Disability Management and Workplace Integration

International Research Findings

Henry G. Harder, Thomas Geisen

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317150152
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Disability Management is perceived and understood to be an important approach to reducing the negative impact, for workers and the company, of absence due to illness and accidents, and to assisting those with disabilities to enter or re-enter the workplace. Disability Management has already become established in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. Recently European countries have begun to promote the approach in order to reduce illness related expenses and avoid unemployment, early retirement and costs to the welfare state. In Disability Management and Workplace Integration leading researchers from around the World consider the development of Disability Management over the last three decades. They examine the on-going debate about methodology and implementation of disability management strategies and programmes, highlighting the critical debate about the implications of a stricter cost-benefit approach to Disability Management theory and practice. Professionals involved in workplace integration, researchers approaching workplace integration from a variety of perspectives such as sociology; rehabilitative medicine; psychology; education; social policy; and economics, and students on a range of courses, will appreciate this valuable book.

1 Disability Management An Introduction

HENRY G. HARDER and THOMAS GEISEN

DOI: 10.4324/9781315577395-1

Since its beginning in the late 1980s, disability management has gained more and more attention in many countries worldwide. Disability management is perceived and understood as an important approach to reduce the negative impact of workers, who are absent due to illness and accidents, on the workers themselves and the company and to assist those with disabilities to enter or re-enter the workplace. Disability management has at its heart the belief that work is central to all of our lives, that individuals, society, employers and governments all value work and want to have all of their colleagues, friends and citizens gainfully employed. An unfortunate reality of work is that some people become injured or ill and have difficulty returning to work, or cannot work to the same extent as before. Some people have difficulty accessing or maintaining work because of existing impairments. Given this reality, disability management says that we should all be proactive in identifying and resolving all factors that prevent persons with any kind of disability from accessing work. Far too often, initiatives to address issues faced by persons with disabilities come as afterthoughts; they react to problems faced by an individual, an organization or a society. Therefore disability management argues on the one hand to give those suffering illness or accident the best support possible to get back to a decent life, which includes getting back to gainful employment. While on the other hand, disability management (based on the case experiences) proposes that we should be thinking about these issues in advance and developing policies and procedures to address them. A clear example of this kind of attitude is: We don’t wait to build a hospital until after people are sick. We recognize and accept that they will need medical care. Why don’t we do that with respect to disability?

Disability management (DM) in its various guises has now been active for a good decade or more. In some areas, such as workers’ compensation, it has made dramatic inroads. In other fields, such as social work, it is much slower in bringing change. DM also appears to be geography specific, being strong in North America and Northern Europe. Indeed, while countries such as Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the USA, Canada and the UK are leaders in DM, other countries, such as China, Japan, Italy and France, have not embraced it to the same extent. Research supporting DM and perhaps shedding light on some issues, such as those mentioned above, appears to be lagging. Government funding agencies appear much more interested in funding new programming rather than research studies which may or may not support existing DM practices and endeavours. As a result, DM appears a bit fractured and not always identifiable as a unique discipline. People are confused by what it is and, perhaps more importantly, by what it seeks to achieve and also what DM has in common with such concepts as ‘workplace health promotion’ or ‘workplace health management’?

So far, disability management has not been developed into a coherent approach. In theory there are some variations under discussion, which typically focus on the usual view that workers with an illness or who have had accident are not able to fulfil their current work duties. Integration, separation, increased flexibility and outsourcing-insourcing (Ulich & Wülser 2009: 192) are offered as strategies to cope with this change in a worker’s capacity. However, these disability management strategies represent only a few options for dealing with the negative impact of absent workers. A more cohesive framework, such as the ‘comprehensive disability management’ approach (Harder & Scott 2005), is preferable so that a range of possibilities and solutions can be brought together rather than separated out. This approach offers a more effective and efficient way to deal with matters arising from absent workers. This is important from the perspective of the worker concerned, as well as for the different stakeholders in a company, e.g., management and co-workers.

Not surprisingly, the question of implementing disability management in companies is a difficult one. Empirical research shows that it takes at least one to two years before DM is successfully introduced and implemented in a company (Geisen et al. 2008). Further a continual and ongoing effort is needed by the company’s stakeholders to ensure disability management is a success in the workplace. The reason for this is that disability management is not a pure management strategy that can rely solely on defined structures, procedures and processes. Indeed, personal contacts and interactions are in many cases seen as decisive for success in DM (Geisen et al. 2008). In this regard disability management can be defined as a professional action that needs the capacity to be understood, analyzed and worked on with adequately developed organizational structures. Based on this professional attitude, ‘success’ cannot be pre-defined by a reduction of absentees or by a short reintegration process, for example. Certainly success in workplace integration or reintegration may not be the best solution for each case. Success in disability management can be defined in an abstract way, such as when the best and most adequate solution has been found for a difficult situation in which many stakeholders are involved. The guiding question for measuring success could be: Does everybody involved in the DM case process see the solution as the best possible for the current situation? Such a process is very demanding for those involved and it can only lead to success if there is an overall commitment to disability management, not only from all stakeholders involved, but also from everyone within an organization.

A strong commitment to disability management when introducing and implementing it in an organization is the result of an intensive process in which the various stakeholders commit themselves to common action and support of disability management. This in turn enhances communication processes between the different stakeholders within a company; social relations also become more open and understanding about social orientations, and expectations improve. This is particularly relevant for decisions that are not likely to be to the advantage of everybody involved. Transparency is necessary to enhance and propel the communication process forward. It is also a pre-condition to reach a fair resolution in difficult and often conflict-ridden situations. Disability management research shows that even if the outcome of the disability management process is far from initial expectations, providing support and seeking a solution as part of a participative process in which all relevant stakeholders are involved generates confidence amongst all involved (Geisen et al. 2008). Not all efforts reach the goal, but the efforts themselves contribute to endow and establish dignity and respect for the person concerned, which can be seen as scarce values in modern capitalist societies (Sennett 2003).

What is relevant at the individual case level is also highly relevant at the organizational and institutional levels. Individual cases can incorporate aspects relevant to the understanding of a more general situation. In a comprehensive DM situation, individual cases are evaluated in order to learn from them and improve health, safety and disability management strategies within an organization. Visibility is the first step to start changes and development at organizational or institutional level. This may lead to changes in conditions and practices that have had a negative effect on the health conditions of workers. Accordingly, comprehensive DM always focuses on the interrelationship between action and practice at the micro-level and within an organization’s structure on the meso-level. It is well informed with regards to current social developments relevant to a particular company and workplace, i.e., the macro-level (Bronfenbrenner 1979).

By connecting the micro- and meso-levels within an organization, disability management gives access to a complex knowledge, which supports a company in improving its absentee ratio. In addition, it contributes to cultural change and development that support an overall commitment amongst workers towards their workplace and company by improving working conditions and gives support to a worker in critical and difficult situations. This is the case in Western societies that are typically facing significant demographic changes associated with an aging workforce and an increasing gap between unskilled and qualified workers. Companies need to improve their abilities to support workers more effectively. This means that companies need to enhance workplace conditions and organizational structures according to the heterogeneous need of the workers they have. In the past the strategy to ‘hire and fire’ was seen as an adequate means for companies to make sure that the labour force was sufficient and of suitable quality. This practice seems to be outdated and a fierce competition between companies for qualified workers is now the norm.

The concept for this book arose from intense discussions on DM that have taken place in recent years, particularly in the European context. Such discussions are closely connected to the transformation of the welfare state into one that supports welfare-through-workfare strategies. During the 1990s DM became established in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and to some extent in the USA. In contrast, European countries have only recently sought to promote DM as a preferred approach to reducing illness-related costs and aiming, in the long run, to avoid unemployment and early retirement and thereby reducing the social costs of the welfare state. Research on DM is still very scarce, therefore findings on the theory, history, research and methods of DM are limited. This book seeks to gather the existing knowledge surrounding how DM has developed in different countries over the last few decades and explore the basic theoretical issues of DM. It also aims to present current research findings in the field of DM, and presents and discusses methodological debates and developments of DM.

The close connection between the implementation of disability management and recent transformation processes of welfare states in Europe has put the spotlight on disability management because it has been accused of being a mere instrument of cost reduction. However, current research shows that disability management has been perceived as very well supported by the workers concerned (Geisen et al. 2008).

In practice, disability management appears to be unchallenged in its relevance and success (Geisen et al. 2008); however, research on disability management has, so far, not been widely conducted and there is an urgent need for research on theory and professional practice. This book therefore seeks to collect the existing knowledge about how disability management has developed in recent decades; to explore basic theoretical issues of disability management; to present current research findings from different countries; and present and discuss the methodological debates about and developments of disability management.

With this book the editors seek to promote current empirical research, the theoretical and historical basis of disability management, the international comparative research findings and methodological approaches of disability management. It includes critical investigations of theory and practice in disability management, especially within the context of the development of welfare states, and it highlights the critical debate around a stricter cost-benefit approach in social work theory and practice. Finally, the book aims to highlight the current state of knowledge and practice in disability management.

An Outline of the Chapters in the Book

The book is organized into three parts: empirical, practical and specific. Part I, Theory and Empirical Research in Disability Management Practice, focuses on examples of research that seeks to show the value of DM in practice. This part starts with the contribution of Christine Randall and Nicholas Buys showing the value and power of using participatory action research to introduce disability management in large organization. They argue that there is a lack of evidence about successful implementation of disability management systems within specific organizations. Action research is presented by the authors as an approach to working with an organization to address occupational stress and occupational rehabilitation issues, taking stakeholder engagement, organizational climate and systems thinking into account. The action research process with the case study organization included a review of organizational background data, 65 individual interviews, six focus groups, and data integration via process maps. Randall and Buys argue that action research is an ideal approach to the development of a disability management strategy within a large organization, and for research.

Dealing with the question of what companies are doing about the introduction of disability management or other health-related programs and activities, Thomas Geisen in his chapter argues that disability management in the workplace has the potential to be an effective instrument for human resources and organizational development to manage new demands for workplace integration and contribute systematically by transforming the company into a learning organization. Currently, companies largely perceive disability management as a strategy to reduce employee absence from work and therefore as a means to keep their illness- and health-related costs to a minimum. The implementation and improvement of casework is therefore the focus of these companies. However, a systematic analysis of the findings at case level compared to the relevance of those findings regarding aspects of work organizations and human resources development are not available, neither on a theoretical nor on an empirical level. In this chapter, recent developments in the area of human resources and organizational development are discussed in relation to their possible links to disability management. In addition, disability management is presented as a course of action, and the possible connections between human resources and organizational development are presented on a theoretical-conceptual level.

In the next chapter, Gregory Murphy focuses on the micro-level. He provides a review of the literature focusing on the importance of social support in the practice of disability management. Theoretically, the potential of the workplace disability management approach to reduce various problems associated with (preventable) employee incapacity is based on the premise of a positive contribution to rehabilitation and the return-to-work outcomes that flow from the occupational bond that exists between an employer and an injured or unwell employee. This chapter also examines one component of that occupational bond, i.e., workplace social support, and, following an analysis of the construct of social support, reviews empirical studies that have assessed the nature and impact of social support on rehabilitation outcomes in general, and on return-to-work achievements in particular. The implications from the findings of this analysis are presented and are especially relevant for those involved in the design and delivery of occupational rehabilitation services.

Of critical importance for social support are the disability management professionals. In their chapter, Dörte Bernhard, Mathilde Niehaus and Britta Marfels show what has been happening with respect to the professionalization of disability management. The participation of people with disabilities in the labour market, coupled with their own desire to take on a more active role in their rehabilitation process, has led to discussions about disability management professionals. By comparing company performance in DM, both internationally and within Germany, this chapter focuses on standardization and quality management for professional actors. The focal point is whether or not the term ‘profession’ is adequate in the context of the existing disability management practice in Germany. Outlining a need for high quality and effective counselling measures, this chapter states the prerequisites and calls for more research into disability management.

The law provides a base and source of guidance for disability management. Daniel Haung, Shannon Wagner and Henry Harder write in their chapter about the Canadian context and shed some light on the legal issues and developments in jurisprudence that have implications for the practice of disability management throughout the world. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of Canadian human rights legislation and the duty to accommodate provision in employment law. A history of the development of human rights is discussed along with relevant acts and regulations including the Constitution Act, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Human Rights Act. In addition, the practice and procedures of human rights legislation are outlined with the interpretation and application of both human rights legislation and the duty to accommodate provision in employment law. It is of paramount importance that disability management professionals understand and have an in-depth knowledge of human rights and have a duty to accommodate this issue in order to: (a) educate employers, unions and workers; and (b) use the legislation and case law remedies to accommodate those who have been discriminated against as a result of their membership in a protected group.

The final chapter in this section examines the discriminated groups by focusing on what disability management and diversity management have in common. Stephan Boehm, David Dwertman and Miriam Baumgaertner argue for the integration of diversity management and disability management and add a broader and interesting perspective to the practice of disability management. This chapter aims at making use of conceptual knowledge from diversity research by transferring it to the field of Disability Management.

Part II, Disability Management in Different Countries, seeks to broaden our knowledge of what is happening in DM around the world. Starting with China, Ignatius Yu, K. K. Chan, Dan Tang, F. K. Ip and Karen Hui-Lo bring us up to date on disability management in this major economy. The chapter examines the development of disability management in both mainland China and in the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong (HKSAR). The chapter begins with an overview of the economic development and changes in the social security policy in mainland China since the beginning of economic reform in 1978. The original model of social security in communist society is no longer able to deal with the increasing occupational health and safety issues and work injuries accompanying the recent economic reform in mainland China. Hence, reforms in occupational health and safety legislation and changes in the injury insurance system were introduced at the beginning of the twenty-first century. T...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Figures
• Tables
• List of Contributors
• 1 Disability Management An Introduction
• PART I Theory and Empirical Research in Disability Management Practice
• PART II Disability Management in Various Countries
• PART III Illness, Rehabilitation and Disability Management
• Index