obligation is not backed by any effective sanctions.

According to Jayasooria (1999), policy matters require work in social and political

analysis, accurate research and documentation, both of which are often outside the scope

of most organizations. In this case, the Malaysian government lacks the resources and the

personnel to effectively implement the plan. Besides, too critical and confrontational an

approach is not welcome in Malaysian society.

Affirmative Action in Employment for People with Disabilities in the United States

Affirmative action laws in the United States address different types of discrimination

related to employment opportunities. The laws are to help everyone who is qualified to

have fair chances in the labor market regardless of race, creed, age, disability and gender.

37

An affirmative action law in the United States had actually been enforced even before

the term was formally used. In 1941 President Roosevelt signed an order called Executive

Order 8802 that contained a clause banning employment discrimination based on color,

race, creed, or national origin. The term "affirmative action" was first used in March of

1961, when President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10925, which established

the President's Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity. The committee was to

study the employment practices of the US government and contracting agencies. Then the

committee was required to recommend any affirmative action that should be needed to

correct existing discriminating employment practices (Teasley, n.d).

Affirmative action in employment for people with disabilities is stated in Section 501

and 503 of the Rehabilitation Act 1973 which pertains to any discrimination against

people with disabilities who are applying for employment. Section 501 requires

affirmative action and non discrimination in employment by Federal agencies of the

executive branch, while Section 503 requires affirmative action and prohibits

employment discrimination by Federal government contractors and subcontractors with

contracts of more than $10,000.

In Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Federal Government agencies are

required to prohibit discrimination due to disability in Federal employment and to engage

in affirmative action for people with disabilities.

Under this section, Federal employers are required not to discriminate against qualified job applicants or employees with disabilities. Persons with disabilities should be given opportunities to be employed in all grade levels and occupational series commensurate with their qualifications. Federal employers should also ensure that their policies do not unnecessarily exclude or limit persons with disabilities because of

38

a job's structure or because of architectural, transportation, communication, procedural, or attitudinal barriers. (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, 2002)

Section 501 prohibits employers from having selection criteria and standards that tend to screen out people with disabilities, unless such procedures have been determined through a job analysis to be job-related and consistent with business necessity, and an appropriate individualized assessment indicates the job applicant cannot perform the essential functions of the job, with or without reasonable accommodation. The law also requires Federal agencies to develop affirmative action programs for hiring, placement, and advancement of persons with disabilities (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, 2002).

Employers are also required to provide "reasonable accommodations" to applicants

and employees with disabilities unless it causes undue hardship to the employers. There

are guidelines in providing suitable accommodations and suggestions of changing the

environment to make it "user-friendly" to workers with disabilities such as restructuring

the job, reassigning the worker, modifying work schedules, adjusting examinations,

providing readers or interpreters, and acquiring equipment and/or facilities including the

use of adaptive technology (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, 2002).

Section 505 provides for the remedies and attorney's fees upon the violation of

Section 501. In the case of a 501 violation, a court may consider the reasonableness of the

cost of any necessary workplace accommodation, the availability of alternatives or other

appropriate relief in order to achieve an equitable and appropriate remedy, as well as a

reasonable attorney's fee as part of the cost.

In Section 503, the implementation of affirmative action is emphasized for Federal

government contractors and subcontractors with contracts of more than $10,000.

Employers are also required to come out with written Affirmative Action Plans (AAP)

annually that describe their sufficient assurances, procedures, and commitments to

39

provide adequate hiring, placement, and advancement opportunities for people with

disabilities that would be monitored by OFCCP officers.

The plan would be reviewed by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) which would also investigate the employment practices. During a compliance review, a compliance officer examines the contractor's affirmative action program; checks personnel, payroll, and other employment records; interviews employees and company officials; and investigates virtually all aspects of employment in the company. The investigator also checks to see whether the contractor is making special efforts to achieve equal opportunity through affirmative action. Expanded efforts in outreach, recruitment, training and other areas are some of the affirmative steps contractors can take to help members of the protected groups compete for jobs on equal footing with other applicants and employees. If there are problems, the contractor will specify in its AAP the specific procedures it will follow and the good faith efforts it will make to provide equal employment opportunity. OFCCP will recommend corrective action and suggest ways to achieve equal employment opportunity (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, 2002).

Section 503 also described about the penalties that might be faced by employers due

to the violation. It is stated that failure to comply with the non-discrimination or

affirmative action provisions is a violation of the contract. A violation may result in

contracts cancelled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor may

be debarred, i.e., declared ineligible for future government contracts after a full

evidentiary hearing.

Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act requires affirmative action plans that include the 10 major components as below. An employer should:

1. Assign a company official to be responsible for the implementation of affirmative action activities.

2. Prepare and post an equal opportunity policy statement. 3. Review personnel processes to ensure job applicants and employees with

disabilities are considered for all job vacancies and training opportunities, and are not stereotyped in a manner which limits their access to all jobs for which they are qualified.

40

4. Review all job qualification standards to ensure that they are job-related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.

5. Make reasonable accommodations to the known functional limitations of otherwise qualified individuals with disabilities.

6. Develop and implement procedures to ensure that employees with disabilities are not harassed because of disability.

7. Undertake appropriate outreach and positive recruitment activities such as: a. establishing formal arrangements for applicant referrals with recruitment sources such as state employment security agencies, state vocational rehabilitation agencies, college placement offices, labor organizations and organizations of or for individuals with disabilities; b. participating in work-study programs with schools which specialize in training or educating individuals with disabilities; c. including current employees with disabilities in promotional literature and career programs; d. sending written notification of company affirmative action policy to subcontractors, vendors and suppliers; and e. considering applicants with known disabilities for all available positions for which they may be qualified, not just for which they have applied.

8. Train all personnel involved in recruitment, screening, selection, promotion, disciplinary action and related processes to ensure that affirmative action steps are taken.

9. Develop procedures to disseminate information about affirmative action policies within a company in order to ensure greater employee cooperation and participation.

10. Design and implement an audit and reporting system to measure the effectiveness of an affirmative action program. Where an affirmative action program is found to be deficient, actions must be taken to remedy the situation (OFCCP, 2002).

The Rehabilitation Act 1973 was amended in 1974 and 1976 which basically extended

the services of rehabilitation as authorized in the 1973 Act. In 1978, the legislation was

extended in the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities

Amendments (P.L. 95-602) with an emphasis on people with severe disabilities. It led to

the establishment of independent living rehabilitation programs for people with

disabilities who did not have work potential. The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of

1984 then mandated state rehabilitation agencies to have a client assistance program, and

in 1986, the amendments to the Act authorized the agencies to provide supported

employment services for individuals with severe disabilities (Rubin & Roessler, 2008). In

41

1998, the Rehabilitation Act was again amended and incorporated in the Workforce

Investment Act.

Other Executive Orders have emphasized anti-discrimination protection in

employment for people with disabilities such as Executive Order 13078, Increasing

Employment of Adults with Disabilities, which created a coordinated and aggressive

national policy to bring adults with disabilities into gainful employment at a rate as close

as possible to the general adult population. Executive Order 13163, Increasing the

Opportunity for Individuals with Disabilities to be Employed in the Federal Government,

increased the opportunities for individuals with disabilities to be employed at all levels

and occupations of the Federal Government. Executive Order 13164, Requiring Federal

Agencies to Establish Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable

Accommodation, required each Federal agency to establish effective written procedures

to facilitate the provision of reasonable accommodation. Agencies shall submit their

plans, and any modifications, to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Finally, Executive Order 13217, Community-Based Alternatives for Individuals with

Disabilities, promotes community based alternatives for individuals with disabilities,

including helping ensure all Americans have the opportunity to live close to their families

and friends, to live more independently, to engage in productive employment and to

participate in community life (United States Department of Labor, n.d.).

If individuals believe they have been discriminated against by federal contractors or

subcontractors, they may file complaints. Complaints may also be filed by organizations

42

on behalf of the person or persons affected within 180 days from the date of the alleged

discrimination, although filing time can be extended for a good reason.

The "Vietnam Era Veterans" Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, VEVRAA, was

amended to stop discrimination and require affirmative action be given in all personnel

practices for veterans with disabilities from the Vietnam War, i.e., for any veteran who

served during a war or in a campaign that issued a campaign badge (Teasley, n.d). It sets

the policy goal of "the maximum of employment and job advancement opportunities

within the Federal Government for disabled veterans and certain veterans of the Vietnam

era and of the post-Vietnam era who are qualified for such employment and

advancement" (p.2)

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 requires "fair and equitable" treatment in all

aspects of personnel management without regard to political affiliation, race, color,

religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or disabling condition.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed July 26, 1990 as Public Law 101-336 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq) and became effective on January 26, 1992. The ADA is landmark federal legislation that opens up services and employment opportunities to the 43 million Americans with disabilities. The law was written not as an affirmative action law but is intended to eliminate illegal discrimination and level the playing field for disabled individuals (Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington, 2009).

The Americans with Disabilities Act 1990 consists of five titles to prevent discrimination of persons with disabilities seeking employment, public accommodations, public services, transportation and telecommunications. In this act, under the employment section, it is mentioned that people with disabilities should be given fair chances to be hired. Employers with 15 or more employees are required to offer equal opportunity in selecting, testing, and hiring, qualified applicants with disabilities as well as provide reasonable accommodations for qualified applicants or workers with disabilities when accommodations would not impose "undue hardship" (United States Department of Labor, n.d.).

43

Supporting the Employment for People with Disabilities

Malaysian Commitments

Besides the circular, Malaysia has many programmes to enhance the employment of

people with disabilities. Government policies regarding employment opportunities for

people with disabilities appear in the National Labour Policy, the quota scheme, the tax

policy, grants, and support measures and general statutory measures (Aeberhard and

Raskin, 1997). Programmes that support the employment of people with disabilities,

directly and indirectly are:

Worker with Disabilities Allowance

To encourage people with disabilities to work, the Government, through the 2004

Malaysia Budget, provided a Disabled Worker Allowance of RM200 per month if their

monthly income ceiling does not exceed RM500. In May 2008, under the Malaysian

2009 Budget, the Government raised the income ceiling to RM1, 200 and the allowance

increased to RM300 per month.

Facility and Tax Relief Incentive

In 1981, the Government doubled the tax relief to employers employing workers with

disabilities and, in 1991; the Government provided further exemptions to parents who

have children with disabilities who are below 18 years old. Tax rebates are also given to

taxpayers who bought special equipment for their own use and for their children or

parents with disabilities.

44

There are also tax deductions for renovation costs in the workplace for workers with

disabilities. As a continuous incentive to care for persons with disability and in addition

to RM5, 000 and RM3, 000 in personal and wife tax relief, respectively, the Government

has approved a further tax relief of RM5, 000 to taxpayers with disabilities and RM2, 500

to the spouse beginning from 1995.

Job Placement

The purpose of the job placement program is to help people with disabilities find

employment in Government Agencies, factories, or private sector settings as well as in

special programs such as sheltered workshops. The Department provides assistance in

securing jobs in the manufacturing sector and government agencies.

Protected and Sheltered Workshops

For persons with disabilities who are unable to access government or private sector

services, training and certain facilities are provided through the cooperation of

government agencies, private and statutory bodies at protected workshops which provide

job opportunities.

Sheltered workshops are designed for give people with disabilities to provide opportunities that lead to dignity, self worth and socialisation amongst their peers. Sheltered workshops often employ people with disabilities in a variety of subcontracting work such as packaging, mailing and sorting services for companies and also producing food and crafts. The majority of sheltered workshops found in Malaysia cater for people with learning disabilities. Employees of sheltered workshops work a certain number of hours per week (determined by the management) and are paid wages based on their abilities to produce in comparison to normal standards (BAKTI-MIND, 2008)

45

According to BAKTI-MIND (2008), sheltered workshops provide people with

disabilities the basic skills to become independent and integrate with society. By

working, people with disabilities would earn salaries that allow them to contribute and

provide services for society. Besides, earning a salary provides a portion of their

livelihood. People with disabilities would also learn about responsibility when they learn

about coming to work and doing a job. Employment also functions as an avenue for

people with disabilities to socialize with their friends.

Other than that, the Cheshire organisation in Malaysia works together with training

institutions in the public and private sectors to offer courses that help young people with

disabilities. Through study, they indentified new areas of work that they had not

considered before. In previous courses, they concentrated on baking. New initiatives

included hospitality, information technology, office administration and business

management (Leonard Cheshire Disability, n.d.).

Self-employment

Because job opportunities for people with visual impairments such as typist,

stenographers and telephone operators have declined, the Government has encouraged

the Association for the Blind to establish a network of Franchise Shops to provide

opportunities for individuals to become entrepreneurs as well as to create more job

opportunities. They can also obtain financing from the Government's Micro-Credit

46

Scheme and receive suitable locations to establish a network of Franchise Shops. In

addition, the Government will also bear the full expenses for the purchase of white canes

and Braille machines for people with visual impairments.

There are several reasons for people with disabilities to choose self-employment, as an option to gain economic independence. Firstly, by being self-employed people with disabilities can work in interest areas, e.g., interior designer, hair stylist, web designer, and baker. Secondly, it provides flexible working hours and resources. Thirdly, self-employed persons can help other people with disabilities by providing employment opportunities. Lastly, since people with disabilities always been discriminated against and under-employed, self- employment provides access to income. However, self-employment requires a tremendous amount of self-motivation, persistence, initiative and commitment from people with disabilities. Pity and overprotection are completely inadequate to prepare people with disabilities for self-employment (BAKTI-MIND, 2002).

Skim Bantuan Galakan Perniagaan Orang Kurang Upaya (Business Incentives

Assistance Scheme for People with Disabilities) is a Government scheme to provide

business loans for people with disabilities who are interested in self-employment and

having their own business. It is an incentive for them to start their business or expand the

business in order to open new employment opportunities for other people with

disabilities. The application for the loan can be made by completing a SBGP-OKU form

that is available at any Department of Labor office, and the form must be submitted with

a business plan. There are three levels of evaluation before the grant is approved. There is

an evaluation team who monitors and advises them regarding business progress after six

month from the date of approval.

Public Transportation

Transportation is among the barriers for people with disabilities to acquire

employment. Public transportation that is not "user friendly" for people with disabilities

47

may leave them "stuck" at home instead of able to go to work. Due to this awareness, the

Government has taken a few actions to reduce the barrier such as requiring that public

transportation to be accessible for people with disabilities. Other than that, the

Government has encouraged transport companies to give concession fares to people with

disabilities. PUTRA-LRT, the light rail transit in Malaysia, has given concession fares

that allow people with disabilities to go to work at low cost. Besides, there is no road tax

for motorcycles 150cc and below and no road tax for locally make vehicles owned by

people with disabilities.

Job coaching

Job coaching services were started in 2006 and were introduced by Japan International

Cooperation Agency (JICA). The purpose of job coaching is to help people with

disabilities to adapt to the work environment, learn about the jobs in order to become

successful employees, and increase the understanding between workers with disabilities

and employers as well as co-workers (Department of Social Welfare, 2008). This

program has currently been implemented at Giant Hypermarket, Denso and Sony.

Building accessibility

The Technical Committee with SIRIM has drafted a Practice Code pertaining to the

Access to Public Buildings for Persons with Disabilities which has resulted in

amendments of the Building Standards By-laws 1984 with regard to buildings meeting

48

the requirements of persons with disabilities. Among the requirements are ramps and

railings, appropriate wheelchair passage-ways, suitably designed elevators, reserved car

parking lots, and suitable toilets.

United States' Commitments

Supported Employment

The supported employment program is another program that enables individuals with

the most severe disabilities, i.e. psychiatric, mental retardation, learning disabilities, and

traumatic brain injury, to integrate into competitive work settings. Supported employment

programs were authorized by the Rehabilitation Act Amendments 1986 which mandated

that state rehabilitation agencies provide on-the-job assistance.

In supported employment, job coaches, transportation, assistive technology, specialized job training, and individually tailored supervision are provided as assistances for the purpose of ongoing support services in order for workers to perform their jobs. Recent studies have indicated that the on-going support services for people with severe disabilities could increase their rates for employment retention. Supported employment encourages people to work within their communities and encourages work, social interaction, and integration (United States Department of Labor, 1993).

The basic components of supported employment are paid employment, integrated

work sites, and ongoing support (United States Department of Labor, 1993). In supported

employment programs, wages and benefits such as sick leave, vacation time, health

benefits, bonuses, and training opportunities are provided. At the work sites, people with

disabilities should be given equal opportunities to participate in activities together with 49

workers without disabilities. Ongoing support is given to individuals so that they can

keep their employment.

Clients in supported employment are placed in community businesses that best suit

their interests and abilities. The training is provided on the job site with help from job

coaches, and individuals learn about jobs and work related skills such as work behaviour

and social skills. Job coaches "fade" from the site gradually when the individuals are able

to be independent at the workplace. There is also a type of supported employment called

the enclave model, in which a group of people with disabilities, usually 5 to 8 persons,

would be trained by employees without disabilities at the work site and then work as a

group within the work site. Employers benefit from supported employment by not paying

fees, by receiving screened applicants whose abilities match the job requirements, by

having on-job training by job coaches, and by having follow-up services for the duration

of employment (United States Department of Labor, 1993).

Vocational Rehabilitation

The Vocational Rehabilitation Program in the United States is a program that helps

people with all kinds of disabilities find and keep jobs. It was begun for veterans with

disabilities as a result of wartime, yet grew to include civilians with disabilities. The

Vocational Rehabilitation Program is mandated and regulated by the Federal government

while being administered through state governments. The first Vocational Rehabilitation

Act was signed into law on June 10, 1920 (Office of Health and Human Services, 2010).

The Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1954 were available in January

1954 when President Eisenhower urged Congress to draft legislation to meet the

50

rehabilitation needs of the nation (Rubin & Roessler, 2008). Later the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973 was authorized to continue the allocation of Federal funds for administration and

operation of a vocational rehabilitation (VR) program to help people with the most severe

disabilities in employment (Office of Health and Human Services, 2010).

The VR program provides a range of employment services for people with disabilities

who wish to work that involve preparing for, entering, engaging in, and retaining jobs. To

apply for VR services, a person must be physically or mentally disabled. Priority

however is given to people with the most severe disabilities (Office of Health and Human

Services, 2010).

Job Coaching

A job coach is a person who is hired by the placement agency to provide specialized

on-site training to assist the employee with a disability in learning and performing the job

and adjusting to the work environment (United States Department of Labor, 1993). Job

coaching services are provided in supported employment programs in order to assist

workers with disabilities to understand the scope of employment, as well as other related

work skills such as social and interpersonal skills.

Sheltered workshops

Sheltered workshops offer employment training and services for people with

disabilities to help them move toward optimal levels of preparation in order to compete in

the labour market. Nelson (1971) in Hsu, Ososkie, and Huang (2009) defined a sheltered

workshop as "A sheltered workshop is a nonprofit rehabilitation facility utilizing

51

individual goals, wages, supportive services, and a controlled work environment to help

vocationally handicapped persons achieve or maintain their maximum potential as

workers." (p. 127).

Sheltered workshops provide employment opportunities for persons who are not yet

capable of independently seeking and holding employment due to their physical or

cognitive disabilities. According to Murphy and Rogan (1995) in Hsu, Ososkie, and

Huang (2009), in the United States, sheltered workshops are divided into two major types

which are transitional sheltered workshops and extended sheltered workshops.

Transitional sheltered workshop programs provide job training and work experience to

individuals in segregated working environments. The employment training assists the

trainee to acquire the skills necessary for competitive employment. For extended

sheltered workshop programs, the services are to be long-term or permanent placements

for individuals who may not be able to work in the community.

Cultural influences

The early movement of rehabilitation for people with disabilities in Malaysia was

much influenced by a collectivism culture as well as a charity perspective due to the

society's sympathy for people they regarded as "unfortunate". According to Jayasooria

and Ooi (1994), the Department of Social Welfare, which was established in 1946, had

the principal duty "to care for the crippled, blind, and feeble-minded" (p. 96). In 1950s

and 1960s the government encouraged voluntary effort from society in general, as it was

52

evident that all needs could not be adequately met and sustained through statutory

involvement. This change in the government's focus was characterized in three ways.

Firstly, it encouraged the wider community to take responsibility for people with

disabilities and their families. The belief during that particular time was that voluntary

attempts by people without disabilities to organise people with disabilities were

important. Secondly, the attempts were motivated by a common ideology based on

charity and good will to provide relief and assistance for people with disabilities who

would had been totally neglected. Thirdly, it was based on institutional or custodial care

which, of course, resulted in people with disabilities being segregated from society.

In the 1960s people with disabilities started to challenge this isolation or welfare

approach. In the 1970s, the growing awareness among people with disabilities of their

rights and constructive roles in society was mushrooming. They fought for self-respect

and dignity, a movement consistent with changes taking place internationally. The end of

the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s saw the involvement of people with disabilities

in issues concerning their welfare and future (Jayasooria & Ooi, 1994).

Malaysian culture heavily emphasizes the spirit of gotong-royong. Gotong-royong is a

social concept of cooperation among many people who work together to achieve a shared

goal in the spirit of goodwill. Being a caring and loving society, it is important to be

responsible, to take care of each other, and to have sympathy toward people who are less

fortunate such as the poor, elderly, as well as people with disabilities. These are the

expected manners that are highly valued in Malaysia. In elementary schools, there are

53

moral classes that teach the importance of helping each other (gotong-royong). Hence,

the value of collectivism is planted at an early age.

Ooi (1991) in Jayasooria (1999) mentioned that people with disabilities in Malaysia

are deprived of their rights due to public apathy, discrimination and prejudice. There

needs to be change in the approach to providing social services from one based on charity

which implies goodwill and low standards to one based on social responsibility and

human rights. It is different in the United States where the country is influenced by the

individualism culture, and rehabilitation services are based on civil rights. The early

phases of rehabilitation had some basis in civil rights as veterans were asking for their

equal rights in exchange for their sacrifices for their country. Historically, the United

States has placed a high value on individuality rather than group benefits. The concept of

individualism emphasizes self-reliance and personal independence, stressing that each

person is born with rights of his / her own.

The influence of individualism leads people with disabilities in the United States to

fight for their rights in every area of life including employment. They are less dependent

on society as compared to Malaysia and demand to be given equal opportunities with

people without disabilities.

54

Theories

Models of Disability

The unemployment issue among people with disabilities can be explained via

numerous models of disability that exist. According to Shapiro (1994) in Gottlieb,

Myhill, and Blanck, 2009), these models are tools for defining impairment and are

important as they play a significant role in determining the strategies that government and

society devise to help meet the needs of people with disabilities. There are three most

prominent models which are the medical model, the social model and the biopsychosocial

model.

The medical model is the earliest model that dominated the formulation of disability

policy for more than a century (Blanck, 2001; Myhill and Blanck, 2009 in in Gottlieb,

Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). This model emphasized the physical and mental limitations of

the individual. It stressed that the physical and social environments in which people live

are unrelated to the barriers faced by the persons. The medical model focuses almost

solely on the individual's impairment when forming disability policy and developing

treatments and services for those living with a disability (Shapiro, 1994).

According to the medical model (Blanck, 2008 in in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck,

2010), people with disabilities may be excused from the normal obligations of society

such as work, and institutionalization and segregation are ultimately justified. This model

produces negative consequences for employment because it limits people with disabilities

to more dependency on service providers. Shapiro (1994) mentioned that this model

strengthens prejudices among employers about the incapability of people with disabilities

55

to carry out the same level of job performance as compared to people without disabilities.

In countries that utilize the medical model of disability, people with disabilities are rarely

given chances to work. Most of time, when they are hired, they are usually be placed in

isolated settings (Lunt and Thornton, 1994).

The social model on the other hand believes that disability is a consequence of

negative environmental, social, and attitudinal forces affecting people with disabilities

that hold them back from fully participating in society (Blank et. al, 2009). According to

Myhill and Blanck (2009) in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck (2010), in recent years, this

model has become increasingly recognized as it focused on barriers within society instead

of the individual, as well as acknowledges the uniqueness of individuals' abilities and

needs. This model also emphasized the attitudinal, physical, and institutional barriers to

be removed, and people with disabilities were seen as able to participate in society

instead of incapable to be responsible as adults (Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). This

model has significantly influenced the lives of people with disabilities and policies of the

country as it helped to change the negative views and attitudes of employers when hiring

people with disabilities. According to Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blank (2009), the social

model has had positive consequences for employment outcomes in the United States,

Canada and Australia enabling many individuals with disabilities to obtain customized

and competitive employment in the community.

The biopsychosocial model is a new model adopted by the World Health Organization

(WHO). This model combines the idea of medical and social models regarding disability

(Jette, 2006; Wright 2004). According to this model, neither medical model nor social

56

model is adequate to understand people with disabilities. It is believed that disability

stems from the interactions between biological, psychological, and social factors

(Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). This model acknowledges socio-environmental

factors, socio-demographic factors, and behavioral factors that affect the lives of people

with disabilities (Jette, 2006). "The impact of this model however is still unclear. Yet,

since it focuses on social and environmental factors, it is reasonable to assume that, like

the social model, it would have positive impact on employment opportunities for people

with disabilities (Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010, p.3)."

Employment Models for People with Disabilities

Employment for people with disabilities around the world has been implemented

using several models. Among the primary models are sheltered, supported, and

customized employment. The differences among these models pertain to the environment

of job placements whether it is a segregated or integrated environment as well as worker

payment, whether it does or does not pay competitive wages (Kregel and Dean, 2002).

Under sheltered employment, people with disabilities are trained under people without

disabilities supervision and they are taught to work together (Kregel and Dean, 2002).

Based on this model, people with disabilities are regarded as less productive compared to

workers without disabilities. Often the wages are low and a fraction of the wages given

other workers, i.e., "subminimum wage" (Blanck et al., 2003; Kregel and Dean, 2002 in

Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). Workers with disabilities are expected to improve

their productivity before they can move out from the sheltered workshop employment

57

into competitive employment (Blanck et al., 2003; Kregel and Dean, 2002 in Gottlieb,

Myhill, and Blanck, 2010).

There are a few disadvantages to placing people with disabilities in sheltered

employment. First, as the incomes for sheltered settings are low or inconsequential,

individuals remain dependent on government cash benefit programs (Blanck et al., 2003;

Kregel and Dean, 2002 in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). Other than that, because

of the "special or dissimilar employment training", segregated employment leads to low

expectations and negative perceptions among society which makes it more difficult for

individuals with disabilities to obtain meaningful employment (Kregel and Dean, 2002).

Very few people in sheltered employment progress into competitive employment (Blanck

et al., 2003 in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010), and thus sheltered employment is said

to have long-term impact assisting people with disabilities to become more independent

in society (Murphy and Rogan, 1995).

Supported employment is an employment model that assists workers with disabilities

throughout the employment process beginning with searching for a job to keeping the job

(Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). Job coaching is provided under supported

employment model to help the individual to find a job, train for the job, and maintain

employment through individual supports and accommodations (Parent, 2004). This aim

of this model is to place people in jobs that provide competitive wages (Gottlieb, Myhill,

and Blanck, 2010). Supported employment usually involves people with severe

disabilities. It is based on a self-determination concept which emphasizes core values

such as the right to work, capacity to perform a job, individual strengths, personal goals

58

and choices, and role of the community in the person's growth and development

(Wehman et.al., 2003).

Customized employment is another model that aims at placing people with disabilities

in competitive jobs. This is a new model, and it begins with the person's needs,

aspirations, talents and skills, which serve as a basis for contacting potential employers

about the person's choices, strengths, and abilities (Inge, 2008). Via this model, jobs are

created to benefit the abilities and interests of the individual, and the individual is placed

in a competitive setting and obtains supports that match his or her needs (Gottlieb,

Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). This model is employed in the One-Stop Service Delivery

System in the United States (Blanck et al., 2009; Inge, 2008 in Gottlieb, Myhill, and

Blanck, 2010) in which workforce investment, education, and other human service

programs collaborate to enhance access to services and long-term employment outcomes

(United States Department of Labor, 1999 in Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010).

The supported and customized employment models are able to provide the wanted

outcomes for persons with disabilities (Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). This is due

to reasons related to individuals such as wages, choices, and discriminations faced by the

persons. Individuals with competitive employment receive higher wages and more

working hours as compared to individuals in sheltered employment. According to a

Maryland survey, individuals in customized and supported employment earn 3.5 times

more that those in sheltered employment and work 30% more hours per week (Conley,

2003).

59

Secondly, individuals who work in supported and customized employment gain more

social benefits as the environment enables the individuals with disabilities to make

friends with individuals without disabilities, obtain cultural benefits from holding a job

since an individual's identity is often shaped by work, and become integrated in society

outside of work (Ohtake and Chadsey, 1999). Both models may also diminish stigma

associated with having a disability because they emphasize the person's abilities and

productivity (Wehman et. al, 2003).

Increasing numbers of people with disabilities are employed through models that

focus on abilities and choice (Gottlieb, Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). However, most of

individuals with disabilities worldwide still are employed in sheltered rather than

competitive settings (Wehman et. al, 2003).

60

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This chapter discusses the methodology used for this study that includes the design of

the study, data collection, and data analysis.

Design of the Study

This research utilizes a review of relevant literature to compare and contrast

affirmative action and employment initiatives. In this research, the relevant documents

used were journal articles, conference proceedings, books, government documents, and

national data. This study compares differences in affirmative action and employment

services in Malaysia and the United States pertaining to people with disabilities.

Affirmative action programs in employment for people with disabilities in government

and private sectors of both countries are compared, and recommendations based on the

differences are made in order to improve the implementation of affirmative action as well

as employment rates for people with disabilities in Malaysia.

Data Collection

The literature review consisted of searches of PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Ebsco

Academic Search Premier, ProQuest Direct, and Web of Science using various

combinations of the following terms: affirmative action, rehabilitation services, people

61

with disabilities in Malaysia and the United States, quota scheme, and employment

barriers for people with disabilities. Information regarding affirmative action in the

United States was gained from US Department of Labor websites and journals, while

information on affirmative action in Malaysia was gained from the Department of Social

Welfare Malaysia website, journals, and government documents on Service Circular No.

3/2008.

Data Analysis

The literature reviews, government documents, and journals were reviewed and the

information regarding affirmative action in Malaysia and the United States was analyzed.

The data are presented in Table 4.1, Table 4.2, Table 4.3, and Table 4.4. The affirmative

action program in employment for people with disabilities in both countries are compared

generally in Table 4.1. Next, the government sector affirmative action policies in

Malaysia and the United States are compared in Table 4.2, while the affirmative action

programs in the private sectors for both countries are compared in Table 4.3. Table 4.4

presents the programs implemented by the Government in Malaysia and the United States

to support affirmative action. The first research question regarding differences between

the affirmative action approaches is answered under each table, and the second research

question regarding recommendations on improvement for affirmative action is addressed

via literature reviews.

62

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

Introduction

In this chapter, affirmative action in employment for people with disabilities in

Malaysia and the United States is explained and clarified (see Table 4.1). The differences

between affirmative action in both countries in public sectors are explained in Table 4.2,

while in Table 4.3 the differences in affirmative action in private sectors in both countries

are presented. Table 4.4 describes other related programs by the Government to support

affirmative action as well as to achieve the target. Research questions are answered based

on tables where public and private affirmative action procedures are differentiated, and

steps that can be taken to improve the situation in Malaysia are discussed.

Results

RQ1: What are the differences between affirmative action policies for people with

disabilities in Malaysia and in the United States?

The development of affirmative action legislation in a country is based on a careful

consideration of history, needs, values, and social perceptions. Hence, it is not

unexpected that affirmative action policies implemented in countries around the world

are different from one another.

63

Type

Laws/regulations

Related laws (upon violation)

Cultural influence

Parties involved

Malaysia

Ouota scheme : 1% employment quota is reserved for people with disabilities in government sector since 1988. : extended to the private sector, where code of practice for private sector was introduced by Ministry of Human Resources in 2001.

• Service circular No 10/1988, and was renewed as Service circular No 3/2008 (for Government sector)

• Code of Practice for Employment of Persons with Disabilities in Private Sector (for Private sector)

• People with Disabilities Act 2008

• Collectivism • Welfare based • Employers • People with

disabilities • Government

United States of America

Non quota scheme : requires employers to take affirmative action to employ and advance workers with disabilities. Written affirmative action program (AAP) is required annually for both Federal Government and Private sector.

• Rehabilitation Act 1973-Section 501 (for Federal Government)

• Rehabilitation Act 1973-Section 503 (for Government contractors)

• Section 501 through 504, and 510

• American with Disabilities Act 1990

• Individualism • Civil right based • Employers • People with

disabilities • Government

Table 4.1: Employment Affirmative Action Implementations for People with Disabilities in Malaysia and the United States

64

Table 4.1 describes employment affirmative action for people with disabilities in

Malaysia and the United States generally. For RQ1, the differences between the

affirmative action strategies are:

Quota scheme and Non-Quota Scheme

Affirmative action as implemented Malaysia and the United States is different in

terms of its type. A quota system in employment for people with disabilities is

implemented in Malaysia, while in the United States the affirmative action is a non-quota

scheme. Malaysia has extended its quota scheme for affirmative action to the private

sector, while there is no history of a quota requirement in the United States (Thornton,

1998).

A quota scheme affirmative action means employers are expected to hire a specified

minimum numbers of people with disabilities to ensure that a certain percentage of their

workforce is made up of people with disabilities. In Malaysia, the Government has

specified a 1% hiring quota for people with disabilities. To ensure that employers are

making the effort to achieve the quota, the Government requires them to fill in a form

that states the number of workers with disabilities that they have hired and the number of

people with disabilities that they plan to hire. The form is reviewed every 6 months.

In the United States on the other hand, there is no specific percentage that is required

by the Government for employers. Instead, affirmative action in employment for people

with disabilities has been implemented by employers in which they have to present a plan

of action that should be updated and reviewed by the authorities once a year. The plan is

called an Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) and should include a description of sufficient

65

assurances, procedures, and commitments to provide adequate hiring, placement, and

advancement opportunities for people with disabilities.

Cultural influences

The influence of culture on the existence of affirmative action in both countries is

undeniable. Laws and regulations of a country typically take into account the culture of

the society which makes the implementation of policies different from one country to

another. Individuals from Asian cultures exhibit collectivistic tendencies, while the

United States is the country with the highest individualism index (Hofstede, 1980 in

Brutus et.al., 1998).

Malaysian society is a practicing collectivism culture, and the history of rehabilitation

services in Malaysia shows that it is based on a "charity" perception. Hence, the treatment

for people with disabilities is based more on sympathy which can become a barrier for

them to live independently.

The dominant view held by the majority of Malaysians is that charity is the best assistance that can be provided to "helpless" persons with disabilities. According to Hodges-Aeberhard and Raskin (1997), people with disabilities rarely experience barriers to employment as a result of overt hostility. In fact, discrimination often takes place with the best intentions, resulting from genuine concerns about capabilities and a desire to protect people with disabilities from harm, injury or embarrassment. Some have advocated that Malaysia change this attitude of "charity" towards people with disabilities as it reinforces the belief that they are incapable of becoming part of the open labour market. In response to this reality, affirmative action on behalf of persons with disabilities frequently takes the form of quota systems, which require that a certain percentage of jobs be set aside for persons with disabilities (Hodges-Aeberhard & Raskin, 1997, p.2).

66

In the United States on the other hand, as they are a practicing individualism culture,

affirmative action is based more on civil rights, and the focus is on protecting equal

rights. The affirmative action policies are influenced by the notions of justice and the

rights of individuals. Affirmative action in the United States was historically formed as a

result of discrimination against minorities and the resulting unequal treatment in society.

Hence, the purpose of affirmative action is to eliminate the past and present inequities in

access and advancement opportunities. A study by Fletcher and Chalmers (1991) in

Brutus (1998) shows that an ethnic minority in the United States will tend to be positive

toward programs that will rectify past discrimination against this minority group.

By definition, affirmative action provides remedies designed to rectify past

discrimination for the benefit of society as a whole. Therefore, it seems reasonable to

assume that those individuals who are closer to the collectivistic end of the continuum

will have more favourable attitudes toward affirmative action plans than those who are

closer to the individualistic end. A collectivist might relegate his/her personal goals for

those of the in-group or a group whose membership is based on shared characteristics.

Hence, a collectivist, whose in-group encompasses society at large, will indeed see the

benefit of those programs for the in-group (Brutus et.al. 1998). Yet, studies by Arthur,

Doverspike, and Fuentes (1992) in Brutus et.al. (1998) failed to link individualism-

collectivism and effective responses to affirmative action.

67

Affirmative Action in Government and Private Sectors

In Malaysia and the United States, there are also similarities in affirmative action

policies. In each country, affirmative action is guided by written laws and supported by

related laws upon violation. Both countries have a specific affirmative action plan for the

Government sector, and a specific affirmative action plan for the private sector.

In Malaysia, employment affirmative action for the Government sector is currently

stated in Service Circular No. 3/2008 and is supported by the People with Disabilities Act

2008 upon violation. While in the private sector, the affirmative action plan is written in

the Code of Practice for Employment of Persons with Disabilities in the private sector

and also supported by People with Disabilities Act 2008 upon violation. In America, both

the Government and the private sectors' employment affirmative action plans are stated

in the Rehabilitation Act 1973 but under different sections. For the Government sector,

affirmative action is mentioned under Section 501, while for the private sector it is

written under Section 503.

However, the implementation of affirmative action for the Government and private

sectors in Malaysia and the United States are different. Implementation of affirmative

action in the Government and private sectors in Malaysia is basically the same where

employers need to fill in a form that states the number of people with disabilities they

have already hired, and the number of people with disabilities they plan to hire. There is

no penalty stated in both sectors if the plan does not achieve the proposed hiring goals.

In the United States, both employers in the Government and private sectors need to

prepare a written Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) with specific plans for hiring,

68

placement, and advancement. There are penalties stated in the law if the plan is not

implement accordingly, and penalties for the Government and private sectors are

different.

69

Parties involved

Requirements

Service Circular No 3/ 2008

• Employers • People with

disabilities • Government /

Department of Social Welfare

Emplovers : inform the Government and Department of Social Welfare regarding the vacancies in departments that are suitable for people with disabilities.

: required to fill in a form on the number of employees with disabilities who have been hired, and the number of persons with disabilities they plan to hire every 6 months. The report will be monitored by Society Welfare Department.

: ensure the appropriate work settings for workers with disabilities and provide reasonable accommodations.

Section 501, Rehabilitation Act 1973

• Employers • People with disabilities • Government /

Interagency Committee on Employees, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Emplovers : should not discriminate against qualified applicants with disabilities, and ensure that their policies do not unnecessarily exclude or limit people with disabilities because of job's structure, architectural, transportation, communication, procedural, or attitudinal barriers.

: provide "reasonable accommodations" to applicants and workers with disabilities unless the accommodations can cause undue hardship.

Table 4.2: Affirmative Action for Government Sectors in Malaysia and the United States

70

: implement orientation program to help people with disabilities adapt to the workplace, as well as to increase the awareness and understanding of co-workers towards workers with disabilities, for example, Disability Equality Training (DET).

People with Disabilities : register under Department of Social Welfare

Government / Department of Social Welfare : organize job search activities for people with disabilities

: supply the work information registration of people with disabilities to the employers

: organize programs involving people with disabilities to discuss issues and challenges of employment

: promote job coaching approaches at workplaces to help workers with disabilities understand and adapt to tasks and environment.

: cooperate with non government organizations to

prohibited from having selection criteria and standards that tend to screen out people with disabilities, unless the procedures are determined by job analysis to be job-related, and an appropriate individualized assessment indicates the job applicant could not perform the essential functions of the job.

: required to develop a written Affirmative Action Plan (AAP). The plan should include a description of sufficient assurances, procedures, and commitments to provide adequate hiring, placement, and advancement opportunities for people with disabilities. It should be updated annually and reviewed annually by the Commission, with consultation with Committee.

People with Disabilities : should be employed in all grade levels and occupational series commensurate with their qualifications.

: may file complaints if they believe they have been discriminated. Complaints must be filed within 180 days from the date of the alleged discrimination. However, filing time can be extended for a good reason.

Table 4.2: Affirmative Action for Government Sectors in Malaysia and the United States

71

Penalties

organize programs for social awareness regarding on potential of people with disabilities

: ensure that employers submit the report of numbers of workers with disabilities twice a year.

There is no penalty according to the circular. Employers only need to continue the efforts to hire 1% of people with disabilities until the target achieved. The progress is monitored by the Department of Social Welfare every 6 months.

Government/ Interagency Committee on Employees, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. : review and approve affirmative action plan by employers annually.

: the Commission, after consultation with the Committee can develop and recommend policies and procedures which will facilitate hiring, placement, and advancement in employment for people with disabilities who received rehabilitation services under State vocational rehabilitation plan, veteran's plan or other programs for people with disabilities, to the Secretary for referral to the State agencies.

Section 505 of Rehabilitation Act 1973: The remedies, procedures, and rights shall be available with respect to any complaint. A court may take into account the reasonableness of the cost of any necessary workplace accommodation, the availability of alternatives or other appropriate relief in order to achieve an equitable and appropriate remedy, as well as a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the cost.

Table 4.2: Affirmative Action for Government Sectors in Malaysia and the United States

72

Table 4.2 describes the affirmative action in both countries for the Government

sectors. The table shows the following differences:

Affirmative Action Requirements

The requirements of affirmative action in Malaysia and in the United States are almost

the same. Employers are required not to discriminate against qualified job seekers with

disabilities, to provide "reasonable accommodation" for workers with disabilities and to

develop written plans for hiring people with disabilities. The governments in both

countries would come out with programs to support the affirmative action as well to

monitor the plan by the employers.

The differences are, in the United States, employers in Government agencies must

create a specific plan called the Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) that includes policies

and procedures which will facilitate hiring, placement, and advancement in employment

for people with disabilities every year. While in Malaysia, employers in government

agencies need to fill in a form that contains information regarding number of workers

with disabilities that they have and number of people with disabilities that they plan to

hire. The form needs to be filled in every 6 months. There is no specific plan required for

hiring people with disabilities or for achieving the target.

Penalties

In Malaysia, there is no penalty stated in the Service Circular No. 3/2008 regarding

the failure to comply with the circular. In Malaysia, the type of quota scheme that has

been implemented is a binding quota, which means employers are obliged, through

73

legislation, to employ a quota of people with disabilities but the obligation is not backed

up with any effective sanctions.

It is different in the United States where there are consequences that have to be faced

by employers if they do not take serious actions to implement the non-discrimination

hiring. People with disabilities can make complaints of discrimination, and upon

violation in the Government sector, may seek protection and attorney fees under Section

505 of the Rehabilitation Act 1973.

Defining Job Suitability

People with disabilities are frequently denied employment due to employers' belief

regarding their job suitability. People with disabilities are said to have less mental and

physical capabilities for work. Hence, defining job suitability in terms of how a person's

skills match job requirements is vital in order to have equal chances for employment.

Ability to define job suitability clearly would indirectly reduce and avoid discrimination

by employers. Other than that, having specific resources to define job suitability can

help in job matching. In Malaysian policies, Service Circular No. 3/2008 for example,

states that "the Head of the Department should inform the Department of Social Welfare

and Government regarding the vacancies in their agencies that are suitable for people

with disabilities"

This provision is vague as the definition of job suitability might be biased if it is based

only on employers' understanding or opinions. In the United States, job suitability

determination is based on the ability of a person to perform essential tasks of the job

often through formal assessments. Hence, people with disabilities cannot be denied

74

positions because of other reasons than being unable to perform essential job functions.

Job suitability can be defined based on job analyses. In the United States, there are

resources that can be used as guidelines such as 0*NET, Classification of Jobs, and DOT

that explain jobs in terms of job descriptions, skills, qualifications needed, and wages.

Discrimination Complaints

A formal discrimination complaint is one of the ways to report the violation of laws

regarding affirmative action in the United States. It is stated in Section 501 that people

with disabilities in the United States should be employed in all grade levels of federal

employment based on their qualifications. Those who believe that they are discriminated

against in employment can make complaints within 180 days from the date of the alleged

discrimination. Investigators from the Interagency Committee on Employees and Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission would take action by examining the

implementation of the hiring plans by the employers.

In Malaysia, Aeberhard and Raskin (1997) reported that another factor that impacts

the implementation of affirmative action is how formal complaints of discriminations are

handled. The Industrial Relations Department (IRD) does not keep records of complaints

of discrimination based on disability. If such complaints were received from people with

disabilities, they would be based on other grounds such as wrongful dismissal or wage

disputes.

75

Parties involved

Requirements

Code of Practice for Employment of Persons with Disabilities in Private Sector 2001

• Employers • People with disabilities • Government/Technical

Committee of Employment Promotion for Persons with Disabilities

Emplovers : ensure the appropriate work settings for workers with disabilities and provide reasonable accommodations.

: hire people with disabilities based on their qualifications and productivities.

: organize programs regarding effective communication and interaction between management, co-workers, and workers with disabilities.

: identify problems and barriers faced by workers with disabilities, and make reports to the Department of Labor if the problem cannot be solved.

: continually inform the Department of Labor regarding suitable vacancies for people with disabilities.

Section 503, Rehabilitation Act 1973

• Employers • People with

disabilities • Government/ Office

of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP)

Emplovers : Government contractors with contracts of $10,000 or more are required to develop a written AAP. AAP helps the contractor identify and analyze potential problems in the participation of people with disabilities in the contractor's workforce. It should contain a description of sufficient assurances, procedures, and commitments to provide adequate hiring, placement, and advancement opportunities for people with disabilities.

Table 4.3: Affirmative Action for Private Sectors in Malaysia and the United States

76

Government/Technical Committee of Employment Promotion for Persons with Disabilities : formulate the implementation of policies in job placement for people with disabilities in private sector.

: monitor the implementation of employment policies for people with disabilities.

: organize necessary strategies to address problems that arise from time to time.

: investigate and resolve problems that arise, especially problems that are proposed by state committee.

: monitor, manage, and update a database for people with disabilities at state and national levels.

People with Disabilities : register under Department of Labor

Government / Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) : compliance officers examine the contractor's affirmative action program; check personnel, payroll, and other employment records; interviews employees and company officials; and investigate, virtually all aspects of employment in the company. Investigators would also check whether the contractor is making special efforts to achieve equal opportunity via affirmative action.

People with Disabilities : may file complaints with the EEOC if they believe they have been discriminated against by federal contractors or subcontractors. Complaints must be filed within 180 days from the date of the alleged discrimination. However, filing time can be extended for a good reason.

Table 4.3: Affirmative Action for Private Sectors in Malaysia and the United States

77

Penalties At the time of this research, there is no penalty or enforcement under the affirmative action related to the failure to comply the circular. Employers only need to continue the efforts to hire people with disabilities, and the progress is monitored by the Department of Social Welfare every 6 months.

The equal opportunity clause requires that the contractor take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and treated equally. Failure to comply with the non-discrimination or affirmative action provisions is a violation of the contract. A violation may result in contracts cancelled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor may be debarred, i.e., declared ineligible for future government contracts after a full evidentiary hearing.

Table 4.3: Affirmative Action for Private Sectors in Malaysia and the United States

78

Table 4.3 describes the affirmative action in both countries for the private sector. The

table shows the differences which are almost the same as Table 4.2:

Affirmative Action Plan

Like affirmative action in the public sector, employers in the United States are

required to come out with an AAP that includes specific procedures on hiring, placement,

and advancement once a year. In Malaysia, there is no specific report required.

Employers however need to complete a form twice a year communicating the current

number of workers with disabilities and number of people with disabilities they plan to

hire in their agencies. The form will be reviewed by the Technical Committee of

Employment Promotion for Persons with Disabilities.

Penalties

As Malaysia is practicing a binding quota system, affirmative action procedures are

written and stated legally in law but there is no sanction or penalty stated in the Code of

Practice for Employment of Persons with Disabilities in the Private Sector (2001)

regarding the failure to fulfil the Code of Practice. It is different in the United States,

where failure to comply with the non-discrimination or affirmative action provisions is a

violation of the contract. Violators may have contracts cancelled, terminated, or

suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor may be debarred, i.e., declared

ineligible for future government contracts after a full evidentiary hearing.

79

Programs Malaysia United States of America

Job search assistance

Table 4.4: Programs

Borans Maklumat Pencarian Keria OKU (Job Seeking Information Form for PWDs)

:a form to collect information about a person with disabilities to help him/her with placement in government agency.

SPOkufSvstem of Placement for PWDs) : online system for employers to advertised vacancies and for job seekers with disabilities to find and apply for jobs.

Jobstreet.com Malaysia E-enabling Persons with Disabilities : internet recruitment website for people with disabilities to apply jobs in private sector.

Vocational Rehabilitation

Job Analysis : 0*NET, OSCAR, DOT

Plans for Employment Supporting Affirmative Actioi

80

Services : Rehabilitation evaluation -determine abilities, skills, and interests for employment. : Vocational counseling and rehabilitation planning for employment services. : Assistance in finding jobs, including the use of special employer incentives.

Employment : State departments of employment services

Job readiness training

On-the-job supports

Table 4.4: Programs

Industrial Training and Rehabilitation Center : center that provides vocational training and courses such as IT Computer, Electrician, Tailoring, and Prosthetics and Orthotics.

Protected workshop : training and other facilities are provided through cooperation of government agencies with private and statutory bodies which provide job opportunities.

Technical and vocational schools and polytechnics : open to special needs learners to learn technical skills.

Job coach : introduced by JICA to help workers with disabilities adapt to work environments and learn about job tasks.

Job Placement : Department of Social Welfare provides assistance in securing jobs in manufacturing sector, firms, and government

Vocational Rehabilitation

Vocational Rehabilitation

Plans for Employment Supporting Affirmative Actioi

81

Services : Employment services such as job-training, job-seeking skills, resume development, and other work readiness assistance. : On the Job Training (OJT), apprenticeships, and non-paid work experiences. : Post-secondary training at a college, vocational, technical or business school.

Supported employment program : provides specialized job placement and training

Sheltered workshop : provides training and employment services, assists in moving toward optimum level of vocational and social functioning.

Vocational schools and community college : open to people with disabilities, often with special support services provided.

Supported employment program : provides job coaches, transportation, assistive technology, and individually tailored supervision.

Services : assistance in keeping a job, including the use of job accommodations.

Other programs supporting the employment

agencies.

Tax Relief Incentives : tax deduction on renovation costs in the workplace by employers for workers with disabilities to encourage the private sector to hire more workers with disabilities.

Workers with Disabilities Allowance : RM 300 per month allowance is provided to workers with disabilities with income ceiling of RM1.200.

Transportation (to work) : No road tax for motorcycle 150cc and below, and for locally made vehicle owned by people with disabilities. : Discounts on prices for PUTRA-LRT services.

Barrier-free Environment Released by the Standards and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia (SIRIM). :MS 1184: 1991-Code of Practice for access for people with disabilities to public building. :MS 1331: 1993-Code of Practice for access for people with disabilities

Job Accommodation Network (JAN) website : source to find information about appropriate accommodations for workers based on their disabilities.

Tax Relief Incentives : an annual deduction for expenses incurred to remove barriers for people with disabilities in the workplace, including costs for sign language interpreters, alternative formatting, job coaches, assistive technology, and architectural modifications : Work Opportunities Tax Credit - employers may take up to 40% of the first $6,000 in first-year wages (12 months) per qualified employee, for employees who work at least 400 hours during tax year, and can claim a partial credit of 25% of wages paid for qualified employees who work at least 120 hours but less than 400 hours during a one year period.

Transportation : American with Disabilities Act 1990, Title II : Medicaid Transportation Services :Section 502, Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998

Barrier-free Environment : Section 502 - Accessibility : Architectural Barriers Act

Table 4.4: Programs Supporting Affirmative Action Plans for Employment

82

outside buildings. :MS 1183: 1990-Code of Practice for means of escape for people with disabilities.

Jobs Carnival for People with Disabilities Organized by Department of Manpower for people with disabilities to search for jobs.

Skim Bantuan Galakan Perniagaan Orang Kurang Upava (Business Incentives Assistance Scheme for People with Disabilities) : Government business scheme that provides loan for people with disabilities who are interested in self-employment and having own business.

1968

Medicaid /Medicare : health insurance for people with disabilities

SSI/SSDI : monthly allowances for people with disabilities with work histories or with poverty-level incomes.

Ticket to Work : employment program for people with disabilities which is designed to remove barriers that influence their decisions about going to work because of the concerns over losing health care coverage and financial benefits : Social Security Administration provides disability beneficiaries with a Ticket they may use to obtain the services and jobs they need from Employment Networks (ENs).

Table 4.4: Programs Supporting Affirmative Action Plans for Employment

83

Disclosure on Disabilities

People with disabilities in Malaysia who wish to apply for work must fill in a special

form called Borang Maklumat Pencarian Kerja OKU (Job Seeking Information Form for

people with disabilities). This form would help identify people with disabilities for

employment in government agencies. Job seekers may complete the form online and

submit it to the Department of Social Welfare. Another system helps people with

disabilities search for jobs called SPOku or System of Placement for People with

Disabilities. In this system, registered job seekers can browse different types of vacancies

which been posted by registered employers and apply online for jobs in the private sector.

Jobstreet.com Malaysia: E-enabling Persons with Disabilities is also an internet

recruitment website for the private sector that is exclusively designed for people with

disabilities. Jobstreet simplifies the process of getting a job and becoming employed in

various industries and sectors. It provides free job application services to a registered

member. Persons with disabilities and those who are registered with the Department of

Social welfare can also post their resumes on this website. However, the risk of filling out

the forms and applying through these sites is that employers can directly know the

disabilities of the person, even when the site has its privacy policy stating that

information in resumes is available only to the employers.

It is different in the United States. Consistent with the civil rights argument, people

with disabilities go through the same process of applying for jobs as do people who are

non-disabled, but they have the right not to disclose their disabilities to the employers.

Employers also have no right to ask any questions related to disabilities of any job

84

candidates. Applicants with disabilities only need to disclose their health conditions after

they have been hired so that they can ask for accommodations. The American with

Disabilities Act 1990 prohibits employers from asking any question regarding the

disabilities of job applicants. It also states that the job applicants have the right not to

disclose their disabilities unless they need accommodations in the interview or after the

hiring offer if they need accommodations to perform the essential functions of the

position.

Job Search and Readiness Training

To support the employment seeking efforts of people with disabilities, programs are

available that help them search for jobs and prepare for work. In the United States, there

are vocational rehabilitation and supported employment programs that assist people with

disabilities regarding employment. Vocational rehabilitation programs offer a variety of

employment services from job seeking skills training to job maintenance services for

clients with disabilities. In the early stages, a person will complete vocational evaluation

to determine a suitable job for him/her. The person will be evaluated on skills, abilities,

and interests. Next, the client, with assistances from the rehabilitation counselor, will

develop on employment describing how the person will prepare for work and seek jobs.

Before entering the labour market, clients will be equipped with an understanding of

the world of work. Clients should be trained on employment skills such job seeking

skills, job application skills, interview skills, communication skills, and social skills.

Besides, there is also on-the-job training (OJT) as well as non-paid work experiences

85

such as volunteer work to improve clients' understanding of the job and the world of

work. Supported Employment programs and sheltered workshops provide the same

services by offering specialized job training to assist clients in realizing their full

potential.

In Malaysia, most vocational training centers are operated by NGOs. The Government

does have its own sheltered workshop that helps people with disabilities enhance their

working skills such as Taman Sinar Harapan institutions, Daya Workshops,

Rehabilitation in Community Centers, and cluster homes. At sheltered workshops and

institutions, training and facilities are provided through the cooperation of government

agencies and private and statutory bodies which provide job opportunities (Department of

Social Welfare, 2009). There is also an industrial training and rehabilitation center in

Bangi Selangor that provides vocational training and courses such as IT computer,

tailoring, electrician, prosthetics and orthotics, and other specialities. Technical and

vocational schools and polytechnics are other training centers that help people with

disabilities learn technical skills.

On the Job Support

Getting a job is not the only goal; keeping a job is as important as getting a job.

Hence, the services and assistance needed to help workers with disabilities maintain their

positions at the workplace are vital. Malaysia has introduced a job coach program for the

first time through JICA. The purpose of the program is to help workers with disabilities

adapt to the work environment and to offer support needed to learn job tasks. Under the

86

job placement program, the Department of Social Welfare provides assistance in securing

jobs in the manufacturing sector, private firms, and government agencies (Department of

Social Welfare, 2009).

Vocational rehabilitation services provide assistance on keeping a job as well as on

job accommodations. In assisting with keeping a job, the use of job accommodation

becomes vital. In supported employment programs, there are job coaches, transportation

services, and individually tailored supervision services available. In the United States,

JAN is one of the sources that provides information on accommodations and assistive

technologies that are suitable for persons depending on their conditions.

Programs Supporting Employment

Although Malaysia and the United States provide very similar programs, the United

States does have intensive services such as Vocational Rehabilitation, Supported

Employment, and the Ticket to Work program that helps people with disabilities find

jobs. In these programs, government agencies work together with private vendors who

are paid by the government to train clients and help them find jobs. The purpose of this

program is to obtain employment for people with disabilities.

In Malaysia, most of the vocational training is conducted by NGOs, although NGOs

lack adequate funding and expertise to offer the training. The idea of the government

paying them to help clients find jobs would improve the conditions and result in a win-

win situation.

87

RQ2: What steps can be taken to improve the employment services for people with

disabilities in Malaysia to achieve the target ofl%?

Despite the efforts by the Government via policies and programmes, the number of

people with disabilities being employed is still far from the target.

Ganapathy (1992) identified five factors that hinder the effectiveness of affirmative action which are:

a) an absence of a register of job seekers among people with disabilities. Collaboration between government and voluntary agencies is poor coordination,

b) prejudice that exists against people with disabilities,

c) poor access to public facilities due to their physical inaccessibility,

d) restricted availability of employment as the majority of positions offered (70%) were located in Klang Valley, and

e) the reluctance of employers to modify or adopt machinery and facilities for people with disabilities.

(Hodges-Aeberhard and Raskin, 1997, p.p. 61-62)

To improve the employment among people with disabilities, Bolton et al. (2000) in

Dutta et al. (2008) stated that rehabilitation outcome research needs to focus on

answering the question: "Which approach works best for whom, how, and under what

condition?" This research question pertains to the improvements that can be made based

on the comparison of affirmative action policies in the two countries as well as other

improvements based on current employment practices in Malaysia.

Disclosure on Disabilities

The rights of people with disabilities in Malaysia should be the same as those of

people with disabilities in the United States. They should be given the right not to

88

disclose their disabilities in order to reduce the biases among employers. In Malaysia,

employers should only ask questions which are related to the job and not be distracted by

disabilities that are not related to nor barriers to performance of essential tasks of the job.

In the United States, disability disclosure by workers only occurs after they have been

hired and if they need accommodations at the workplaces. It is unnecessary for them to

disclose their disabilities if they do not need to have accommodations to perform job

tasks. As long as the disabilities do not affect their job performance, it is not necessary

for the employers to know about them.

The People with Disabilities Act 2008 in Malaysia stated the need for equal

opportunities in employment. However, it is riot as detailed as the Americans with

Disabilities Act 1990 where it stated the prohibition of asking about the disabilities.

Disclosure on disabilities can be avoided by restricting employers or the application from

asking about disabilities.

Strengthening the law

In planning for services for people with disabilities, it is not enough just to give of the

heart; "right mind" and "right effort" are also required (Ooi, 1991 in Jayasooria and Ooi,

1994). Malaysia circulars do not mention clearly sanctions for failure to implement

affirmative action quotas. In the United States for example, the Rehabilitation Act of

1973, Section 503 states "Any employer receiving federal assistance in the form of

contracts of $2,500 (now $10,000) or more is required to develop an affirmative action

plan to recruit, hire, train, and advance in employment handicapped individuals...The

plan must be reviewed and updated once a year" (Sarkees & Scott, 1986).

89

Section 503 of the Law also requires that employers make a "reasonable

accommodation" for workers with disabilities. This means that specific changes must be

made to the work environment to accommodate the needs of workers with disabilities.

The requirement does not mean that an employer must assume a large financial hardship.

Furthermore, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 1990 requires employers to

accommodate workers with disabilities and prohibits discrimination against people with

disabilities in hiring, firing, and wages (Acemoglu & Angrist, 2001 in Salleh, Mustapha,

& Habib, 2004).

As Malaysia is practicing a binding quota scheme, there is no penalty mentioned in

Service Circular No. 3/2008 and Code of Practice for Employment of Persons with

Disabilities 2001. As having no penalties leaves the employers to choose whether to obey

or not to obey the affirmative action, it is recommended that penalties should be

implemented upon violation. The emphasis on penalties is not purposely to punish

employers but more on encouraging them to take the affirmative action commitment

more seriously.

Introduce quota-levy system

Malaysia started its legislation on employment quotas for people with disabilities as

early as 1988. In the circular, employers are encouraged to meet the 1% quota, but there

is no sanction mentioned in the circular if the employers fail to meet the quota. Levy

systems however differ from plain quota schemes in allowing employers to make a

financial contribution, or levy, to a special fund in lieu of employing the target proportion

of people with disabilities. Such a contribution may be permitted only as a last resort

90

when the possibility of direct employment has been exhausted, or it may be a legitimate

choice. The levy is not conceived of as a legal penalty; employers who do not pay the

levy may be fined but this option is seldom used. The levies from employers commonly

are collected in a special rehabilitation fund and redistributed variously to employers,

workers with disabilities or service providers. The rehabilitation fund usually

complements publicly funded provisions to promote the training and employment of

persons with disabilities (Thornton, 1998).

Quota systems are based on long-standing acceptance of a social obligation to employ

individuals with disabilities. Quota legislation requires private and/or public sector

employers who employ a certain minimum number of workers to ensure that a given

proportion of employees consist of designated persons with disabilities (Thornton, 1998).

The purpose of a quota levy system is not to exert pressure on employers or to collect

the revenue. It focuses more on hiring people with disabilities who are qualified, which

means they are trained and capable in performing the tasks when availability of suitable

and accessible jobs are exist. The quota is not legitimate to use to hire people with

disabilities whose have not meet the qualifications, work potential or performance that

are expected (Thornton, 1998). The use of a levy is differs from one country to another. It

is usually depends on the needs and plans of rehabilitation services of the country that

influenced on how the levy is distributed.

In Japan, the underlying principle of promoting collective responsibility redistributes the levy to cover the cost of employers who employ workers with physical disabilities. In France, the policy recognises the economic constraints facing some enterprises and allows employers who are not in a position to recruit, train or generally foster the employment of people with disabilities to discharge their obligations by contributing

91

to a fund to aid integration of individuals with disabilities in enterprises which are able to support those aims (Thornton, 1998,p.6).

Two main uses for levy funds are emerging:

a) The Western European and Japanese model, which uses levy funds mainly to invest in a variety measures that are deemed to improve the labour market efficiency of workers with disabilities. It removes the disadvantages that the employer may have, or feel that they have, when hiring or retaining an employee with disabilities.

b) The Eastern European and Chinese model that using levy funds as a financial incentive for employers to employ a difficult-to-place category of worker, that is as a form of compensation for agreeing to employ a less productive worker.

(Thornton, 1998, p.7)

Job Accommodations and Assistive Technology

Kim (1991) in Jayasooria (1999) states that people with disabilities in Malaysia have

been excluded from general development of the country in activities such construction on

public roads, buildings and schools, and access to supermarket, public transportation and

recreational parks. Many problems however can be solved if people with disabilities are

not treated as helpless clients but as intelligent consumers who are meaningfully

consulted in the provision of services and facilities.

In general, assistive technology represents tools that help individuals enhance their

ability to perform basic life skills and promote their independence for a better life. Mohd.

Ali (2001, p.563) mentioned that Lueck at. al. (2001) described "assistive technology

includes all optical and non-optical devices, adapted materials, electronic devices and

equipment which can help individuals with difficulties develop and use their skills to the

best of their potential". According to Lewis (1998, p. 16), assistive technology means

"any technology with the potential to enhance the performance of people with

92

disabilities". It functions on two fronts which are building on individual strengths and

compensating for the individual's difficulties to enable him/her to better perform a given

task.

On the job-seekers' side, one of the common barriers is the expense to go to work.

Without effective accommodation, it may be expensive for the person to work. For

example, personal assistance is needed for the person to get ready to work if accessible

transportation is not available. The medical costs also are higher as compared to people

without disabilities (National Council on Disability, 2007).

The purpose of providing accommodations at the workplace is to help match the

person's aptitudes with the tasks of the job by reducing the barriers faced by people with

disabilities. Work barriers are expected to decrease once the accommodations are

provided. Accommodations reduce the mismatch between person skills and job demands

caused by disabilities (Rumrill et al., 2004).

Zolna (2005) stated that the primary objective of workplace accommodations is to

provide an environment that supports the skills and functional abilities that are needed to

achieve independence and integration. Loprest and Maag (2001) mentioned "having an

accommodation might open up a broader range of job possibilities, which could also have

implications for higher wage rates or promotions. Essentially, not having certain

accommodations could be holding working adults with disabilities back." This obviously

shows that job accommodations are crucial in facilitating people with disabilities hit their

stride in their careers.

93

Scherich (1996) indicated that 20% of people with disabilities encountered physical

barriers in the workplace that interfered with effective job performance. This shows that

employees with disabilities require facilities and assistance at their workplace in order to

deliver their best performance on job tasks. Accommodation practices were found to be a

significant factor in employment success for people with disabilities (Moore, 1995 as

cited in Scherich, 1996).

Educating employers on assistive technology and job accommodation is important.

Most employers have the perception that accommodation is related to high technology,

thus requiring them to spend considerable amounts of money. Workplace

accommodations can exist as a barrier when employers hesitate to hire people with

disabilities due to mistaken fears of expensive accommodation and healthcare costs

(National Council on Disability, 2007). Empirical studies demonstrate, however, that

most accommodations cost nothing or less than $500 and result in substantial benefits to

employers (Schartz et al. 2006). It is vital for employers to know that providing assistive

technology does not always have to be expensive.

Mohd. AH (2001, p.p. 563-564) divided assistive technology devices and equipment

into several categories:

• No technology - any form of service which does not require the use of any equipment or devices. It can be in the form of services or systematic teaching.

• Low technology - any form of devices which can be "passive or simple with few moving parts" (Judge, 1998). These devices may be cheap and easily found in shops like crutches, pencil grippers, Velcro strips or battery-operated toys.

• Medium technology - these devices use simple electronic mechanism like cassette players, simple calculators, books on tape and electric hole-punchers and staplers.

94

• High technology - the devices in this form use high technology with a number of complex electrical components. Examples of high technology devices are powered mobility equipment (e.g. powered wheelchair), computers, speech synthesizers, and computer software.

Due to this awareness of the feasibility and importance of accommodations the

American with Disabilities Act (ADA) was enacted and obliged employers to provide the

necessary accommodation for workers with disabilities. The ADA emphasized that the

responsibility of initiating the accommodation process rested with the employees

(Scherich, 1996). Qualified individuals with disabilities are protected from

discrimination in employment under Title I of the ADA. This title also emphasized the

requirement to provide reasonable job accommodations for employees with disabilities

by employers who have 25 employees or more to provide reasonable accommodation

unless it causes undue hardship. Employers are required to provide not merely job

accommodations, but reasonable job accommodations. Acemoglu & Angrist (2001,

p.915) in their research on the effects of ADA towards the employment of people with

disabilities, stated "The American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires employers to

accommodate disabled workers and outlaws discrimination against the disabled in hiring,

firing, and pay".

In Malaysia, advocacy groups for people with disabilities continuously stress the need

to increase job accommodation services in order to lower the barriers faced by workers

with disabilities at the workplace. The Malaysian Federation of the Deaf, the Society of

the Orthopaedically Disabled and the Malaysian Association for the Blind for instance,

have been actively developing programmes to make assistive devices available for people

95

with disabilities. For instance, the Malaysian Association for the Blind obtained a grant

of two million RM from the government to provide adaptive computer equipment for

persons who are blind. This grant was under the Government's 2001 budget. Simple

assistive devices are available as are adaptations to improve functional performance or

prevent or reduce deformities through services from occupational therapists at hospitals

or private enterprises upon referral.

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794d), requires

that when Federal agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information

technology, employees with disabilities have access to and use of information and data

that is comparable to the access and use by employees without disabilities, unless an

undue burden is faced by the agency. Section 508 also requires that individuals with

disabilities, who are members of the public seeking information or services from a

Federal agency, have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to that

provided to the public and individuals without disabilities, unless an undue burden would

be imposed on the agency.

The People with Disabilities Act 2008 in Malaysia addressed access to employment

for people with disabilities and stated that they should be given equal opportunities.

However, to increase the effectiveness of the law, People with Disabilities Act 2008

should stress more the provision of job accommodations by employers, as well as state

clearly the implication of negative discrimination towards people with disabilities for

employment.

96

Discrimination Complaints

Among the barriers existing on the employers' side that obstruct equal opportunity in

employment for people with disabilities are discrimination, prejudice, stereotypes and

misconceptions of ability, which often make employers reluctant to hire individuals with

disabilities (National Council on Disability 2007). As discrimination in employment is

prohibited, people with disabilities in the United States who think they have been

discriminated against can file complaints within 180 days from the date of the alleged

discrimination with the EEOC.

In Malaysia, Aeberhard and Raskin (1997) reported that another factor that impacts

the implementation of affirmative action is how formal complaints of discrimination are

handled. The Industrial Relations Department (IRD) does not keep records of complaints

of discrimination based on disability. If such complaints were received from people with

disabilities, they would be based on disability discrimination grounds such as wrongful

dismissal or wage disputes.

By taking serious actions on the complaints, the situation can be improved by controlling

the rate of discrimination. As discrimination is one of the main factors that causes the

unemployment among people with disabilities, reducing discrimination can be a main

goal in order to increase employment rates among people with disabilities.

Vocational Training Program

Lower levels of education and training among people with disabilities are barriers for

employment (Blanck et al. 2009; National Council on Disability, 2007 in Gottlieb,

97

Myhill, and Blanck, 2010). Hence to increase the skills and knowledge of working among

people with disabilities, vocational training programs are necessary.

It is reported that vocational training programs in Malaysia are heavily dependent on

NGOs, yet most of the NGOs lack funds, expertise, and suitable training environments

(JICA, 2002). Thus, more allocation of funds by the Government is needed in order to

establish vocational training programs such as in schools and vocational centers for

people with disabilities. In 2006, RM488 million has been allocated to the Ministry of

Women, Family, and Community Development in the National Budget for daily living

skills, sheltered workshops, and employment training which a step in the right direction

(JICA, 2002).

Expertise, research and more qualified personnel are also needed to strategize and

improve the vocational programs and services in Malaysia (JICA, 2002). Up to this date,

professional assistance with the job search is still lacking. There is a need for

rehabilitation counsellors in Malaysia which would be part of solution for this problem.

Better collaboration between government, NGOs, and the community is also in need

(JICA, 2002). In the United States, Vocational Rehabilitation programs and Supported

Employment programs are implemented by Government agencies and provide

rehabilitation services for people with disabilities by working together with private

vendors, who are paid for training clients and finding them jobs.

For this particular problem, the Malaysian Government can hire NGOs that run

vocational training programs for people with disabilities by paying them to train the

98

clients as well as find them jobs. With this approach, the lack of funds for the NGO's can

be overcome and lack of coordination between government and NGOs can be improved.

99

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, AND SUGGESTION

Introduction

This chapter discusses and summarizes the results in this study, suggests ways to

improve the implementation of affirmative action in Malaysia, recommends future

research steps, and offers overall conclusions for the study.

Discussion

This research found that the rehabilitation services in Malaysia for people with

disabilities are not far behind other developed and developing countries. People with

disabilities have received attention from the Government officially since 1940s.

Implementing affirmative action in employment is one of the ways to include people with

disabilities in the labour market as well as in society. The Malaysian Government decided

to allocate a minimum of 1% of employment for people with disabilities both in

Government and private sectors. There are plans and guidelines written in Service

Circular No.3/2008 for the Government sector and in the Code of Practice for

Employment of Persons with Disabilities 2001 for the private sector.

The plans require employers to open opportunities for qualified job seekers with

disabilities without discrimination, providing reasonable accommodation as well as

100

suitable environments for workers with disabilities, and completing a form regarding the

number of workers with disabilities they have and the number of people with disabilities

they are planning to have once in every six months.

Employers are motivated by the tax relief for renovation costs in the workplace, while

people with disabilities are supported with different employment programs as well as

monthly allowances to encourage them to find and maintain jobs. The implementation of

affirmative action in Malaysia for both Government and private sectors is described in

Figure 5.1 below:

TARGET

1% employment for people with disabilities

People with disabilities

i i

* i t *

Government Employers

i L

Employment Support Programs Tax incentives

Figure 5.1: Employment Affirmative Action in Malaysia

101

The figure shows that the implementation of affirmative action in Malaysia includes

plans, monitoring, and services to enhance employment among people with disabilities.

However, another vital element in order to make the affirmative action success is not

included. The element is "consequences". This means that there is no penalty applied if

employers do not take serious action in implementing affirmative action as planned.

By expecting employers to meet their social obligation in hiring people with

disabilities, it leaves the employers with two choices of whether they want to hire or not.

As there is no consequence or penalty if the plan is not met, there could be situations

where the plan of action is not been taken seriously, subsequently leading to the failure of

achieving the target.

It is different in the United States where the affirmative action plan should be taken

seriously by employers as it will be monitored, and serious consequences, especially in

the private sector, exist to protect the rights of people with disabilities. The affirmative

action implemented in the United States is depicted Figure 5.2.

102

TARGET

Employment for people with disabilities

People with disabilities

i L

s* iL ^

Government Employers

iL

Employment Support Programs Tax incentives and Penalties

Figure 5.2: Employment Affirmative Action in the United States

The differences in the Table 5.1 and 5.2 center on penalties, which ensure the

affirmative action plan's success because employers face negative consequences if they

fail to comply affirmative action obligations. The investigators from the Interagency

Committee on Employees, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the

Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) monitor employers to ensure

that serious action is taken to implement the plan accordingly.

The penalties involving the US Government sector are written in Section 505 of the

Rehabilitation Act 1973 where the remedies, procedures, and rights are specified with

respect to any complaint. A court may take into account the reasonableness of the cost of

any necessary workplace accommodation, the availability of alternatives or other

103

appropriate relief in order to achieve an equitable and appropriate remedy, as well as a

reasonable attorney's fee as part of the cost.

In the private sector, Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act 1973 mentioned that failure

to comply with the non-discrimination or affirmative action provisions is a violation of

the contract. A violation may result in contracts cancelled, terminated, or suspended in

whole or in part, and the contractor may be debarred, i.e., declared ineligible for future

government contracts after a full evidentiary hearing.

Summarization

In order ensure that affirmative action is effective, there should be four elements

which are plans, monitors, services, and consequences. Literature reviews have shown

that most countries with affirmative action have the four steps to ensure the success of

such programs

The rehabilitation system in Malaysia can be considered supportive since the

Government has directed serious attention toward people with disabilities' welfare since

the early 20th century. Malaysia has introduced affirmative action plans where there are

guidelines for Government and private sector entities written in Service Circular No.

3/2008 and Code of Practice for Employment of Persons with Disabilities in Private

Sector 2001.

The Malaysian plan requires employers from the Government and Private sectors to

complete a form regarding number of workers with disabilities they have already hired

104

and number of persons with disabilities they plan to hire every 6 months. The plan is

monitored by the Department of Social Welfare for Government sector and by the

Technical Committee of Employment Promotion for Persons with Disabilities for private

sector. To support the affirmative action, the Malaysian Government has developed many

of the services to enhance the employment of people with disabilities such as monthly

allowances for workers with disabilities, tax relief for employers, discounts on public

transportation, and others.

Affirmative Action in Malaysia contains plans, monitoring, and services for

employment. Yet, the element of consequences remains to be added. There is no penalty

stated legally in laws if employers do not take serious action to comply with and

implement affirmative action.

The dominant approach in Malaysia remains one which reaffirms a "charity" model.

However, there are clear signs that affirmative action programmes and other initiatives of

government and NGOs which seek to empower people with disabilities are resulting in

increasing employment opportunities (Hodges-Aeberhard and Raskin, 1997).

Recommendations

To increase the employment rates of people with disabilities, Malaysia needs to

implement appropriate consequences for failure to achieve affirmative action goals. Other

ways of implementing the affirmative action can be considered such as the quota- levy

105

system. The purpose of consequences is not to penalize people but more to lead people to

take the affirmative action commitment seriously.

People with disabilities must no longer be viewed as charity objects deserving

patronizing care. They must be seen to be what they are; human beings with human

potential and capacity for integration in society (Hodges-Aeberhard and Raskin, 1997).

The welfare approach is suitable in a society that practices collectivism. It is good that

people take care of each other, yet the opportunity for people with disabilities to live

independently is also vital. It is time for people with disabilities to have their individual

rights, without forgetting the mutual benefits of collectivism.

Suggestion for Future Research

This research is a content analysis study where journals, articles, and government

documents were analyzed to determine the differences between affirmative action in

Malaysia and in the United States, as well as improvements that can be made for

affirmative action in Malaysia. For future research, analyzing the barriers faced by

employers in hiring people with disabilities is recommended, especially in the public

sector. Barriers in term of perceptions or social biases, physical accommodations, and

understanding of assistive technology are among the obstacles that could be studied.

Research is also needed on moving from charity perceptions to civil rights perceptions of

people with disabilities.

106

Bibliography

Abdul Rahman, S. (n.d). Services for the disabled in Malaysia - meeting the goals of the decade. Retrieved from http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:964qscxNUWsJ:campaign99.tripod.com/C99/19/ 19c.doc+Services+for+the+disabled+in+Malaysia+%E2%80%93+meeting+the+goals +of+the+decade.&cd=l&hl=en&ct:=clnk&gl::=us

Acemoglu, D. & Angrist, J. D. (2001). Consequences of employment protection? The case of the American with Disabilities Act. Journal of Political Economy, 109, 915-930.

Acton, N. (1981). Employment of disabled persons: where are we going? International Labour Review, 120 (1), 1-14.

BAKTI-MIND (2008). Employment. Retrieved from BAKTI-MIND PORTAL website: http://www.mind.org.my/index.php?page=20

Baldwin, M.L., & Schumacher, E.J. (2002). A note on job mobility among workers with disabilities. Industrial Relations, 41(3), 430-441.

Becker, D.R., Drake, R.E., Bond, G.R., Xie, H., Dain, B.J., & Harrison, K. (1998). Job terminations among persons with severe mental illness participating in supported employment. Community Mental Health Journal, 34, 71-81.

Bennett, K., Frain, M., Brady, M.P., Rosenbergh, H., Surinak, T. (2009). Differences between employees' and supervisors' evaluations of work performance and support needs. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44(4), 471-480.

Brutus, S., Parra, L.F., Hunter, M., Perry, B., & Ducharme, F. (1998). Attitudes toward affirmative action in the United States and Canada. Journal of Business and Psychology, 12(4), 515-533.

107

Conley, R.W. (2003). Supported employment in Maryland: Successes and issues. Mental Retardation 41(4), 237-249.

Crosby, F.J. (1994).Understanding Affirmative Action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 75(1), 13-41.

Department of Social Welfare (2008). Orang Kurang Upaya. Retrieved from Department of Social Welfare website: http://www.jkm. gov.my/jkm/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=434:k anak-kanak&catid^ 192 :piagam-pelanggan

Dutta,A., Gervey, R., Chan, F., Chou, C, & Ditchman, N. (2008). Vocational rehabilitation services and employment outcomes for people with disabilities: A United States Study. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 2008, 18, 326-334.

Faridah Serajul Haq (2003). Career and employment opportunities for women with disabilities in Malaysia. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 14, 71-78.

Ganapathy, R. (1992). The placement of disabled persons in employment: Some problems and strategies. Paper presented at the Seminar on Education and Training of the Handicapped and their integration into the labor market, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Gates, L.B., Klein, S.W., Akabas, S.H., Myers, R.,Schawager, M., Kee, J.K. (2005). Outcomes-based funding for vocational services and employement of people with mental health conditions. Retrieved from http://psychservices. Psychiatriconline.org /cgi/content/full/56/11/1429

Gottlieb, A., Myhill, W.N., Blanck, P. (2010). Employment of People with Disabilities. International Encyclopaedia of Rehabilitation. Retrieved from http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/pdf/en/employment_of_people_with_disabilities .pdf

Hodges-Aebergard, J. (2001). Affirmative action in employment: recent court approaches to a difficult concept. Retrieved from http://www.iiav.nl/epublications/2001/women_gender_and_work.pdf#page=:450

108

Hodges-Aeberhard, J. & Raskin, C.(1997). Affirmative action in the employment of ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en«&lr=&id=P2bAfabd98C&oi=fnd&pg-PR5&dq= 1 %25+quota+Malaysia+disabled&ots=dOL2eN0RAi&sig=CFNbuRiL6IcM 1 ihWZD BpybaBBIw#v=onepage&q=l%25%20quota%20Malaysia%20disabled&f=false

Hsu, T., Ososkie, J., & Huang, Y. (2009). Challenges in transition from sheltered workshop to competitive employment: perspectives of Taiwan social enterprise transition specialists. Journal of Rehabilitation. Retrieved from http://findarticles.eom/p/articles/mi_m0825/is_4_75/ai_n41268116/

International Labour Office (ILO) (2004). Achieving Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities Through Legislation : Guidelines. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=Qf7RnVWOqzwC&pg=PA35&lpg=PA35&dq=qu ota+scheme+can+be+divided+into+three+basic+groups:+a+binding+quota&source=bl &ots=eUobEtOsk4&sig=DZCjtbdvd-sx6TS3m5TzSjhdNM&hl=en&ei=QqzMS-miCpCKNuC-gLMJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CA8Q6AEwAg#v=onep age&q=quota%20scheme%20can%20be%20divided%20into%20three%20basic%20g roups%3A%20a%20binding%20quota&f=false

Ismail, M.R. (2003). Country Paper: Malaysia. Expert Group Meeting and Seminar on an International Convention to Protect and Promote Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.worldenable.net/bangkok2003/papermalaysia.htm

Jayasooria, D. (1999). Disabled people: active or passive citizen - reflections from the Malaysian Experience. Disability & Society,\A (3), 341-352. Retrieved from http ://books .google. com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=P2b Afabd-98C&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=malaysia+quota+system+culture+disabled+people&ots=d OMVcN0PBl&sig=SQ6JezsQa48bK9sKoECU8GXOk9U#v=onepage&q=malaysia&f =false

Jayasooria, D. & Ooi, G. (1994). Disabled people's movement in Malaysia. Disability & Society, 9 (I), 97-100.

109

Jette, A.M. (2006). Toward a common language for function, disability, and health. Physical Therapy S<5(5),726-734.

Khatijah (2002). The impact of NGO efforts in the promotion of full participation and equity during the decade: a review on the decade of disabled persons 1993-2002 A Malaysian NGO perspective. Retrieved from http://www.dinf.ne.jp/doc/english/int/02mn/malaysia_e.html

Kuno, K. (2007). Disability equality training (DET): Potentials and challenges in practice in developing countries. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal 20 (1). Retrieved from http://www.dinf.ne.jp/doc/english/asia/resource/apdrj/vol20_l/developmental-art2.html

Leonard Cheshire Disability, (n.d.). Livelihoods: Supporting people with disabilities into work. Retrieved from http://www.lcint.org/livelihoods

Lewis, R.B. (1998). Assistive technology and learning disabilities: Today's realities and tomorrow's promise. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(\), 16-26.

Loprest, P. & Maag, E. (2001). Barriers and Supports for Work among Adults with Disabilities: Results from the NHIS-D. Retrieved from http://www.ucp.Org/ucp_channeldoc.cfm/l/17/l 1928/11928-11928/4663

Lueck, A.H., Dote-Kwan, J., Senge, J.C. and Clarke, L. (2001). Selecting Assistive Technology for Greater Independence. Re: View. 33(1), 13-33. Retrieved from http ://web2 .epnet.com

Lunt N, Thornton P. (1994). Disability and employment: Towards an understanding of discourse and policy. Disability & Society 9(2), 223-238.

Misra, S., Orslene, E.L., Walls, R.T. (2010). Personal Assistance Services (PAS) for Workers with Disabilities: views and experiences of employers. Journal of Rehabilitation 76(1), 22-27'.

110

Mohd.Ali, M. (2001). Knowledge and profile of criterion selection of assistive technology. Retrieved from http://edu.chandra.ac.th/teacherAll/mdra/PROCEEDINGS.PDF#page=573.

Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington (2009). Americans with Disabilities Act. Retrieved from MRSC website: http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/legal/ada/adainfo.aspx

Murphy S, Rogan P. (1995). Closing the shop: conversion from sheltered to integrated employment. Baltimore (MD): Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Mustapha, R. (2004). IT and multimedia literacy in technical and vocational education in Malaysia. InternationalJournal of Digital Contents, 2(1), 113-115

Mustapha R., Ali, M., Yasin, R., & Bari, S. (2002). Technical and vocational education for all: The case of special needs students in technical higher education in Malaysia. Proceeding of the International Conference on Education for All. Bangi, Selangor: University Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Myhill, W.N. & Blanck, P. F. (2009). Disability and aging: historical and contemporary challenges. Marquette Elder's Advisor 10

National Council on Disability. 2007. Empowerment for Americans with disabilities: Breaking barriers to careers and full employment. Retrieved from http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2007/pdf/ncd94_Employment_20071001. pdf

Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), (2002). Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/sex503.htm

Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS).(2010). Vocational Rehabilitation Services Overview. Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eohhs2terminal&L=4&L0=Home&Ll=Consumer&L2

111

=Disability+Services&L3=Vocational+Rehabilitation+Services&sid=Eeohhs2&b=ter minalcontent&f=mrc c vr overview&csid=Eeohhs2

Office for Institutional Equity (OIE). (2006). EEO/affirmative action. Retrieved from OIE website at http://www.duke.edu/web/equity/EEOAA_Programs_At_Duke.htm

Office of Personnel Management, (n.d.). Laws and Executive Orders. Retrieved from http://www.opm.gov/disability/Laws.asp

Ohtake, Y., Chadsey, J.G. (1999). Social disclosure among coworkers without disabilities in supported employment settings. Mental Retardation 37(1), 25-35

Parent, W. (2004). Supported and customized employment. Retrieved from http://www.wnyilp.org/RRTCILM/bestprac/pdfs/supcust.pdf

Perry D. (2002). Disability issues in the employment and social protection. Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/Documents/Events/2002/Disability_Development/perry_paper.pdf

Rai, K.B. & Critzer, J.W. (2000). Affirmative action and the university: race, ethnicity, and gender in higher education employment. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=QP35ID0tDp8C&dq=The+term+%22Affirmative+ Action%22+however+was+introduced+for+the+first+time+in+Executive+Order+109 25+signed+by+President+Kennedy+on+March+6,+l 961 ,+although+the+first+affirma tive+action+law+signed+by+President+Roosevelt+was+Executive+Order+8802+in+l 941.&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=hzbQS8bKBIT2NYL68ecP&sa=X &oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum= 12&ved=0CCwQ6 AEwC w#v=snippet&q= 1092 5&f=false

Rubin, S. E. & Roessler, R. T. (2008). Foundations of the vocationalrehabilitation process. Texas:Pro.ed

Rumrill, P., Roessler, R., Vierstra, C, Hennessey, M., & Staples, L. (2004). Workplace barriers and job satisfaction among employed people with multiple sclerosis: An empirical rationale for early intervention. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 20, 177-183

112

Salleh,N., Abdullah, K., & Buang, N.A. (2001). Job Opportunities for Special Needs Population in Malaysia. Jurnal Pendidikan 27(2001), 77-85.

Salleh, N.,Mustapha, R., Habib, A.R. (2004). Vocational training and IT competencies for students with special needs in Malaysia. Innovation in Inclusive School Development Conference Proceedings. Bangi, Selangor: University Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Sarkees, M.D., & Scott, J.L. (1986). Vocational special needs. Homewood, IL: American Technical Publishers, Inc.

Schartz, H., Hendricks, D.J., Blanck, P. (2006). Workplace accommodations: Evidence-based outcomes. Work 27:345-354.

Scherich, D.L. (1996). Job accommodations in the workplace for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing: current practices and recommendations. Journal of Rehabilitation, April/Mei/June (1996), 27-35.

Schur, L., Kruse, D., Blasi, J., Blanck, P. (2009). Is disability disabling in all workplaces?: Disability, workplace disparities, and corporate culture. Industrial Relations ¥S(3):381-410.

Shapiro JP. (1994). No pity. New York: Times Books.

Teasley, C, (n.d). The history of affirmative action laws in the US. Retrieved from http://www.helium.com/items/1243988-us-affirmative-action-laws

Thorton, P. (1998). Employment quotas, levies and national rehabilitation funds for persons with disabilities: pointers for policy and practice. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/gladnetcollect/84

Tomblin, M.J., & Haring, K.A. (1999). Vocational training for students with learning disabilities: A qualitative investigation. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 57(3), 375-370

113

USLegal Definition. (2010). Affirmative action law & legal definition. Retrieved from http ://definitions. uslegal. com/a/affirmative-action/

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). UNDP Partners with SEGI University College to Champion Disabilities Issues. Retrieved from http://www.undp.org.my/20-05-2009-undp-partners-with-segi-university-college-to-champion-disability-issues

United States Department of Labor. A world in which people with disabilities have unlimited employment opportunities. Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/odep/

Wehman P, Revell WG, Brooke V. (2003). Competitive employment: has it become the "first choice" yet? Journal of Disability Policy Studies 14, 163-173.

Welch, P., Palames, C. (1995). A brief history of disability rights legislation in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.udeducation.org/resources/readings/welch.asp

World Health Organization (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva, Switzerland.

Wright, B. (2004). Redefining disability to promote equality: The role of disability studies in educating occupational therapists. Disability Studies Quarterly 24(04). Retrieved from http://www.dsq-sds.org

Zarocostas, J. (2005). Disabled still face hurdles in job market, The Washington Times: A16.

Zolna, J.S. (2005). Factors for success of workplace accommodations. Retrieved from http://www.workrerc.org/News/04june20_5.php

114