Claire was a triple-certificate nurse, and she had diabetes. When her illness prevented her from continuing to work in her profession, she sought a disability pension. During this process, she was told by a government employee that she was fat, lazy and did not want to work. Claire was forced onto a Newstart allowance (unemployment benefit) which required her to undertake volunteer work at a local school for disabled children. She enjoyed this work because she was not judged by others due to her size or her illness, and she was able to utilise some of her nursing skills as a teacherâs helper. After a period of time, it became evident that her symptoms, which had been attributed to her diabetes, were changing and she was ultimately diagnosed with a brain tumour. Claire has since passed away, and friends have only regret the way she was treated by others who were quick to judge by appearances, social norms and unhelpful regulations. Claireâs situation was particularly poignant, but the disadvantage she experienced is not unique.
The disadvantage experienced by individuals in the labour market due to particular personal characteristics is a âuniversal and permanently evolving phenomenonâ (International Labour Organisation, 2017). The complexity of the interplay of these characteristics and the regulatory environments, in which participants in the labour market engage, can result in negative workforce participation outcomes. The effective inclusion of these employees is a legal requirement in many countries, and yet there is still some way to go to achieve a positive diversity climate in workplaces and in the related regulatory environment.
Prasad, Pringle, and Konrad (2006, p. 1) base their definition of diversity on groups that âhave systematically faced discrimination and oppression at work⊠[including] non-whites, women, religious and ethnic minorities, individuals with physical disabilities, older employees, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered peopleâ. We add to this list: people with invisible disabilities, young workers and individuals with various types of migrant status. âAt its core, the concept of diversity is all about matters of difference and inclusionâ (Prasad et al., 2006, p. 2).
These matters of difference may form hurdles which prevent the acceptance or inclusion, of those workers belonging to particular diversity groups, into the workplace of productive employees. These diversity groups could also be referred to as diverse social identity groups (Prasad et al., 2006, p. 2), and we acknowledge that identity is in many ways a personal construct and membership of a âdiverse social identity groupâ is not straightforward. An individual with a medical diagnosis might prefer not to identify as an individual with that condition in every social situation, for example, but instead might choose an alternative identity to present in particular social situations (Goffman, 1986). The term diversity group or diverse social identity group is used in this book to refer to groups of individuals who identify as a member of that group. Workers themselves tend to see their occupational identity as the most âsalient identity at workâ (Santuzzi & Waltz, 2016, p. 1115), while other aspects of their identity such as age, gender or disability are considered to be less significant. Some workplaces will respond negatively to disclosure of a stigmatising characteristic. Many employees realise this and attempt to hide information that may be stigmatising from their employer (Vickers, 2017). Where members of a diverse social identity group are aware of the stigma , Vickers (2017, p. 4) points out that âit becomes critical that the negative information about oneâs self be hiddenâ. Williams-Whitt and Taras (2010, p. 535) note that âthe preponderance of research suggests that employers harbour inaccurate beliefs based on negative stereotypesâ. Regardless of their legal obligations, employers tend to hold narrow perceptions of who is an ideal worker, and alternately, who is not. Available legal obligations and social expectations do not provide protection from the disadvantaging attitudes of employers.
The results of this can be considered a paradox: in the literature, a diverse workforce has been shown to provide a variety of benefits to workplaces, but disclosing a diverse identity , where an individual has a choice, may not be beneficial to that employee personally. It is important for employers to understand how diverse social identity groups contribute to their workplace. This book explores issues of identity and stigma as they relate to diverse social identities in the workplace. Identity is not well understood or appreciated in many social spaces. Understandings that define belonging are often developed through the normative expectations of others. Despite the best efforts of the activists in movements demanding social change, such as the disability movement, we are yet to see the full integration of individuals with differing personal characteristics into the structures of todayâs society.
There are changing views of what constitutes identity , and research that more closely examines the different types of identity is important. An individualâs social identity can be considered as being âderived from the groups, statuses or categories that the individual is socially recognised as being a member ofâ (Clair, Beatty, & MacLean, 2005, p. 80). Where these indicators are not readily visible, people may have a choice about disclosure. Literature on the disclosure of invisible social identities has derived from researching sexual orientation (Ragins, 2004) and multiracial identities (Leary, 1999), and has been explored in other fields such as chronic illness and work (Vickers, 2001).
Choices that are made about how to manage the disclosure of potentially stigmatising personal information have the potential to influence the success of the individual in the workplace. Sometimes, therefore a disclosure conversation can be a positive experience. More commonly though, it is a somewhat awkward sharing of what could be stigmatising information. The way it is received depends on the supervisor or colleague with whom it is shared. It can also be influenced by the culture and policies within the organisation. Many peopleâwomen who request assistance with career progression in a male-dominated field, individuals who are seeking accommodations to assist with a disability or chronic illness, older workers who are asking for a change in their working hours because of caring responsibilities and migrant workers who seek a change in working days because of their religious beliefsâmight find that they have revealed stigmatising information in the process of making requests. However else they describe their need for assistance or accommodations, it is imperative that they preserve their appearance as a capable worker. A managerâs preference for employees who conform to narrow conceptions of an ideal worker means that workers with any characteristic that labels them as âother than a capable workerâ may experience difficulties in their workplace.
This book seeks to explore challenges faced by individuals who are in some way different. It is organised around five key themes: disability; age; gender; migrant labour; and authority, power and support. In the first chapters which focus on Disability, we see that supervisors are often considered gatekeepers with considerable influence over both the culture of the organisation and the acceptance of flexible working within the organisation (Skinner, Pocock, & Hutchinson, 2015). Where a supervisor implements inflexible expectations based on ânormalcyâ (or at least what is considered to be normal), they may disadvantage workers with different characteristics. The following chapters examine some workers who might be considered to have different characteristics.
Beatty and McGonagle (Chapter 2) explore the challenges for employees with chronic health conditions and the organisations in which they work. Buryâs (1982) description of chronic illness as a âbiographical disruptionâ can provide a catalyst for identity change for employees with chronic illness. Concepts from the fields of lifespan psychology and identity process theory are used to consider the way in which individuals respond and adapt their identities to a chronic health condition.
The ways that individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) navigate negative attitudes in the workplace are examined in Chapter 3. Brownlow, Werth and Keefe reflect on the substantial emotion work undertaken by workers with ASD that influences the degree of success they experience in the workplace.
The second thematic section focuses on issues related to age, which examines the workplace experiences of workers who are young or ageing. Radford, Chapman, Bainbridge and Halvorsen (Chapter 4) explore the ageing working population and associated opportunities and challenges. They offer diversity practices that might be undertaken to respond to the challenges and amplify the opportunities for this group of workers. Price and Grant-Smith (Chapter 5) look at the difficulties that young workers face when they are framed as âdeficientâ in terms of their skills profile, work ethic and personal attributes.
Gender forms the third theme, with contributions from Shah and Barker (Chapter 6) who look at the experiences of female Indian information technology workers working on international assignments. This chapter looks at the interaction between different characteristics, and the authors note that âalthough most women lacked support from their organisations and in some instances from families, their motivation and the need for independence facilitated their assignment positivelyâ. Waldron, Southey and Murray (Chapter 7) explore the way that women survive the isolated echelons of the corporate ladder. The authors use status characteristics theory to explore the expe...