INFORMATION TO USERS
This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming.
While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce
this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the
quality of the material submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or
notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This
may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages
to assure complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an
indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure,
duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For
blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If
copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in
the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed,
a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is
customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer o f a large sheet and to
continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on
until complete.
4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic
means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted
into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the
Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best
available copy has been filmed.

University

Microfilms
International
300 N. Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

THE EFFECT OF FEDERAL AND STATE L E GI SL A T I ON
ON CALHOUN COUNTY EMPLOYERS'

H I RI NG PRACTI CES

OF HANDICAPPED PEOPLE FOR THE YEARS 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 8 0
by
Barbara

Major

Rupp

A DI SSERTATI ON

in

Submitted to
Michigan S ta te U n iv e r s it y
p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the requirem ents
fo r the degree o f

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department

College o f Education
o f A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and C u r r i c u l u m

1983

ABSTRACT

THE EFFECT OF FEDERAL AND STATE LE GI SL A T I ON
ON CALHOUN
COUNTY
EMPLOYERS
HIRING
PRACTICES
OF HA NDI CAPP ED PEOPLE FOR THE YEARS 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 8 0

By
Barbara

The p u r p o s e
of

federal

ers

and

h irin g

they

make

a

of

in

the

and

(A)

cappers

than

non-federal

people
as

or

the

form ing

the

telephone
for

County

mo r e

during

the

for

in fo rm a tio n
the

of

the

were,

were

1976-1980

then

and

sizes

of

(3)

do

others?,
a nd

managers

handicappers

contractors

years

(1)

types

than

employ­

hire

who

mo r e

get

handi­

contractors?
who

years

th is

em ployed

1970-1980

study,

w ith

at

le a s t

were
269

16

selected
em ployers

sample.

method,

gathering

do

impact

County

supervisors

number

em ployers

population

survey

for

federal

p o p u la tio n

Th e

used

do

between

(2)

the

d u rin g

researched

handica ppers

hired?,

Calhoun

being

programs

difference

on C a l h o u n

handicappers

more

determine

hand i c a p p e r s

1970-1975?,

tra in in g

Rupp

was t o

le g is la tio n

more

during
h ire

study

questions

h irin g

com panies
employer

state

The

were

th is

p ra c tic e s

1970-1980.
employers

of

Major

com bining

c o lle c tio n
research

a

q u e stio n n a ire

procedure,
data.

was

the

and

method

Barbara

In fe re n tia l
ences

betw een

selecte d

s ta tis tic s
the

item s

on

were

company
the

used

s iz e ,

to

the

M ajor

test

for

company

FINDINGS
1.

2.

Federal

and

e ffe ct

the

County

em ployers

capped

people

Federal

h irin g

capped

4.

by

h ire d

The

of

e ith e r

was

between

3.

had

C alhoun
of

h a n d i­

1976.

an

im pact

a C alhoun
federal

have

not

h ire d

on

the

County

agencies
236

h a n d i­

h a n d ica p p e rs

federal

d u rin g

the

or

being

nonfederal

years

1970-1980

. 30.

There

did

of

number

a fte r

as

did

p e o p le .

co n tra cto rs
was

the

1976,

County

p ro b a b ility

hire d

in

h ire d

sin ce

Calhoun

The

p ra c tic e s

governm ent

em ployer;
in

le g is la tio n

le g is la tio n

federal

3.

state

the

size

s ig n ific a n t

types

h ire
of

of

d iffe re n ce

businesses

and

those

that

types

that

ha n d ica p p e rs.
the

p o s itiv e

han dica ppers
1976 .

a

han dica ppers

not

cant

not

business
d iffe re n ce

both

p rio r

made
in
to

a
the

and

s ig n ifi­
h irin g

d iffe r­

type,

q u e s tio n n a ire .

of

fo llo w in g

Rupp

and

This
encouraged
seven
and

years

love,

D octor
husband,

I

of
I

is

d ed icatedto

me

to

start

la te r,

am c o m p l e t i n g

want

to

husband,

college

thanks

P h ilo sophy

my

to

on

his

atria l
patience,

th is

fin a l

degree.

To a

say, "thank

ii

Ge ne,

you".

who i n

basis.

1956

Twenty-

understanding,

requirement

for

the

w o n d e r f u l man

and

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

As

a n o th e r

successful
tu n ity
a ll

of

extend

my

the

p e o ple

who

Kenneth

d ire c to rs h ip

th e ir

Dr.

Jack

d ire c tio n
M r.
support
and

be

me

S p e c ia l

the

p a re n ts,

G la d y s

husband,

Gene,

th e ir

and
and

encouragem ent

Dr.

the
my

the
to

a

oppor­

thanks

to

p o ssib le :

d is s e rta tio n
fin a l

a s s is t

G e n try,

Kenneth

m onths.
whenever

D r.

L o u is

H a rd in g ,

w ritin g

of

my

course

and

support
i i i

I

me

for

John

and

pursued

gave

stu d y.
to ta l

research,

worked

g ra titu d e

K a p ric e
as

w ork,

m eeting

and

and

th is

gave

who

and

Adams,

dau g h te rs

o f

who

ty p is t,

lo v e

G ordon

pushed,

boss,

years

of

and

and

the

d u rin g

d is s e rta tio n

th o u g h ts

th is

degree

over

c a jo le d ,

H a rb e rts,

th is

took

and

b e g in

C a s ta n ie r,

ty p in g

th is

C a s te lle

who

B e rn a rd in e
in

take

to

in te re s t.

w ritin g .

me

make

w illin g n e s s

D r.

and

through

to

draws

a p p re c ia te d .

d is s e rta tio n

w ith

to

Levine,

to

career

a p p re c ia tio n

chairm an

and

tim e ,

R obert
a ll

of

H um bert

fo r

lik e

who

m em bers;

g uidan ce,
D r.

w ould

helped

ro le

Joseph

a ca d e m ic

s in c e re

alw ays

C o m m itte e
Romano,

I

c a rin g ,

w ill

my

H a rd in g ,

and

concern,

necessary

o f

co n c is io n ,

to

D r.

Your

phase

c lo s e ly

tim e lin e s .
go

to

my

M a jo r;

my

B a b e tte ,
th is

fo r

degree.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
P age
LI5T

OF T A B L E S ..................................................................................................... v i

Chapter
I.

THE P R O B L E M ....................................................................................

1

I n t r o d u c t i o n ...............................................................................
1
S t a t e m e n t o f t h e P r o b l e m ...............................................
4
P u r p o s e o f t h e S t u d y ..........................................................
5
Need f o r t h e S t u d y ...............................................................
7
L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e S t u d y ...............................................
8
B a s i c A s s u m p t i o n s ...............................................................
9
D e f i n i t i o n o f T e r m s ..........................................................
9
P r o c e d u r e s f o r t h e S t u d y ...................................................... 10
M e t h o d ................................................................................................ 11
P o p u l a t i o n ......................................................................................11
Sampling T ech niq ue. . . .
.....................................
11
I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n ...............................................................
11
A n a l y s i s o f D a t a ...................................................................... 12
H y p o t h e s e s t o be T e s t e d ................................................. 13
S u m m a r y ..............................................................................
13
II.

REVIEW OF RELATED L I T E R A T U R E ................................................. 13
I n t r o d u c t i o n .........................................................
13
F e d e r a l and S t a t e L e g i s l a t i o n ................................
17
H i s t o r y o f Handicapped D i s c r i m i n a t i o n . . .
23
P r e j u d i c e and M y t h s ................................................................ 31
E m p l o y e r P r a c t i c e s and A t t i t u d e s ................................. 33
R e l a t e d 5 t u d i e s ....................................................................
42
I m p l i c a t i o n s o f P r i o r R e s e a r c h ...................................... 48

III.

RESEARCH PROCEDURES

...............................................................

50

H y p o t h e s e s t o be T e s t e d ...................................................... 50
M e t h o d ..................................................................................................... 52
P o p u l a t i o n ...........................................................................................53
S a m p l e ..................................................................................................... 54
I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n ....................................................................
58
D a t a C o l l e c t i o n ...........................................................................60
A n a l y s i s o f D a t a ...........................................................................61
S u m m a r y ................................................................................................62

iv

Page
IV.

F I N D I N G S ..................................................................................................... 63
Demographic I n f o r m a t i o n About
P a r t i c i p a n t s ................................................................................ 63
D a t a A n a l y s i s and F i n d i n g s .................................................68
Other F a c to rs A f f e c t i n g Handicapper
E m p l o y m e n t ......................................................................................83
S u m m a r y ................................................................................................ 84

V.

SUMMARY,

CONCLUSIONS,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

.

.

87

I n t r o d u c t i o n ......................................................................................87
The P r o b l e m ......................................................................................88
The P u r p o s e ......................................................................................88
L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e S t u d y .................................................90
B a s i c A s s u m p t i o n s ......................................................................90
R e s e a r c h P r o c e d u r e s ..........................................................
91
H y p o t h e s e s t o be T e s t e d ...................................................... 91
F i n d i n g s and D i s c u s s i o n ................................................
92
F i n d i n g s ...........................................................................................99
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s ..................................................................... 101
APPENDI X
APPENDI X A
E m p l o y e r C o v e r L e t t e r a nd S u r v e y
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ................................................................................... 105
APPENDI X B
Telephone

Procedure

Training

..........................................

110

APPENDI X C
I n t e r v i e w w i t h Employers from the Survey
P i l o t G r o u p ........................................................................................ 112
APPENDI X D
U n iversity

of

Kentucky

Research

. . . .

120

APPENDI X E
A Research P r o j e c t Conducted in P o r t l a n d ,
O r e g o n a n d San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f o r n i a . . . .

123

APPENDI X F
Summar y o f E m p l o y e r Co mment s
S i z e ...............................................

124

by

Report

Company

APPENDI X G
Calh o un County Employment P r o f i l e
1 9 7 0 - 1 9 8 0 .........................................................................................
B I B L I O G R A P H Y ....................................................................

v

1 27
129

LIST

OF TABLES

Page
TABLE 1
EMPLOYER SI ZE OF THE TOTAL POPULATION
IN CALHOUN COUNTY EMPLOYING 16 OR MORE
P E O P L E ..................................................................................................................... 55
TABLE 2
P ARTI AL TABLE FOR DETERMI NI NG SAMPLE
SI ZE FROM A GI VEN P O P U L A T I O N ........................................................... 56
TABLE 3
QUESTI ONNAI RE RESPONSE RATE OF THE
190 EMPLOYERS..................................................................................................... 57
TABLE 4
EMPLOYER QUESTI ONNAI RE TOTAL SAMPLE
RESPONSE RATE..............................................................................
TABLE 5
NUMBER OF EMPLOYERS
THE SURVEY BY S I Z E

58

WHO RESPONDED TO
AND TYPE OFB U S I N E S S ..................................... 64

TABLE 6
EMPLOYER F A M I L I A R I T Y WITH FEDERAL AND
STATE L A W S ...........................................................................................................66
TABLE 7
EMPLOYERS WHO WERE OR HAD BEEN FEDERAL
CONTRACTORS, 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 8 0 .....................................................................

66

TABLE 8
EMPLOYERS' H I RI NG PRACTI CES PRIOR TO AND
FOLLOWING 1976 ..........................................................................................

67

TABLE 9
EMPLOYERS WHO HI RED HANDICAPPERS PRIOR
AND FOLLOWING THEYEAR 1 976

70

TO

TABLE 10
THE DI FFERENCE I N H I RI NG PRACTI CES BY TYPES
OF C O M P A N I E S ..................................................................................................... 72

vi

Page
TABLE 11
C L A S S I F I C A T I O N BY TYPES OF BUSI NESS AND
H I RI NG PRACTI CES BEFORE AND AFTER 1 9 7 6 ..............................

73

TABLE 12
THE NUMBER OF HANDICAPPERS H I RE D, 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 7 3
BY TYPE AND S I Z E OF COMPANY................................................................. 75
TABLE 13
THE NUMBER OF HANDICAPPERS HI RE D, 1 9 7 6 - 1 9 8 0
BY TYPE AND S I Z E OF C O M P A N Y ............................................................ 76
TABLE 14
THE DI FFERENCE I N H I RI NG PRACTI CES BY SI ZE
OF C O M P A N I E S .......................................................................................................78
TABLE 15
C L A S S I F I C A T I O N BY SI ZE OF BUSI NESS AND H I R I N G
..........................................
PRACTI CES BEFORE AND AFTER 1 9 7 6

79

TABLE 16
EMPLOYER RANKING BY HANDICAPPER H I R I N G
PRACTI CES BEFORE AND AFTER 1 9 7 6
..........................................

80

TABLE 17
THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF HANDICAPPERS HI RED BY
S I Z E AND TYPE OF BUSI NESS BEFORE AND AFTER
1 9 7 6 ..................................................................................................................... B 1
APPENDI X D
D I S T R I B U T I O N BY COMPANY S I Z E OF BUSI NESSES AND
I NDUSTRI ES WHO REPORTED HAVI NG PHYSI CALLY
HANDICAPPED EMPLOYEES
.....................................................................

121

APPENDI X G
1 9 7 0 POPULATI ON, C I V I L I A N LABOR FORCE TOTAL
EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT DATA ...........................................

127

1 9 7 0 CENSUS OF POPULATI ON STATUS OF DI SABLED
OR HANDI CAPPED PERSONS 16 TO 64 YEARS OF AGE .

.

.

127

1 9 7 0 ADJUSTED STATUS OF DI SABLED OR HANDICAPPED
PERSONS 1 6 - 6 4 HEARS OF A G E ...............................................................128

vi i

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM

I NTRODUCTI ON
H is to ric a lly ,
cess

to

treated
in

vocational
as

th e ir

exclusion
Even

successful

job

have

and

capa ble

or

th e ir

W hile
to

could

and

have

and

be

has

be

as

is

re a lly

what

is

considered

been

oppor­

areas

where

handicapped

against.

to

than

ac­

resulted

employment

expected,

viewed

had

freq uently

v o c a tio n a l

tend

are

not

re je ctio n

discrim inated

in d iv id u a ls

from

la s t
for

u nd erem p loym ent
L e v ita n

and

have

d e va lu e d

being

the

case

far

by
less

because

normal

of

physical

behavior. *

the

em ploym ent

social

career

repeatedly

com petent

or

they

educational

subsequently

d e v ia tio n

appearance

from

performance

H andicapped
others,

This

in

been

in d ivid u a ls

fu lfillm e n t;

outcasts.

tu n itie s .

persons

disabled

ten

years

have

handicapped
s t i l l

Taggart

persons,

rem a in

(1977)

shown

as

have

greater

unem ploym ent

c r it ic a l
made

access

the

and

p roblem s.
p o in t

that

^M.
W. G o l d ,
"Meeting
t h e Needs o f t h e H a n d i c a p p e d , "
paper p re s e n te d to the N a tio n a l B ic e n te n n ia l Conference
o n V o c a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n , M i n n e a p o l i s , MN, O c t o b e r 1 , 1 9 7 6 ,
p. 13.

1

2
"employment
in

a

s itu a tio n

c i e t y . "2
percent
Their

The
of

the

fin d in g s

that
Urban

for

persons

imposes

showed

d is a b ilitie s

staggering

In stitu te

pop ula tion

w ith

(1975)

between

18

costs

on

estim ated
a nd

64

2.

P e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s t e n d t o do m o r e
p a r t - t i m e w o r k a nd h a v e l o w e r a n n u a l a nd
weekly e a r n in g s .

3.

Persons w ith d i s a b i l i t i e s are g e n e r a lly
members o f t h e s e c o n d a r y l a b o r m a r k e t .

4.

The d eman d f o r w o r k e r s
i t i e s i s le ss than the
in general.

5.

Employers tend to expect th a t h i r i n g work­
ers w ith d i s a b i l i t i e s w i l l increase c o sts.

6.

Employer a t t i t u d e s are g e n e r a ll y u n f a v o r ­
able towards h i r i n g people w ith d i s a b i l i ­
tie s .

7.

C e rta in groups o f people w ith d i s a b i l i t i e s
have a more d i f f i c g l t t i m e f i n d i n g e m p l o y ­
ment.
These g r o u p s i n c l u d e t h e m e n t a l l y
i l l , m entally re sto re d , m entally retarded,
c o n g e n i t a l l y d i s a b l e d , a nd o l d e r p e r s o n
with d i s a b i lit ie s .

by

^S.
abled.

a

la rg e

Service

co n so rtiu m

A.
L e vita n ,
(B a ltim o re :

our

so­
18.7

disabled.

that:^

P e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s t e n d t o have
l a b o r f o r c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s which are
le s s than ra te s f o r the n o n d is a b le d .

Comprehensive

re su lt

that

are

1.

The
ted

problems

and
Th e

who h a v e d i s a b i l ­
demand f o r w o r k e r s

Needs

(the

Study

Urban

R. T a g g a r t ,
John H o p k in s

( CSN),

In s titu te ,

conduc­
1975),

Jobs f o r the D i s U n iv e rs ity Press,

T 9 77)".
v ice
FuTe

3 The U r b a n
In s titu te ,
R eport o f C om prehensive 5 e r Needs S t u d y ,
( W a s h i n g t o n , t>. t . :
The U r b a n i n s t i ,” 19751 , p p . 2 9 2 - 3 2 9 .

3
documented
disabled
th e ir

re la te d

persons

fin d in g s,

problem s

in

the

of

em ployment

com petetive

im portant

to

th is

labor

study

of

se ve re ly

market.

Two

of

are:^

" B e s i d e s t h e l i m i t a t i o n s p l a c e d on t h e s e ­
v e r e l y h a n d i c a p p e d b y t h e i r i m p a i r m e n t a nd
t h e i r socio-econom ic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , a
number o f o t h e r f a c t o r s a f f e c t t h e i r l e v e l
o f p a r t ic ip a t io n in the la bor m arket.
Some
o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s are i n a d e q u a t e
a g g e g a t e d e m a n d , c a p i t a l d i s i n c e n t i v e s , em­
p l o y e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , and l a c k o f f u l l
employment in th e economy."
" A f f i r m a t i v e a c tio n e f f o r t s w i l l probably ex­
t e n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s somewhat t o t h e l e s s
severely d isabled.
W ithout major l e g i s l a ­
tiv e
changes,
the
p re s e n t em ployer
a ttitu d e s ,
t h e e f f e c t o f p e r c e i v e d a nd a c t u a l i n s u r a n c e
premium c o s t s , jo b r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r f l e x i ­
b ility of
s c h e d u l e s , and m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o
places of
employment, a l l suggest t h a t la b o r
f o r c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s a f a i n t hope f o r a l l
b u t a few o f t h e s e v e r e l y h a n d i c a p p e d . "
The
497,408

handicapped
people

more.

Of

tween

the

disabled

who

census

had

a work

t h i s number,
ages o f

50

states

the

d isabled

in

the

16-64

pop u la tio n .

the

U nited

p o p u la tio n

M ichigan

in

for

d is a b ility
disabled

represented

This

the

of

of

six

9.5

the

s a me

23rd
Calhoun

group

or

10.23

percent

ofthe

county

of

unemploym ent

is of

im m ediate concern

were

percent

In

was

population.

The
to

counted

months

p e o p l e who

ranked M ichigan
States.^

1980

or
be­

of

the

out

of

County
10,247,
problem

people

in

4Ib id .
5 An n e W a l t z ,
"In te g ra tin g
D isabled
W orkers
Into
Your
W orkforce."
P u b l i c P e r s o n n e l Management J o u r n a l ,
v o l . 1 0 , n u m b e r 4 ( Wi n t e r , 1
) : p .' 41 6 .

business,
During

in d u stry,

the

Commission
of

of

job

or

were

1978-1980,

records

in d ica te

sought

job

cou n se lo rs

placement
not

Privacy

education

years

d is a b ility

ploym ent

and

Act

of

that

se rvin g

p o ssib le
which

M ichigan
842

Employment

Security

from

people

o b ta in ,

governs

County.

Calhoun

8 42

to

C alhoun

people

assistance

these

in

the

the

some t y p e

lo cal

job

Count y .6
were

due

release

with

of

Records

eithe r

to

the

em­

not

kept

R ights

ce rta in

types

of
of

in form at io n .

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The
pers

in

problem
Calhoun

proportion
laws

tra in in g

the

employment

t at ion

The

1975,

a nd

of

ilita tio n

Act

of

in

to

the
of

of

both

th is

(T itle

the

the

so

as

and

state

not,

were

weaknesses

a nd

to

in
and

re h a b ili-

increase

the

county.

County

during

V,

greater

handicappers

centered

of

If

show

handicap­
in

federal

study

enactment

and

educational

address
in

of

might

that

Calhoun

1973

hired

if

p ra ctice s.

that

could

handicappers

p ra ctices
p rio r

hiring

community,

determine

enactment

preparation

a c tiv ity

to

g e ttin g

trends

in s titu tio n s

employment

the

employer
or

was

were

before

in d ica to rs

the

ment

County

then

governing

there

id e n tifie d

federal
Sections

around

employ­

the

years

laws,

the

503

a nd

1970Rehab­

504),

and

^ M ic h ig a n Employment S e c u r i t y C om m ission, Calhoun
County,
B a ttle
Creek, MI, A p r i l
1 9 7 8 - M a r c h 19 8 0 f i g u r e s
c o m p ile d from a p p l i c a n t f i l e s .

the

1974

Vietnam

(Section

402),

M ichigan

enacted

A c t 183 o f

the

Era
and

Veterans

Readjustment

employment

Act

P u blic

2 20

of

Acts

a c tiv ity

the

P ublic

Assistance

after
Acts

Act

1976

of

when

19 7 6 and

o f 1977.

The

specific

questions

th is

study

attempts

to

answer

1.

Wer e h a n d i c a p p e r s b e i n g h i r e d b y C a l h o u n C o u n t y
e m p l o y e r s p r i o r t o 1 9 7 6 , and i f s o , t o w h a t d e ­
gree?

2.

Has f e d e r a l a nd s t a t e l e g i s l a t i o n
of
1 97 3 and
1976 had any i m p a c t
on e m p l o y m e n t o f h a n d i c a p p e d
people s in c e those dates?

3.

Is
there
a d iffe re n ce
in
p r a c t i c e s between e m plo yers
tractors
and t h o s e who a r e
tors?

4.

Is there a type o f in d u s try
more h a n d i c a p p e r s t h a n o t h e r
houn C o u n t y ?

5.

Do e s t h e s i z e
in whether or

6.

Do e s t h e c o m p a n y p r o v i d e t r a i n i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s
for
th e ir
personnel
and s u p e r v i s o r y p e o p l e r e ­
g a r d i n g t h e h i r i n g and s u p e r v i s i o n o f h a n d i c a p ­
pers?

7.

I f t r a i n i n g was
the tra in in g ?

are:

handicapped h i r i n g
who a r e f e d r a l c o n ­
not f e d r a l c o n tra c ­

th a t tends
in d u s trie s

to
in

hire
Cal­

o f t h e i n d u s t r y make a d i f f e r e n c e
n o t h a n d ic a p p e r s f i n d employment?

provided,

what

was

the

nature

of

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
Th e

problem

of

change

are

becoming

in crea sing ly

and

in dustry

to

during
Future

the

stay

1970's

Shock,

that:

and

im portant

current,

and

people's

1980's.

in

compete
A lvin

a b ility
order
and

to

for

business

remain

T o ffle r

adjust

solvent

stated

in

6
" u n t i l t h i s c e n t u r y . . . s o c i a l c h a n g e was
so s l o w t h a t i t w o u l d p a s s u n n o t i c e d i n one
persons's li f e t i m e .
T h a t i s no l o n g e r s o .
The
r a t e o f c h a n g e h a s i n c r e a s e d so much
that
o u r i m a g i n a t i o n c a n n o t k e e p up . . .
and b e c a u s e o f t h i s a c c e l e r a t e d r a t e o f
change, the v a st m a j o r i t y o f people f i n d
t h e i d e a o f c h a n g e so t h r e a t e n i n g t h a t t h e y
a t t e m p t t o deny i t s e x i s t e n c e .
The p u r p o s e
or

not

and

Calhoun

state

pers;

or,

nation

in

of

th is

study

was

to

County

employers

were

le g is la tio n

regarding

the

is

Calhoun

facing

d erem ploying

a

issue

s ig n ific a n t

population.

It

vide

for:

a basis

the

County

was

by

determine
affected
hiring

much
e ith e r

that

federal

handicap­
rest

o fthe

not employing

p ro p o rtio n

a n ticip a te d

by

of

l i k e the

whether

th is

of

our

study

orun-

w orking

would

pro­

1.

D e t e r m i n i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e number o f h a n d ­
icappers
being h ire d
in Calhoun County a f t e r
1976 when c o m p a r e d w i t h t h o s e b e i n g h i r e d d u r i n g
the p e rio d 1970-1975.

2.

D e te rm in in g the d i f f e r e n c e
in h i r i n g p ra c tic e s
b e t w e e n e m p l o y e r s wh o a r e f e d e r a l c o n t r a c t o r s
and t h o s e
who a r e n o t f e d e r a l c o n t r a c t o r s .

3.

Determ ining
businesses
those th a t
1976.

4.

D e t e r m in i n g the d i f f e r e n c e between the s i z e o f
b u s i n e s s e s t h a t h a v e h i r e h a n d i c a p p e r s and t h o s e
t h a t have not h ir e d
h a n d ic a p p e rs s in c e 1976.

5.

D e t e r m i n i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n e m p l o y e r s who
h i r e h a n d i c a p p e r s and p r o v i d e p e r s o n n e l a n d s u ­
perviso ry tr a in in g
p r o g r a m s and t h o s e e m p l o y e r s
who do n o t p r o v i d e t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s a nd do n o t
h ire handicappers.

^A lv in
House, 1970.

T o ffle r,

the d i f f e r e n c e between the ty p e o f
that
have
h ired
handicappers
and
have not h i r e d h a n d ic a p p e rs s in c e

Future

Shock,
......

(New

York:

Ra n d o m

7

NEED FOR THE STUDY
Five
which

le g is la tiv e

have

regarding

for

had
the

a

d ire ct

handicapped.

These

3.

Revenue

4.

M ichigan
1976.

Act

220

of

the

P ublic

Acts

of

5.

M ichigan
1977.

Act

183

of

the

P ublic

Acts

of

Act

W ithin

the

employers

to

and

use

in

th e ir

regulations

requesting

w ith
for

the

monetary

laws,

fa c ility

in te rvie w in g
and

(T itle

1973

in d u stry
laws

are:

V,

1978

laws

com plying

re la tio n s
a ction

of

1973

and

The 1 9 7 4 V i e t n a m E r a V e t e r a n s R e a d j u s t ­
ment A s s i s t a n c e A c t ( S e c t i o n 402)

p o lic ie s ,

along

are

methods

assistance

w ith

rather

m o d ific a tio n s ,

procedures,

a d v e rtis in g

and

about

an

know

the

spe­

h irin g

developing

being

to

p u b lic

a ffirm a tiv e

employer.

Employers
are

are

mandated

employers

as

problem?

to

do;

T o ffle r
(See

Inform ation
problem
of

saying

im plem enting

e ffe ct,

su lt

business

sin ce

2.

procedures

the

of

on

passed

The R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A c t o f
S e c t i o n 5 0 3 , S e c t i o n 504)

c ific

the

been

1.

in

in

have

impact

employment

assist

they

acts

th is

of

that
so

the

the

question

in te n t

suggests,

Appendix
for

it

is

of

the

denying

law

and

becomes,
laws
the

or

what

are
are

the
they

existence

of

G)

Calhoun

em ploying

study,

they

the

County

is

scarce

handicapped;

hoped

that

there

a nd
w ill

regarding
as
be

a

re­
some

8
s p e c ific

trends

id e n tifie d .
a vaila ble

or

These

to

the

patterns
trends,
of

range

in

short

and

long

of

eleventh

and

tw e lfth

p loyers.
affecting
tio n a l

tra in in g

handicappers

tra in in g ,

tra in in g
capped

This

with

or

D irector

clusion
both

of

and

those

patterns,

V ocational

develop
employers

w ould

made

for

in ­

the

tra in in g

students

a nd

area

em ployment

students

employment
who

be

for

m atch

those

em ployment

Education

planning

grade

w ould

w ith

handicapper

are

not

trends

seeking

voca­

strategies
h irin g

em­

a nd

handi­

employees.

LIMITATIONS

OF THE STUDY

1.

The s t u d y w i l l be l i m i t e d t o C a l h o u n C o u n t y and
t h o s e e m p l o y e r s who h a d s i x t e e n o r m o r e e m p l o y ­
e e s on t h e i r p a y r o l l d u r i n g t h e y e a r s 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 8 0 .

2.

Some e m p l o y e r r e c o r d s w e r e n o t a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e
e n t i r e t e n y e a r s p a n and t h e i n f o r m a t i o n n e e d e d
for th is
s t u d y had n o t been d o c u m e n te d d u r i n g
the e a r l i e r years (1970 -19 75).

3.

Some e m p l o y e r s w o u l d n o t
fo r t h is type of study.

4.

The e c o n o m i c c o n d i t i o n s i n C a l h o u n C o u n t y c r e a ­
t e d a 14 p e r c e n t u n e m p l o y m e n t r a t e , and t h i s may
g i v e a d i s t o r t e d view f o r th e year 1980, in t h a t
many b u s i n e s s e s w i l l
not have h i r e d back a l l
t h o s e on l a y o f f d u r i n g 1 9 7 9 - 1 9 8 0 .

5.

T h is s t u d y uses i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s
to t e s t
t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e m p l o y e r t y p e and s i z e
o f b u s i n e s s i n C a l h o u n C o u n t y and may b e g e n e r ­
a liz e d to o th e r s i m i l a r s e t t in g s in M ichigan or
the n a t io n .

open

up

th e ir

records

9
BASI C ASSUMPTIONS
For

the

purposes

of

th is

study,

it

was

assumed

th a t:

1.

The e m p l o y e r s b e i n g i n t e r v i e w e d a r e m a k i n g e f ­
fo rts
t o be i n c o m p l i a n c e
w ith
federal
and
s ta te laws.

2.

C o lle ctin g
such
and
u s e d on t h e
c r e a te change.

3.

There w i l l
in fo rm a tio n
employer.

4.

Im plem enting
federal
g u id e lin e s
d iffe r e n c e in h i r i n g p r a c tic e s fo r

inform ation,
as was i d e n t i f i e d
q u e s tio n n a ire ,
w ill
help
to

be a d i r e c t
re la tio n s h ip
c o lle c te d
and t h e r e a l i t y

DEFINITION
1.

between
o f the

w ill
make a
handicappers.

OF TERMS

C a l h o u n C o u n t y E m p l o y e r s - me a n s t h o s e b u s i n e s s e s
h a v i n g 16 o r m o r e e m p l o y e e s o n t h e i r p a y r o l l s
d u rin g the years 1970-1980.

2.

E ffects
o f Federal L e g is la tio n - r e fe r s to
cruitm ent e f f o r t s ,
handicappers in te r v ie w e d ,
number o f h a n d i c a p p e r s h i r e d .

re­
and

3.

Federal
Contractors - re fe rs
ceivin g
a federal co n tra c t,
$ 2 , 3 0 0 o r m o r e .8

re­
of

t o any b u s i n e s s
or s u b -c o n tra c t,

4.

Federal L e g i s l a t i o n - r e f e r s to T i t l e V o f the
1973 R e h a b i l i t a t i o n
Act,
S e c t i o n 5 03 and 5 0 4 o f
the
R e h a b ilita tio n
Act,
the
1974 V i e t n a m Era
V e t e r a n s R e a d j u s t m e n t A s s i s t a n c e A c t , S e c t i o n 402
a nd t h e R e v e n u e A c t o f 1 9 7 8 .

5.

H a n d i c a p p e d o r H a n d i c a p p e r - r e f e r s t o any p e r s o n
who
(1)
has
a p h ysica l
or m ental
im pairm en t
w hich s u b s t a n t i a l l y
lim its
one o r more m a j o r
lif e
a c tiv ity ;
(2)
h a s a r e c o r d o f s u c h an
im p a irm e n t:
( 3 ) i s r e g a r d e d a s h a v i n g s u c h an
im pairm ent. 9

8 " The F e d e r a l C o n t r a c t o r ' s
Guide to W o rkers w i t h
Handicaps",
M a i n s t r e a m n , I n c o r p o r a t e d , 1200 1 5 t h S t r e e t ,
N . W. , Wash i n g t o n , t>. C . , a u t h o r .

9Ibid.

10
6.

H irin g P ra c tic e s - r e fe rs to re c ru itm e n t e f f o r t s
a n d t h e n u m b e r o f h a n d i c a p p e d p e o p l e who w e r e
h ire d .

7.

I m p a c t - t h e amount o f i n c r e a s e o r d e c r e a s e i n
h i r i n g h a n d ic a p p e r s over t h e te n year span, 19701980.

8.

M i c h i g a n L e g i s l a t i o n - r e f e r s t o M i c h i g a n A c t 2 20
o f t h e P u b l i c A c t s o f 1 9 7 6 and M i c h i g a n A c t 183
o f th e P u b l i c A cts o f 1977.

9.

Size o f In d u s tr y - r e f e r s to a c a te g o ry , 16-49,
5 0 - 1 0 0 , 1 0 1 - 5 0 0 , a n d o v e r 501 o f t h e n u m b e r o f
e m p l o y e e s on t h e p a y r o l l o f a s p e c i f i c i n d u s t r y .

10.

T r a i n i n g - me a n s t h e a m o u n t o f s c h o o l i n g ,
m e e tin g s , c o n fe re n c e s , workshops, seminars th a t
w e r e p r o v i d e d t o t h e e m p l o y e e s on t h e t o p i c o f
r e c r u it in g , h i r i n g , s u p e rv is in g o f handicappers.

11.

Type o f I n d u s t r y - means i t s p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n o r
p r o d u c t ( s u c h as c o n s t r u c t i o n , m a n u f a c t u r i n g ,
insurance, p r in t in g ) or s e rv ic e .

12.

Yo ung A d u l t - means p e r s o n s c e r t i f i e d
c a p p e d a n d b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 20 a nd

13.

Y o u t h - m e a n s p e r s o n s b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 16
a n d 20 who a r e s t i l l a t t e n d i n g a s e c o n d a r y
sch o o l.

as h a n d i ­
26.

PROCEDURES FOR THE STUDY
The
(1)

procedures

method,

(2)

strum entation ,

for

the

pop ula tion,
and

(5)

study
(3)

analysis

in volve

sample
of

five

areas:

selection

data.

(4)

in ­

11
METHOD
The
naire

survey

and

data

method,

telephone

c o lle ctio n
in to

ment

which

employers

The

business
was

during

a

in tervie w s,

procedure.

c la s s ifie d
size ,

w ith

com bination

of

was

upon

decided

employers

types

a nd

divided

re p re se n ta tive

the

years

were

of

the

question­
for

the

id e n tifie d ,
in to

employ­

Calhoun

County

1970-1980.

POPULATI ON
There
at

le ast

they

16

were

employers
which

were

Calhoun

people

or

more

selected

as

the

were

they

during

employers
the

for

as

engaged,

and

then

The

employer

from

th is

to

who

years

pop ula tion

d iv is io n s .

selected

County

c la s s ifie d

were

ploy m ent-size
was

363

the

1970-1980

th is

type

of

divide d

employed
and

study.

The

business

in to

sample

four

size

in
em­

of

2 69

pop ula tion.

SAMPLI NG TECHNIQUE
Ihe
ected

sample

consisted

through

allowed

the

a

employment

m ining

sample

minimum

of

to

be

the

employer

employers

sam pling

Using

researcher
responses

who

the

of

the

table

needed

for

were

procedure

rep re se n ta tive

community.

size,

191

269

s tra tifie d

sample

County

of

the

to

for

se l­
w hich

Calhoun
deter­

acquire

purpose

of

a
the

study .
I NSTRUMENTATI ON
A que stionnaire
the

in fo rm a tio n

(Appendix

needed

to

A)

was

address

developed
the

seven

to

obtain

que stions

12
raised

e a rlie r

tio n n a ire

was

curriculum
The
by

c ritiq u e d

by

The

of

the

A

cover

wording

draft

group

le tte r
B)

5).

The

A)

to

being

types

the

personal

and

developed

same q u e s t i o n n a i r e

a

v a lid ity

d iffe re n t
by

of

employ­

in te rv ie w .

telephone
be

and

meaning.

for

approved

ques­

w rite rs

content

teste d

five

through

were

and

was

was

(Appendix

page

p ro fe ssio n a l

representing

p ilo t

the

five

for

fin a l

(Appendix

w ith

(see

q u e s tio n n a ire

employers

scrip t

chapter

s p e cia lists

businesses.

tio n

th is

re vise d

fiv e

ers

in

used

procedure

in

m ailed

to

conjunc­
employers.

A NAL YSI S O F DATA
The
w ith in

survey

two

and

tio n n a ire s
the

SPSS

cent

eight

used

a ll

em ployer

predeterm ined

determine

the

sis

of

for

te stin g

used

For

on

for

a ll

alpha.

and

data

The

ana lysis,

s ize

and

varia b le s.

t-test,

hypotheses,

the

c ritic a l
a nd

from

the

ques­

cards

using

on

of

a nd

per­

tabulations

were

b usiness,

Chi-square

between
and

completed

frequency

Cross
type

were

data

keypunched

questions.

differences

variance,

in te rvie w s

months.

form atted

system.

by

telephone

on e -h a lf

were

were

computed

and

was

used

varia b le s.
ra tio

(z)

a sig n ifica n ce

using
to

Analy­
were

of

.05

used
was

HYPOTHESES TO BE TESTED
Five
effects
ty

prim ary

of

federal

em ployers'

years

hypotheses
and

hirin g

state

were

tested

to

determine

le g is la tio n

on

Calhoun

practices

of

handicappers

the

Coun­

for

the

1970-1980:

Hypothesis

1:

There i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the
number o f h a n d i c a p p e r s b e i n g h i r e d i n C a l hound County s i n c e
19 7 6 when c o m p a r e d t o
1970-1975?

Hypothesis

2:

There i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n h i r i n g
p r a c t i c e s b e t w e e n e m p l o y e r s who a r e f e d e r a l
contractors
and t h o s e who a r e n o t f e d e r a l
contractors .

Hypothesis

3:

There i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the
t y p e o f b u s i n e s s e s t h a t have h i r e d h a n d i ­
cappers
in
Calhoun
County p r i o r
t o and
follow ing
1976,
and t h o s e t y p e s o f b u s i ­
nesses
t h a t have n o t
hired
handicappers.

Hypothesis

4:

There i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between
the
size
o f businesses
that
have h ir e d
h a n d ic a p p e rs in Calhoun County p r i o r
to
and f o l l o w i n g
1976,
and t h o s e
size b u s i­
nesses
t h a t have n o t
hired
handicappers.

Hypothesis

5:

The re i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between
t h e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e r s who h a v e p e r s o n n e l
a nd s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s a nd h i r e
han dica ppers,
and e m p l o y e r s
who do n o t
have p e r s o n n e l
and s u p e r v i s o r y
tra in in g
programs
a nd do n o t h i r e
handicappers
in
Calhoun County.

SUMMARY
In
the

Chapter

problem

purpose

I,

was
need

assumptions,

and

procedures

in trodu ction

presented

and

the

an

for

the

so

the

to

study.

d e fin itio n

for

as

study

of

to,

provide
The

terms

were

and

statement
a base

for

lim ita tio n s,
were

b rie fly

specified,
detailed ;

of,
the

basic
and
five

14

hypotheses
d ire c tio n
In
search
w ill
be

were
of

be

along

II,

w ill

in

presented
w ith

presented

in

These

hypotheses

determine

the

p re vio u s

re­

study.
se le cte d

have

presented.

described

being

th is

Chapter
which

stated.

d ire ct

The

Chapter
in

II;

V.

w ith
IV.

and

and

im p lica ito n

research

Chapter

co n clu sio n s
Chapter

readings

design
the

upon
to

th is

be

used

research

A summary

of

recom m endations,

study
w ill

fin d in g s

the

study,

w ill

be

CHAPTER I I
REVI EW OF RELATED LI TERATURE

INTRODUCTI ON
C itize n s
common

of

needs:

choices,

personal

Yet,

(B lacks,

Jews,

wo men ,

time

place

la st

in

and

society

from

and

s h e lte r,

growth

needs

the

these

in d u s tria liz e d

incom e,

re la tio n s h ip s .
of

the

tends

ce rta in

to

segments

that

a

had

been

to

assist

a

large

segment

p o p u la tio n ,

known

as

e q u a lity

as

the

U nited

are

equal
The

m ajor

States.
to

those

a w rite r

of

the

world

that

one

d isabling
for

the

to

The

pop ula tion

throughout
estim ates

guaranteed

disabled
every

of

every

co n d itio n .
Research

an

upon

the

During

increasing

U nited

han dicapped,

rig h ts

more

pop ula tion

begun.

the

the

or

in

States
to

gain

co n stitu tio n
of

of

handicappers

non-handicapped.

grows
out

of

under

in d iv id u a l

the
of

them

or

one

depending
is

there

choices

the

study

years

d isa b le d

and

of

s o me

vo ca tio n a l

w ithhold

handicapped),

history

have

h e a lth ,

development,

tw enty-eig ht

emphasis

n a tio n s

in

the

year.

The

ten

people

According

N e ws ,

15

U nited

to

States

United
liv e s

L e slie

and

Nations
w ith
Y.

a

Lin,

16
" f o r th e f i r s t t im e i n h i s t o r y , l a r g e numbers
of d is a b le d are s u r v iv in g in t o a du lthood ,
a i d e d by m o d e r n m e d i c i n e and t e c h n o l o g y .
T h i s v e r y s u r v i v a l p o s e s new p r o b l e m s f o r
society.
We a r e u n a c c u s t o m e d t o l i v i n g w i t h
t h i s p o p u l a t i o n as a d u l t s .
We h a v e n o t d e ­
v e lo p e d e d u c a t i o n a l o r economic models to
f a c i l i t a t e people w ith d i s a b i l i t i e s l i v i n g
i n d e p e n d e n t l y ."1
According
disabled,
now

3 00

have

a

em ployed
placin g
pipe

m illio n ,
of

c itiz e n s .

liv e

in

over

3 00

To

disabled

the

m a jo rity

developing
m illio n

contem plate

in

the

open

of

the

w o rld 's

co u n trie s

jo ble ss

the

or

which
under­

p o s s ib ility

labor

market

is

of

ju s t

a

dream.2
the

slump

but

Sackstein,

backlog

many

In
ic

to

no

has

thrown

group

market
hired

in d u s tria liz e d

than
and

is

having

firs t

unemployment

is

cause

bias,

of

disabled
It
unless

some

disabled

the

sex

coun trie s,
17

a

men

tougher

and

fire d .

tw ice

that

the

m illio n

women

the

people

tim e

in

who

often

In

some

of

able-bodied

s itu a tio n

current

places,

out
the

econom­
of

work;

tig h t

are

the

th e ir

job
la st

rate

persons.

of
Be­

is

doubly

d iffic u lt

for

present

trends

continue,

and

fem ales.^
is

predicted

resolu te

that

rem edial

if

action

is

taken,

the

number

of

1L e s lie
Y.
L in ,
"T h is M onth",
The R e s e a r c h N e w s ,
D iv is io n
of
Research D evelopm ent
and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,
U n i v e r s i t y o f M i c h i g a n , V o l . X X X I I , No. 1 1 - 1 2 , N o v e m b e r /
December, 1 9 8 1, p . 3.
^Ed
S a ckste in ,
"S e lf-R e lia n c e
and
W o r k " , UNESCO C o u r i e r , V o l . 3 4 , p p . 2 8 - 3 0 .
UNESCO, P l a c e (Je F o n t e r o u y , P a r i s , F r a n c e .

3Ib id .

the
R ight
Published

to
by

17
han dica pped
m illio n

by

people

the

seeking

turn

of

the

FEDERAL
The
sons

in d iv id u a l

are

equal

o p p o rtu n ity
ness.
w e lfa re ,

lo ss

life ,

of

person

are

across

concept

mulgated

of

nation

through

ope rational

but

th is

and

or

the

equal
in

in

study

the

R e h a b ilita tio n

the

term s

lo ss

of

recent

The
fiv e

Act

of

that

the

handicapped
Section

502

rig h ts

1 83 o f

includes

the

are

of

the

the

an

of

Vietnam

Acts

of

deals
the

of

mandated

a nd

1968,

Era

P u blic

the

pro­

p e rtin ­

Act

Acts

to

e sta blishe s

acts

P u b lic

accessible

in

1974

and

p rio ritie s

the

19 6 8

in d iv id u a ls

been

been

Revenue

of

301

has

the

Act

Section

a ll

A rchitectural

of

Act

for

le g is la tiv e

1973,

220

R e h a b ilita tio n

section s:

revenue

has

Recent

in clud e

A rch ite ctu ra l
be

e du cation,

P o licy

Act

b u ild in g s

h a p p i­

years.

the

lic

of

Congress

197B,

The

tax

equal

S tates

A ct,

Act

per­

U n ite d

A ssista nce

M ichigan

of

in d iv id u a l

R eadjustm ent

and t h e

p u rsu it

in

erans

M ichigan

800

handicapped

o p p o rtu n ity

the

procedures.

to

some

n o n hand icap ped--a n

w hether

le g is la tio n

ent

to

im p o rta n t.

debated

the

the

p ro d u ctio n ,

c o n s id e ra tio n s ;

v ig o ro u s ly

of

p h ysica lly

lib e rty ,

m ajor

The

of

costs,

even more

sw e ll

AND 5TATE L E G I S L A T I O N

those

F in a n cia l

m ight

century.

rig h ts

to

to

help

Vet­

Act
of

of

1976,

1977.
that

a ll

pub­

handicapped.
1973,
with

T itle

V,

employment

federal

A rchitectural

co n ta in s
of

government
and

w h ile

Transporation

18
B a rrie rs
any

C om pliance

firm

federal

w ith

a

tra ct,

c ie s ,

w ith

50

a ffirm a tive

p ra c tic e s ,

contractors

must

so cia l

se rvice

employ

q u a lifie d

S e ction

and

of

d iscrim in a tio n
fe d e ra lly

tio n

in clu d e s

the

fo llo w in g

secondary,
b u ild in g
social

a ll

and

B,

p ra ctice s,

programs

in

handicapped
la rg e r,

con­

prepare

id e n tify

w ith
to

the

a c tio n

o p e ra tio n .

Grants

or

and
p o li­
Such

appropriate
re c ru it

edu cation
and

Act

of

and

1973,

sectio n ,

handicapped

by

in d ivid u a ls
This

federal

p ra c tic e s ;
cu rricu lu m

p ro v is io n s

of

the

p ro h ib its

a c tiv itie s .

supported

em ploym ent

in

S e ction

p ro h ib its

com pensation,

q u a lifie d

p ro v is io n s
make

for

R e h a b ilita tio n

a c c e s s ib ility ;

w ith

sec­

monies

in

elem e ntary,
o ffe rin g s ;
h e a lth

and

se rvices.

h irin g ,
of

that

agencies

q u a lifie d

h igher

must

that

persons.

programs

areas:

or

arrangements

Federal

against

Sub-part
ment

Under

assisted

q u a lifie d

procedures

the

m ore

$50,000,

e d u ca tio n a l

re q u ire s

a ffirm a tiv e

programs

handicapped

504

a

or

em ployees,

action

and

to

w ith

more

503

$2,500

prom oting

e stablish

N o ndiscrim ination

in

and

or

of

agree

C ontractors

and

m aintain

must

h irin g ,

in d iv id u a ls .

S e ction

co n tra ct

governm ent

re c ru itin g ,

Board.

jo b

handicapped

for

re a son able

frin g e

504,

which

concerns

d iscrim in a tio n
assignm ent

and

in d iv id u a ls ;

b e n e fits .

acom m odation

to

in

A lso,

em ploy­

recru itm en t,

c la s s ific a tio n

it

also

in clu d e s

em ployers

q u a lifie d

must

handicapped

19
app licants
strate

or

employees

that

hardship

for

the
the

Section
ta tio n

Act

considered
The

are

Vietnam

tance

A ct,

Section

a tion

in

uals,

disabled

the

Sub-parts

402,

employment
veterans

contractors

and

those

who

$10,000

in

to

a ll

receive

employ
le vels

quirements

not

would

under

the

and

can

impose

the

demon­

an

p ro h ib its

undue

any

disabled

work

these

of

form

era

federal

they

of

It

also

Vietnam

force.

A ffirm a tive

re g u la tio n s

include

study.

by

fed­

requires

era

veterans

action
these

C o n t r a c t o r s must u n d e r t a k e a c t i v e o u t ­
r e a c h and r e c r u i t m e n t t o f i n d q u a l i f i e d
h a n d i c a p p e d and v e t e r a n w o r k e r s .

2.

The e n t i r e p e r s o n n e l p r o c e s s m u s t
a c c e s s ib le to those w ith m o b ilit y
c e p tu a l im pairm ents.

3.

Accommodations must
perform the jo b .

4.

W a g e s , b e n e f i t s , and p r o m o t i o n s m u s t be
determined through jo b - r e la te d c r i t e r i a
o n l y a n d c a n n o t i n a n y way d i s c r i m i n a t e
a g a in s t the handicapped or veteran
worker.

be made
or p e r­

needed

in d iv id ­

a ctive ly

1.

if

A ssis­

to

points:

be made

not

d iscrim in ­

veterans

contracts

and

are

th is

handicapped

Vietnam

in

R e h a b ili­

R eadjustm ent

q u a lifie d

and

the

since

purposes

V eterans

of

E of

subcontractors.

q u a lifie d
of

D,

in clud ed,
to

Era

eral

seek

C,

be a p p l i c a b l e

1974

employer

company.

1973,

to

the

accom m odation

504,
of

unless

to

re­

major

20
The
ing

Revenue

c e ilin g

$2.5

for

b illio n

aged,

ch ild

employment

of

sta ffin g

standards

defines
caps

the

as

an d
act,

to

a nd

to

customs

in

who

employ

subcontractor
or

veloping

a ffirm a tive

divid u a l

c la ssify

refuse

w ith

or

respect

Furtherm ore,
any

employee

in d ivid u a l

adve rse ly

to

of

a ffe cts

or

to

the

have

those

rig h ts;

(and/or

m aterial

for

are
the

or

de­

may

not

an

in ­

against

employment

lim it,

or

an

con­

segregate

a way w h i c h

statu s

vo l­

of

promote

o p p o rtu n itie s,

em plo yee's

a ny

to

purpose

or

th is

working

urged

discrim inate

in

or

Employers

re c ru it,

1976

p ra ctices,

people

a p p licant

of

handi­

more

compensation

employment

of

Under

em ployers

em­

w aiver

Acts

who

of

e n tity ),

otherw ise

for

for

rules.

programs.

h ire,

a

for

funds

of

practices

action

discharge,

in d ivid u a l
d itio n s .

or

h irin g

and

P u b lic

fu rn ishing

a governmental

reassess

d isq u a lify

or

affe ctin g

programs.

exercise

four

less

provide

discrim inatory

prom ulgation

from

of

cre d it

in d ivid u a ls

the

employers

state

the

p ro h ib it

the

the

of

Act

funds

tax

fund­

program

a d d itio n a l

a

care

of

for

or

of

day

220

rig h ts

u n ta rily

the

Act

the

These

use

the

a number

re c ip ie n ts ,

ch ild

provide

contractor
for

c iv il

of

re cip ie n ts,

for

follow s:

p o lic ie s ,

the

w e lfa re

Mi cji i gan

making

disabled.

w elfare
h ire

and

raised

services

provisions

se rvices,

who

The

XX s o c i a l

in

and

ployers

tem p ora rily

b illio n

changes

care

1978

T itle

$2.9

b lin d ,

day

of

the

to

far-reaching
the

Act

or

deprives
otherwise

because

of

a

21
handicap
to

perform

not
is

that

is

the

duties

adm inister
not

unrelated

or

d ire c tly
may n o t

need

adaptive

to

enable

the

deny

tablished

to

or

second

to

in ju rie s ,

diac

Second

under

Section

sation

A ct.

w o rke r's
have

weeks

e n title d

lim its

the
to

to

the

This
to
is

c lie n ts

may

w ith

the

for

heart,

coverage

by

of

weeks

the

1977,

car­

authorized
Compen­

for

new e m p l o y e e s
epile psy,

does

but

not

lim its
If

beyond

the
104

from

who
or

lim it
the

an

n u mb e r

employee
weeks,

a "Second

lim ite d

four

lia b ility

ce rtifia b le

is

the
In­

if

they

d is a b ili­

tie s :
1.

with

and/or

is

es­

state.

for

the

of

W orker's

back,

provided

the

u tiliz e d

lia b ility

responsible.

q u a lify
o ne

of

the

in d ivd u a ls

C e rtific a tio n

le g is la tio n

is

Acts

for

that

and

to

may

requirem ents.

diabetes,

ben efits,

benefits

establishe d

Employers

104

due

job

P u blic

Nine

test

may be

the

an e m p l o y e r ' s

compensation

of

Fund"

employer

which

epilepsy,

c e rtifia b le

entitle m e nt

the

In ju ry

mental

requirem ents;

perform

of

or

a b ility

Employers

employment

aids

Chapter

d is a b ility .

remainder

hire

of

compensation

employee's

ju ry

It

a m edica lly

diabetes

of

915

job

jo b .

c e rtific a tio n

orthopedic/back
problems.

or

183

in ju ry

the

refuse

in d ivid u a l
Act

in d iv id u a l's

a physical

devices

^ he M i c h i g a n

the

a p a rticu la r

require

related

employer
for

of

to

T h i s e m p l o y e r d i d n o t employ t h e h a n d i ­
capped w orker f o r th e 52-week p e r io d
p r it ir to a p p lic a t io n fo r c e r t i f i c a t i o n ,
and

22
2.

These

The e m p l o y e r o r h i s / h e r i n s u r a n c e c a r ­
r i e r i s no t p a y in g W orkers' Compensation
b e n e f it s to the c e r t i f i e d i n d i v i d u a l .
t wo

cond ition s

apply

to

a ll

divisio n s

of

any

cor­

p oratio n.
As

w ith

a ny

le g is la tio n ,

nated

to

Equal

Employment

O ffice
were

of

people

and

and

to

be

re g u la tio n s ;

Commission

C ontract

1970,

Compliance

$120

m illio n

to

by

becoming

In

the

an

(EEOC),

desig­

thus

the

and

the

Programs

EEOC

takes

took

A

cated

that

( OFCCP)

OFCCP' s

of

and

as

w ell

effe ctive ,
years

to

800

$ 13

fu ll-tim e

m illio n ;

increase

in

operated

fu ll­

under

a tenfold
as OFCCP,

but,

a

increase.
had

matured

enforcement

agency.

process

one

com plaint.

two m o n t h s . ^
EEOC

random
90

than

percent

employees

t h e EEOC,

d iscrim in a tio n

does.

budget

a 450

e ffic ie n t,

'7 0 's ,
it

a

fewer

budget, approxim ately

C u rrently,
vent

w ith in

3,500

im p o rta n tly,

Today,

employed

EEOC e x p e r i e n c e d

personnel

More

in

operated

time

the

ru le s

O pportunity

Federal

EEOC,

1979,

w ith

the

has

establishe d.
The

by

enforce

some e n t i t y

does

against

survey

percent

^Robert
A.
P rofessionals
in
J u n e , 1 9 8 0 , p . 83

have

the

conducted
of

mandates o f

handicapped.

not

Since

the

handicapped;
by

OFCCP

in

e m p l o y e r s were

re c ru itin g ,
then,

ju ris d ic tio n

Congress

has

Holmes,
''W hat's
Ahead
the
80's?",
Personnel

pre­

only

OFCCP

1978

in d i­

not

hirin g

to

com plying

and p r o m o t i n g
held

hearings

for
Personnel
A d m in istra tio n ,
"

23
to

consider

tio n

to

expanding

prevent

T itle

VII

by

d iscrim in a tio n

giving

against

EEOC

the

ju ris d ic ­

handicapped.5

HI STORY OF HANDI CAPPED D I S C R I M I N A T I O N
Data
tio n

about

is

on

the

age ncie s,

these

been

unable

or

are

l i t t l e

to

to

who

wh o

do

not

use

the

co n sid e r

Knowing

not,

could

s t ill

le g is la tio n .

5Ib id .

For

"hidden "
in

is

by

a

needing

exam ple,

of

s itu a ­

the

those

data

who

have

cond ition s

and/

th e re fo re ,

or

have
(those

at

in depe nden t

han dica pped

le a st
h a n d i­

persons

and

do

not

s e rv ic e s ,

but

le g is la tio n .

for

la rg e
the

The

p h y s ic a lly

a s ig n ific a n t

q u a lify

data

w e lfa re

p o p u la tio n

im p a irm e n t),

for

and

overcoming

s u c c e s s fu lly

leaves

p o p u la tio n

a ssista n ce ,

them selves

there

serve

several

v o c a tio n a l

age ncie s.

only

popula­

have

(1)

handicapping

the

provided

that
who

they

succeeded

are

are:

in co m p le te n e ss

th e ir

th e ir

that

unem ploym ent

the

that

adu lt

between

systems

s e c u rity

of

of

have

who

services

(2)

re c e iv in g

for

people

p o p u la tio n

is

record

capped

S tates

much

overcome

no

com pensating

m ajor

p o p u la tio n

s o c ia l

sources

handicappers

does

(3)

cu rre n tly
or

The

a ge ncie s,

and

handicapped

d e c e n tra liz e d

han dica pper

le ading

from

and

system s.

re h a b ilita tio n

tio n

p h ysica lly

in co m p le te

in fo rm a tio n
bases

the

handicapped

sp e cia l
p o rtio n

se rv ic e s
the

1966

of

the

p ro vid e d
S o c ia l

U n ite d
for

by

S e c u rity

24
Survey
the

of

Disabled

United

a b ilitie s

States
for

In

at

1978,

A dults

estim ated

working-age
le a st

there

six

were

an

estim ated

A m ericans

m illio n ,

21

lim ite d

in

th e ir

co n d itio n
1,000

than

or

abled,
thus

10.7

unable

basis.

to

work

In

sons
the

fare
impetus

hensive
th e ir

in

questions
the

behind

Service

findings

la bor
the

Needs

were

were

or,

of

dis-

(17
to

market
research

th is

percent),

a chronic

words,

165

127
were

health

of

half

severely

the

every
dis­

lim ite d

and

on

a regular

categorized

as

follow s:?

and

to

non­

work

perta in in g

( CSN)

Of

Approxim ately

a d u lts ,

adults

due

Severely d is a b le d
O ccupationally disabled
Secondary work l i m i t a t i o n s
Nondisabled
Important

had

m illio n

18-64.

other

altog eth er,

disabled

percent

(18-64)

127.1

a du lts,

work

disabled.

m illio n
to

The

a b ility

were

aged

m illio n

im pairm ent.

adults

population

17.2

months.®

in s titu tio n a liz e d
more

that

8
4
5
83
to

percent
percent
percent
percent
how w e l l

the

conducted

Study.

labor
for

A p a rtia l

these

per­

force

were

the

Compre­

s u mma r y

of

follow s:®

® l . D. H a b e r , D i s a b i l i t y W o r k a n d I n c o m e M a i n t e n ­
ance:
P revelance o f b i s b i l l t y ,
(Report
t ^o.
2 from
"SocTaT S e c u r i t y S u r v e y o f t h e D i s a b l e d , 1 9 6 6 )
Washington,
D.C.:
U n i t e d S t a t e s D e p a r t m e n t o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n , and
W elfare,
SSA,
O ffice
of
Research
and S t a t i s t i c s ,
1968.
?Work D i s a b i l i t y
in the U n ite d S ta te s :
A C hartbook,
U.
S. D e p a r t m e n t
o f H e a l t h a n d Hu ma n S e r v i c e s ,
S o c i a l S e c u r i t y A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , U. S. G o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g
O f f i c e , W a sh in g to n , D . C . , 1980.
®The
Urban
In s titu te :
R eport o f th e Comprehensive
S e r v i c e Ne e d s S t u d y .
Washing t o n ,
D.fc.:
Author,
197^.

25
1.

P e rs o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s t e n d t o have
l a b o r f o r c e p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s which
are le s s than r a te s f o r the n o n d is a b le d .
( p . 292)

2.

P e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s t e n d t o do
m o r e p a r t - t i m e w o r k a nd h a v e l o w e r a n ­
n u a l and w e e k l y e a r n i n g s , ( p . 294)

3.

Persons w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s are g e n e r a l l y
members o f t h e s e c o n d a r y l a b o r m a r k e t .
( p . 295, 97)

4.

The d eman d f o r w o r k e r s
i t i e s is le s s than the
in general .
( p . 299)

5.

Employers tend to expect th a t h i r i n g
workers w ith d i s a b i l i t i e s w i l l increase
c o s t s . ( p . 312)

6.

Employer a t t i t u d e s are g e n e r a ll y u n f a v o r ­
able towards h i r i n g people w ith d i s a b i l ­
itie s .
( p . 324)

7.

C e rta in groups o f people w ith d i s a b i l i ­
t i e s have a more d i f f i c u l t t i m e f i n d i n g
employment.
These g r o u p s i n c l u d e :
the
m e n t a l l y i l l , m e n t a l l y r e s t o r e d , men­
t a l l y retarded, c o n g e n ita lly disabled,
a nd o l d p e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s .
( p . 329)

This
tie s

do

force

evidence
not

as

regarded

persons

to

sample

the

number

^B.
M arket".

in

w ith out

that
the

id e n tify

of

la bor

disabled

assistance

1)

w ith

market
do,

d is a b ili­

or

the

and

labor

may

be

in

an

group.

researcher,

fo llo w in g :

persons

d is a b ilitie s

a "hard-to-em ploy"

independent

e ffo rt

a

p a rticip a te

as

An

suggests

who h a v e d i s a b i l ­
demand f o r w o r k e r s

Barbara

persons,

persons

programs

W o lfe ,^

in clu d e d

receiving

income

(Supplem ental

L . W o l f e , "How t h e D i s a b l e d
M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , 198D,

in

her
from

Security

Fare in th e Labor
1 0 3 ( a ) , pp. 4 8 -5 2 .

26
Income,

workers

fits ,

and

work

disabled

a c tiv ity

ill-h e a lth
were

than

(these

to

are

older,

has

20 t o

found
the

assumed
sample

ages

of

64,

d o lla r

were

persons

percent

one

The

Wolfe

lim ite d

d is a b ility ;

workshops).
ized

veterans

was

or

less

tions

compensation,

to

work,

work

fu ll-tim e .

The

lower

differences.
was

59

percent

ment
and

for
the

were
only

1O l b i d

if

by

reason

wh o s e

in

to

wage

ce rta in
in

of

rates

occupa­

sheltered

n o n in s titu tio n a l­

her

have l e s s

labor

wage

60.6

percent

for

for

less

rate

of

per

for

the

fu ll-tim e

workers

workers

80

lik e ly

lik e ly

than
for

to

the

20
be
is
to
be

non­

educational

p a rtic ip a tio n

percent
hour

for

was

the

$2.57

n o n d i s a b l e d . 10
annual

w ithout

w ith

to

persons,

less

force

a nd

$4.27

rates

also

allow ing

disabled,

a nd

is

12.3

ages

tends

nonwhite

education

even

average

population

of

are

d e fin itio n ,

pop ula tion,

working,

disabled

1970's,

.

to

disabled

a nd

the

percent

wh os e

persons

year

were

lim ite d

the

29.3

2)

be p a r t i c i a t i n g

was

wages,

disabledpersons,
During

who

Forexam ple, the

non-disabled;
for

and

bene­

persons

according

tend to

and

3)

p ro po rtion

lik e ly

disabled,

the

and

to

The

higher

and

during

n o n in s titu tio n a liz e d

less

m arried,

ben efits);

d is a b ility

64.

that

disabled.
a

ra ilro a d

employ­

d is a b ilitie s

d is a b ilitie s .

The

27
rate

of

fu ll-tim e

32 p e r c e n t
Two

in

employment

and

that

low

when

which

a

ted

than

that

school

in

the

with

the

le ss
tended

dead-end,
who

do
th e ir

In

1966,

b ilitie s
percent
1970,

of

the

rose

are

to

under­

predic­

ch ild re n

leaving

u n d e r e m p l o y e d . 12

the

people
the

earned

was

surveyed

represented

when c o m p a r e d

below

p icture

is

s till

in

w ith

poverty
annual
bleak

severe
lin e ,
incomes
a nd

they

paying,

disabled
at

be,

(w orking

low

the

to

that

in

income
w ith

(1972)

people

underemployed,

and

occurs

It

these

Those

same

productive

u n d e ru tiliz e d

earnings

had

be

found

p ositions.

of

incomes

or
over

live s

number

and

the

of

A d m in istra tio n

tim e ),

half

degree

w ill

of

cond ition

handicapped

unemployed,

lower

many

perform s.

years

S ecurity

g ro ssly

have

over

that

the

she

of
This

greater

or

four

part,

working

had

outgrowth

a

he

se rvice -typ e

work

in

In

be

unemployment

unemloyment.

task

next

fu ll

to

to

an

d is a b ilitie s

most

than

is

percent

S ocial

persons

p a ra lle l

possessed
the

40

The

for

lead

person

capacity

adu lts

wages.

Underemployment
b a rrie rs

disabled

1980.11

problems

employment

for

persons

a ll

points

nondisabled.
work
a nd

over

below

h a lf

disa­

of

75

$500.
those

1 1 S . A. L e v i t a n a n d R. T a g g a r t , J o b s f o r t h e D i s abled, Baltim ore:
The John H o p k i n s U n i v e r s i t y 0 r e s s , 1 9 7 7 .
12e .
M a rtin ,
"In d iv id u a lis m
and
B ehaviorism
as
F uture
Trends
in
E d u c a tin g
H andicapped
C h ild re n ",
E xce p tio n a l C h ild re n
(Septem ber,
1972):
pp. 517 -5 25.

28
w ith

severe

earned

less

d is a b ilitie s
than

Another
in

19 7 5

pared

to

lower

paying

is

22.0

percent

In

to

People,"

of

Handicapped

about
One

m illio n
they

the

a ll

d isa b le d

year.

earnings

of

that

the

of
of

general

Workers

re la tiv e ly

workers

taken

w ith

general

dis­

p u b lic.

re h a b ilita n ts ,
population,

w ith

secondary

survey

c o m­

were

d is a b ilitie s

labor
low

market,

wages,

in

gen­
which

poor

job

c o n d itio n s .^
e n title d

P re sid e n t's
reported

the

"Facts

Committee
fo llo w in g

About
on

facts

Handi­

Employment
and

fig ­

h a n d ica p p e d :^

eleven

permanent
of

re c e n tly

A dm inistra tion

the

the
be

were

percent

pamphlet

persons

A m ericans,

had

percent

the
in

of

working

special

capped

ures

51.6

in

and p o o r
a

mean

occupations.

p a rticip a te

se cu rity,

the

percent

that

c h a ra c te riz e d

the

the

63.6

found

for

S ecurity

that

was

Tausig

e ra lly

S ocial

noted

a b ilitie s

$2,325

who

16-64
work

those,

^ D .
T ausig,
in
the
Secondary
paper
(In s titu te
U n ive rsity of C a lifo

is

yeares

handicapped.
of

d is a b ilitie s

ages

age,
in

Over

reported

1970.

This

11

that
is

9

16-64.

"The P a r t i c i p a t i o n
by t h e D i s a b l e d
Labor
M arket",
U npublished
student
for
Urban
and R e g i o n a l
P la n n in g ,
r n i a at B e rk le y , 1972).

^ P re s id e n t's
C o m m itte e
on E m p l o y m e n t
of
the
Handicapped,
"Facts
About
Handicapped P e o p le ,"
pamphlet
b a s e d on ONSET OF D I S A B I L I T Y ( R e p o r t No. 18 f r o m S o c i a l
S ecurity
Survey o f the D i s a b l e d ,
1 9 6 6 , DHEW P u b l i c a t i o n
N u m b e r SSA 7 2 - 1 1 7 1 3 ) a n d PERSONS WI T H WORK D I S A B I L I T Y
( F in a l P ro je c t PC(2)-6C,
U.
S. B u r e a u o f C e n s u s , C e n s u s
of Population:
1970 S u b j e c t R e p o r t s , 1 9 7 3 ) .

29
Many
m illio n
for
of

Americans

Americans,

fiv e

years

those

with

been

of

longer

10

with

with

18

five

did

of

the

w ith

75

percent

compared
Far

fewer
are

p ed

were

adults
the

ployed
who
in

the

for

seeking

work)

hav e more
of

to

society

work

and,

a va rie ty

come

wa s

the

general

as n o t

w ith

the

d is a b ilitie s

$1,000

low er

average

below

and

the

c om­

the

w ith

59

percent

persons

not

w illin g

to

not
and

work

o ffic ia lly
looking

these

reasons
b a rrie rs

in d ivid u a ls.

earnings

handicapped

em­

not

those

average

general
handicap­

a ttitu d in a l
of

Only

education

of

Some o f

than

have

and

working

physical

about

of

who a r e

reasons.

school

popu1u1a t i o n .

compared

those

compared

E ig h ty-five

percent

ready

Americans,

colleg e

than

the

The

one-

pop ula tion.

some

w ith

workers.

had

nonhand-

school

had

do

workers

half

than

the

high

Handicapped

(b)

of

than

go b e y o n d

1970

those

(defined

more

population.

Forty-two

(a)

is

than

4 m illio n

disabled

general

of

in

Over

the

handicapped

both

Handicapped
handicapped

the

population.

force

for

the

been
more

elementary

disabled

employed

general

labor

of

is

This

of

not

employed.

include

are

did

percent

of

This

schooling

general

percent

pop ula tion

of

the

11

less

beyond

disabled

w ith

disabled

h ad

six

d is a b ilitie s .

percent

of

the

age,

of

lo nger.

have

go

of

Over

1970.

permanent

not

percent

percent
pared

or

Thirty-seven

18-64,

in

d is a b ilitie s .

d is a b ilitie s .

years

The h a n d i c a p p e d

ages

years

permanent

those

capped.

long-term

18-64

or

disabled

th ird

have

than

non­

perons's

for

the

in ­

to ta l

30
p o p u la tio n
$1,800;
the

(M edian

to ta l

p o p ula tion,

difference

h an dica pped ,
of

men

in

people

u la tio n .
h eld

men

were

ic a l,

more

sales,

cent

of

also

la b o r

force

new

wide,

1976.

It
is

employment
and

of

Needs

is

not

remains

having

an

pra ctice s

s p e c ific a lly ,

employed

m anagerial
male

to

pop­

employed
p o sitio n s
Disabled

have

c le r­

Twenty-two

(The

per­

s e rv ic e w orkers

w ith

career

be

effe ct

Urban

research

chan gin g

In s titu te ,

regarding

p ic tu re

seen

if

on

the

County.

the

d is a b ilitie s .
for

those

at

le a st

a p p re c ia b ly ,

business

Calhoun

d is­

women .

or

people

the

of

employed

women

men

fewer
the

to ta l

jo b s.

Study

of

to

of

e m p l o y e d wo men .

p re vio u s

that

percent

te c h n ic a l

la b o re rs

a ll

percent

than did

and

the

non d isa b le d

p a rtic ip a tio n
co n firm

of

and

a ll

were

percent

of

disabled

la b o re rs'

w o me n

d is a b ilitie s
by

or

sum m arized

data

le g is la tio n
tio n

17

than

Comprehensive

1975)

not

service

w ith

The

w ith

lik e ly

of

jobs

te c h n ic a l,

m a n a g e ria l,

31

1969:

p ro p o rtio n a te ly

percent

a ll

me n ,

income,

only

m anagerial

of

Among

1969.

held

percent

percent

percent

d isa b le d

compared

The

20

26

16-64,

F o rty -fiv e

but

in

Twenty-one

p ro fe s s io n a l,
w ith

and

w ith

(Median

$6,200).

jobs

ages

$2,700).

s trik in g

p ro fe s s io n a l,

F ifte e n

compared

14-64,

$7,000

with

technical

compared

d isa b le d ,

p o p ula tion,

made o v e r

held

p o sitio n s

ages

to ta l

p o p ula tion.
men

1969:

more

general

me n ,

p ro fe ssio n a l,

abled

even

$4,200;

D isabled'

general

is

the

handicapped

incom e

a ffirm a tive

action

h irin g

reten­

and

a nd

in d u stry

na tio n ­

31

PREJUDI CE AND MYTHS
Im pressions
during
a nd

the

it

that

what

they

which

attacks

but

the

of

the

According
set o f

classroom
towards
ity
to

or

myths

of

the

unce rtainty,
person

those

being

Along

w ith

or

tends

to

social

in d ica te
as

the

the
or

need

group,

to

view

w illing ness

must

them

fe e lin g

fear

as

mo v e m e n t
at­

to

agree

to

help,

c h a rity .

transfer

and

w ith

its e lf

been

P rejudice
a

be­

tra d itio n a l

has

forced

study

accordance

The

precede

from

th is

generally

handicapped

which

re su lt

of

gathered

new m i n o r i t y

reform

m arketplace.

of

in

both

of
of

counter­
the

employers
u n fa m ilia r­

negative
the

feelings

com petition

prejudged.
the

p re ju d ic e ,

m isinform ation

handicapped

in

enemy.

reform

stereotypes

phase

paid

every

the

Kokaska,

handicapped

another

from

hire

a nd

as

made,

cost

be

against

were

community

Industry

toward

be

to

c o lle c tio n

should

in dustry

must

comments

business

people

employers

protest

a

the

defensive

change

act

data

c o n trib u te .

on

that

that

a ll

being

titu d e

in fo rm a l

telephone

seems

lie ve s

and

persons.

15c.
Kokaska,
the
H andicapped,"
(1976):
pp. 14-15 .

that

there

make

These

are

employers

a

number

of

re lu cta n t

to

are;16

"Recent
Expansions
in
Careers
for
T h re s h o ld s in Secondary E d u c a tio n ,

1 ^ F . A. K o e s t l e r ,
Jobs f o r Handicapped
Persons:
A New E r a i n C i v i l R i g h t s " ^
P ub 1 i c
A ffa irs
Pam phlet
Fo^
5 5 7 . t ) I s t r l b u t e d b y t h e P r e s i d e n t ' s C o m m i t t e e on
Employment
of
the
H andicapped,
(W ashington,
D .C .,
1978) .

32
1.

In d u stria l
rocket .

2.

C o n s i d e r a b l e e x p e n s e w i l l be
making n e ce ssa ry a d ju s t m e n ts
area.

3.

Safety

4.

O the r employees
capped w o rk e r s .

w ill

not

accept

5.

Job p e r f o r m a n c e
dard.

w ill

not

be

6.

Absenteeism

7.

I f more o f t h e h a n d i c a p p e d were r e a d y f o r
j o b s , t h e r e w o u l d be m o r e j o b s f o r t h e m .

Unfounded
re lu cta n t

to

versus
the

hire

gesl

employer

survey
A tota l
ing

of

orthopedic

pairm ents,
Some

in volve d in
i n t h e work

jeopardized.

up

handi­

to

q u a lifie d
myths

job

stan­

One

de

such

had

of

was

a nd

recently

over

an

in

handicapped
conducted

by

physical

the

16th

conducted

a

8-month

s p a n . 1?

handicaps

in c lu d ­

am putations,

p a ra lysis,

epile psy,

key

rebutted

C o mp a n y ,

heart

the

w ith

Delaware.

blindness,

to ta l

em ployers

seekers

been

study

States,

employees

employees

job

have

N e mo u r s

United

make

performance

W ilm ington,

the

sky­

problems,

and
of

the

Pont

w ill

m is in fo rm a tio n

these

110,000

1,452

im pairm ent,

of

du
in

its

of

of

workers.

I.

be

otherwise

Company

E.

rates

be h i g h .

and

comparing

regular

w ill

w ill

Many

done

DuPont

records

myths

d is a b ilitie s .
studies

insurance

disease,

visio n

hearing

im­

deafness.
findings

of

the

du

Pont

study

were:

1 7 " H ir in g the Handicapped:
F a c t s and M y t h s . "
Pam­
p h l e t p u b l i s h e d b y P r e s i d e n t ' s C o m m i t t e e on E m p l o y m e n t o f
t h e H a n d i c a p p e d and t h e A m e r i c a n M u t u a l I n s u r a n c e A l l i a n c e
o f Chicago.

la r-

33
1.

Insurance:
Th e re were
com pensation c o s ts nor
ju rie s.

2.

P hysical adjustm e nts:
Most h a n d i c a p p e d
r e q u i r e d no
s p e c i a l work a r r a n g e m e n t .

3.

S afety:
96
p e rc e n t o f handicapped work­
e r s r a t e d a v e r a g e o r b e t t e r , b o t h on and
o f f t h e j o b ; more t h a n o n e - h a l f were
average.

4.

S pecial p r i v i l e g e s :
w a n t s t o be
treated

5.

J ob p e r f o r m a n c e :
age o r b e t t e r .

6.

Attendance:
better.

The
little

du

Pont

workers
e rvisors
In

as

to

and

fe llo w

another

rated

to

average

that

work

aver-

there

and

in

or

wa s

very

nonhandicapped

harmony

with

sup-

employees.

study

conducted

ph ysica lly

handicapped
as

rated

handicapped

a b ility

R e h a b ilita tio n

perform ance

percent

in d ic a te d

Vocational

job

91

between

th e ir

A handicapped worker
as r e g u l a r e m p l o y e e .

79 p e r c e n t

study

difference

no i n c r e a s e s i n
lo s t-tim e in ­

of

s eemed

compared

by

the

100

large

to

have

w ith

the

U.

S.

O ffice

corporation s,
a

s lig h t

edge

of
the
in

nonhandicapped:

1.

P ro d u c tiv ity :
66 p e r c e n t o f t h e e m p l o y ­
e r s r e p o r t e d no d i f f e r e n c e :
24 p e r c e n t
r a t e d t h e h a n d i c a p p e d h i g h e r ; 10 p e r c e n t ,
lower f o r handicapped.

2.

Accident Rates:
re p o rte d lower f o r the
h a n d i c a p p e d b y 57 p e r c e n t o f t h e e m p l o y ­
e r s , w i t h 41 p e r c e n t r e p o r t i n g t h e same
a c c i d e n t r a t e a nd o n l y 2 p e r c e n t r e p o r t ­
ing h ig h e r f o r the handicapped.

3.

Absenteeism :
re p o rte d lower fo r the
h a n d i c a p p e d b y 55 p e r c e n t o f t h e e m p l o y e r s ; 40 p e r c e n t , no d i f f e r e n c e ; and 5
percent re p o rte d h igher fo r the h a n d i­
capped.

34
4.

Turnover R ates;
re p o rte d lower fo r the
h a n d i c a p p e d i n 83 p e r c e n t o f t h e c a s e s ;
16 p e r c e n t , t h e s a me ; and 1 p e r c e n t
h ig h e r f o r the handicapped.

Many
standing

of
by

summarized
Labor
ped

the

employers
in

Council

the

m isinform ation

regarding

the

White

In d iv id u a ls

wh o

met

1976.

The

House
in

and

lack

handicapped

recommendations

of

November o f

made

by

recommendations

Handicap­

Illin o is ,

3.

N a t i o n a l s t a n d a r d s on w o r k e r ' s
t i o n l a w s s h o u l d be p r o p o s e d .

4.

L e g i s l a t i o n s h o u l d be p r o p o s e d t h a t w o u l d
"spread the l i a b i l i t y " o f h i r i n g the
h a n d i c a p p e d a c r o s s i n d u s t r y , so t h a t
t h o s e e m p l o y e r s who make t h e g r e a t e s t
e f f o r t and h i r e t h e m os t h a n d i c a p p e d
workers are not p e n a lize d fo r t h e i r
actions.

5.

Ways t o o f f s e t t h e " f i n a n c i a l h a n d i c a p o f
h i r i n g the h a n d ic a p p e d "--e s p e c ia lly fo r
t h e s m a l l e m p l o y e r - - m u s t be e s t b l i s h e d .

6.

A n a t i o n a l s tu d y r e g a r d i n g employee bene­
f i t s p r o g r a m s a s t h e y a p p l y t o a nd a f f e c t
t h e h a n d i c a p p e d s h o u l d be c o m m i s s i o n e d .

of

h irin g

h irin g
the

the

handicapped"

handicapped",

speak

a nd
to

compensa­

as

"spread

"fin a n c ia l
the

d u rin g

were:

S e c o n d i n j u r y f u n d s u n d e r w o r k e r ' s com­
p e n s a t i o n m u s t be b r o a d e n e d a n d made
uniform .
By l i m i t i n g a c o m p a n y ' s l i a ­
b i l i t y on p r e e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s , c om­
p a n i e s w i l l be l e s s w a r y o f h i r i n g
s e v e re ly handicapped a p p lic a n t s .

such

be

on

2.

above,

can

Industry-

A u n ifo rm d e f i n i t i o n o f handicap should
be e s t a b l i s h e d u n d e r s t a t e and f e d e r a l
laws.

statements

under­

the

Conference

C hicago,

of

people

1.

P a rticu la r
ity

fears,

need

lia b il­

handicap
for

of

employer

35
understanding
of

the

and

s k ill

in

job

placement

a nd

supervision

handicapped.

EMPLOVER PRACTI CES AND ATTI TUDES
Handicapped

people

good

e d u ca tio n ,

have

a

ment

opp o rtu n itie s

w illin g

a lte rn a tive

and

state

w e lfare

h a b ilita tio n

show
of

The

that

a

disabled
m illio n

work

T.

that

working

age

D isabled
the

in

his/he r

been
pay
of

U nited

The

and

in

then

federal
that

Re­

hard

Labor

cash

s ta tis tic s

in

the

be

generated

re h a b ilita tio n

part

of

employment

States

employ-

them

proven

off

life tim e ,

taxes.

the

w ill

to

and

adds

by

that

which

goes

of

at

100,000

least

$500

GNP. 1 8
Kearns,

more

than

p re sid e n t
50

are

not

people

and

th e ir

in

invested

$35,000

who

poor

does

the

assistance

has

acq u ire

s k ills ,

if

availa ble

p ub lic
It

but

Department

$1,000

State

persons

on

States

work,

made

disabled

person,

and

D avid

go

the

during

the

not

programs.

every

to

states

of

for

Federal

to

United

disabled

person's
to

of

re h a b ilita te d ,
v o c a tio n a l

toward

are

is

be

e x c e lle n t

attitu d e

the

terms.

gain

can

Am erica.

18 Ed S a c k s t e i n ,
W o r k , " UNESCO C o u r i e r
pp. 2 8 -3 0 .

percent

of

Xerox

of

disabled

in s titu tio n a liz e d
fa m ilie s
Last

year

are

C o rpo ra tion
people

unemployed.

co n stitu te
$110

" S e lf R eliance
(P aris:
UNESCO,

of

b illio n

50

percent

was

spent

and t h e R i g h t t o
September,
1980):

36
on

d is a b ility -re la te d

pensation
In
$10

on

spend

a nd

costs--m edica l

workers'

com­

re h a b ilita tio n .^

fa ct,

according

keeping

disabled

on

care,

helping

them

to

Kearns,

people

get

"A m erica

dependent

in to

the

work

now

spends

for

every

force

and

$1

we

b e c o me

s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t . "20
Kearns
e ffo rt

to

is
help

"A ttitu d e s ",
Anne
Workers
rie r
of

business

educate

he s a y s ,

W altz,

in to

to

urgin g

of

b ec o me

d isa b le d

m ajor

problem ".

a rtic le

Force,"

both

that

persons
in

the

the

is

in

the

A m ericans.

"In te g ra tin g

states

disabled

p ra ctice s,

a partner

em ploy

the

her

Wo r k

employment

employment

"are

in

Your

and

to

D isabled
major

bar­

p rim a rily

p u b lic

and

one

p riva te

s e c t o r . 21
The

disabled

o p p o rtu n ity ,
wages

worker

pro m o tio n s,

commensurate

paying

the

rent,

tin g

the

than

a ffirm tiv e

tra in in g ,

and

require

a ction .

what

p le a sa n t

w ith

food,

disabled

^R obert
the D is a b le d ,"
number 7.

wants

liv in g
only

everyone
w orking
a

else

c o n d itio n s ,

sa la ry

expenses.

wants:

capable

of

Laws

protec­

n o n d iscrim in ation

rather

Nonetheless,

employer

good

fa ith

G etty,
"B u s in e s s Finds P r o f i t
in H irin g
N a t i o n 's B u s in e s s , (A ugust, 1981), V o l. 69,

20lbid.
2^Anne
W altz,
Handicap
R e cru ite r,
U n iv e rs ity
of
W ashington.
"In te g ra tin g
D is a b le d W orkers in t o
Your
Wor k F o r c e , " P u b l i c P e r s o n n e l M a n a g e m e n t D o u r n a l ,
(W inter
1 9 B 1 ) , V o l . 1 ( T , " n u mb ' e r 4 , pp' . 4 1 2 - 4 1 7 .

37
e ffo rts
the
work

could

fo llo w in g
force

expand
e ffo rts

(according

passive
to
to

non discrim in ation

in te g ra te

the

to

disabled

in to

S u r v e y and m o d i f y t h e company b u i l d i n g
f o r p u b l i c and e m p l o y e e a c c e s s .

2.

Meet w i t h
community

3.

Review j o b d e s c r i p t i o n s
requirem ents.

A.

P r o v i d e i n t e r p r e t e r s and f l e x i b l e
f o r t h o s e who r e q u e s t i t .

3.

Se e k i n n o v a t i v e r e s o u r c e s t o make b u i l d ­
i n g s a c c e s s i b l e , w i t h s o l u t i o n s wh o s e
c o s ts are not p r o h i b i t i v e .

6.

U tiliz e
testing

7.

Se e k o u t e m p l o y e e s i n o t h e r c i v i l s e r v i c e
s y s t e m s a n d u s e t h e m as r o l e m o d e l s .

8.

D e t e r m i n e w h a t c o u l d be q u i c k l y a n d i n ­
e x p e n s i v e l y c h a n g e d now a n d w h a t m i g h t
have t o rem a in lo n g - r a n g e .

9.

Provide
viso rs.

disabled
goals.

leaders

and

for

unnecessary

o n -th e -jo b tra in in g
competency.

s e n s itiv ity

set

as

tra in in g

te stin g

a tool

for

for

super­

10.

D e v e l o p r e s o u r c e s and c o n t a c t s w i t h r e ­
f e r r a l agencies s e rv in g d is a b le d c l i e n t s .

11.

A d v e rtis e jo b openings in p e r io d ic a ls
s e rv in g the d isabled p o p u la tio n .

12.

Se e k o u t
schools,
tra in in g

13.

U tiliz e
to o l.

Studies

study
of

the

W altz):

1.

A

in clu d e

q u a l i f i e d a p p lic a n ts in high
u n i v e r s i t i t e s , and v o c a t i o n a l
fa c ilitie s .
se le ctive

prepared

in

R e h a b ilita tio n

c e rtific a tio n

conjunctio n
(Betz,

as

w ith

Weiss,

a

the
Dawis,

Minnesota
England

38
and

Lofquist)22

managers

a nd

found

that

having

higher

lower
the

explored

500

firs t-lin e

subjects

production.

that

handicapped

p lo ym e n t
stressed
for

and
the

in d iv id u a ls
Surveys
ifo rn ia

to

d isa b le d

and

lack

P o rtlan d,

Oregon

em ployers

development

disadvantaged

and

the

being

disabled
cants,

or

Alm ost
person

and

a

above
a ll

who

th ird

of

have

the

a nd

San

about

by

th e ir

average

more

in

for

a ll

handicapped.

q u a lifie d

than

C al­

exposure

being

they

em­

handicapped

and

serving
were

contacted,

employees

com pariso n

that

employers

p o te n tia l

agencies

disabled

em­

S u b je c ts

Respondents
to

ob­

in d ic a te d

Francisco,

th e ir

a c tiv ity

were

lim ite d

trained

persons.

of

the

of

standards

h irin g

in d ic a te d

was

evaluations

appearance,

in d iffe re n t

performance

average

w orkers.

or

or

however,
to

as

rates

handicapped

q u a lifie d ,

in

favorable

absenteeism

the

equal

research

handicapped

po sitive

h ea lth,

when

job

personnel

o p p o rtu n itie s .

concerns

448

or

perceived

of

of

800
This

the

ite m s,

as

generally
rated

were

placement,

the

asked

reaction s

other

im portance

a nd

view

of

advancement

fle x ib ility

ployees,

not

ad d itio n ,

to

of

supervisors.

ch a ra cte ristics

Responses

attitu d e s

turnover,

In

ta in e d .
the

did

accident,

personal

the

to

w ould
other

in d ica te d

as

other
h ire

a

a p p li­

that

they

2 2 e . B e t z , D. 3 . W e i s s , R. V . D a v i s , W. G. E n g l a n d ,
and
L.
H.
L o fq u is t,
S e v e n Y e a r s o f R e s e a r c h on Work
A djustm ent.
M in n e a p o lis , M innesota S tu d ie s in V o c a tio n a l
R e h a b i l i t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M in n e s o ta , 1966.

39
would

give

ifie d

as o t h e r
On

the

evidence
ment

preference

of

that

ta in in g ,

p o sitive

the

job

the

em ploym ent

m a in ta in in g

A ct,

has

in

in itia te d
Act

of

persons

for

permanent

a

real

funded
in
The

1973,

market
work

under

developing
sp e cific

lish e d

also

under

become

programs

1968

was

qua l­

employment

through

job

T itle
s k ills

programs
these

Th e

for

s u mme r

the

in

disabled

Industry

(PWI)

to

prepare

disabled

the

p riv a te

com peti­

and

experience

work

general

w ith

R e habil­

and

a ll

tra in ­

the

m onies,

funds

through

jo bs.

in to

Special

n a tio n a l

in itia tiv e

in v o lv e d

W ith

being

Some

vocatio nal

II

and

a c tiv e .

d ire c tly

tra in in g

s e t t i n g . 23

CETA

and

ob­

p h y s ic a lly

tra in in g

in corp orate d
in te n t

of

is

enact­

preparing,

more

jo b

there
the

co n sid e ra b le

P rojects

and
the

much

since
in

education,

example,

ita tio n

in

career

employment

1973,

p ro vid e d

org a n iza tio n s

have

was

taken

have

programs,

For

become

have

and

po p u la tio n .

1 abor

who

problem ,

of

E m ployers

tive

the

Act

placem ent

government

of

R e h a b ilita tio n

em ployers

in g ,

side

em ployer,

p riv a te

w ork-study

person

the

in d ivid u a ls,

the

disabled

of

and

ro le

disabled

sin ce

a

a p p lica n ts.

more

the

to

has

actual

employment

P rojects
been
for

successful

the

disabled.

a sso cia tio n s
c lo s e ly

e ffo rt,

w ith

estab­
lo c a l

23"E nhancing
E m p lo y a b ility
of
H andicapped
In d i­
v id u a l s , " U npublished paper,
a u t h o r e d b y Human R e s o u r c e s
C e n t e r , Human R e s o u r c e s C e n t e r , A l b e r t s o n , N. Y . , a u t h o r ,
1982.

40
p riva te

employers

in c re a s in g

to

expand

employer

job

o p p o rtu n itie s

awareness

of

w hile

disabled

also

in d ivid u a ls'

a b ilitie s .
The B e r k l e y
shows
in to

that

Study

other

p riva te

p riva te

sector

in d u strie s,

pany,

AT

lik e

the

who

in te rn a l

w ith

keeping

tia te d

as

in

the

become

B e rkley

tors

pro vid in g

were

a b ilitie s

who

(1982).

which

to

move

been

on

Sears

disabled

the
the

have

re h a b ilita tio n

or

and

of

recognized
disabled,

re ta in

assessed

how

accommodations
th e ir

re c e n tly

to

major

to

have

th e ir

a

own
an

re la tio n ­
s e rv ic e s .

the
a nd

disabled

w ell

Com­

e sta b lish in g

developing

b e c o me

and

begun

re h a b ilita tio n

also

to

by

disabled

o rg a n iz a tio n s

employees,

e ith e r

1980)

increase.

Roebuck

business

A sso cia te s

Among

Associates,

B u sin e ss,

system

have

P la n n in g

study

of

d ire ct

programs

nationw ide

as

p riv a te

unions

own

of

3M,

disabled,

employees

th e ir

w e ll

ben efits

have

as

A llia n c e

o u ts id e ,

la bor

in itia tiv e s

such

re h a b ilita tio n

Various
of

the

in vo lve d

employees

ship

T,

N a tio n a l

appreciate
b e c o me

and

Planning

employment

In d ivid u a l
and

(Berkley

ben efits
have

in i­

m e m b e r s . 24

com ple te d

federal

workers
fin d in g s

a

contrac­
w ith
were

d is­
the

f o l l o w i n g :25

2^Berkley P la n n in g A s s o c ia t e s .
A S tu d y o f Accom­
m odations
Provided
to
Handicapped
Employees
by
Federal
C ontractors.
(Prepared f o r :
U. S . D e p a r t m e n t o f L a b o r ,
Employment
Standards
A d m in istra tio n ),
1982,
pp.
41-44.
25 i b i d .

41
1.

accommodations
great cost,

2.

most h a n dica pped
dated,

3.

accommodations u s u a l l y b e n e f i t
than h in d e r co -w o rke rs,

4.

m o s t o f a c c o m m o d a t i o n s a r e made f o r
e x i s t i n g e m p l o y e e s r a t h e r t h a n new h i r e s ,

workers

not

feel

e n ta il

a c c o mmo ­

rather

t h e r e d o e s n o t a p p e a r t o be a r e l a t i o n ­
s h i p b e t w e e n t h e p r e s e n c e o f accommoda­
t i o n s and a d v a n c e m e n t s ,

6.

unions

7.

t h e A c t o f ' 7 3 was v i e w e d a s a p o s i t i v e
f a c t o r as w e l l a s t a x c r e d i t s , a n d ,

8.

a l l s i z e s a n d t y p e s o f f i r m s seem t o h a v e
th e p o t e n t i a l t o d e ve lo p accommodations.

were

not

study

also

accommodations.

The

a negative

assessed
findings

which

p ra ctice s

fa c ilita te d

in clu d e d :

commitment

2.

a co mp a n y s p e c i a l i s t f o r h i r i n g , accommo­
d a t i n g , and u p g r a d i n g w o r k e r s w i t h d i s ­
a b ilitie s ,

3.

tr a in in g fo r personnel s t a f f , supervisors
and c o - w o r k e r s o f w o r k e r s w i t h d i s a b i l ­
itie s ,

4.

inform ation

5.

o u t r e a c h t o r e f e r r a l s o u r c e s who c a n p r o ­
vide q u a li f i e d workers w ith d i s a b i l i t i e s .

the

creasing

cum ulative

from

factor,

1.

The

as

re su lts
of

a na tio n a l

Council

Ronald
when

a firm 's

sharing

employment

President
Labor

do

5.

This

that

ty p ic a lly

w ith

of

persons

top

management,

other

firm s,

previous
w ith

and

research

in dica te

d is a b ilitie s

is

in ­

concern.
Reagan's

giving

an

remarks
honor

to

the

Industry-

c ita tio n ,

expressed

42
his

"high

m illio n s
most

regard
of

for

disabled

u n d e ru tilize d

fle c t

the

n a tio n 's
crease

the

th e ir

Americans

n atio nal

magnitude
disabled

C o u n cil's

of

the

citize n s

p a rtic ip a tio n

of

the

F.

Uthe,

O ccupational

icapped
fin d in g s

in

resources."
employment
and
in

cnducted

the

are

cite d

one

These

problems

re ite ra te
labor

the

of
of

the
our

words
of

need

re­

the
to

in ­

force.

STUDIES
a study

O pportu nitie s

Vocational

on b e h a l f

who r e p r e s e n t

RELATED
E laine

work

Education"

for
and

on
the

the

"Assessment

P h ysically

a p o rtio n

of

Hand­

her

below :^^

1.

E i g h t y - e i g h t ( 1 1 . 6 p e r c e n t ) o f t h e 761
r e s p o n d in g companies i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e y
had p h y s i c a l l y h a n d ic a p p e d e m p lo y e e s .

2.

J o b o p p o r t u n i t i e s s e e m e d t o be a p p r o x ­
i m a t e l y e q u a l i n s m a l l , m e d i u m , and
l a r g e c o m p a n i e s and a v e r a g e d a b o u t 1 i n
50 e m p l o y e e s i n a c o m p a n y t h a t h a d any
p h y s i c a l l y handicapped employees.

3.

The p h y s i c a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d p e r s o n i s
l i k e l y to have a b e t t e r than exp e cte d
o p p o r t u n i t y f o r employment i n th e s e r ­
v i c e s , m a n u f a c t u r i n g , and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
c a t e g o r i e s and a l e s s t h a n e x p e c t e d o p ­
p o r t u n i t y i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and t h e
p u b lic a d m in istra tio n categories.

4.

Few a d a p t a t i o n s t o t h e w o r k s p a c e , j o b
t a s k s , a n d / o r e q u ip m e n t were r e p o r t e d
f o r the p h y s i c a l l y handicapped employ­
e e s ; t h e r e f o r e , l i t t l e j o b r e d e s i g n has
taken p la c e .

2 6 E l a i n e F. U t h e , " O c c u p a t i o n a l O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r
th e P h y s i c a l l y H andicapped ", Department o f V o c a tio n a l
E d u c a t io n , U n i v e r s i t y o f K e n tu c k y , June, 1980.

43
5.

N e a r l y 59 p e r c e n t o f t h e c u r r e n t p h y s i ­
c a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d em plo yees were em plo yed
on o r b e f o r e 1 9 7 3 ; 37 p e r c e n t o f t h e s e
were s t i l l h o l d i n g e n t r y - l e v e l j o b s .

In

another

which

they

m ajor

eastern

firm ed

the

analyzed

common

by

the

data

in d u s tria l
in tu itiv e

C ra ft,
on

c ity ,

B enecki,
4 98

found

presum ptions

job
that

and

Shkop
in

th e ir

con­

data

2.

Agency and n o n a g e n c y p l a c e m e n t s a r e c o n ­
c e n t r a t e d i n t h e same t y p e o f j o b s - s e r v i c e , c l e r i c a l , and s a l e s p o s i t i o n s .
S e r v i c e j o b s , s u c h as k i t c h e n w o r k e r ,
f o o d and b e v e r a g e s e r v i c e w o r k e r , j a n i ­
t o r , p o r t e r , m a i d , and h o u s e k e e p e r
a c c o u n te d f o r more t h a n h a l f o f t h e
p l a c e m e n t s on an o v e r a l l b a s i s .

3.

Most s e r i o u s l y h a n d i c a p p e d w o r k e r s are
employed i n th e s econ dary l a b o r m a r k e t.
a rtic le s

and

m ajor

obstacle

to

a ttitu d e s.

d iffe re n t
h is

of

h irin g

Dennis

p o sition

study

research

on

the

E.

have

handicapped

M ithaug,

employer
Fortune

fin d in g s

the

is

a ttitu d e s.
500

a

that;27

M o s t o f t h e p l a c e m e n t s w e r e made i n s m a l l
( l e s s t h a n 1 0 0 e m p l o y e e s ) s e r v i c e , ma n ­
u f a c t u r in g , or r e t a i l sales o rg a n iz a tio n s
w ith o u t union r e p r e s e n ta tio n .
Of t h e s e ,
s e r v i c e e s t a b l i s h m e n t s were t h e d o m in a n t
em ployers.

Many

in

placements

1.

ployer

in

study

stated

that

involves

a proponent
Mithaug

c o m p a n i e s , 28

that

em­
of

a

found
the

2 7 ja m e s A. C r a f t ,
Thomas 3. B e n e c k i ,
Y e t z c h a k M.
S h k o p , " Who H i r e s t h e S e r i o u s l y H a n d i c a p p e d ? "
In d u stria l
R e la tio n s , Vol.
19, number 1,
(W inter,
1980).
P u blicat i o n Is Research N o t e , pp. 9 4 - 9 9 .
^ ^ D e n n is E. M i t h a u g , " N e g a t i v e E m p lo y e r A t t i t u d e s
Toward
H irin g
the
H a nd ica p p e d :
Fact
or F ic tio n ? "
J o u r n a l o f C o n t e m p o r a r y B u s i n e s s , V o l . 8 , number 4 , 1981.

44
fiv e

most

decision

im portant
to

hire

im portance,

to
but

be

a b ility

(5)

respondents,

re la tiv e ly

c lu s te re d

as

a group,

im portant

a

p o in t

in

15

e m p lo ye r's

the

in

(2)

of

pro­

a ction ;

(4)

re la tio n s.

considered

in

order

jo b ;

a ffirm a tiv e

p ub lic

more

an

were,

perform

w ith

positive

a ffe ct

person

to

com pliance

and

that

handicapped

the

(3)

absenteeism ;
The

a

(1)

d u c tiv ity ;

fa cto rs

th e ir

spread

the

top

fiv e

decision-m aking,

were

the

fo llo w in g

fa cto rs:
1.

e m o tio n a l problems
d is a b le d persons

2.

turnover
the job

3.

a v a ila b ility

of

low

le ve l

jobs

4.

a d a p ta b ility

to

d iffe re n t

jobs

5.

inadequate

6.

special consid e ra tio n s
p o s s ib le reduced la b o r

7.

possible

The
factors

rate,

become

a ttitu d e s

lia b ility

physical

increased

q ue stion

ra ise d

the

for

in ju ry

of

on

fa c ilitie s
w i l l be
costs

labor
was,

expectations

about

and p e r s o n a l i t i e s

required;

costs
"at

which

handicapped

what

equate

p o in t
w ith

w o rke r's

do

these

unfavorable

employment

po­

govern

em­

te n tia l?
Sections

of

Federal

p lo yin g

p ra c tic e s

federal

contractors

the

basis

of

a ffirm a tiv e

of

federal

o b lig a tio n

physical
a ctio n

Acts

or
to

5 03

504,

co n tra cto rs.
to

m ental
seek

and

out

avoid

part

of

d iscrim in a tin g

on

handicap,

As

the

they

q u a lifie d

must

take

handicapped

45
persons
1973

for

employment

R e h a b ilita tio n

C ontract

Compliance

tra cto rs

found

m ative

a ffirm a tiv e
percent

had

24

no

in

outreach

study

did

percent

cla u se

O ffic e

(OFCCP)

percent

51

(Section

A recent

Programs

plan;

a c tio n

advancement

A ct).

that

a ctio n

or

not

did

program

of

of

300
an

even

re c ru it

J.

Petersen

con­

a f f ir ­
have

an

and

44

contracts;

to

the

Federal

of

have

not

th e ir

503

disabled

p e o p l e .29
In
al

a

study

contractors'

503,

he

found

handicapped

that

firm s

they

the

achieve
In

the

persons,
for

said

firm s

by

experience

q u a lifie d

of

completed

the

w ith,

and

preferred

is

to

th is

w illin g

to

N orthern

government

survey
agencies

M agazine's

top

100

of

in d u s tria l

and

who

However,

hirin g

in d u s tria l

in d u s tria l

35

(72

were

Section

already
of

the

percent

persons

to

U n iv e rs ity

p ra ctice s

firm s

firm s

are

percent

Illin o is

1969,

feder­

a ssim ila tin g

handicapped

the
a

for

on

to,

tra in

^0

conducted

62.5

method.

l e v e l s .

of

those

jo b ;

needed s k i l l
fa ll

response

method

re c ru it

a v a ila b le

u tiliz e

were

Donald

of

of

280

Fortune

i n c 1u de d);51

29oonald J. P e te rs o n ,
" P a v i n g t h e Way f o r
the
Handicapped,"
P e rsonnel, Vol.
58,
number 2
A p r i l , 1 98 1), pp. 4

H irin g
(March/

50lb id .
31charles
A. H a r k n e s s ,
" Nondebi1i t a t i n g Diseases
and I n d u s t r i a l H i r i n g P r a c t i c e s , " The V o c a t i o n a l G u i d a n c e
Q u a r t e r l y , V o l . 2 0 , number 1 ( S e p t e m b e r , 1 3 / 1 j , p p . 5 2 - 5 5 .

46
48

percent

responded

to

the

survey.

Some o f

the

fin d in g s

wer e :
1.

government agencies appear to f e e l
s t r o n g l y on t h e p o i n t o f e m p l o y i n g
abled persons;

2.

in s u r a n c e companies s e rv e
goats to the remainder o f

3.

stereotypes

4.

th e employment o f persons w i t h a non­
d e b i l i t a t i n g disease is a s u b je c t fo r
in te n s iv e fu rth e r study.

This

study

lite ra tu re
and

the

fin d in g s

the

to

slow

have

of

research.

the

Rights

Michigan

passing

Act,

have

file d
of

C iv il

by

was

220

1976,

handicappers
Rights,

to

d iffe re n t

M ichigan
in

found

p rio r

somewhat

the

Acts

that

a nd

conducted

be

of

P u blic

been

O ffice

to

as s c a p e ­
in d u stry;

change;

one

been

appear

la te r

to

only

re s u lts

com plaints
of

are

was

review

Since
C iv il

d is­

in

the
1970,
than

H andicapper' s
the
w ith

regarding

fo llo w in g
the

State

employment

d i s c r i m i n a t i o n : 52

of

1.

O ctob er 1977-September 1978:
373 s u i t s
f i l e d w i t h t h e O f f i c e ; 541 i n
employment;
7 i n e d u c a t i o n ; a n d 27 i n o t h e r c a t e g o r ­
ies.

2.

O ctober 1978-September 1979:
502 s u i t s
f i l e d w i t h t h e O f f i c e ; 475 i n
employment;
5 i n e d u c a t i o n ; a n d 22 i n o t h e r c a t e g o r ­
ies .

3.

O c to b e r 19 7 9 -S e p te m b e r 1980:
5,951 s u i t s
f i l e d w i t h t h e O f f i c e ; 362 i n
employment;
a l l others in other cate g o rie s

5 2 p o r t i o n s t a k e n from t h e S t a t e
C i v i l R i g h t s , a n n u a l r e p o r t , 1 £61 .

of

Michigan,

O ffice

47

that

5.

O c t o b e r 19 7 7 - S e p t e m b e r 1 9 8 0 : 1 , 3 7 8 com­
p l a i n t s were f i l e d w i t h t h e M ic h i g a n
C i v i l R ights O ffic e regarding d is c rim ­
i n a t i o n i n employment i n t h e S t a t e o f
M ichigan.

The

lite ra tu re

change,

tu a l

back

capped

have

the

quate,

been

most
and

nored

as

part,

those

fit

that

for

and

Payne

in

Kauffman

Rather
was

than

not

repeated

and
ered

from
now.

This

its e lf

rig h t,

Because

normal

of

physical

been

b e lie f

in te lle c ­
slo w .
the

In

handi­

society
cru e l,

and,

inade­

to

were

regard
the

freq uently

life

as

fittin g

handicapped

e ffo rts

to

group

oversee

fa ile d

ig ­

did
and

not
care

(Mercer

and

1975)24

exam ining
it

general
tim e

educational

that

larger

has

unfortunate

& Payne,

over

the

and

Early

society

doing

them selves.

sion

survive,

th is

and

extrem ely

handicaps

seemed

requirem ent.
educate

of

the

best.

apparent

could

growth

finds

treatm ent
at

re in fo rce

and
one

mercy

the

to

human

p a in fu l

the

so cie ty

who

to

h isto ry,

ill-m anage d

the

for

is

at

w ith

tends

p ertain s

through

Persons

or

it

developm ent,

lo o kin g

for

as

reviewed

and
th e ir

what

blamed
pattern

and

has

the
of

handicapped

resulted

deviation
or

was d o i n g

social

employment

appearance

it

in

people

re je c tio n
th e ir

what

behavior,

is

has

exclu­

o p p o rtu n itie s,
from

wrong

then

consid­

handicapped

2 2 j . m . K a u f f m a n & 3 . S. P a y n e ( E d s . ) , M e n t a l Reta r d a t io n :
In tro d u c tio n
a n d P e r s o n a l P e r s p e c t i v e s ,'
TToTumTfu's , ffh i o :
(fha"r 1 e s TTT","Re F r T T T l V D b .

24 l b i d .

48
in d ivid u a ls

tend

quently

are

viewed

than

re a lly

is

to
as

the

fu lfillin g

to

be m e t .

devaluated

being

of

a nd

helping

that

m a jo rity

there

a d u lts,
are

ages

able

such

in

of

rece ivin g
Most
100
cent)

of

to

G e n e ra lly ,
the

laws

a ctu a lly

in

handicapped

have

labor

competent

are

and

made
few

lead

has

yet

percent)

m arket;
in

re ve a ls

d is a b ility

the

but

and

work

the
force

in

jobs

p ositions.

Th e y

nondisabled

workers.

in

sm all

are

(less

than

(11-14

per­

com plying

w ith

employers

workers.

co n tra cto rs

a ffirm a tive

which

of

(17

concentrated

sales

are

handicapped

people

possible

la b o r

comparable

be

persons

review ed

type

m arket,

disabled

to

as

m illio n

who

and

than

federal

appears

the

persons

businesses;
hire

21

some

in

placements

filin g

hirin g

There

wages

life

lite ra tu re

c le ric a l,

the

employees)
appear

the

who

secondary

lower

or

subse­

OF PRI OR RESEARCH

p a rtic ip a te

se rvice,

capable

and

handicapped

a

a p p ro xim a te ly

disabled

the

as

of

18-64,

to

m a jo rity
are

are

others,

less

a ll

independent

IMPLICATIONS
The

far

by

c a s e . ^5

The c h a l l e n g e
as

be

are

action

plans;

but

few

are

people.

an

in v is ib le

in fe rs

that

ranking
s o me

process

of

handicapped

^ M . w. G o l d , " M e e t i n g t h e N e e d s o f t h e H a n d i c a p ­
ped."
P a p e r p r e s e n t e d t o t h e N a t i o n a l B i c e n t e n n i a l Con­
ference
on
V o c a tio n a l
E d u c a tio n ,
M in n e a p o lis ,
MN,
O c t o b e r 1, 1 9 7 6 .

49
peo ple

are

employ

group

m entally
w ith

more

em plo yable

in cludes

retarded,

m e n tally

co n g e n ita lly

o thers.
il l,

The

h a rd -to -

m entally

restored,

disabled,

a nd

old

persons

the

R e h a b ilita -

d is a b ilitie s .
A fter

tia o n

Act

business
h irin g

ten
of

years

1973,

w ith

and

in clud e

such

to p ics

capped

workers

place,

they
and

The
to

of

enactment
s t ill

have

s k ills

a high

im p lica tio n s

determ ine

are

expensive

work

of

whether

and

rate

be

These

increase

safety

of

by

the
myths

insurance

ris k s ,

m o d ifica tio n s
held

conducting

re g a rd in g

workers.

high

previo us
or

to

m yths

handicappers

people

of

appear

disabled

as:

need

lack

they

the

em ployers

prom oting

handicapped

sons,

of

m is in fo rm a tio n

rates,

are

the

than

to

handi­

the

work

non-disabled

per­

absenteeism .
fin d in g s

to

th is

not:

1.

e m plo yers in Calhoun County are h i r i n g
a n d p r o m o t i n g i n t h e same m a n n e r a n d
d e g r e e as a r e t h e e m p l o y e r s n a t i o n - w i d e .

2-

t h e h a n d i c a p p e r s who a r e e m p l o y e d
c o n c e n t r a t e d i n t h e same t y p e s o f
as t h e y a r e n a t i o n a l l y .

3.

em ployer e d u c a tio n an d /o r t r a i n i n g p r o ­
grams w o uld i n c r e a s e j o b o p p o r t u n i t i e s
fo r handicappers.

4.

jobs fo r handicappers are, in f a c t ,
c lu s te re d in c e r ta in types o f businesses;
and i f t h e y a r e , c an v o c a t i o n a l e d u c a t i o n
p ro v id e t r a i n i n g programs to prepare
h a n d ic a p p e r s f o r t h e jo b s t h a t most o f t e n
o p e n u p?

are
jobs

study

CHAPTER I I I

RESEARCH PROCEDURES
The
d u c tin g

research
th is

procedures

study

w ill

be

sections:

(1)

hypotheses

pop ula tion;

(4)

sample;

le c tio n ;

and

(7)

and

ana lysis

discussed

to

(5)

methods

be

u tiliz e d
in

tested;

the
(2)

in strum entation;

of

in

con­

fo llo w in g
method;

(6)

(3)

data

c o l­

data.

HYPOTHESES TO BE TESTED
There

were

The o u t c o m e
the

years
n u ll

was

e ffe ctsof

County

five
to

1970-1980.

Hypothesis

were
1:

answer

federal

employers

form,

hypotheses

h irin g
The

a nd

the

to

researched

research

state

fo llo w in g
a nd

questions

le g is la tio n

practices

form ulated

be

of

and

regarding

on

handicappers

hypotheses,

tested.

stated

Calhoun
for

the

in

the

answered.

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e
number o f h a n d i c a p p e r s b e i n g h i r e d i n C a l ­
h o u n C o u n t y s i n c e 1976 when c o m p a r e d t o
1970-1975.

H y p o t h e s i s 2:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t
in g p r a c t i c e s between
federal contractors
and
federal co n tra cto rs.

Hypothesis

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
th e t y p e o f b u s in e s s e s t h a t have h i r e d han­
dicappers
in
Calhoun County
p rio r
to
and
follow ing
1976,
and t h o s e t y p e s o f b u s i ­
nesses
that
have
not
hired
handicappers.

3:

50

d iffe r e n c e in h i r ­
e m p l o y e r s who a r e
t h o s e who a r e n o t

51
Hypothesis

4:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
the
size
of
businesses
that
have h ir e d
h a n d ic a p p e rs in Calhoun County p r i o r to
and f o l l o w i n g
1976,
and t h o s e
size b u s i­
nesses
that
have
not
hired
handicappers.

Hypothesis

5:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
t h e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e r s who h a v e p e r s o n n e l
and s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s and h i r e
h a n d ica p p e rs,
and e m p l o y e r s
who do n o t
have
personnel
or
su p e rviso ry
tra in in g
programs
a nd do n o t
hire
handicappers
in
Calhoun C ounty.

Because
using

the

the

data

the

purpose

ing

of

in

of

at

of

the

to

address

Chapter

I)

by

quency,

what

tin g

in

are

planning

C ounty

it

d u rin g

need

for

ana lysis

for

and t h e

appears
the

(which

numbers,
the

data

the

hypotheses,
were

raised

percents,

employers

1970-1980.

im portance

of

pop u la tio n ,

tio n

re h a b ilita tio n

s k ills

tra in in g

employer

perspective

d iffe re n t

and

is

of

job

as

what

was

tra in in g
it

re la te s

in te re st

services

re s p o n s ib ilitie s
and

in
fre­

two

below:

I f t r a i n i n g was p r o v i d e d ,
nature o f the t r a in in g ?

tasks

to

conduc­
The

2.

and

and

were

Do c o m p a n i e s p r o v i d e t r a i n i n g o p p o r t u n ­
i t i e s f o r t h e i r p e r s o n n e l and s u p e r v i s o r y
p e o p l e r e g a r d i n g t h e h i r i n g and s u p e r ­
v is i o n o f handicappers?

em ployer's

design­

necessary,

1.

The
the

in

and

the

re je c tin g

a c tiv itie s

lis te d

of

questions

describ ing

C a lho un

questions

or

two

other

study

programs,

accepting

to

the

program

tra in in g

attem pt

of

com pletion

vo catio nal

employer

a dd ition

nature

that

placement.

to

programs,
to

a

are

because
charged

from

somewhat

vocatio nal

people
they

the

educa­
of

the

w ith --

52
METHOD
The

purpose

of

of

federal

and

fects

employers
some
of

hirin g

study
out,

laws
was

tin g

that

p e rtin e n t

a

us

to

d e scrip tive
describe

cation al

process

Because
survey

or
to

w ith

a

view

techniques

employment

size.

the

an

191

number

to

of

G all

though

H illw ay

is

th is

points

a process
about

that

in fo rm a tio n
of

knowledge

an

for

exis­

the

purpose

that

perm its

persons

or

an

edu­

in s titu tio n .2
stu d ie s

u s u a lly

research
research

the

using

Using
were

p a rticip a n ts

chart

decision

survey

method

telephone

in te r­

the

Introduction
1 9 5 6 ) , pT 5 .

were

types,
for

established
in

and

County

business
a

the

the

e ith e r

dat3.

C alhoun

th irte e n

employ

methods,

que stionna ire

of

^Tyrus H illw a y ,
The R i v e r s i d e P r e s s ,

Even

As

study,

provides

c o lle c t

employers
of

one.

ef­

County

p ra ctice s,

state

the

em plo yers
in to

size ,

or

conduct

cla ssifie d

hirin g

ch a ra cte ristics

com bination

The

th e ir

the

Calhoun

employers

and

observational

made

the

inform ation

d e s c rip tiv e

was

to

precise

study

the

on

as

d e scrip tive

and

determine

handicappers.

a de scrip tive
or

to

of

affect

s i t u a t i o n . B o r g

of

was

le g is la tio n

made

may

survey,

learning

state

were

b a sica lly

"the

study-

practices

in feren ces

the

th is

and

id e n tifie d ,
divide d

determ ining
as

the

in to

sample

c rite ria

for

study.

to

Research

(Cambridge:

^ W a l t e r R. B o r g a n d M e r e d i t h D. G a i l , E d u c a t i o n a l Research;
An I n t r o d u c t i o n
3 r d e d . , L o n g m a n , I n c . , ( New Y o r k ,

T979r,"p'. 36:-------------------

53
The
and

q u e s tio n n a ire

then

cause

valida ted

of

the

employers
as

the

by

legal

in

the

study

in te riv e w .

phone

no

a

from

they

th e ir

vided

in

the

The

data

were

group
of

the

data

pu ttin g
the

of

out

in

was

any

Be­

in fo rm a tio n ,

a ll

anonym ity,

advance

in form ation

to

before

they

were

the

the

over

the

w ritin g

the

ques­

in form ation

interview ed
cover

of

in

received

gather

and

of

c o lle c te d

employers

questionna ire

developed

em ployers.

guarantee

m ailed

The

were

the

week

over

le tte r

the

are

pro­

A.
keypunched

were

used

le tte r

o ne

were

questions

data

had

Appendix

The

was

After

file s

telephone.

p ilo t

had

employer

sig nature.

tio n n a ire ,

cover

s e n s itiv ity

te lep hone

over

a

q u e stio n n a ire

w ith

and

to

for

analyzed,
describe

the

and

the

computer

operations,

a d d ition al

descrip tive

c h a ra cte ristics

of

p a rti­

cip ants.

POPULATION
The
County

employers

1970-1980
th e ir
were

population

and

d iv id e d

employed.

who

who

business

were

in

em ployed

d u rin g

in to

The

for th is

that

"s iz e "

d ivisio n s

by

study

consisted

business
s ixte e n

during
or

more

tim e

fram e.

The

the

number

used w e r e :

1 6 - 4 9

of

Group

A

employees

Group

B

50 - 100

employees

Group

C

101 - 4 9 9

employees

Group

D

5 00 +

employees

of

Calhoun

the

years

people

in

em ployers

people

they

54
The

type

service;
ance;

banking;

business

state

restaurant;
The

and

food

lo cal

education;

processing;

used

were:

re ta ilin g ;

federal

government/agency;

in su r­

government/

construction;

and o t h e r s .

demographic

employers

c la s s ific a tio n s

u tilitie s ;

m anufacturing;

agency;

of

of

were:

business

data

co llected

employment

ente rp rise ;

contractors;

whether

su p e rviso ry

tra in in g ;

size ;

whether

or

not

or

if

the

type

they

and

on

p a rticip a tin g

or

not

c la s s ific a tio n

they

provided
so,

were

federal

personnel

the

nature

of

and
the

tra in in g .

SAMPLE
Calhoun
who

employed

Because
h irin g

size

it

was

group

from

or

le ft
more

employed
is

According

problem

not

decided
the

affect

people
in
to

Table

th is
114

to

those

Calhoun

who

employ

base.

County

50

people.

em plo yers'

em plo yers

employer

employed

1970-1980

7,000+

gove rn ing

employer

363

betwen

in

that

This

pro­

who

employed

p op ula tion,
or

1-15

more

2 49

people.

1.

Borg

appropriate

requires

in

and

up

e lim in a te

a va ila b le

employers

and

laws

to

Of

employers

person

sta te

does

people.

shown

2,300

one

and

363

16-49

p a rtic u la rly

had

le a st

p ractices

cedure

This

at

federal

p e o p le ,

16

County

and

G a ll,

in

comparisons

"s tra tifie d

studie s
between

where

samples
the

various

are

research
subgroups

55
T a b le

1

EMPLOYER SIZE OF THE TOTAL POPULATION
IN CALHOUN COUNTY EMPLOYING 16 OR MORE PEOPLE
(n=363)

and

Number of
Employees

Number of
Companies

16-49

249

69%

50+

114

31%

Total

363

100%

assures

the

research

re p re s e n ta tiv e
c ritic a l

of

fa cto rs

s tra tific a tio n ,
subgroup
A

and

that

p o p u la tio n

that

s tra tifie d

from

s e n ta tive
To

worker

have

also

the

in

been

term s

used

assures

of

sample

as

of

w ill

be

c e rta in

a

basis

for

adequate

cases

for

a n a lysis.

p op u la tio n ;
Size

the

Percent of
Total

and
the

of

respondants,

3I b id . ,

using

employer
the

269

p.

the

was

used

"Table

Population"^

the

in su re

sampl in g

the

for

questionnaires

select

of

a

were

from

th is

D eterm ining

Sample

size

repre­

sample

pop ula tion

attainm ent

to

was

191.

to

See T a b l e

response
m ailed

be

rate
to

the

of

2.
191

sample

187.

^ R o b e r t V. K r e j c i e
a n d D a r y l e W. M o r g a n , " D e t e r ­
m i n i n g Sample S i z e f o r R e s e a r c h A c t i v i t i e s , "
E ducational
a nd P s y c h o l o q i c a l M e a s u r e m e n t ,
vol.
30
(Autumn.
1970):

p p r^ G 7 -6 'io :

------------------------

56

T a b le

2

PARTIAL TABLE FOR DETERMINING SAMPLE SIZE
FROM A GIVEN POPULATION

N

S

220

140

230

400

144
1
1
186
1
191
i
1
196

40,000

380

50,000

381

75,000

382

100,000

384

3j60
380
I
1

Note:

N is population size.
S is sample size.
It should be noted that as the population increases,

the sample size increases at a diminishing rate and re­
mains relatively constant at slightly more than 380 cases.

57
p o p u la tio n .
obta in e d .

One

comments,
goal

of

was

One

but

hundred

response

none

obtainin g

achieved

n in e ty

w ith

was

of

the

from

the

a rate

usable

m ailed

questions
sample

of

back
were

size ,

99 p e r c e n t

Table

responses
w ith

w ritte n

answered.

a response
as

were

s h o wn

The

of

in

191,

Table

3.

3

QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE RATE
OF THE 190 EMPLOYERS
(n=190)

Employer
Size
16-49

121

63.68%

69

36.32%

190

100%

50+
TOTAL

The

overall

ceived
Table

response

of

was

the

269

employers

.7100,

or

71

was

c a lle d

who

percent.

re­
See

4.
p o te n tia l

tim es

before

fusal

to

was

respondent

fa ilu re

to

p a rtic ip a te .
from

a company

from

companies

from

companies

ie d .

rate

q u e stio n n a ire s

A

one

Percent
of n

Number
Returned

Most

reach
Of

em ploying
they

78

employing

em ploying

ofte n

the

them

101-499
16-49

was

over

5 00

or

no

people;

employees;

they

le a st

three

considered

re fu sa ls,

people.

in d ic a te d

at

The
did

a

re­

returns,
21

were

56

were

reasons

var­

and

not

have

the

58

T a b le

4

EMPLOYER QUESTIONNAIRE
TOTAL SAMPLE RESPONSE RATE
(n=269)

Employer
Size

Number
Sent

16-49
50+
Total

59

22%

89

69

26%

20

07%

269

190

71%

79

29%

considered

unless

requested.

much

and

Percent
of n

45%

once:

file s ;

Number Not
Returned

121

being

too

Percent
of n

180

records

take

Number
Returned

such

tim e

have

required

reasons

in form ation

and

p o licy
by

Other

work
of

to

not

given,

at

c o n fid e n tia l;

c o lle c t

data

com pleting

le ast
would

from

our

que stionna ires

law.

I NSTRUMENTATI ON
A
were

que stionna ire

used

tio n n a ire
seven

to

in strum ent

co lle c t

the

(Appendix

questions

were

converted

were

designed

posed
to
to

data

for

A)

was

in

Chapter

answered

data.

The

rough

draft

tiq u e d

by

three

p ro fe s s io n a l

curriculum

s p e c ia lis ts

of

for

telephone

th is

study.

con stru cte d

hypotheses
be

and

the

I.

Five

and
by

two

to
of

of

que stionna ire
proposal

wording

and

The
address

the
the

demographic

procedure
ques­
the

questions
q ue stions

and
was

w rite rs
content

s u mma r y

then
and

c ri­
two

meaning.

59
The

revised

draft

sented

to

a

fie ld s

of

banking,

tu rin g ,

and

p lo ye r

was

whether

it

was

The
of

a

Because

co lle cte d ,
kind
was

of

of

the

the

a nd

the

s ig n ific a n tly

were

in

the

approved
The

p ilo t

group

personal

how

employers

mended
le tte r,

that
one

the

item

the
the
we ek

an

on

why

the

le g a l

nature

of

from
for

item

of

em ployers

it

seven

group

was

approved

of

by

the

re w ritte n .
to

provid e

be

th is

wording

que stionna ire
A ll

changes

employers

designed

to

a nd

also

to

acquire

during

the

gain

The

fin a l
a

in

the

employer

approval

perspective

telephone

data

of
on

co l­

C).
the

que stionna ire
advance

ac­

em ployers.

was

in

not

data

study.

in te rv ie w .

of

or

the

o rig in a l

personal

meeting

was

to

a

Appendix

agreement

que stionna ire

th is

p ilo t

react

the

was e l i m i n a t e d

the

m ight
(See

If

revised

in te rvie w

During

of

em­

id e n tify

asked,

one

based

em ployers.

the

draft

questionnaire

was

inform ation,

through

phase

Each

and

being

the

manufac­

v a lid ity .

address

item

reluctance

the

the

le ctio n

an

proposal

by

fin a l

was

pre­

re p re se n tin g

que stion

what
it

se n sitive ,

sp e cific

designed

to

then

insurance,

face

each

did

of

a m a jo rity ,

of

checking

was

study.

acceptance

by

processing,

as

and

questionna ire
em ployers

read

cle ar

the

m a jo rity

cepted

for
to

asked,
in

of

food

asked
was

the

group

eduction

being

questions

p ilo t

of

p ilo t
be

of

group,

m ailed
the

out,

telephone

it

was

w ith
c a ll.

recom­
a cover
This

60

would

give

giving
the

personnel

out

file s .

phone.
design

and

that

also

group

of

of

le tte r

would

that

would

the

to

to

content

more

create

use

were
for

approval
the

the

in form ation

employers

the

get

c o lle c tin g

recommended

o u tlin in g

the

and

c o lle c tin g

p ilo t

term inology
the

was

w hile
The

o p p ortun ity

inform ation

It

tio n n a ire

so

the

the

data

ques­

the

te le ­

involved

e ffe ctive ly

from

same

over

the

for

in

cover

the

le tte r

communicate

a w illin g n e ss

to

respond

in
to

que stionnaire.

DATA COLLECTI ON
A lis tin g
panied

by

obtained

from

( CENT)

two

lis tin g s

pany

and

name

tio n n a ire

Council

the

were

and

employers

addresses

the

lis tin g

randomly
was

completed

a

in te rva l

To

the

was

hired

and

over

the

phone

tency

before

was c o l l e c t e d
do

data

over

were
the

to

(Appendix
of

the

who
from
a

m ailed

Ne eds
of

was

T rain­

Co mme r c e .

The

and

order

the

by

one
c o m­

the

ques­

master

lis t.

four

telephone

week
each

period.

week

phase

with

started.

week p e r i o d .

by

telephone,
the

This

study.

and

received

out

accom­

numbers,

du p lica tio n s

over

c o lle ct
B).

County,

alphabetical

a seven

co lle ctio n

trained

and c o n t i n u i t y

in

for

selected

que stionna ires

The d a t a

Ch amb er

The e m p l o y e r s

Sixty-seven
one-week

Employment

Creek

compiled

Calhoun
telephone

cross-checked

size .

m ailing

in

and

for

B a ttle

was

were

The

a ll

m ailing

ing

master

of

one

person

questionnaire
allowed

for

data

consis­

61
ANALYSI S OF DATA
The

data

punched

and

age

the

for

percent

of

sponses
type

received

formated
S ocial

of

on

then

business

of

was
(laws

that

nine

with

six

(employer

eleven

(being

compared

(h irin g

a federal

(h irin g

va riab le

one,

ten

d e scrip tio n s),

seven

(increase

of

a nd
eses

c ritic a l
and

three

key­
Pack­

Frequency

a nd

questions.

The

re­

of

company

and

the

employer

size

a nd

(labor

one

was

above
ra tio

to

five
19 7 6

m edical

to

a nd

four

of

after

han­

19 7 6 ) ,

c e rtific a ito n ) ,

and

of

a

effo rts)

w ith

p ra ctice s),

and

contrac­
variab le

compared

with

emphasized).

A nalysis

.05

1976)

federal

was

determ ine

used

com paring

after

tra in in g );

a c tiv itie s

were

run

(h irin g

(being

company

to

and

five

eleven

va ria b le s.

a sig n ifica n ce

size ),

(h irin g

were

1976

size ),

used

(z)

fa m ilia rity )

contractor).

p rio r

of

law

(employment

h irin g ),

recruitm ent

(kinds

C h i-square
the

were

S ta tis tic a l

c o m p u t e d by

of

(pro vid in g

eight

size

p rio r

(employer

twelve

a ll

c ro s s -ta b u la tio n s

six

between

were

awareness

tor),

the

survey

system.

on

by

variab les

va riab le

va ria b le

used

employer

A d d itio n a l

(job

using

( SPSS)

va riab le

effect

dicappers),

employer

enterprise.

business;

compared

cards

were

C ro ss-1 a b u la t ions
type

the

Sciences

responses

were

from

for

was u s e d

the

of

d iffe re n ce s

variance

testing
for

a ll

alpha.

t

test,

hypoth­

62
SUMMARY
The

s tu d y 's

chapter.
search

Through

two

the

hypotheses

preted,

tio n

research

and

one

described

in cluded

se c tio n

of

tested,

data

conclusions

chapter

three

was

the

and

contained
was

d e scrib e d

fiv e

d e ta ile d

the

data

eses

were

section

contained

in
the

th is

seven
of

in

se ctio n

for

explanation

and
of

the

re­

in te r-

form ulated.

study;
the

sec­
section

study;

four;

process;

s ix ;

the

and

process;

s e c tio n

c o lle c tio n

th is

section s:

the

sam pling

in

design,

analyzed

selected

the

s tru m e n ta tio n

state d

in to

methodology

population

presented

recommendations

divided

the

was

execution

were

The

design

the

the
data

the

and
in ­

se ctio n
hypoth­

concluding
a n a lysis.

CHAPTER IV

FI NDI NGS
The
sponses

data

analyzed

from

the

Em ployer
three

p a rtic ip a n ts

firs t

the

section

sample

represents

to

the

the

Calhoun

a n a lysis

contains

to

hypothesis.

each

order

in

which

contains
two

the

they
the

is

re­

County

d iv id e d

to

demographic
the

analysis

The

hypotheses

appear

in

lis te d

in

s ta tis tic a l

and

in to

and

Chapter

The

second

relevant

presented

III.

in

The t h i r d

fin d in g s
III

p e rta in ­

fin d in g s

are

Chapter

ana lysis

data

population.

data

data

questions

themselves

provides

representin g

section

the

The

IV

sections.

to

tio n

Chapter

Q u e s tio n n a ire .

The
ing

in

the
sec­

relevant

which

did

to

not

lend

com piled

from

ana lysis.

DEMOGRAPHIC I NFORMATI ON ABOUT PA RT I CI PA NT S
The
the
of
ted
of

summarized

responses
the
the

one

in

th is

hundred

sample

size)

was

who

Calhoun

from

the

in

represent
County

used

group
the
in

study

ninety

que stionnaire-telephone

return

Ta b l e

of

desired

people)
in

data

of

5.

63

employers

Calhoun

County

(99

percent

who

comple­

process.

The

employers

(em ploying

largest
th is

were

composite

study.

This

largest

of
is

rate
16-49

employers
s hown

in

T a b le 5

3

5

101-499

2

5

2

500+

2

TOTAL

56

2

23

2

1

7

11

2

4

1

9

1

3

2

46

7

2

1
2

2

11

33

4

1

Restaurant

1

2

Other

6

Construc­
tion

50-100

Local
Government

26

Federal
Government

2

Food
Processing

Retailing

1

Manu­
facturing

Education

46

Insurance

Banking

16-49

Utilities

Company
Size

Service

NUMBER OF EMPLOYERS WHO RESPONDED TO THE SURVEY BY SIZE AND TYPE OF BUSINESS
(n=190)

Total

5

6

121

1

34

17.9

1

26

13.7

9

4.7

190

100.0

1
1

1

7

8

5

8

Percent of
Population
63.7*

*The employers in Calhoun County who employ between 16-49 people number 249, or
69% of all the employers who employ more than 15 people.

65
Employer

responses

County

business

during

the

years

se rvice -typ e
sponses;
ing,

33

percent)

(24

a nd

laws

sented
30.5

were

h irin g

of

the

both
Table

business

employers
a nd

were
the

under

(29

re­

11

re ta il­

combined,

to ta le d

Refer

back

w ith

the

to

Table

federal

p ra ctice s

pop ula tion,
re g a rd in g

w ith
to

person,

most

section

and

repre­
only

w hich

laws

W hile

65.7

the

m edical

employers

of

5.

but

operation.

b e n efits

th is

percent)

percent)

fa m ilia r

handicapped

q u a lify in g

the

(6

employment
sample

business

h ad
the

not

when
hired

law.

See

6.

in

the

federal

a fte r

th e ir

section

Between

tors

the

Calhoun

representing

education,

fa m ilia r

the

responses;

categories,

th e ir
of

56

percent)

know le dgeab le

a c e rtifie d

person

ses

were

percent

affected

(24

for

responses.

governing

c e rtific a tio n

Table

wh o

percent

percent

a

the

51.5

d ire c tly

46

other

of

Em ployers
state

accounted

of

conducting

Employers,

responses;

a ll

percent)

community

1970-1980.

business,

(17

rep re se n ta tive

in dustry

m anufacturing,

responses;
44

and

were

1970

and

sam ple

to

1976;
p rio r
7.

1976;
and

to

and

18

50

Calhoun

p o p u la tio n

contracto rs;

p rio r

1980,

17
15

(26.3

employers
employers

em ployers
fo llo w in g

were

1976.

percent)

were

were

County

federal

federal

busines­
had

been

contrac­

contractors

federal

contracto rs

This

displayed

is

in

66
T a b le

6

EMPLOYER FAMILIARITY WITH
FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS

Question

Yes

No-

Are you familiar with
federal and state laws?

51.5%

48.5%

Are you knowledgeable
regarding the laws that
directly effect you?

30.5%

4.8%

Are you knowledgeable
about medical certifica­
tion of handicappers?

65.7%

34.3%

Not Sure

64.7%

Table 7
EMPLOYERS WHO WERE OR HAD BEEN
FEDERAL CONTRACTORS, 1970-1980
(n=50)

Federal
Contractors
1970-1975
17

Federal
Contractors
1976-1980
15

Federal
Contractors
1970-1980
18

67
When
disabled

answering
people,

th e ir

c o mp a n y

(42.6

percent)

percent)
cent)

had

the

110

had

had h i r e d
hired

employers

hired

had

hired
after

both

questions

regarding

(57.8

handicapped
before
1976;

before

a nd

people;
65

said

81

1976.

of

that

employers

employers

36 e m p l o y e r s

afte r

hirin g

percent)

1976;

and

the

(34.2

(18.9

See

per­

Table

8.

Table 8
EMPLOYERS' HIRING PRACTICES
PRIOR TO AND FOLLOWING 1976
(n=190)

Question
Has your company hired
disabled people?

Resjsonse
Yes
No

Didn't
Know

Percent

110

71

9

57.8

Were disabled people
hired by your company
before 1976?

81

99

10

42.6

Were disabled people
hired by your company
after 1976?

65

114

11

34.2

Were disabled people
hired by your company
both before and after
1976?

36

154

0

18.9

68

R egarding
handicappers,
o verall

employers

the

use

using

182

for

percent)

through

in te rvie w in g

69

job

(37 .9

w ritte n

they

employers

w ritte n

pany?",

the

h irin g

had

of

increased

improvement

techniques,

tio n ,

percent)

job

were

"do

w ith in

you

your

108

w h ile

company

(78.3

17

96

and

of

selec­

seven

percent)

that

said

no.

the

supervisory
and

percent)

percent)

said

com­

hired

said

percent)

(16.7

(5.1

said

percent)

responded to

and

"do

fo r your

re g u la rly

re cru itm e n t

Tw enty-three
yes;

they

(9.3

who

the

the q u e s tio n ,

h irin g

(52.7

personnel
for

to

when

that

employers

provide

said

said

de scrip tio n s;

138

han dica ppers?"
percent)

responding

d e scrip tions

som etim es d i d ;
There

and

(9.47

effo rts

methods,

e ffo rts

process.
Of

you

18

re c ru itm e n t

recru itm en t

recru itm en t
tio n

the

ques­

tra in in g
h irin g
said

of

yes;

sometimes;

no.

DATA ANALYSI S AND FI NDI NGS
This
and

state

practices

study

was

le g is la tio n
of

between

selected

items

generalized

on

handicappers

In fe re n tia l
ences

concerned

to

on
the

effects

County

for

years

company
the

the

Calhoun

s ta tis tic s

the

w ith

the

were
size ,

used
the

que stionna ire.

employer

population

of

em ployers'

federal
hiring

1970-1980.
to

test

company

for

d iffe r­

type,

and

The

re su lts

may

be

of

Calhoun

County

69
(em ploying
other

16

or

s im ila r

peo ple ),

em ployers

P resented
potheses

more

and

on

the

in

and

M ichigan

fo llo w in g

fin d in g s

may

upon

or

the

pages

which

be

to

n a tio n .

are

th is

generalized

the

research

in v e s tig a tio n

hy­
wa s

f ocused.
H yp oth esis
of

federal

and

em plo yers
years

p ra c tic e s

of

of

firs t

determ ine

upon

of

afte r

the

"yes",

1976

"no",

to

and

dicappers

the

the

im pact

Calhoun

County

h a n d ica p p e rs

and

a

hypo the sis

hypotheses

the

survey.

d u rin g

actual

the

numbers
t-te st
in

1976

the

The
2 -ta il
fa ile d

t

153

Only

a fte r

from

those

in

the

the

190

em ployers

before
hired ,

tabulate d

were

and/or

was

used

number

to
of

compared

value

was

p ro b a b ility
to

were

used

"yes"

or

for
to

and/or
said,

a n a lysis.

h irin g

1976,

but

determ ine

the

han­

they

did

hired .

the

wh e n

is

numbers

responses

before

being

h a n d ica p p e rs

handicappers

d iffe re n ce

1970-1975 .

responses

h irin g

em ployer

paired

afte r

to

to

e ith e r

p rovid e

four

provid ed

h irin g

T hirty-se ve n

A

em ployer

responding

sa id ,

hired

le g is la tio n

number

em ployers

dom

state

to

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n
t h e number o f h a n d i c a p p e r s b e i n g h i r e d
i n C a l h o u n C o u n t y s i n c e 1 9 7 6 wh e n c o m ­
pared to 1970-1975.

a n a lysis

cant

form ulated

1970-1980.

The

not

wa s

h irin g

^01:

who

1

re je c t

handicapped

to

the

number

people
hired

.82

w ith

91

of

.416;

therefo re,

as

shown

in

degrees

Table

s ig n ifi­

9.

being
durin g

of

free­

the
It

n u ll
can

70
T a b le

9

EMPLOYERS WHO HIRED HANDICAPPERS
PRIOR TO AND FOLLOWING THE YEAR 1976
(n=92)

Standard
E rro r

S tandard
E rro r

D iffe r e n c e
(Mean)

t
Value

Degrees
o f Freedom

2 - T a il
P r o b a b ilit y

.82

91

.416

1976-1980
A fte r
.305
.2174

.266

1970-1975
B e fo re .188
( P > .05)
thus
of

be

stated

handicappers

and

the

during

to

the

difference

in

Calhoun

of

being

years

tabulations

not

to

and

in dustry

skew

The
1976,

since

a

for

the

in

the

County

numbers

since

h ire d

1970-1975

data

for
in

the

not

they

second

have

( if

1976,

you

are

and

after

1976

hypothesis

d iffe re n ce

in

the

in

of

the

in d u strie s

were

three,

excluded
and

sector

four
of

from
so

as

business

County.

had

236

but

priva te

hired

a va ila b le

hired

government

one,

Calhoun

but

have

one

survey,

government

did

was

hypotheses

employers

federal

The

employer

federal

1976,

the

government

the

the

was

hired

no

p ro b a b ility

federal

responding

of

is

.50.
Tne

to

there

being

random

handicapped)
was

that

handicappers

actual

numbers

handicappers

Calhoun

County.

examined

whether

h irin g

p ra c tic e s

as

or
of

p rio r
hired;

employees

not

there

federal

71
co n tra cto rs

and

non -fede ral

co n tra cto rs

d u rin g

the

years

1970-1980.
*"*02:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n
h i r i n g p r a c t ic e s between em ployers
who a r e f e d e r a l c o n t r a c t o r s a n d t h o s e
who a r e n o t f e d e r a l c o n t r a c t o r s .

A n a ly s is
fa cto rs

them

being

a

.283;

the

state d

in

by

s iz e

federal

of

value

there

types

lo w ing

of

3

of

h irin g

both

to

typ e

of

com­

company,

F)

in

the

when

F

was

th e re fo re ,

d iffe re n c e
and

of

c a lc u la te d

re je c t;

co n tra cto rs

other

i f

the

value

was

396.

The

it

may

h irin g

non-federal

and

be

prac­

co n tra cto rs

was

teste d

to

h irin g
the

determ ine

p ra c tic e s

em ploym ent

the

d iffe re n ce s

p rio r
of

to

and

fo l­

h a n d ica p p e rs

in

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n
th e ty p e s o f b u s in e s s e s t h a t have h ir e d
h a n d ic a p p e rs in C alhoun County p r i o r to
and f o l l o w i n g 1976 and t h o s e t y p e s o f
b u s in e s s e s t h a t have n o t h ir e d h a n d i­
cappers .
v a ria n ce

F

was

handica ppers

em ployers

c a lc u la te d
R efer

no

re g a rd in g

A n a ly s is

then

each

The

d e te rm in e

C ounty.

^03:

nesses

from

company,

to

b u sin e sse s'

1976,

C alhoun

to

C ounty.

H yp o th e sis
in

is

used

(s ig n ific a n c e

fa ile d

federal

C alhoun

of

co n tra cto r.

ta b le

th a t

was

s ig n ific a n tly

h y p o th e s is

tic e s

v a ria n c e

d iffe re d

p a rin g

n u ll

of

value

Table

10.

run

before

on

the

1976,

who

h ire d

before

being

.783,

.649,

and
and

types
a fte r
a fte r,

.430

of

b u s i­

1976,

and

w ith

the

re s p e c tiv e ly .

72

T a b le

10

THE DIFFERENCE IN HIRING PRACTICES
BY TYPES OF COMPANIES

Description

Mean Square

F

Before 1976

.291

.783

After 1976

.287

.649

3.549

.430

Before and After 1976

(p>.05)

A m u ltip le

c la s s ific a tio n

to

determine

whether

in

h irin g

types

types

of

possible
lo c a l
being

by

of

businesses
beginning

by

not

of

these

Type

Service
Ret a i l i n g
L o c a l Government

there

a

See

in d ica te d
trend

was

T h e ' average
types

of

was

m ight

businesses.

that

governm ent.
hired

or

analysis

number

B e f o r e 1976
N

.2593
.3333

11.

a p o sitive
se rvice ,

performed

a s lig h t

Table

businesses

.7381

be

also

The o n l y

movement

re ta ilin g ,

of

trend

or
and

h a n dica ppers

were:

A fter

19 7 6
N

1.0000
.7778
.6667

T a b le

11

CLASSIFICATION BY TYPES OF BUSINESS AND HIRING PRACTICES
BEFORE AND AFTER 1976

Type of
Business

Before 1976
Adjusted for
Independents

After 1976
Adjusted for
Independents

Deviation

Deviation

Beta

Before & After
1976 Adjusted
for Independents

Beta

Deviation

.09

.71

-.22

-.36

- .66

Retailing

-.13

-.05

- .38

Insurance

.47

.31

- .31

Manufacturing

-.03

-.00

.08

Food Processing

-.18

-.35

- .13

Local Government

-.15

-.06

- .24

Construction

-.13

-.05

- .25

.27

.34

-1.17

Service

.12

Utilities

.91

Education

Restaurant

.25

.22

Beta

.20

74
A
the

n e g a tive

decrease

in

of

in d u s trie s

on

the

fo re

(T ables

a p p ro x im a te ly
person

may

be

the

e co n o m ic
in

a

h irin g

1976.

per

mean.

p a rtic u la r
sents

the

e xp la n a tio n

for

having

e m p lo ye e s

12

size

of

For

the

m id d le

and

la y -o ff

the

th is

ca te g o rie s

is

the

type

of

number

in

h irin g
The
and

and

not

1978-1982.

1976

stu d y,

b u sin e ss.

in fo rm a tio n

is

the

type

11.

d is trib u tio n

in

M edian
of

each

m edian,

em ployers
The

500+.

For

count,

of

were

101-499;

numbered

of

of

c o m p a n ie s

50-100;

number

p ra c tic e s

by

d e s c r i b e d by

the

and

N

company

is

decrease

M ic h ig a n

A fte r

16-49;

data

and

.0000
1.3333
1.5000
.2000

on

the

h irin g

p a ra lle lin g

the ye a rs

1970-1975.

s iz e s :

The C o u n t
size

data

years

business
row,

d u rin g

on

5.0000
2.4444
1.7500
2.8000

the

four

p e o ple

B e fo r e 1976
N

c o n ta in s

the

sta te

be­

1976,

th is

of

e n te rp ris e .

and

before

the

b u s in e s s

and

company

h irin g

was

in

by

colum n

E d u c a tio n

is

types

company

c o n d itio n s
of

four

per

were

Industry

of

p e o ple

1976

were

businesse s

d is p la y e d

types

in

of

d u rin g

The

sin ce

U tilitie s

1976.

One

place

types

new

in to

13).

han dica p p e d

em plo yers

grouped

taken

ha n d ica p p e rs

and

U tilitie s
E d u ca tio n
Insurance
Food P r o c e s s in g

T a b le

of

a fte r

p o s itio n

of

has

persons

these

any

Type

two

a fte r

that

12

fiv e

and none

one

that

em ploym ent

average,

1976,

were

change

that

repre­

em ployees

Table 12

.00

2.00

o
o

101-499

1.00
1.00

.00

5
.00

4
.00

104
-

Count A
Median B

.43

.40

.50

.59

Mean

1

0

1

27
-

1

Service
4

1

0

1
5.00
0

1
15.00

i

2

.00

2.50
2.50

0

0

15.00

500+
42
.74

1
-

9
-

5.00

2.44

.57
8

2

.00
.13

.50
.50

8

1

1.50
4.38
1
3.00
3.00

27
2.59

4
1.75

40
1.30

7

.25

1.00
1.00

1

0

.00

1.00

O
o

5.00

3
.00
.00

O
©

0

Total

Total

50-100

4
.00

Restaurant

0

.00

1
.00
.00

Other

3
3.00

4

.00

16-49

1
1.00
1.00

Construction

23
.00

Government

2
1.00
1.00

Local

22
.00
.32

37
.00
.81

Processing

Retailing

2
.50
.50

Size of
Company

Food

Education

0

>%

Insurance

Utilities

o
0.
n

Manufacturing

THE NUMBER OF HANDICAPPERS HIRED, 1970-1975
BY TYPE AND SIZE OF COMPANY

1.00

1

0

.00
.00
0

1
5.00
5.00

0

0

19
2.74

0

3
-

12.00
12.00
5
2.80

.37

10.00
6
.33

8
- '•
.50

5
.40

6
1.17

153
1.00

Count
Median
Mean

A.
B.

The number of employers in that particular size and type category.
Median represents the middle number in the distribution of employees hired.

C.

Mean is the average number of the entire sample of scores by size, type, and overall totals.

C

Table 13

16-49

Education

Retailing

Insurance

Manufacturing

Food

Local

Construction

Other

Restaurant

2

22

2

23

1

1

7

5

4

50-100

101-499

104

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

1.00

1.00

.00

.00

.00

-

.86

.00

.73

.00

.43

1.00

1.00

.29

.40

.50

.63

3

4

0

8*

2

4

1

0

1

27

2.00

.00

1.00

.50

.00

.50

1.00

5.00

-

2.00

.67

1.25

3.13

.00

.75

1.00

5.00

1.81

1

1

0

0

1

1

3

1

.00

.00

.00

2
3.00

.50

.00

.00

2.00

-

2.00

.00

.00

.00

3.00

1.13

.00

.00

2.00

1.00

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

4.00
4.00

.00

-

.00

4.67

10.00

500+

8*

0

0

0

1

0

1

9

27

4

40

5

6

8

5

6

153

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

.38

.40

1.50

.97

1.33

.78

1.50

1.20

.20

.67

Mean

C

3

-

1.00

A

19

42

.00

Count

Median B

2.00

10.00

Total

Total

Utilities
0

4

§

Government

Service
37

«
a
>.

Size of
Company

Processing

THE NUMBER OF HANDICAPPERS HIRED, 1976-1980
BY TYPE AND SIZE OF COMPANY

Count
Median
Mean

♦There appears to be a company or a small number of companies that hired quite a few handicappers,
but the majority in this category are not hiring handicappers.
A.

The number of employers in that particular size and type category.

B.

Median represents the middle number in the distribution of employees hired.

C.

Mean is the average number of the entire sample of scores by size, type, and overall totals.

77
hired .

The

a te ly,

median,

describes

because

the

extreme

Mean

describes

size ,

what

is

average

fa cu trin g

number

of

in

the

"m edian"

num ber

that

o ne -h alf

person

per

probably

doing

most

in

the

type

i n Calhoun

made
of

Hypothesis
the

size

of

numbers

of

p rio r

and

to
^04:

that

p rio r

the

4

was

business

is ,
the

accur­

employers
there

were

other.
of

fa ile d
i s no
that
and

of

to

for

The
scores

accurate
of

101-499,

re s u lte d
being

account

the

h irin g

but

was

sig n ific a n t
hired

the

on
the

.50,

handicappers

have

manu-

companies

r e j e c t a nd

As

h irin g

company;

two

years

business.

fo llo w in g the
to

the

companies

or

h irin g

tested

h a n dica ppers
fo llo w in g

eight

One

there

to

the

data

type

size

business

businesses

County

the

show

company.

hypothesis

be

in

was

The

more

sample

a more

each

businesses.

may

is

of

per

m anufacturing
n u ll

kind

h a n dica ppers

of

at

e n tire

company

businesses
1.13

of

that

than

the

same

happening

type

data

to ta ls .

a ctu a lly

"average"

ment

end

of

the

median

th is ,

skewed;

one

and o v e r a l l

The

an e x a m p l e

the

the

th is

performance

was

at

13 c o n t a i n s

1976-1980.
of

h irin g

numbers

type,

Table

the

reporting

d is trib u tio n

more

by

for

or

were

in

the

state­

difference
handicappers
year

1976.

determ ine whether

or

in

d iffe re n c e

in

in

County

a

h ire d

Calhoun

1976.

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n
th e s i z e o f b u s in e s s e s t h a t have h r i e d
h a n d ic a p p e r s i n Calhoun County p r i o r
t o a n d f o l l o w i n g 1 9 7 6 a nd t h o s e s i z e
b u s in e s s e s t h a t have n o t h i r e d h a n d i ­
cappers .

not
the

78
Analysis
es

hiring

as

haring

F value

shown

variance

handicappers

employers
culated

of

in

was

before

both

before

being

11.788,

Table

run

on

the

1976,
and

size

after

after

6.826,

of

1976,

1976,

and

business­
a nd

then

the

ca l­

and

.656

resp e ctive ly,

14.

Table 14
THE DIFFERENCE IN HIRING PRACTICES
BY SIZE OF COMPANIES

Description

F

Mean Square

Before 1976

4.377

11.788

After 1976

3.019

6.826

Before and After 1976

5.418

.656

( p < .05)

A m u ltip le
determ ine
Refer
or

to

more

panies
order.
mo r e
with

cla s s ific a tio n

where
Table

the
15.

employees

But

companies

cappers,
number

were

and
of

of

hirin g

101-499,

after

handicappers

d iffe re n ce
Before

em ploying

1976,
than
500 o r

companies

disabled

ana lysis
in

1976,
more

as

and

h irin g
16-49

than
in

50-100

the

hirin g

d isp la ye d

had

16-49,

101-499

in

to

o ccu rrin g .

that

employing
w ith

s till

employing

was

handicappers

50-100,

companies

peo ple ,

size

performed

companies

companies

more

was

500
com­
that

hired

employees,
most

handi­

the
Table

least
16.

T a b le

15

CLASSIFICATION BY SIZE OF BUSINESS AND HIRING PRACTICES
BEFORE AND AFTER 1976

Size

Before 1976
Adjusted for
Independents

After 1976
Adjusted for
Independents

Before & After
1976 Adjusted
for Independents

Deviation

Deviation

Deviation

Beta

Beta

-0.16

-0.20

.14

50-100

0.01

.34

-0.14

101-499

0.42

.15

-0.29

500 +

1.74

16-49

-1.63

1.71
0.52

Beta

0.47

0.11

80
T a b le

16

EMPLOYER RANKING BY
HANDICAPPER HIRING PRACTICES
BEFORE AND AFTER 1976

Company Size

Before 1976

500+

1

1

101-499

2

3

50-100

3

2

16-49

4

4

To i l l u s t r a t e
people
(.37)

p rio r
person

h irin g ,

on

1976,

who

was

the

101-499

were

a fte r

change
Data

1976,

17

percentage,

that

1970-1980

The
a

shows

null

h irin g

people

who w e r e

th e ir
12

a nd

the

to ta l

hired

Calhoun

p o sitive

by

companies

were

handi­

employing

people

(1.00)

person

who

was

16-49

people

did

not

hirin g

Tables

they

three

employing

hypothesis

sig n ifica n t

nesses

in

50-100

o n e -th ird

1976,

period,

one

hired

after

approxim ately

were
in

(1.81)

h irin g

em ploying

average,

same t i m e

were

from

the

t wo

Companies

taken

Table

during

th is

s ig n ific a n tly

is

on

businesses

handicapped;

hirin g

handicapped.

point,

average,

During

and

th is

to

capped.

is

After 1976

p ra ctices

(2.73);

after

1976.

13.

number

of

size

and

handicappers,
type

of

by

company

County.

was

rejected ;

difference

handicapped

people

in
in

therefore,
the

size

Calhoun

of

there
b u si­

C ounty.

Table 17

1

101-499

1

5.26
5.26
2.38 100.00
0

0

3
15.79
33.33
1
33.33
11.11

500+

Total
A.
B.
C.

33.33

4

1
5.26
3.70
0

2

0

4
14.81

1
3.70

66.67

12.50

8
42.11
20.00
1
33.33
2.50

1
5.26
20.00
1

1

4
104
3.85 100.00
66.67 67.97

0

1
27
3.70 100.00
16.67 17.65

0

0

1
19
5.26 100.00
16.67 12.42

0

0

5.26
16.67
0

Total

Other

2
7.41
40.00

87.50 100.00

Restaurant

Construction

8
29.63
20.00

50.00

10.53
50.00

Government

57.20

1
.96
16.67

23
22.12

0

5
4.81

1
.96
20.00

2
1.92

14.81
14.81

7
6.73

Local

3
11.11

4

Processing

22
21.15
81.48

Manufacturing

2
1.92
22.22

Insurance

0

Food

50-100

14.81
9.52

Retailing

16-49

37
35.58
88.10

Education

Size of
Company

Utilities

o*
£

Service

THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF HANDICAPPERS HIRED BY SIZE AND TYPE OF BUSINESS
BEFORE AND AFTER 1976

0

33.33
20.00

3
100.00
1.96

1
6
8
5
6
153
42
9
27
4
40
5
3.27
3.92
100.00
27.45
.65
17.65
2.61
26.14
3.27
3.92
5.23
5.88
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Count is the number of employers.
Row percent is the percent of employers representing that size of business.
Column percent represents the percent of employers for that type of business.

Count
A
Row «
B
Column t C

Count
Row %
Column %

82
Handicappers
em ploying
people,

are

500

than

more

or

other

H ypothesis
employers

han d ica p p e rs,
tra in in g

The
sonnel
in

a

le ve l

em plo yers
do

not

who
h ire

do

value

for

the

le ve l

which

was

had

been

w ith

two

at

A
a

n u ll

in

h irin g

seek

tria n in g

(p

not

50-100

between
and

have

hire

personnel

of

percent

h yp o th e sis
is

a

have

jo bs

from

programs

to

do
a

and

also

of

not

and

em ployers
th e ir

a

and

positive

supervisory
the

chance
who

supervisors

alpha

value

and

was

it

gave

There­
ma y

by

employ­

tra in in g

a nd

Handi­

em ploym ent

p ro vid e

be

difference

tra in in g .
for

per­

sig n ifica n ce

handicappers

provid e

greater

the

in te rv a l.

re je c te d

h irin g

than

conducted

confidence
was

to

resulted

C hi-square

sig n ific a n t

personnel
who

greater

freedom
was

re la tin g

handicappers

.05).

test

p ra ctice s

provide

w ill

z

95

there

employers

cappers

set
degres

.0041.

the

who

programs

items

p ro b a b ility

the

firm s

handicappers.

h irin g

that

they

and

large

difference

tra in in g

and

stated

those

personnel

in

em ploying

the

programs

re su lts

ers

in v e s tig a te s

and

hired

businesses

tra in in g

of

fore,

firm s.

C hi-square

10.99503

the

size

be

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e ­
t w e e n t h e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e r s who h a v e
p e r s o n n e l and s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g p r o ­
g r a m s a n d h i r e h a n d i c a p p e r s t h a n em­
p l o y e r s who do n o t h a v e p e r s o n n e l a n d
s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s a n d do
n o t h i r e h a n d ic a p p e r s in Calhoun
County.

that

le v e l

and

have

programs

^05:

to

more

fiv e

who

lik e ly

if

h a n dica pper

and p l a c e m e n t

sta ff.

83
OTHER
The

FACTORS

secondary

Q uestion

The

1:

programs
viso ry
tim es
sm all

on

who

seven
the

emphasis

EMPLOYMENT

were:

responded
said

a regular

provided

HANDICAPPER

Do c o m p a n i e s p r o v i d e t r a i n i n g
o p p o rtu n itie s fo r th e ir person­
n e l a nd s u p e r v i s o r y p e o p l e
r e g a r d i n g t h e h i r i n g and s u p e r ­
v is io n o f handicappers?

(16.7K)

people;

Calhoun

questions

employers

tw enty-three

AFFECTING

basis
(5.1?o)

that
for

on

they

th e ir

employers

tra in in g .

put

(138)

There

tra in in g

to

th is

question,

p ro vid e d

tra in in g

personnel

and

said

they

that

appears

programs

to

by

be

super­
some­

a rather

employers

in

County.

Question

2:

Businesses

I f t r a i n i n g was p r o v i d e d , w h a t
was t h e n a t r u e o f t h e t r a i n i n g ?
that

fered

the

fo llo w in g

sta ff

a nd

supervisory

provide

tra in in g

tra in in g

programs

people:

programs
to

th e ir

(30)

of­

personnel

84

Number of Employers
Providing the Training

Category
Stereotyping

18

Legislation

18

Job Requirements

17

Attitudes

16

Recruitment

16

Communications

12

Supervision

12

Support Services
Available

12

Handicapper
Characteristics

10

SUMMARY
Chapter
crip tiv e

IV

data

presented,

presented

was

and

analyzed;

the

s ta tis tic a l

procedure

was

in tro d u ce d ,

along

the

data

were

A s u m ma r y
1.

w ith

eithe r

re a lize d
of

from
the

Findings
each

secondary

The

Hypotheses

the

the

research

used
the

to

test

re su lts
or

study;

hypothesis

que stions

accepted
the

of

answered.

each

hypothesis

of

re je cte d

data

was

were

each

analysis

according

study.

demographic

des­

reveals:

E m p l o y e r s who w e r e f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e
f e d e r a l and s t a t e l a w s g o v e r n i n g t h e i r
employment p r a c t i c e s r e g a r d i n g th e .
h i r i n g o f handicappers, represented
51.5 p e r c e n t o f th e sample p o p u l a t i o n ,

to

85
b u t o n l y 3 0 . 5 p e r c e n t were s u r e o f
which laws d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d t h e i r
business o p e ra tio n s .
2.

B e t w e e n 1 9 7 0 and 1 9 8 0 , f i f t y
c e n t ) e m p l o y e r s were f e d e r a l
tors.

3.

One h u n d r e d t e n e m p l o y e r s ( 5 7 . 8 p e r ­
c e n t ) h i r e d handicapped p e o p le between
1970-1980 in Calhoun C ounty.

4.

In c re a s in g the o v e r a l l r e c ru itm e n t e f ­
f o r t s f o r h i r i n g h a n d i c a p p e r s was do n e
by e i g h t e e n ( 9 . 4 7 p e r c e n t ) o f t h e em­
p l o y e r s i n the sample p o p u l a t i o n .

5.

E m p l o y e r s who h i r e d u s i n g w r i t t e n j o b
d e s c r ip tio n s represented 47.2 percent
o f a l l the employers responding to the
survey.

The

fin d in g s

m arized,

as

of

the

research

(26.3 p e r­
contrac­

hypotheses

may

follow s:

1.

T h e r e was no d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e n u m b e r s
o f handicapped p e o p le b e ing h i r e d in
Calhoun County a f t e r 1976.

2.

F e d e r a l a nd n o n - f e d e r a l c o n t r a c t o r s
s h o w e d no d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e i r h i r i n g
p r a c t i c e s o f r e c r u i t i n g and e m p l o y i n g
handica pped peo ple between 1970-1980.

3.

T h e r e was no d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e t y p e s o f
businesses th a t h ire d handicappers p r i o r
t o and f o l l o w i n g t h e y e a r 1 9 7 6 .
A
s l i g h t p o s i t i v e m o v e m e n t was n o t i c e d i n
t h e s e r v i c e , r e t a i l i n g , and l o c a l g o v ­
ernment type b u s in e s s e s .

4.

The s i z e o f b u s i n e s s d o e s make a d i f f e r ­
ence i n employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r
h a n d ic a p p e r s in Calhoun County.
Co mp a n ­
i e s e m p l o y i n g 500 o r more p e o p l e were
t h e most l i k e l y t o h i r e h a n d i c a p p e r s ,
b o t h b e f o r e a nd a f t e r 1 9 7 6 .
B e f o r e 1976
c o m p a n i e s e m p l o y i n g 1 0 1 - 4 9 9 p e o p l e were
t h e n e x t most l i k e l y s i z e t o employ h a n d ­
i c a p p e r s , b u t a f t e r 1976, com panies t h a t
e m p l o y e d 5 0 - 1 0 0 were t h e n e x t most l i k e ­
l y s i z e t o employ h a n d ic a p p e d w o r k e r s .

be

sum­

86
5.

A

T h o s e e m p l o y e r s who p r o v i d e d p e r s o n n e l
an d s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g h i r e d m o r e
h a n d i c a p p e d w o r k e r s t h a n e m p l o y e r s who
d id not p ro v id e t r a i n i n g fo r the r e ­
c r u i t m e n t and h i r i n g o f h a n d i c a p p e d
people.
summary

of

the

secondary

q ue stions

in d ic a te :

1.

There i s n o t
a type o f in d u s try th a t
t e n d s t o h i r e more h a n d i c a p p e r s t h a n
others.
A s l i g h t p o s i t i v e movement t o ­
ward t h e h i r i n g o f h a n d i c a p p e r s a p p e a re d
i n t h e s e r v i c e , r e t a i l i n g , and l o c a l
government type b u s in e s s e s .

2.

There i s not
a t r e n d by l a r g e c o m p a n ie s
( 5 0 0 o r m o r e e m p l o y e e s ) t o h i r e , on t h e
a v e r a g e , more h a n d i c a p p e r s t h a n o t h e r
s iz e companies.
T h e r e i s a s t r o n g t r e n d , s i n c e 1 9 7 6 , by
the f e d e r a l government, to h i r e h a n d i­
capped p e o p le .

3.

A very s m a ll percentage o f employers
(2 1 .8 p e r c e n t) p r o v id e t r a i n i n g programs
f o r t h e i r p e r s o n n e l and s u p e r v i s o r y
p e o p le ( 1 6 . 7 p e r c e n t c o n s i s t e n t l y , 5.1
percent som etim es).

4.

O f t h o s e e m p l o y e r s who p r o v i d e d ( r e c r u i t ­
m e n t and h i r i n g o f h a n d i c a p p e r s )
t r a i n i n g , th e t r a i n i n g s e s s io n s most
o f t e n i d e n t i f i e d were s t e r e o t y p i n g ,
l e g i s l a t i o n , job re q u ire m e n ts , a t t i t u d e s ,
and r e c r u i t m e n t m e t h o d s .

Chapter
conclusions

V w ill
drawn

om m endations

for

in clu d e

from

the

fu tu re

the

summary

s ta tis tic a l

of

th is

te stin g ,

co n sid e ra tio n s

and

study,
a nd

rec­

research.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY,

CONCLUSI ONS,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

I NTRODUCTI ON
The
a nd
of

purpose

im plem entation
the

re su lts

recomendations
In

the

passed
and

that

conduct

speak

the

ing

the

is

is ,

p e titio n .
q uit

the

help

determine

the

to

not

how

th e ir

a ll

w ill

the

afte r
The

regulating

of

ju st
a ll,

the

how

of

people

data

many

make

should
sector

87

of

laws

and

h ire

laws

h irin g

en te rp rise
keep
of

made

p re se n tly

th e ir

the

play,

c o lle ctio n

the

its

been

these

pra ctice s,

that

a p riva te

of

comments

have

in

liv e ,

Some

to

fa ir

w ill

have

re c ru it

hirin g

p riva te

and

w ill

on

people

laws

Many

laws

government

nature

a re c a p itu la tio n

conclusions,

telephone

a nd

the

study.

em ployers

necessary

be

draw

business.

the

review

present

com panies.

during

to

thousands

n a tio n 's

em ploym ent

Employers
it

on

is

study,

fin d in g s,

based

regarding
it

the

decade,

w ith in

that

of

chapter

past

employers

cess,

th is

a nd

d ire c tly

people

and

of

by

proc-

suggest
govern­
e x is ts .

practices

based

on

distance

economy.

com­
and

88

THE PROBLEM
The
that

problem

in

C alhoun

p o p u la tio n
the

same

ment

rect

tim e,

out

the

in

greater

was

ment

m

1975

w ith

m ajor

state

was

5.2

w h ile

population
the

mid

were

passed

to

taking

fact

w orking

percen t,

D uring

laws

the

no n d isa b le d

working

study

County
than

gove rn ing
designed

the

the

d iscrim in a tio n

Calhoun

of

rate

th is

to

o p p o rtu n itie s

employment

1970,

around

at

unemploy­
197 0's
help

place

a

cor­

through­

States.

p ro p o rtio n
laws

study

and

problem

cappers

in

centered

percen t.

employment

The

study

disabled

30.3

fedral

U nited

state

County

the

was

of
the

th is

unem ploym ent

rate

series

of

for

le g is la tio n

were

before

measure

h irin g
the

of

by

during

fedral

handi­

h ire d ,

and

federal

differences

which

if

were

and

This

of

employ­

comparing

the

in
and

p ra c tic e s .

people

persons

1976-1980,

determ ine

g e ttin g

handicapped

(both

to

enactm ent

em ployer

handicapped
years

was

the

years

1970-

years

after

the

sta te )

was

im p le ­

mented .

THE PURPOSE
The
or
and

not

purpose
Calhoun

state

pers;
n a tio n

or,
in

of

th is

County

le g is la tio n
is

C alhoun

fa c in g

underemploying

a

th is

study

was

to

employers

were

regarding

the

County
issu e

s ig n ific a n t

much
by

determ ine
affected

h irin g

lik e

e ith e r

p ropo rtion

the
not
of

w hether

by

of

federal

h an dica p­

rest

of

em ploying
our

the
or

p o te n tia l

89
working
would

pop ula tion.

provide

a basis

was

a n ticip a te d

that

th is

D e t e r m i n i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e number
o f h a n d ic a p p e r s b e in g h i r e d i n Calhoun
C o u n t y a f t e r 1 9 7 6 when c o m p a r e d w i t h
those being h ire d d u rin g the p e rio d
1970-1975.

2.

D eterm ining the d iffe r e n c e in h i r i n g
p r a c t i c e s b e t w e e n e m p l o y e r s who a r e
f e d e r a l c o n t r a c t o r s a n d t h o s e who a r e
not fe d e ra l c o n tra c to rs .

3.

D e t e r m in i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e between th e
t y p e o f b u s in e s s e s t h a t have h i r e d h a n d i ­
c a p p e r s and t h o s e t h a t h av e n o t h i r e d
h a n d ic a p p e r s s in c e 1976.

4.

D e te r m in in g the d i f f e r e n c e between the
s i z e o f b u s in e s s e s t h a t have h i r e h a n d i ­
c a p p e r s a nd t h o s e t h a t h a v e n o t h i r e d
h a n d ic a p p e r s s in c e 1976.

5.

D e t e r m i n i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n empp l o y e r s who h i r e h a n d i c a p p e r s and p r o v i d e
p e r s o n n e l and s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g p r o ­
g r a m s a n d t h o s e e m p l o y e r s who do n o t
p r o v i d e t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s a n d do n o t h i r e
handicappers.

would

was

b e lie ve d

assist

seeking

job

handicappers

seeking

tra in in g

would

be

trends
develop

vo ca tio n a l

who

are

m aking

both

for
data

on

Also,
a nd

which

tra in in g ,

h irin g

in

placem ent

youth

stra te g ie s
not

these

counselors

employment.

w ith

em ployment

em ployers

for

programs,

provided

w ith

that

placement

s tra te g ie s

study

for:

1.

It

tio n

It

and

d e te rm in a tio n s
developing
co u n se lo rs

vocatio nal

a du lts,
to

and

jo b -

match
w ould

tra in in g

handicapped

and

educa­

ages

16-26,

employment
be

able

w ith

to

those

em ployees.

90

L I M I T A T I O N S OF THE STUDY
1.

The s t u d y was l i m i t e d t o C a l h o u n C o u n t y
and t h o s e e m p l o y e r s who h a d s i x t e e n o r
m o r e e m p l o y e e s on t h e i r p a y r o l l d u r i n g
the years 1970-1980.

2.

E m p l o y e r r e c o r d s n o t , i n many i n s t a n c c e s ,
a v a i l a b l e f o r th e e n t i r e te n year span;
and t h e i n f o r m a t i o n n e e d e d f o r t h i s
study
had n o t b e e n d o c u m e n t e d d u r i n g t h e
e a r li e r years (1970-1975).

3.

Some e m p l o y e r s w e r e n o t w i l l i n g t o o p e n
up t h e i r r e c o r d s f o r t h i s t y p e o f s t u d y .

4.

The e c o n o m i c c o n d i t i o n s i n C a l h o u n C o u n t y
c r e a t e d t e d a 14 p e r c e n t u n e m p l o y m e n t
r a t e , and t h i s may g i v e a d i s t o r t e d v i e w
for
t h e y e a r 1 9 8 0 , i n t h a t many b u s i n e s ­
s e s h a d n o t h i r e d b a c k a l l t h o s e on l a y ­
o f f d u rin g 1979-1980.

5.

T h i s s t u d y used i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s
t o t e s t th e r e l a t i o n s h i p between employer
t y p e and s i z e o f b u s i n e s s i n C a l h o u n
C o u n t y and may be g e n e r a l i z e d t o o t h e r
s i m i l a r em ployers in M ic h ig a n or
the n a tio n .

BASI C ASSUMPTIONS
For

the

purposes

of

th is

study,

it

was

1.

B u s i n e s s e s had e m p l o y m e n t
past ten years.

2.

M o s t e m p l o y e r s w o u l d be w i l l i n g t o s h a r e
the
em ploym ent d a ta w it h
an o u t s i d e

records

assumed
for

that:

the

3.

B u s i n e s s e s have k e p t t h e
m a t i o n t h a t was a s k e d on
naire.

kind of i n f o r
the q u e s tio n ­

4.

The e m p l o y e r s b e i n g i n t e r v i e w e d w e r e
m a k i n g e f f o r t s t o be i n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h
t h e f e d e r a l and s t a t e l a w s .

age nt.

91

RE5EARCH PROCEDURES
The
who

pop ula tion

employed

at

1970-1980.

The

of

in

business

in to

four

50-100

for

le a st

th is
16

people

employers
which

were

they

consisted

or

more

engaged

as

and

d iv is io n s :

101-499

of

employers

during

c la s s ifie d

were

em ploym ent-size

em ployees;

study

to

and

years

the

then

16-49

em ployees;

the

type

divided

employees;

500

or

more

em ployees.
The
were

sample

se le cte d ,

procedure
the

of

em ployers

computed
using
to

used
by

used

of

for

was u s e d

the

for

was

a ll

questions.

a ll

to

t-te st,

The

190.
and

te le ­
data

frequency

a nd

per­

C ro s s -1 a b u la t ions

were

and

type

of

Chi-square
the

c ritic a l
and

number

the

between

hypotheses,

representative

c o lle c t

size

and

who

sam pling

questionnaire

v a ria b le s.

differences

be

was

ana lysis,

employer

employers

community.

used

data

variance
testing

a

For

pre-determ ined

determine

alysis

on

to

survey

using

269

s tra tifie d

sample

the

procedure,

comparing

eight

to

of

a

employment

method,

study.

were

using

the

responding

in te rvie w

th is

cent

County

survey

consisted

random,

allow ed

Calhoun

The
phone

at

which

of

for

population

business,
was

varia b le s.
ra tio

An­

(z)

a sig n ifica n ce

used

were
of

.05

alpha.

HYPOTHESES TO BE TESTED
Five
to

hypotheses,

determine

the

stated

effects

of

in

the

fedreal

n u ll

form,

were

tested

and

state

le g is la tio n

92
on

Calhoun

cappers

County

for

the

em ployer's

years

h irin g

practices

of

handi-

1970-1980:

H ypothesis

1:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e
number o f h a n d i c a p p e r s b e i n g h i r e d i n C a l ­
houn C o u n t y
since
1976,
when c o m p a r e d t o
1970-1975.

Hypothesis

2:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n h i r ­
i n g p r a c t i c e s b e t w e e n e m p l o y e r s who a r e
f e d e r a l c o n t r a c t o r s and t h o s e who a r e n o t
federal co n tra cto rs.

Hypothesis

3:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e
t y p e o f b u s i n e s s e s t h a t have h i r e d h a n d i ­
cappers
in
Calhoun County p r i o r
to
and
fo llo w in g
1976,
and t h o s e t y p e s o f b u s i ­
nesses
that
have not
hired
handicappers.

Hypothesis

4:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
the
size
of businesses
that
have h i r e d
h a n d ic a p p e rs in Calhoun County p r i o r
to
and f o l l o w i n g
1976,
and t h o s e
size b u s i­
nesses
that
have
not
hired
handicappers.

Hypothesis

5:

T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
t h e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e r s who h a v e p e r s o n n e l
and s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s and h i r e
han dica ppers,
and e m p l o y e r s
who do n o t
have p e rs o n n e l
and s u p e r v i s o r y t r a i n i n g
programs
and do n o t h i r e
handicappers
in
Calhoun C o unty.

FINDING5
The
the

data

responses

completed
The

the

In

researcher
not

of

the

in

or
the
has

nece ssarily

of

th is

190

telephone

fin d in g s

acceptance
ses.

presented

AND DI SCUSSI ON

re je ctio n

of

attempted

were

County

c o lle c tio n

study

d iscu ssio n

apparent

Calhoun

data

the

study

are

the

to
from

p rim a rily

previo usly
each

express
the

data.

em ployers

from
who

procedure.

based

fo llo w in g

compiled

stated

on

hypothe­

q u e stio n ,

in sig h ts

the

which

the
are

93

Q uestion

1:

Is th e re a s ig n if ic a n t d iffe r e n c e
in the
number o f h a n d i c a p p e r s b e i n g h i r e d i n
Calhoun
County
sin ce
1976,
when c o m p a r e d
to 1970-1975?

Findings
No
of

s ig n ific a n t

handicappers

The

t

ta il
if

value

difference

being

hired

was

.82

w ith

p ro b a b ility

of

.416.

you

are

in

91

handicapped,

was

found

Calhoun

degrees

in

County

of

before

of

or

numbers

since

freedom

The p r o b a b i l i t y
eithe r

the

1976.

a nd

a two-

being

hired,

afte r

1976

was

.50.

Discussion
It
has

is

had

apparent

little

handicappers
Chapter
h irin g

II,

ing

the

law s

of

trem ely
of

th is

Calhoun

in dica tes
is

is

of

The

the

of

real

the

real

h irin g

le g is la tio n
practices

research,

problem

situ a tio n ,

H isto ry
le g is la te

comply

state

cite d

w ith

of
in

employer

a ttitu d e .

exception

to

Other

h a n dica ppers

to

and

employer

County.

government.

e ffo rts

federal

the

that

one

the

d iffic u lt

governing

people.

the

on

p ro h ib itio n .

federal

strong
laws

in

h irin g

people.

the

e ffe ct

practices

If

that

As

of
an

w ith

recru itm en t

then

are

th is

us

a nd

that

to
it

a ttitu d e s

and

statement

is

em ployer,
the

laws

s im ila r

te lls
the

the

they

are

govern­
the

old

is

ex­

morals
that

of

making

purpose

of

the

federal

h irin g

of

handicapped

94
A few
ances
and

employers

w ith in

th e ir

Company,

AT&T,

Looking
h irin g

at

study,

were

which

handicappers

11.6

than

In

the

Sears

w hile
or

to

employers

percent

im bal­
Roebuck

of

practices
note
in

that

the

th e ir

Kentucky

businesses

Calhoun

for

h irin g

County

faired

C a lifo rn ia .

Oregon

study,

h ire d

had

i.e .

employment

those

D),

sam ple

correct

du P o n t .

C a lifo rn ia ,

Kentucky
that

had been

Q uestion

pra ctice s,

to

62

percent

of

d isa b le d

peo ple ;

and

65

percent

h ire d

of

the

h a n d ica p p e d

the
in

sample
w orkers

E).

stated

workers

p o licie s

in te re stin g

Oregon

p o p u la tio n

(Appendix

pers

showed

F rancisco,

e m p lo ye r

is

than

the

up

County

it

P o rtla n d ,

in

and

Calhoun

(Appendix

the

em ployers
San

3-M,

better

favorable
In

set

business

handicappers,

p ractices

less

do

2:

study,

employers

approx .imately
employed

p rio r

59
to

who

hired

percent

of

handicap­
handcapped

1973.

Is there a s i g n i f i c a n t d iffe r e n c e in h ir in g
p ra ctice s
b e t w e e n e m p l o y e r s who a r e f e d e r a l
co n tra cto rs
and t h o s e
who a r e n o t
fedral
cont ra cto rs?

Findings
No

s ig n ific a n t

p ra c tic e s

of

contractors
variance;
a nd

the

in

the

d iffe re n ce

fe d e ra l
Calhoun
mean

sig n ifica n ce

found

c o n tra c to rs ,
County.

square
of

was

was

F being

The
2.337,
.596.

in

and

test
w ith

the

h irin g

no n -fe d e ra l

was
F

analysis
being

of

.283,

95
D iscussion
Federal
of

the

w ith

contract,

the

and

by

could

not

It

hire

ofte n

phase

The

federal

would
of

the

Q uestion

3:

an

show

law

d o lla r

size

a ffirm a tive

action

plan

the

for

not

was

for

b a sica lly

the

me t

contractors

having

to

hire

to

reason

c o lle c tio n
was t h a t
job

at
met

made

The

data

h irin g ,

people

was

e ffo rt

te le p h o n e

federal

w ithout

upon

handicappers.

the

q u a lifie d

the

that

contractors

that

law

file

a nd

the

appear

to

d u rin g

locate
of

depending

"q u a lifie d "

c ite d

in te n t

ment

have

government

re c ru it
most

contractors,

they

openings

th is
the

point.
require­

handicapped

people.

Is th e re a s ig n if ic a n t d iffe r e n c e
in the
ty p e o f b u s in e s s e s t h a t have h i r e d h a n d i­
cappers
in
C a lh o u n
C ounty
p rio r
to
and
fo llo w in g
1976,
and t h o s e t y p e s o f b u s i ­
nesses
that
have
not
h ire d
handica ppers?

Findings
No

s ig n ific a n t

businesses

that

fo llo w in g

1976.

and
1976

the

employed

being

.734;

and

of
for

F,

found

was

re ta ilin g ,

a nd

lo ca l

the

of

handicappers

to

to ta l

po sitive

was

1976,

years,

in

Calhoun

p rio r

to

the t e s t

was

.633;

re su lts

of

types

of
or
run

after

F=.899.

movement
types

the

either

analysis

government

in

variance

p rio r

the

there

h irin g

of

c la s s ific a tio n
a s lig h t

was

handicappers,

A n alysis

sig n ifica n ce

M u ltip le
that

d ifference

in

indicated

the

service,

businesses

County

since

toward
1976.

96

Discussion
The

fin d in g s

reported

in

studie s.

the
The

pected"

a

greater
in

p ra ctices
mo v e m e n t

types.

of

c itie s

Also,

a

s lig h t

education,

Francisco

of

(Appendix
no
with

a nd

Francisco

insurance,

ex­

the

s e rv ic e s ,

of

businesses
reported

a nd s o c i a l

services

people

d iffe re n c e
only

a

d iffe re n t

among

in

slig h t

a ll

food

h irin g
positive

hirin g

government

movement
and

than

E).

lo ca l

negative

those

study

disabled

toward

re ta ilin g ,

types

services

types,

in dica ted

service,

em ployment in

reported

business

than

reported a "b e tte r

educational

two

being

u tilitie s ,

for

d iffe re n t

P o rtlan d-S an

Portland-San

County

by

and

study

percentage

the

Calhoun

in

in

were

tra n s p o rta tio n

The

companies

employers

ces

and

D).

study

Kentucky

o p p o rtu n ity

(Appendix

hired

th is

Kentucky

m anufacturing,

that

in

p ra c ti­
business

appeared

in

processing

the

types

businesses.

Question

4:

Is
there
a sig n ific a n t
difference
between
the
s iz e
of
b u sin e sse s th a t
have h ir e d
handicappers
in
Calhoun County
p rio r
to
and
fo llo w in g
1976 , and t h o s e s i z e b u s i ­
nesses
that
have not
hired
handicappers?

Findings
There
businesses
both
500

p rio r
or

was
that
to

more

a

s ig n ific a n t
employed

and

handicappers

follow ing

p e o p le

d iffe re n ce

were

1976.
the

in

in

the

Calhoun

Companies
most

size

lik e ly

of

County,

employing
to

h ire

97
han d . i c a p p e r s ,
ployin g
100,

both

101-499

and

size

com panies

a lysis

were

icance

of

of

used

the

for

a ll

size

for

the

16-49

age,

were

next,

to

h irin g

1976.

m u ltip le

em­

size

50-

After

1976,

p o sitio n s

w ith

and

after

1970-1980.
were

the

c la s s ific a tio n

hypo the sis,

But,

larger

the

s ig n if­

1976,

and

F being

h irin g

after

w ith

an­

w ith

The

decreased

companies.

place,

company

reversed

before

businesses

Companies

people.

the

years

by

before

and

test

1976.

follow ed

101-499

.0000

size

after

employees

50-100

to ta l

taking

and

variance

F being

for

was

16-49

em ploying

A n alysis

that

were

em plo ying

companies

.582

before

the

companies,

p ra ctice s

1976,

except

little

h irin g

on

the

aver­

to

those

handicappers.

D iscussion
The
found
and

findings

in

Kentucky,

E).

people

for

O ther
have

Calhoun

Oregon,

stu d ie s

greater
therefore,

in d ica te

trend

operations
The
ies

raise

itie s

for

but

large

reversal

of

questions

taking

place

and

also

the

size

since

to

(Appendices

that

o p p o rtu n itie s
County

a pattern

of

D

handicapped
w ith

findings
normal

la rge r
do

not

business

companies.

order
as

sim ila r

C a lifo rn ia

Calhoun

suggest

were

in d ic a te

employment

companies;
a

County

between
the

1976.

kind

the
of

medium-size
labor

market

compan­
a c tiv ­

98

Question

5:

Is there
a sig n ifica n t
difference
between
t h e number o f e m p l o y e r s
who h a v e p e r s o n n e l
and s u p e r v i s o r y
tra in in g
programs
and h i r e
h a n d ic a p p e rs ,
and e m p l o y e r s
wh o do n o t
have
personnel
or
su p e rv is o ry
tra in in g
programs
a n d do n o t h i r e
handicappers
in
Calhoun County?

Fin d in g s
A

s ig n ific a n t

practices

of

personnel

and

do n o t

h irin g

the

sulted

in

handicappers

by

tra in in g

found

in

employers
and

those

the

h irin g

who p r o v i d e d
employers

who

tra in in g .

The c h i - s q u a r e
a nd

was

supervisory

provide

freedom

d iffe re n ce

value

was

a sig n ifica n ce

a 95 p e r c e n t

10.99503

le ve l

of

confidence

w ith

two

.0041.

degrees

A z

test

of
re­

in te rv a l.

Discussion
The
vided
hire
did
of
had

companies

personnel
more

not
one

hundred

tra in in g
that

employment

not

tra in in g
of

methods.

job

only

do

not

respond
seems

were

on

to

to

know
the

be

one

were

the

about

positive

topics

tra in in g
of

a ttitu des,

to

that

companies

out

question,
fifty -tw o

questions

The

pro­

found

companies

th irty

to

the

requirem ents,

sometimes,

those

responding

handicappers.

provided

le g is la tio n ,

we

or

tra in in g ,

than

Yet,

th irty -e ig h t

did

the

often

people

program s;

employer

ment

supervisory

tra in in g .

The

most

and

handicapped

offe r

companies

who c o n s i s t e n t l y ,

at

a ll.

factor

in

programs

ste re o typ in g ,
and

re c ru it­

99
In

review ing

lie te ra tu re
the

the

found

fin d in g s

County

the

contractors
tractors;
numbers

of

in

the

in

th is

no

more

1976,

types

c le ric a l,

throughout

the

of

it

being

hired;

sales)

appears

that

and

were

the

h irin g

p a ra lle l

Federal

the

County

p riva te

h irin g

handicapped

le g is la tio n
p ractices

employers
people

Federal

le g is la tio n

federal

government

1976,
in

the

federal

Calhoun

capped
3.

state

County

an

an

have

not

Calhoun

the

number

afte r

1976.

impact

on

employer;

branches

and

hired

the

since

agencies

236

handi­

people.

The p r o b a b i l i t y

of

hired

federal

by

eithe r

contractors
was

in

hired

had
as

of

.50.

during

handicappers

the

or

being

nonfederal

years

to

con­

second

in

move­

h a n dica ppers
those

did

of

Federal

s lig h t

n atio n.

e ffe ct

of
2.

and

of

Calhoun

nonfederal

FINDINGS
1.

some

s im ila r

natio n.

50-100

com panies

a nd

and

than

size

review

II,

the

less

employers

the

practices

throughout
no

on

Chapter

h irin g

or

of

based

study,

employers

handicappers
the

end

implement

hire

afte r

(services,
types

found

of

conclusions,

at

em ployers

rest

ment

the

1970-1980

business

There

was

between
hired
did
or

not

the

a s ig n ific a n t

types

of

handicappers

not

hire

after

difference

businesses

and t h o s e

handicappers

that

types

eithe r

that

before

1976.

The s i z e

of

the

s ig n ific a n t

business

difference

handicappers

both

made

in

p rio r

a positive

the

to

h irin g

and

of

fo llo w in g

1976.
Some

form

of

pressures
hirin g
ond

social

combined

101-499

position

businesses
1976,

in

to

to

th ird ,

h irin g

businesses

s h ift

from

changing

50-100

number

economic

cause

people

to

the

and/or

of

people

sec­

with
after

handicappers

they

employed.
Employers
for

who p r o v i d e d

personnel

hired

more

ployers

and

tra in in g

supervisory

handicappers

who d i d

not

than

provide

programs

people
those

em­

tra in in g

p r o g r ams.
Less

than

25 p e r c e n t

sponding

to

programs

w ith in

vide

sp e cific

for

sem inars.

the

of

question
th e ir

the

employers

have

tra in in g

companies,

kinds

of

re­

or

tra in in g

pro­

101
9.

The o v e r a l l
state

10.

effects

of

laws

regarding

h irin g

of

handicapped

County

has

Employers
eral
of

and

been
who

of

federal

people

in

since

and

Calhoun

1976.

w ith

governing

represent

a ll

and

recruitm ent

fa m ilia r

laws

handicappers

50 p e r c e n t

the

m inim al

are

state

the

the

the

fed­

h irin g

approxim ately

employers

in

the

study .
11.

Less
ers

than
in

the

overall
12.

10 p e r c e n t
sample

ers

in

had

recru itm en t

Approxim ately
the

w ritte n

a ll

the

increased

e ffo rts

50 p e r c e n t

study

job

of

hired

of

employ­
th e ir

since
the

people

1976.

employ­

using

d e scrip tio n s.

RECOMMENDATIONS
1.

That

M ichigan

le g is la to rs

from

the

awarding

and

state

these

the
2.

That

contracts

a nd

state

and

agencies

h irin g

of

to

h irin g

companies

placement
the

of

M ichigan

contractors

recru itm en t
by

le g is la to rs

of

in ve stig a te
to

federal
the

handicappers
business

with

government.

responsible
handicapped

p ra ctice s

federal

determine

doing

federal

a nd

of

for

the

people
se rvice ,

job

m onitor

re ta ilin g ,
es

for

and

further

employment
That

lo ca l

in d ic a tio n s

trends

agencies
of

plore

hirin g

itie s ,

whether

tice s

have

em ploying
That

and

to

job

That

ben efits

research

in

p ra ctice s

h irin g

further
of

garding

the

job
are

h irin g

cause,

101-499,

effects

who

and

u til­
food

to

deter­
prac­

toward

w ith
for

em ployers

the

ery,

the

programs

placement

determine

That

of

of

be

devel­

the

respon­

handicap­

with

the

hirin g

laws

handi­

employees.

further

h irin g

ex­

hirin g

negative

charged

acquaint

fin a n c ia l

capped

th e ir

re la tio n s

of

further

handicapped.

agencies

s ib ility
pers

the

job

companies

not

b e c o me

p ub lic

ope d by

or

people.

the

insurance;
of

possible

for

practices

types

of

business­

handicapped

handicappers

education,

processing
mine

for

respon sible

placement
the

government

be
or

for

and

employer

be

tra in in g

of

of

that

the

s h ifts

companies

conducted

and

to

people.

content

trained ,

a re su lt

those

tra in in g

c la s s ific a tio n

as

causes,

50-100

studie s

being

conducted

on

the

programs
and

re­

d e liv ­

people

hold

handicapper
tra in in g .

That
in g

employer
the

re cru itm en t

cappers,
those
That

be

service
c ie s,

That

se rvices,

establishe d

business

h irin g

d e scrip tio n s
o p p o rtu n itie s

for
be

as
to

be

w ith

conducted

are

employed

in

Calhoun

studies

be

conducted

held
are

by

to

determine

handicappers

dary

la b o r

That

people

seeking

jobs.
to

job

employment
people.
to

determine
who

County.
in

Calhoun

types

of

and

to

what

employed

in

the

jobs
degree
secon­

force.
who

re sp o n s ib ility
placement

on

up o p p o r ­

handicappers

the

handicappers,

agen­

impact

w ritte n

upward

County

re­

social

open

more

of

edu­

conducted

the

That

for

to

disabled

m o b ility

to

vocatio nal

so

provide

handi­

people.

employment

research

if

studie s

50-499

handicappers

further

of

unions,

community

for

determine

That

and

regard­

provided

responsible

agencies,

tu n itie s

and

between

agencies

be

hirin g

who h i r e

networking

h a b ilita tio n

programs,

and

developed

companies

c a tio n a l

the

tra in in g

are
of

services

charged

job
for

with

development

the
and

handicappers

104
pursue
ing
13.

That

a ll

job

federal

o p p o rtu n itie s

vo ca tio n a l

cation

agencies

and

together
stu d ie s.

to

for

education,

re h a b ilita tio n
conduct

the

in

request­

handicappers.
special

edu­

agencies

work

recommended

APPENDI X

APPENDI X
Employer

Cover

Letter

and

A
Survey

Q uestionnaire

ooc
December 6, 1982

Dear Employer:
We at the Calhoun Area Vocational Center know how busy you are, especially in
the current economic circumstances, so what we are asking you toassist us with
will take about twenty minutes of file and personnel referencing and a ten minute
telephone conversation with Edna Falbe or myself.
The Vocational Center, the Council for Employment Needs and Training(CENT), and
several other organizations will be involved with a training project to improve the
employment and vocational success of handicappers through a training and placement
network. We need to survey employers in Calhoun County to determine future potential
employment opportunities for handicappers and present and future training needs of
employers.
The benefits to you and your firm for participating are:
-better trained employees from the Vocational Center
-training programs for supervisors and managers made available
to you through CENT
-a copy of the summary report to inform you of the overall findings
regarding employment of handicappers and training needs of employers
in Calhoun County
Please complete the enclosed questionnaire. Sometime during the week of December 13th
Edna or myself will call to collect the information over the phone. This should
take no more than ten minutes of your time. The information from this questionnaire
will be kept STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL.
We want to thank you in advance for assisting us with our new training project,
and remind you that we will be calling you during the week of December 13th.
Respectfully,

Barbara A. Rupp
Special Projects Coordinator
:bc
Enclosure

105

CALHOUN AREA VOCATIONAL CENTER
CALHOUN COUNTY EMPLOYER QUESTIONNAIRE
Regarding Handicapper Employment and an Employer Training Program
The information obtained from this questionnaire will be kept STRICTLY
CONFIDENTIAL and the results of the survey will be used to:
1.

Provide vocational administrators, teachers, and
counselors wit h information to help in planning
vocational programs for handicappers, make more
appropriate placements of handicappers in v o c a ­
tional programs and into jobs after graduation.

2.

Assist in the pla nn ing of training for employers
for hiring handicappers and give direction for
the development of strategies for working with
employers who are not hiring handicappers.
This
training wo uld be available to employers through
the Council for Employment Needs and Training (CENT ).

3.

Compare Calhoun County with State and Federal
statistics on handicapper employment for d i s s e r ­
tation purposes at Mi chigan State University.

In the summary of the data, no company will be identified by name or names
of individual people.
Please place a check in the appropriate blanks below. The data will be
summarized by size of business/industry and the type of business/industry as
identified below:
Employment Size:

A.
B.

16 —
50 —

49
100

Type of Business:

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

Service
Banking
Utilities
Education
Retailing
Insurance
Manufacturing

C.
D.

101 — 500
over 500

H.
I.
J.
K.

Food Processing
Federal Gov't/Agency
State Gov't/Agency
Other:

The definition of "handicapped" or "handicapper" to be used when completing
this questionnaire is:
Any person who (1) has a physical or mental impairment
which substantially limits one or more majo r life a c t i v ­
ities; (2) has a record of such an impairment; (3) is
regarded as having such an impairment.
1 06

Please place a check in the blank or blanks next to the appropriate responses
for the following questions:
1.

Are you familiar with the Federal and State laws that govern the
employment of handicappers?
A.
Yes
B. ____ No

2.

If the answer to #1 was yes, which of the following laws directly
affect you?
A. ____ The RehabilitationAct of 1973 (Title V,Section
503 and 504)
B. ____ The 1974 Vietnam EraVeteransReadjustment
Assis­
tance Act (Section 402)
C. ____ Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1974 (outlines
procedures for federal contractor's affirmative
action plans)
D. ____ Revenue Act of 1978 (Targeted Jobs Tax Credit)
E.
Michigan Act 220 of the Public Acts of 1976
(Michigan Handicapper's Civil Rights Act)
F. ____ Michigan Act 183 of the Public Acts of 1977
(Second Injury Certification)
G.
All of the above
H.
None of the above
I. ____ I'm not sure
J. ____ I would like more information regarding the above laws

3.

Has your company hired people with a physical or mental impairment?
A.
Yes
B. ____ No

4.

If your answer to question #3 was "yes", were they hired prior to 1976?
A.
B.

Yes
No

(Approximate number hired
(Figures are not available ______ )

Were they hired since 1976?
C.
D.
5.

Yes
No

(Approximate number hired _______ )
(Figures are not available ______ )

Have your recruitment efforts for hiring handicappers increased since 1976
A.
B.
C.

Yes
No
Stayed

6.

I f you answered " y e s " to q u e s tio n #5, w hat ty p e s o f a c t i v i t i e s have
you tended t o emphasize?
A.
R e c ru itm e n t
B. _____ Im provem ent o f
C.
Im provem ent o f
D. _____ Im provem ent o f
E.
O th e r a c t i v i t i e

7.

th e in t e r v ie w p ro ce ss
th e s e le c t io n p ro ce ss
th e w r it t e n jo b d e s c r ip tio n
s such a s :
___

Are you aware that there are certain handicaps which can be medically
certified, and will limit your liability as an employer?
A.
B.

Yes
No
C. ____ Would like more information

8.

When hiring for any job opening, do you post or have available written
job descriptions with major tasks identified?
A.
B.

Yes
No
C. ____ Sometimes

9.

Were you ever a federal contractor or sub-contractor for a program or
project?
A.
B.

10.

Yes
No

(If yes, the years: ________________ )

Within your company, do you provide training for supervisors, managers,
and/or foreman regarding the interviewing, hiring, placement and super­
vision of handicappers?
A.
Yes
B.
No
C. ____ Sometimes

11.

If you answered "yes" or "sometimes" to question #10, please check each
item below that you have provided training on during the last five years:
A.
Discrimination and stereotyping
B. ____ Legislation and employer benefits
C. ____ Unique characteristics of handicappers
D.
Community and state support services abailable in
Calhoun County
E. ____ Employer/Employee attitudes regarding hiring of handicappers
F. ____ Effective communication strategies when working
with
handicappers
G. ____ Job requirements and employee capabilities
H. ____ Supervision and evaluation of handicappers
I.
Recruitment and interviewing
J.
Other areas:

1 OB

12.

General Comments/Suggestions:

Please check here if you would like a copy of the final summary
report.

Thank you for taking your valuable time to complete this questionnaire.
Your efforts will help us to do a better job of planning, training, and
placement.

Barbara Rupp
Calhoun Area Vocational Center
475 E. Roosevelt Avenue
Battle Creek,
MI
49017
Phone: (616) 968-2271

109

APPENDI X
Telephone

B

Procedure

T rain ing

TELEPHONE PROCEDURE TRAI NI NG

The t e l e p h o n e

in te rvie w e r

The p r o c e d u r e

used

item

discuss

by

item ,

and

answer

the

discussio n,

the

fo llo w in g

c o lle c tio n
made

were

made

a nd

a ny

page)

m onitored
the

the

to

progress

that

had

the

for

by

over

nature
the

use

The

and

durin g

the
and

in

a ll

discuss

a ny

the

unusual
week.

researcher.

each

question,

have.

B a s e d on

was

developed

ca lls
that

minor

Weekly

preceding

11 0

of

m ight

ca lls

given

th is

que stionna ire,

format

researcher,

in te rv ie w s .

the

e n tire

in te rvie w

seven

was

by

purpose

in te rvie w

firs t

th is

trained

in te rvie w e r

in te rvie w e r

telephone

arisen

go

a telephone

purposes.

then

to

questions

continue
check

was

was

for

the

data

in te rvie w e r

m odifica tions

re sp o n sib ility
m eetings

problems

(see

were
or

were
to

held

concerns

Telephone Procedure Format

Good m o rn in g /a fte rn o o n , may I speak w ith
p e rs o n 's name and t i t l e
( to be w r it t e n on th e back o f
th e q u e s tio n n a ire b e in g f i l l e d
o u t)

T h is i s Edna F albe c a l l i n g f o r B a rba ra Rupp and th e Calhoun Area Voca­
t i o n a l C e n te r, re g a rd in g th e q u e s tio n n a ire on H andicapper Employment
and Em ployer T r a in in g .

You sh o u ld have re c e iv e d th e q u e s tio n n a ire in

th e m a il sometime d u rin g th e week o f November 18 th ro u g h November 2 6 th .

(They may have t o lo c a te th e person who i s c o m p le tin g
th e fo rm . Be su re to g e t t h i s p e rs o n 's name and t i t l e ) .

Your c o v e r l e t t e r in d ic a te d t h a t I would be c a l li n g sometime t h i s week.
Would i t

be p o s s ib le now to ta k e ju s t a few m in u te s o f your tim e to

c o l le c t t h i s d a ta o ve r th e phone?
I f NO:

E s ta b lis h a c a ll- b a c k d a te and tim e .
E n te r i t in th e c a ll- b a c k lo g .

I f YES:

Do you have your copy in f r o n t o f you?
( I f th e y do n o t, w a it w h ile th e y g e t t h e i r

I would l i k e

to v e r if y your employment s iz e .

copy).

A p p ro x im te ly how many peo ple

do you employ?

What ty p e o f b u sin e ss are you?

(d is c u s s th e c h o ic e s on th e f r o n t page)

L e t ' s b e g in w ith q u e s tio n one . . .
and c o n tin u e th ro u g h q u e s tio n tw e lv e .

To end

th e in t e r v ie w , ask them i f

mary r e p o r t and th a n k them f o r

th e y would l i k e

a copy o f th e f i n a l sum­

t h e i r e f f o r t s and s u p p o rt w ith t h i s p r o je c t .

111

APPENDIX C
In te r v ie w s w ith Employers
from the
S u rv ey P i l o t Group

INTERVIEW WITH PERSONNEL DIRECTORA
Interview er:

In y o u r o p i n i o n , have a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n
l a w s been e f f e c t i v e i n e n c o u r a g i n g h a n d i c a p p e r s t o e n t e r t h e l a b o r f o r c e and i n
e n c o u r a g i n g e m p l o y e r s t o make m o r e j o b s
a v a i l a b l e t o them?

Interview ee:

No.
L e t me q u a l i f y t h a t .
Government agen­
c ie s conse rted e f f o r t s towards h i r i n g the
handicapped.
I d o n ' t f e e l i t has had t h a t
much e f f e c t on t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r .
There
a r e no q u o t a s as t h e r e a r e w i t h many m i n o r ­
itie s .

Interview er:

I f a n y , w h a t c o s t s has y o u r company i n c u r ­
red i n making accommodations f o r the h a n d i­
capped employees?

Interview ee:

I n d o l l a r s and c e n t s , I r e a l l y d o n ' t k n o w .
I w o u l d h a v e t o go t h r o u g h my r e c o r d s t o
determine th a t .

In te rvie w e r:

Have y o u a t t e n d e d a ny w o r k s h o p s o r r e c e i v e d
a ny t y p e o f t r a i n i n g d e a l i n g w i t h t h e
h i r i n g a nd e m p l o y m e n t o f t h e h a n d i c a p p e d ?

Interview ee:

I h a v e n ' t a t t e n d e d a ny p r o g r a m s s p e c i f i c ­
a l l y f o r h i r i n g handicapped, but I ' v e
a tte n d e d programs t h a t deal w ith h i r i n g
m i n o r i t i e s , women, a nd t h e h a n d i c a p p e d .

I n t e r viewe r :

Who s p o n s o r e d
shop?

Interview ee:

B a t o n , B a t o n , and H u g h e s , M i c h i g a n S t a t e
U n i v e r s i t y , and a n u m b e r o f o t h e r s .

Interview er:

O f f h a n d , w o u l d yo u say t h a t t h e r e ha s been
an i n c r e a s e i n h a n d i c a p p e d a p p l i c a n t s a t
y o u r c o mp a n y s i n c e 1 9 7 6 ?

Interview ee:

No.

Interview er:

I n g e n e r a l , w h a t do y o u f e e l a r e some b a r ­
r i e r s to h i r i n g th e handicapped from the
em ployers p o i n t o f view?

Bank,

or

was

in

charge

of

the

^ In te rv ie w w ith personnel d ir e c t o r , a B a ttle
B a t t l e C r e e k , M i c h i g a n , O c t o b e r 14, 1982.

work­

Creek

Interview ee:

B o y , t h a t ' s a t o u g h q u e s t i o n f o r me s i n c e
I h a v e no p r o b l e m w i t h t h a t a r e a .
I think
t h a t t h e o n l y p r o b l e m I m i g h t be w a r y o f i s
how t h e p r e s e n t s t a f f w o u l d a c c e p t t h e m .
The e m p l o y e e s h e r e a r e g r e a t .
T h e y may t r y
t o h e l p t h e p e r s o n a nd m o s t o f t h e h a n d i ­
c a p p e d I ' v e b e e n i n c o n t a c t w i t h t e n d t o be
quite s e lf- s u f fic ie n t.
The s t a f f w o u l d
p r o b a b l y n e e d t o be t r a i n e d as t o how t o
work w i t h th e h a n d ic a p p e d .

Interview ee:

A n o t h e r p r o b l e m d e v e l o p s when t h e a p p l i ­
c a n t ' s h a n d ic a p p r o h i b i t s him o r h e r from
doing a major p a rt o f the jo b .
For example,
a b l i n d p e r s o n c o u l d n ' t be e m p l o y e d i n a
j o b t h a t i n v o l v e d r e a d i n g m i c r o f i c h e a nd
c o m p u t e r s c r e e n s , b e c a u s e t o my k n o w l e d g e ,
t h e r e i s n o t a method o f making t h i s a v a i l ­
a b l e i n b r a i l i n an e f f i c i e n t m a n n e r .

Inte rview e r:

What m e t h o d , i f a n y , i s u s e d
c o m p l i a n c e i n y o u r company?

Interview ee:

There i s r e a l l y not a n y t h i n g t h a t m o n i t o r s
our com pliance.
W i t h m i n o r i t i e s and women
we h a v e q u o t a s t o m e e t , b u t t h e y d o n ' t r e ­
q u ire quotas f o r handicapped.
We do h a v e
t o make up an a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n p l a n and
t e l l w h a t we a r e d o i n g a nd p l a n t o d o .

11 3

in

m onitorin g

INTERVIEW WITH PERSONNEL DIRECTOR6
Inte rview e r;

Do e s

your

company

employee

a ny

handicappers?

Interview ee:

Yes.

Inte rview e r:

How w o u l d y o u r a t e t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h e
handica pped compared t o o t h e r workers?

Interview ee:

I w o u l d say t h a t t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e i s pa r
w ith o thers.
Some a r e o u t s t a n d i n g , as some
o f the non-handicapped are.
In g e n e r a l,
t h e i r perform ance equals t h a t o f the non­
handicapped.

Inte rview e r:

What a c c o m m o d a t i o n s h a s
f a c i l i t i e s , job d u tie s ,
f o r the handicapped?

Inte rview ee:

The f a c i l i t i e s a r e a l l a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e
handicapped.
The w a l k s a r e c u r b l e s s , t h e
e l e v a t o r s have b r a i l num bers, t h e d r i n k i n g
f o u n t a i n s h a v e b e e n l o w e r e d , and t h e e l e v a ­
t o r b u t t o n s are a l l low enough f o r t h o s e i n
w heelchairs to reach.

y o u r f i r m made i n
a n d /o r machinery

As f a r as c h a n g i n g t h e j o b d u t i e s i s c o n ­
c e r n e d , we h e r e a t o u r c o m p a n y , h a v e o v e r
400 d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f j o b s .
We u s u a l l y
p l a c e h a n d i c a p p e d i n j o b s t h a t do n o t n e e d
t o be a l t e r e d .
We h a v e , h o w e v e r , h i r e d
r e a d e rs f o r th o s e employees i n o f f i c e p o s i ­
t i o n s who a r e v i s u a l l y i m p a i r e d .
Inte rview e r:

What do y o u f e e l b a r r i e r s t o
the handicapped are from the
p o i n t o f view?

Interview ee:

I t h i n k the m ajor b a r r i e r i s the misconcep­
t i o n t h e e m p lo y e r s have o f t h e h a n d ic a p p e d .
Many o f t h e m f e e l t h a t b e c a u s e o f t h e h a n d ­
i c a p t h e y c a n n o t f u n c t i o n p r o d u c t i v e l y on
the jo b .
The l a c k o f e x p e r i e n c e o f d e a l i n g
w i t h handicapped persons a ls o le a d s t o un­
c e r t a i n t y and e m p l o y e r s a v o i d t h e u n k n o w n .

6In te rv ie w
Company, B a t t l e

employment
employers

of

w i t h p e r s o n n e l d i r e c t o r , Food P r o c e s s i n g
C r e e k , M i c h i g a n , O ct ob e r 13, 1983.

INTERVIEW WITH PERSONNEL DIRECTOR0
In terview er:

Do y o u f e e l a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n l a w s h a v e
been e f f e c t i v e i n e n c o u r a g i n g h a n d i c a p p e d
p e r s o n s t o e n t e r t h e l a b o r f o r c e and i n
m a k i n g more j o b s a v a i l a b l e t o them?

Interview ee:

I r e a l l y , I guess in a l l h o n e s ty , I d o n ' t
know.
The l a w s w e r e i n e f f e c t when I t o o k
my c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n .
I don 't th in k i t ' s
made a n y d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e p e o p l e t h a t I
come i n c o n t a c t w i t h .

Inte rview e r:

How w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r
e e ' s p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e

Interview ee:

Comparable

to

the

Interview er:

What

of

jobs

Interview ee:

A va rie ty.
We h a v e some c l e r i c a l , some i n
m a n a g e m e n t , and some a r e a g e n t s .
We d o n ' t
g e t i n t o s e t t i n g n u m b e r s f o r any o f t h e
categories.
We j u s t t a k e t h e m as t h e y come

In te rvie w e r:

What do y o u f e e l a r e some b a r r i e r s t o em­
p lo y m e n t o f th e h a n d ic a p p e d from t h e employ
e r ' s p o i n t o f view?

I n t e r v i ewee:

I t h i n k t h e main t h i n g i s t h e i r a t t i t u d e s .
Th e y f e e l h a n d i c a p p e d m u s t be t r e a t e d d i f ­
f e r e n t l y than t h e average employee i n th e
run o f the m i l l program.
Another t h in g is
th a t they w i l l d is ru p t o th e rs .
For example
a p e r s o n w i l l be s i t t i n g a t t h e i r d e s k and
s a y , ' I c a n ' t s e e t wo i n c h e s i n f r o n t o f
me,' meanwhile th e r e i s a b l i n d person s i t ­
t i n g r i g h t n e x t t o th e m t h a t c a n ' t s e e a t
a ll.
I t h i n k t h i s ma k e s p e o p l e u n c o m f o r ­
ta b le .
I f e e l the m ajor problem i s a t t i ­
tudes.
Have t o g e t p e o p l e t n a c c e p t t h e
h a n d i c a p p e d as p e o p l e .

types

handicapped
job?

employ­

non-handicapped.
do t h e y

hold?

A nother problem i s t h a t o f accommodation.
Many e m p l o y e r s h a v e a n i g h t m a r e o f s p e n d i n g
a l l s o r t s o f money t o c h a n g e t h i n g s a nd
wonder i f i t ' s r e a l l y w o r t h i t t o them.

^ In te rv ie w w ith personnel d ir e c t o r ,
company, M a r s h a l l , M i c h i g a n , O c t o b e r 13,

an i n s u r a n c e
1982.

Interview er:

What t y p e o f t r a i n i n g
and t h e e m p l o y m e n t o f

Interview ee:

We t o o k p a r t i n t h e P r o j e c t MOVE.
We g e t
a l l kin ds o f in fo r m a tio n out o f our c o r p o r ­
a t e o f f i c e t o r e a d and t h a t p e r t a i n s t o t h e
o v e r a l l employment p o s i t i o n o f o u r company.
We a r e a l a r g e c o m p a n y , so we h a v e a l o t o f
re sources at our f i n g e r t i p s .

have you had i n h i r i n g
the handicapped?

We l i k e t o make p e o p l e f e e l t h e s ame; t h a t ' s
t h e o n l y way y o u c a n b r e a k down t h e b a r r i ­
ers.
When y o u h a v e t o s e t up s p e c i a l g r o u p s
f o r every l i t t l e t h in g , i t d e fe a ts the p u r ­
pose o f what i t i s y o u ' r e t r y i n g t o accom­
p l i s h b e c a u s e you n e v e r g e t o u t s i d e t h a t
b a rrie r.
Y o u're always a handicapper, or
y o u ' r e a l w a y s a woman, o r y o u ' r e a l w a y s
black.

116

INTERVIEW WITH PERSONNEL DIRECTOR0
Interview er

In y o u r o p i n i o n , have a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n
la w s been e f f e c t i v e i n e n c o u r a g i n g h a n d i c a p p e r s t o e n t e r t h e l a b o r f o r c e and i n
e n c o u r a g i n g e m p l o y e r s t o make m o r e j o b s
a v a i l a b l e t o them?

Interview ee

I

Inte rview e r

I f a n y , what c o s t s h av e y o u r company i n ­
c u r r e d i n making accommodations f o r th e
handica pped employees?

Interview ee:

We r e a l l y h a v e n ' t h a d t o s p e n d a ny money
in changing the f a c i l i t i e s .
As f a r as
c h a n g i n g j o b d u t i e s , we h a v e n ' t d o n e t h a t
e ith e r.
We h a v e c r e a t e d new j o b s t h a t t h e
d u t i e s c o u l d be p e r f o r m e d b y t h e h a n d i c a p ­
ped.
I have had s u p e r v i s o r s s p e c i f i c a l l y
ask f o r h a n d i c a p p e d p e r s o n s t o f i l l j o b
open i n g s .

Interview er:

Why da
quest?

Interview ee:

Most h a n d i c a p p e d
a b e t t e r jo b , at
gin.

Inte rview e r:

Have y o u a t t e n d e d a ny w o r k s h o p s o r r e c e i v e d
any t y p e o f t r a i n i n g d e a l i n g w i t h t h e h i r ­
i n g and e m p l o y m e n t o f t h e h a n d i c a p p e d ?

Interview ee:

I
I

Inte rview e r:

O f f h a n d , w o u l d you say t h a t t h e r e has been
an i n c r e a s e i n h a n d i c a p p e d a p p l i c a n t s a t
y o u r company s i n c e 1976?

Interview ee:

The re has been a s l i g h t i n c r e a s e ,
r e a l l y any s i g n i f i c a n t n u m b e r .

Inte rview e r:

I n g e n e r a l , w h a t do y o u f e e l some o f t h e
b a r r i e r s t o h i r i n g han dica p p e d are from
the e m p lo y e r's p o in t o f view.

°Interview
Company, B a t t l e

th in k

so.

you

think

they

would

make s u c h

a re­

w o r k e r s t r y h a r d e r a n d do
l e a s t when t h e y f i r s t b e ­

a tte n d e d a workshop, seminar
b e l i e v e i t was c a l l e d MOVE.

w ith personnel d ir e c t o r ,
Creek, M ic h ig a n , October

type

program.

but

not

Manufacturing
15, 1982.

Int e r v i ewe e :

T h e a d d e d r i s k s of" h i r i n g t h e h a n d i c a p p e d ,
along with higher insurance.
They're afraid
t h e y w i l l h a v e to m a k e t o o m a n y c o n c e s s i o n s .

Interviewer :

W h a t m e t h o d , if a n y , is u s e d
c o m p l i a n c e in y o u r c o m p a n y .

Interviewee:

There are
we u s e is

no q u o t a s .
About
a visual survey,

118

in
the

monitoring
only

thing

INTERVIEW WITH PERSONNEL DIRECTORE
Interview er:

I n g e n e r a l , how w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r h a n d i ­
c a p p e d e m p l o y e e s ' p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e j o b ?

Interview ee:

Oh, I t h i n k o v e r a l l I
l i t t l e above a v e r a g e .

Inte rview e r:

Do m o s t

Interview ee:

Some d o , b u t we do h a v e a d e p a r t m e n t c h a i r
th a t i s handicapped.
My s e c r e t a r y i s a l s o
h a n d i c a p p e d , b u t she does n o t d e c l a r e i t .

Inte rview e r:

What t y p e o f a c c o m m o d a t i o n s h a v e y o u made?
Su c h as f a c i l i t i e s , j o b d u t i e s a n d m a c h i n e ­
ry.

Interview ee:

The m a i n t h i n g w e ' v e d o n e i s made t h e f a ­
c i l i t i e s a c c e s s ib le to the handicapped.
As f a r as m a c h i n e r y and d u t i e s , v e r y l i t t l e
n e e d s t o be d o n e .

of

them

hold

would

entry

rate

le ve l

them

a

jobs?

The h a n d i c a p p e d t h a t we h a v e h i r e d d o n ' t
wa n t any t y p e o f s p e c i a l t r e a t m e n t .
I
mentioned the department chairman b e fo re .
He d o e s n ' t l i k e t o t h i n k o f h i m s e l f as
handicapped.
He p r e f e r s t h a t we d o n ' t
make m o d i f i c a t i o n s .
Inte rview e r:

I f t h e d i s a b l e d a p p l i c a n t was m o r e q u a l i f ­
i e d t h a n o t h e r a p p l i c a n t s , w o u ld you h i r e
him o r h e r i n p r e f e r e n c e t o t h e o t h e r s ?

Interview ee:

D e fin ite ly .

Interview er:

I f t wo a p p l i c a n t s had
t i o n s , would you h i r e
the non-handicapped?

Interview ee:

F r a n k l y , I d o n ' t know.
R o u g h l y we t r y t o
look at the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s .
I f th e y're
e x a c t l y t h e s a me , we m i g h t o r m i g h t n o t
h i r e the handicapped.

the
the

same q u a l i f i c a ­
handicapped or

EI n t e r v i e w w i t h p e r s o n n e l d i r e c t o r , E d u c a t i o n a l
I n s t i t u t i o n , B a t t l e C r e e k , M i c h i g a n , O c t o b e r 13, 1982.

APPENDIX D
U n ive rsity

of

Kentucky Research
by
E l a i n e F. Uthe

Report

Conducted in C o n ju n c tio n w ith the
Kentucky Department o f E d u ca tio n ,
Bureau o f V o c a t i o n a l E d u c a tio n

U n iv e r s it y o f Kentucky
C ollege of Education
Department o f V o c a tio n a l Ed ucation
Business E d ucation
L e x in g to n , Kentucky

PLEASE NOTE:
Copyrighted materials in this document
have not been filmed a t the request of
the author. They are available for
consultation, however, in the author's
university lib rary.
These consist of pages:
120-122
123

University
Microfilms
International
300 N. ZEEB RD., ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 (313) 761 -4700

APPENDIX E

Portland,

A Research P r o j e c t
Conducted in
O r e g o n and San F r a n c i s c o ,

C a lifo rn ia

"Employer R eactions to E f f o r t s to Place
D i s a b l e d and D i s a d v a n t a g e d W o r k e r s "

by
Jerry

J.

Zadny

R e gio nal R e h a b i l i t a t i o n Research
P o rtlan d State U n iv e rs ity
P . O . Box 751
P o r t l a n d , Oregon
97207

In s titu te

APPENDIX F
Summar y

o f E m p l o y e r Co mment s
by Company S i z e

CALHOUN COUNTY EMPLOYER QUESTIONNAIRE
REGARDING HANDICAPPER EMPLOYMENT AND AN EMPLOYER TRAINING PROGRAM

Summary Comment Sheet

G eneral C om m ents/S uggestions:
Company s iz e 16-49 em ployees:

Comments . . .

1.

In g e n e r a l, h a v in g o n ly 27 p e o p le and s p e c if ic jo b s w hich in c lu d e
medium and heavy m anual la b o r , th e n a tu re o f th e q u e s tio n s te n d to
e lim in a te us from b e in g a good s a m p lin g .

2.

We have had v e ry few h a n dica ps a p p ly f o r w o rk , b u t a re aware th e r e is
a need f o r t h e i r em ploym ent. We c e r t a in l y w o u ld , a t no tim e , d is c r im ­
in a te in h i r i n g .

3.

Would l i k e more in fo r m a tio n about p rogram s.
when we need someone in th e o f f i c e .

4.

A l l h i r i n g i s done in T o le d o .

5.

You have t o phone p e o p le and have to be a b le to work th e am bulance.

6.

In my o p in io n , a t t h i s r e s ta u r a n t, a h a n dica p person w ould n o t w o rk , as
d ish w a sh e rs have s e v e ra l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s .
Salad p e o p le work and c le a n
around e l e c t r i c d e v ic e s , e t c .
I f o u r o p e ra tio n was la r g e r and someone
worked as s u p e rv is o r o n ly and c o u ld w atch c lo s e ly , we m ig h t be in t e r e s t e d ,
b u t n o t a t t h i s tim e .

7.

P e rso n n e l must have OK from home o f f i c e .

8.

Send l i s t s

o f d i f f e r n t p e o p le

a v a ila b le , w ith ty p e o f jo b to e m p lo ye r.

9.

Would l i k e

t o see one s e r v ic e

- n o t so many d u p lic a it io n s o f s e r v ic e s .

Would be happy t o t r y

h ir in g

10.

H ir in g done th ro u g h u n io n , most o f q u e s tio n n a ir e n o t a p p lic a b le because
o f t h is .
I f u n io n employee i s a h a n d ic a p p e r, th e n th e y h ir e them .

11.

S m all b u s in e s s ; a l l em ployees

12.

T h is program i s som ethin g t h a t

13.

More in fo r m a tio n to em plo yers

14.

Would be in te r e s t e d in s e m in a rs .
ca p p e rs w i l l have t o o f f f e r .

15.

I n our s m a ll b u s in e s s i t is n e ce ssary f o r everyone who w orks he re to be
in re a s o n a b ly good h e a lt h .
There a re many tim e s when em ployees, o th e r
th a n d e s ig n a te d s a le s c le r k s , a re re q u ire d t o a s s is t o u r cu sto m e rs w hich
in c lu d e s g o in g up and down s t a i r s , l i f t i n g packages and bo xe s, ru n n in g
a cash r e g is t e r , w r it in g in v o ic e s and s o lv in g custom er p ro b le m s .
There­
f o r e , some o f yo u r c a te g o r ie s o f th e handicapped w ould n o t be s u it a b le
to s o lv e th e problem s o f o u r b u s in e s s . We do have one employee who has
worked f o r us f o r o v e r 14 ye a rs who o n ly has one lu n g and has done f in e .

have been h e re f o r y e a rs .
i s needed.

Hope i t

w orks w e ll.

about h a n d ic a p p e rs w i l l be v e ry good.
A lso what q u a l i f i c a t i o n s th e h a n d i­

1 24

I d o n ' t t h in k my response has been to o h e lp f u l to you, b u t t r u t h f u l l y
s p e a k in g , we have neve r gone lo o k in g f o r handicapped em ployees and u n t i l
we grow and add a few more jo b d e s c r ip tio n s , I s e r io u s ly do u b t i f th e re
w i l l be much chance o f h i r i n g a person w ith a s e r io u s p h y s ic a l o r m e n ta l
h a n d ic a p .
"
16.

We have n o t had s p e c i f i c a l l y handicapped p e o p le a p p ly .

17.

Not aware o f th e h a n d ica p p e r program s.

18.

Never have to employ by a d v e r t is in g o r u s in g an agency.
em ployees m y s e lf.

19.

Union c o n t r a c t r e q u ir e s t h a t we h ir e th ro u g h th e u n io n h a l l .

20.

I f q u a l i f i e d , no p ro b le m . Hard to f in d h a n d ic a p p e rs in t h i s
b u s in e s s ( l i t h o , p r i n t i n g ) .

21.

We have p a r t - t im e em ployees who work 2 o r 3 days a t a tim e .

22.

No handicapped em ployed.

Company s iz e 50-10.0 em ployees:

Need to t r a i n new

fie ld o f

Out o f s ig h t , o u t o f m ind.

Comments . . .

1.

In th e f a s t fo o d b u s in e s s , h a n d ic a p p e rs g e t v e ry d is tr e s s e d and f r u s t r a t e d .

2.

Company w o rk in g a t 30?£ f o r th e p a s t 3 y e a rs .
I t i s v e r y ha rd t o v is u a liz e
som ething new, when th e r e a re so many re q u ire m e n ts we need to a b id e by now.

3.

H ire m o s tly h ig h ly t r a in e d p e o p le and w ould c o n s id e r anyone i f
We c o u ld use h e lp l a t e r on th e co m p u te r.

4.

I f we need h e lp , we' d be more th a n happy to c o n s id e r a h a n d ic a p p e r.

3.

More in fo r m a tio n I can share w ith th e c o m p t r o lle r .
th e f u t u r e .

6.

Sounds l i k e a g re a t b e g in n in g .
q u e s tio n n a ir e .

7.

As a n u r s in g home w ith o n ly one perso n in th e o f f i c e , th e o n ly o th e r t h in g
I can see w ould be k itc h e n h e lp .
A ls o , we are a u n io n shop and a l l openin gs
have t o be p o s te d .
I t i s hard f o r me t o see how a handicapped person c o u ld
ta k e f u l l c a re o f 10 p a t ie n t s .

8.

Sm all company. When we h ir e everyone s t a r t s
d i f f i c u l t f o r a h a n d ic a p p e r.

9.

Get some in p u t from u n io n s .

10.

q u a li f i e d .

Very in te r e s t e d f o r

S o rry we c o u ld n 't be more h e lp f u l w ith th e

a t t he b o tto m .

I t would be

The n a tu re o f th e o p e ra tio n o f th e road com m ission i s such t h a t
i t in v o lv e s
m o s tly t r u c k d r iv i n g , l o t s o f p h y s ic a l work w ith heavy l i f t i n g o r o p e ra tio n
o f heavy equipm ent - a lo n g w ith b e in g o u td o o rs in a l l k in d s o f w e a th e r.
It
is f e l t t o be n o t v e ry co n d u cive work f o r handicapped in d iv id u a ls .

1 25

Company s iz e 101-500 em ployees:
1.

Comments . . .

I cannot a d e q u a te ly answer w ith o u t know ing e x te n t o f h a n dica p under
c o n s id e r a tio n .

2.

T h is su rve y i s n o t a p p ro p ria te f o r most e d u c a tio n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s .
The
h i r i n g o f a handicapped person w ould have t o be e v a lu a te d on an in d iv id u a l
b a s is dependent upon th e s p e c if ic jo b ( s ) th e person had a p p lie d f o r .
The
q u e s tio n s c o u ld b e t t e r be answered i f a llo w e d more f l e x i b i l i t y in term s o f
th e answ ers.

3.

In p a s t y e a rs , 116 t o 110 em ployees.

4.

A l l o f th e p e o p le t h a t we have h ir e d t h a t a re handicapped have s im p ly
w a lk - in s o f f th e s t r e e t who a p p lie d f o r a jo b l i k e anyone e ls e w o u ld .
do have c e r t a in jo b s t h a t can be p e rfo rm e d by h a n d ic a p p e rs .

5.

When in a h i r i n g mode - one o r two y e a rs — w ould l i k e someone to a n a lyze
work s i t e and h e lp i d e n t i f y jo b s h a n d ica p p e rs can do.

6.

I f th e e x p e r tis e was a v a ila b le , i t

7.

I t h in k i t

8.

Step in th e r i g h t d ir e c t io n - p r e p a rin g f o r th e f u t u r e .

9.

New company. Have many p e o p le l a i d - o f f , b u t in th e f u t u r e , m ig h t
in te r e s t e d when we know what o u r needs a re .

L ittle

o r no t u r n - o v e r .
been
We

would be good f o r a l l n u rs in g homes.

i s g re a t t h a t you work on th e s e k in d s o f program s.

10.

I t h in k th e program i s a good id e a .

11.

We a re n o t h i r i n g - have p e o p le on l a y - o f f .

Company s iz e o v e r 500 em ployees:

be

Comments . . .

1.

Q u e s tio n n a ire tu rn e d o u t q u it e w e l l ! !

2.

Q u e s tio n n a ire i s to o lo n g .

3.

U n -s te re o ty p e p e o p le .

4.

MESC i s n o t r e f e r r in g h a n d ic a p p e rs .

5.

I w ould l i k e to com plim ent you on yo u r work w ith th e han dica pped .
Through
i t I can fo rs e e a u s e fu l o r g a n iz a tio n to a id e m plo yers in t h e i r r e c ru itm e n t
efforts.
U n fo r tu n a te ly , th e in fo r m a tio n I can o f f e r a t t h i s tim e is r a th e r
l i m i t e d . ____________ f in d s i t s e l f in a c r ip p l in g economic e n v iro n m e n t.
As
as r e s u lt , o u r r e c ru itm e n t e f f o r t s s in c e 1976 and beyond have been v i r t u a l l y
n o n - e x is ta n t.
L o o kin g in t o th e f u t u r e , i t appears t h a t , due to th e p re s e n t
number o f l a y - o f f s , o u r r e c ru itm e n t o f new a p p lic a n ts w i l l c o n tin u e t o be very
lim ite d .
Once a g a in , I commend you on yo u r w o rk.

Problem s are a t t i t u d i n a l .

126

APPENDIX G
Calhoun

County Employment
1970-1980

P ro file

F i g u r e s t a k e n f r o m t h e 1 9 7 0 and 1 9 8 0 c e n s u s
o b ta in e d th ro u g h the M ichigan Department o f
t a t i o n and t h e M i c h i g a n E m p l o y m e n t S e c u r i t y
S t a t i s t i c a l Department.

d a t a and
R e h a b ili­
Commission

CALHOUN COUNTY EMPLOYMENT PROFILE
1970-80
1970 POPULATION, CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE
TOTAL EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT DATA

DESCRIPTION

NUMBER

Total Calhoun County area census
for 1970

180,129

Total population between ages 16-64

123,148

PERCENT

Total population rate, ages 16-64
Total civilian labor force, ages 16-64

68.36%
72,898

Total labor force participation rate
Total employment

59.4%
69,086

Unemployment

3,812

Unemployment rate

5.2%

Data taken from the Affirmative Action Information Report. Spring,
1981, prepared by the Michigan Employment Security Commission,
Statistical Division, Detroit, Michigan.

1970 CENSUS OF POPULATION STATUS
OF
DISABLED OR HANDICAPPED PERSONS 16 TO 64 YEARS OF AGE
(N=12,650)

DESCRIPTION

NUMBER

Total population, ages 16-64

123,148

PERCENT

Total population disabled, ages 16-64

12,650

10.27%

Total population employed, ages 16-64

5,834

46.1%

Total population unemployed, ages 16-64

490-^
^

Population not in the labor force, but
able to work

2,043*^

Population not in the labor force, and
unable to work

4,283

Total Job Service (Battle Creek) appli­
cants on file for Handicapped, as of
January, 1981

127

467

20.02%

33.85%

To determine the unemployment rate for the disabled population,
it is necessary to subtract the population not in the labor force and
unable to work (4,283) from the total disabled population, ages 16-64
(12,650), leaving a potential labor force of 8,367 people able to work.
The actual employment rate becomes 69.7 percent, leaving an unemployment
rate of 30.3 percent.
The unemployment rate for nondisabled people in the work force
was 5.2 percent; for the disabled people in the work force it was
30.3 percent.

1970 ADJUSTED STATUS OF
DISABLED OR HANDICAPPED PERSONS
16-64 YEARS OF AGE
(N=12,650)

DESCRIPTION

NUMBER

Total disabled population, ages 16-64

12,650

Disabled population unable to work and
not in the labor force

4,283

Total non-participation in labor force

PERCENT

33.85%

Total disabled population, ages 16-64
employed

5,834

Total disabled population unemployed
and not in labor force but able to work

2,533

Total disabled population able to work

8,367

Total disabled employment rate

69.7%

Disabled unemployment rate

30.3%

128

BI BLI OGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berkley Planning A sso ciates.
A Study r f
Accommodations
P r o v i d e d t o H a n d i c a p p e d E m p l o y e e s by F e d e r a l C o n t r a c ­
tors.
Prepared f o r :
U. S . D e p a r t m e n t o f L a b o r ,
Employment S t a n d a r d s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 1982, pp. 4 1 - 4 4 .
Betz,

E; W e i s s , D. J . ; D a v i s , R. V . ; E n g l a n d , W. G . ; and
L o fq u is t,
L .H .,
S e v e n Y e a r s o f R e s e a r c h on W o r k
A djustm ent.
Studies
in
Vocational
R e h a b ilita tio n ,
U n i v e r s i t y o f M i n n e s t o a , 1966.

Borg,

W alter R.,
a nd G a i l ,
M e r e d i t h D.
E d u c a t i o n a l ReSearch:
An I n t r o d u c t i o n .
3 r d e d i t i o n , Longman ,
Inc.
New Y o r k , 1 9 ? 9 .

C raft,
J a me s A . ;
Benecki,
Thomas 3 . ;
S h k o p , Y e t z c h a k M.
"Who H i r e s
the S e rio u s ly
Handicapped?"
In d u stria l
R e la tio n s.
Vol.
19, no.
1 (W inter,
1980).
P u b li­
c a t i o n i s Research N o t e , pp. 9 4 -9 9 .
G etty,
R obert.
"B u sine ss
Finds P r o f i t
in
D isa b le d ."
N a tio n 's B u sin e ss.
V o l.
( A u gust, 1981).
G old,

M. W. " M e e t i n g t h e N e e d s o f
Paper p re se n te d to the N a tio n a l
ference
on V o c a t i o n a l
Education.
O c t o b e r 1, 1976.

H irin g
the
69, no.
7,

the H andicapped."
B i c e n t e n n i a l Con­
M inneapolis,
MN,

H a b e r , L . D.
D i s a b i l i t y Work and In c o m e M
Prevelance o f D i s a b i l i t y !
R e port No. ~ 2
S e c u r i t y Survey o f th e D i s a b l e d ,
1966.
D.C.:
U nited S ta te s Department o f H e a lth ,
and W e l f a r e , SSA, O f f i c e o f R e s e a r c h a nd
1968.

aintenance:
(rom S o c i a l
Washington,
Education,
S ta tis tic s ,

H a r k n e s s , C h a r l e s A.
" N o n d e b i l i t a t i n g D i s e a s e s and I n d u s ­
t r i a l H irin g P ra c tic e s ."
T he V o c a t i o n a l G u i d a n c e
Q u arterly.
V o l . 2 0 , n o . 2 , T S e p t e m b e r , \ 9 l 1 ) . pp o l TT.
H illw a y,
The

Tyrus.
R iverside

I n tr o d u c t io n to Research.
P r e s s , 1956 , p . 5 .

1 29

Cambridge:

1 30
Holmes,
Robert
A.
"W hat's
s io n a ls
in
the 80 ' s?"
( June, 1980), p .83.
Hu man

Ahead
for
Personnel P ro fe s ­
Personnel A d m in is tr a tio n .

Resources
C enter.
"Enhancing E m p lo y a b ility
of
Handicapped I n d i v i d u a l s . "
Unpublished paper authored
b y Hu ma n R e s o u r c e s C e n t e r .
A lb e rtso n ,
NY, 1 9 8 2 .

K a u f f m a n , 3 . M . , a nd P a y n e , J . S.
(Eds.)
Mental R e ta rd £ t i_o nj _
I n t r o d u c t i o n and P e r s o n a l P e r s p e c t i v e s ,
ToFumTaTTsT" O h i o l
E T h a rle s E. M e r r i l l , 1 9 7 3 .
K o e s t l e r , F . A.
Jobs f o r Handicapped P e rs o n s :
A New E r a
in C i v i l R ig h t s .
P ublic
A ffa irs
Pamphlet
No.
557.
D istrib u te d
by P r e s i d e n t ' s
Committee
on E m p l o y m e n t
o f th e H a n d ica p p e d , W a sh in g to n , D . C . , 1978.
K o k a s k a , C.
"Recent Expansions in Careers f o r the
capped."
T h re s h o ld s in Secondary E d u c a tio n ,
pp. 14-15.
K re jcie ,
Robert V .,
a n d M o r g a n , D a r y l e W.
Sample S i z e
for
Research A c t i v i t i e s . "
and P s y c h o l o g i c a l M e a s u r e m e n t .
V o l.
1 ^ 7 ( 5 ) , p p . £>07-61 0 .
Levitan,
S. A . ,
B a ltim ore :
Lin,

a nd T a g g a r t ,
R.
The J o h n H o p k i n s

Handi­
1976,

"D eterm ining
E ducational
30 ( A u t u m n ,

Jobs f o r t h e D i s a b l e d .
U n i v e r s i t y "Press',
1977.

L e s l i e Y.
"T h is M onth."
The R e s e a r c h N e w s .
D iv i­
sio n
o f R e s e a r c h D e v e l o p m e n t and A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,
U n iv e rs ity of
M ichigan,
V o l.
XX X II,
no.1 1 -1 2 ,
( N o v e m b e r/D e c e m b e r, 1 9 8 1 ) , p. 3.

M ainstream , I n c o r p o r a t e d .
"The F e d e r a l C o n t r a c t o r ' s
to
Work e r s w i t h
H a n d ica p s."
W a sh in g to n ,
M a rtin ,
E.
Trends
tio n a l

Guide
D .C .

"In d iv id u a lis m
and B e h a v i o r i s m
as F u t u r e
in
Educating
Handicapped C h il d r e n . "
ExcepC h ild re n .
(S eptem ber, 1 9 7 2 ), pp. 517-$25 .

M ic h ig a n Employment S e c u r i t y Commission.
Calhoun
B a ttle
Creek,
MI.
A p ril,
1978-March,
1980
com piled from a p p l i c a n t f i l e s .

County,
figures

M ithaug,
D e n n i s E.
"N e g a tiv e Employer A t t i t u d e s
Toward
H ir in g the Handicapped:
Fact or F i c t i o n ? "
Journal
o f Contem porary Business .
V o l.
8 , no.
4,
1961 .

131
P e te rs o n , Donald J.
" P a v i n g t h e Way f o r H i r i n g t h e H a n d ­
ic a p p e d ."
Personnel.
V o l. 38, no. 2.
( M a r c h / A p r i 1,
1981 ) , p p . 4 3 - 5 2 .
P re sid e n t's
Committee
on
Employment
of
the
Handicapped
and t h e A m e r i c a n M u t u a l I n s u r a n c e A l l i a n c e o f C h i c ­
ago.
Pamphlet p u b lis h e d ,
"H irin g
the
Handicapped:
F a c t s and M y t h s . "
S ackstein,
Ed.
"S e lf-R e lia n ce
and t h e R i g h t
to
W ork."
UNESCO C o u r i e r .
V o l.
34.
P u b lish e d
b y UNESCO,
P lace
de f o n t e r o u y ,
P a ris ,
France.
(Septem ber,
1980), pp. 28-30 .
State

of M ichigan,
^ 981 ^

O ffice

of

C iv il

R ights.

Annual

Report,

T a u s i g , D.
" T h e P a r t i c i p a t i o n by t h e D i s a b l e d i n t h e
Secondary Labor M a r k e t."
Unpublished s tu d e n t paper,
In s titu te
for
U r b a n and R e g i o n a l
P lanning,
U niver­
s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a a t B e r k l e y , 1972.
T o ffle r,
A lvin .
1970.

Future

Shock.

New

York:

Random

Urban

In s titu te ,
Report of
Study.
Washing to n b. £ . :
pp. 292-329.

U.

S.

B u re a u o f C e n s u s , Census o f P o p u l a t i o n .
P re sid e n t's
Committee
on E m p l o y m e n t
of the
Handicapped,
"Facts
About Handicapped P e o p le ."
P a m p h l e t b a s e d on O n s e t
of D is a b ility
( R e p o r t N o . 18 f r o m S o c i a l S e c u r J t y
Survey
o f the D is a b le d ,
1966,
DHEW P u b l i c a t i o n
No.
SSA 7 2 —1 1 7 1 3 ; and P e r s o n s W i t h Wor k D i s a b i l i t y ( F i n a l
P ro je ct
PC ( 2 ) - 6 C .
1 9 7 0 Su b j e c t
fteports,
1 973 .

U.

S.

D e p a r t m e n t o f H e a l t h and Human S e r v i c e s , S o c i a l S e c ­
u rity
A d m in istra tio n .
Wor k D i s a b i l i t y i n t h e U n i t e d
S tates:
A C hartbook .
U. S. Government P r i n t i n g
0 1 f i c e , W a shington, b . C . , 1980.

Uthe,

E lain e
F.
tu n itie s for
E d ucation ."

W a lt z , Ann.
force ."
10, no.
W o l f e , B. L .
M onthly

Comprehensive S e rv ic e
The U r b a n I n s t i t u t e ,

House,

Needs
1975 ,

"Assessment o f the O c c u p a tio n a l Oppor­
the P h y 's ic a lly Handicapped in V o c a tio n a l
U n iv e r s it y o f Kentucky.

" I n t e g r a t i n g D i s a b l e d W orkers I n t o Your
P u b l i c P e r s o n n e l Management J o u r n a l .
4.
( W in t e r , 1981j , p. 4 l2 -4 1 7 .
" How t h e D i s a b l e d F a r e
Labor Review,
1980,

Work­
Vol.

in the Labor M a rk e t."
103(a),
pp.
48-52.