A podcast at the Harvard Business Review continues the theme of this newly-discovered species of human, the disabled worker.
In the podcast, Alison Beard interviews Luisa Alemany, an associate professor at London Business School, about her research on companies hiring employees with disabilities. Alemany explains that people are often initially hesitant to hire those with disabilities due to a lack of knowledge, but find after working with them that there is nothing to fear. However, the challenge is in how to recruit them, since normal hiring processes often exclude those with disabilities from applying.
Alemany discusses the many benefits companies see from hiring people with disabilities. These employees can offer unique skills suited to particular jobs, such as security guards in wheelchairs who are adept at spotting pickpockets, or call center workers who are extra empathetic with customers. Her survey of 57 HR executives found that hiring those with disabilities improves workplace culture - the majority reported better internal culture, psychological safety, and teamwork. Moreover, the presence of disabled employees draws in customers who want to support the company's social mission, even if they don't pay more for its products. It also appeals to job seekers, especially progressive millennials.
Alemany notes that leaders' hesitations often come from simply lacking knowledge about disabilities. But associations assisting the disabled community can provide guidance on recruitment and integration. She advises taking practical steps like training managers, providing accommodations, and seeking experts' help as you would with any new business endeavor. Alemany points out that seeing disabilities as rare is inaccurate - 20% of the working age population has them, and they can strike anyone at any time. Progress is happening both through small companies founded by disabled entrepreneurs, and large firms implementing diversity efforts. But there remains untapped potential, even as social impact and ESG initiatives gain prominence. Ultimately, disabilities are a source of competitive advantage that more companies should recognize.
But … if the business leaders think this way, why is disabled unemployment so high?
The podcast promotes the idea that companies should hire people with disabilities as an untapped source of competitive advantage and profit maximization. Whilst seemingly altruistic, this argument is fundamentally rooted in capitalist ideology that prioritizes profits over people. A proper critique would point out that this commodifies disabled workers, viewing them only in terms of their economic utility to employers. Their value stems from being a source of specialized labor and PR for companies to appear socially conscious, not from their humanity.
The podcast fails to challenge the ableist assumptions of capitalism that discriminate against disabled people and exclude them from the workforce in the first place. The onus is placed on disabled workers to prove they can be profitable inputs to production, rather than critiquing the system that disables them socially and materially. Whilst advocating their employment, the podcast does not question the exploitation of these workers under capitalism like any other. There is no discussion of disabling working conditions, pay equity, accessibility needs, reasonable accommodations, and other labour issues.
A more human perspective on the issue would emphasize dismantling the root economic structures that marginalize disabled people, rather than simply trying to fit them into an inherently exploitative capitalist workforce. Rather than seeing disabled employees as a way for companies to gain a competitive edge, the goal should be fulfilling their human need for meaningful employment and social inclusion. This requires moving beyond capitalistic incentives and reimagining a society oriented toward human welfare, access, and empowerment. The podcast overlooks these deeper structural critiques.
The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
This is why I have such a deep hatred of HBR now. After working there and trying to point this out about their content over and over again, especially when it comes to some of the vile, dehumanizing commoditization of autistic people they have committed for decades, I left with a burning desire to expose them and to see their prestige and credibility destroyed. Every attempt I made to enlighten management about how it's not okay to view humans as either profitable or not profitable investment units was met with resistance or acknowledgement that while I was certainly correct, nothing could be done because it just is the way it is. And then they let me go, two months into my new contract after being there nearly a year and a half, a disabled autistic agender person who fled the country to keep my loved ones and myself safe. They destabilized an entire trans, queer, and disabled family, but have the audacity to sell themselves as the global leaders in DEI and leadership thinking and training to international businesses. It's all lies and hypocrisy though. I had told them that I didn't feel comfortable with the project I was working on for these reasons and that it felt very imperialist to me, to presume they have what the world wants and needs. Probably why they let me go, but also seems likely it was because I was struggling so hard to give them full time work due to my stroke and said I wanted to work part time and they let me go shortly after that. Fuck HBR.
This is why I have such a deep hatred of HBR now. After working there and trying to point this out about their content over and over again, especially when it comes to some of the vile, dehumanizing commoditization of autistic people they have committed for decades, I left with a burning desire to expose them and to see their prestige and credibility destroyed. Every attempt I made to enlighten management about how it's not okay to view humans as either profitable or not profitable investment units was met with resistance or acknowledgement that while I was certainly correct, nothing could be done because it just is the way it is. And then they let me go, two months into my new contract after being there nearly a year and a half, a disabled autistic agender person who fled the country to keep my loved ones and myself safe. They destabilized an entire trans, queer, and disabled family, but have the audacity to sell themselves as the global leaders in DEI and leadership thinking and training to international businesses. It's all lies and hypocrisy though. I had told them that I didn't feel comfortable with the project I was working on for these reasons and that it felt very imperialist to me, to presume they have what the world wants and needs. Probably why they let me go, but also seems likely it was because I was struggling so hard to give them full time work due to my stroke and said I wanted to work part time and they let me go shortly after that. Fuck HBR.
So sorry this happened to you 😢
💔💚