Skip to main content

National Inquiry on Employment and Disability Interim Report: chapter 5

  • Back to contents
  • National Inquiry on Employment and Disability
    Interim Report:

    5. Recruitment in the open workplace


    What government-funded employment services are available to people
    with disability?

    5.2.1 Referrals to appropriate employment services.

    5.2.2 Disability Open Employment Services (DOES)

    (a) Capped places in DOES.

    Transition to case based funding (CBF)

    5.2.3 Job Network (JN)

    Job Network and the DEWR DSP Pilot

    Job Network and people with mental illness.

    5.2.4 Commonwealth Rehabilitation Services Australia (CRS)

    5.2.5 Personal Support Program (PSP)

    5.2.6 Disability Recruitment Coordinator

    5.2.7 Funding for employment services.

    5.2.8 Coordination of services.

    5.2.9 Specific disability employment specialists.

    People with mental illness.

    People who are Deaf and hearing impaired

    Blind and visually impaired people

    Employment services for graduates

    How might private recruitment agencies assist people with disability?

    What are some of the recruitment strategies of large employers?

    How might the job selection process be improved for people with

    5.5.1 Disclosure of disability

    Ensuring appropriate selection criteria

    Discrimination in selection processes

    Accessibility of the selection process

    Self-employment and the New Enterprise Incentive Scheme (NEIS)


    5.1  Introduction

    This section of the Interim Report summarises the main issues raised
    in submissions which relate to the job search phase of employment.
    Those issues include:

    1.  the
    main government-funded services available to assist people with disability
    to find a job;

    2.  the
    primary concerns regarding changes to the government-funded employment
    services as announced in the 2005 Commonwealth Budget;[1]

    3.  the
    role of private recruitment agencies;

    4.  the
    recruitment strategies of three large employers;

    5.  potential
    problems encountered in the job selection process; and

    6.  the
    possibilities offered by self-employment.

    What government-funded employment services are available to people
    with disability?

    The Inquiry received a large number of submissions regarding access
    and improvements to certain government-funded employment services. The
    number of submissions reflects both the importance of these services
    (from the employer, employee and government perspectives) and the concern
    about changes announced in the Commonwealth 2005-06 Budget.

    The following text discusses those services that were raised most often
    in the submissions to the Inquiry. For a more general description of
    Commonwealth government-funded services see the Inquiry's Issues Paper

    Employment services can provide a vital service to many people with
    disability. One employment agency, Job Futures, describes the model
    within which they work as follows:

    Job Futures supports an employment services
    model for people with a disability that:

    • <>offers
      financial security to people who are not in work, and appropriate
      opportunities and incentives for people who can work to move into
    • promotes
      a rapid return to work where possible, and backs that expectation
      with services that build capacity, place people in the right jobs,
      and support both clients and employers to ensure people get a secure
      foothold in the labour market;
    • recognises
      the diversity of people's individual needs and outcomes, without assuming
      that some people can't work because of the type of disability they
      have or the degree of disability;
    • recognises the diversity of people's lives and circumstances;
    • provides tailored, flexible services to support people to return
      to work;
    • matches services to the client rather than clients to the services;
    • leads to increased
      social participation, such as work readiness activity, more social
      connection or increased contribution to the community.[3]

    There are a variety of different types of employment services available
    to people with disability. This section of the report briefly addresses
    the following:

    Referrals to appropriate employment services

    Disability Open Employment Services (DOES)

    Job Network employment services (JN)

    Commonwealth Rehabilitation Services (CRS)

    Personal Support Program (PSP)

    Funding for employment services

    Coordination between employment services and other support

    Specific disability employment specialists.

    Referrals to appropriate employment services

    The first stop for many people with disability who are out of work
    is Centrelink, which provides the Disability Support Pension (DSP) or
    other relevant welfare support. Centrelink will generally conduct an
    assessment of a person's abilities and then refer that person to what
    is believed to be the most appropriate agency to assist in finding employment.

    Some submissions expressed concern about this referral processes. For
    example, Stepping Stone Clubhouse told the Inquiry that they often receive
    inappropriate referrals from Centrelink.[4]
    The Disability Council of NSW also note that significant numbers of
    inappropriate referrals are made and that this contributes to substantial
    delays for people with disability:

    Timeliness is key to the success of supports offered to jobseekers.
    The longer a person with disability is out of the workforce the lower
    their chances are of successfully re-entering the workforce. The emphasis
    needs to be placed on swift and effective early intervention, involving
    referral to the most appropriate employment support provider with
    capacity to start the service immediately, or rehabilitation.[5]

    Scope Employment questioned whether Centrelink is the best place for
    people with disability to receive referrals, as people with disability
    often view Centrelink in a negative light.[6]

    In the May 2005 Budget, the government allocated funding to develop
    a 'high quality information technology link to provide streamlined servicing
    to job seekers'. This system is intended to:

    link all service providers, increasing opportunities for job seekers
    to have the provider of their choice and enabling more effective monitoring
    service delivery standards . [and] will allow rapid referral to, and
    between, appropriate employment assistance services and work capacity

    The Budget also announced the introduction of new 'Comprehensive Work
    Capacity Assessments' to 'determine medical impairment, work capacity,
    intervention needs and referral options.'[8]

    Further, the Budget announced that from1 July 2005, people on the Disability
    Support Pension can directly approach Job Network members whether or not they have a Centrelink

    Some submissions to the Inquiry respond positively to the freedom to
    directly access a Job Network or Disability Open Employment Service
    provider. For example the NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre
    (DDLC) argues that the new system will assist in the streamlining and
    integration of existing arrangements, reduce the administrative load
    and enable more effective assessment of demand.[10]

    Others have expressed concern that Job Network agencies are insufficiently
    trained to meet the needs of a job seeker with disability, and therefore
    self referral to such agencies may not be in the best interests of the
    For example, DEAC told the Inquiry that:

    We believe that Job Network staff are ill equipped to service clients
    with complex needs. In our view what is needed are highly specialised
    case managers with skills and experience in servicing people with
    complex need i.e. ABI, psychiatric disability, MS etc.[12]

    Disability Open Employment Services (DOES)

    The ACE National Network, a peak body representing disability employment
    services across the country, describes the role of DOES as follows:

    Disability Employment Services provide a range of services
    to jobseekers with disabilities in order to prepare them to return to

    • Vocational guidance and
    • Support in managing
      disability-related issues before and after starting work
    • On-the-job support to
      assist in settling into a new job
    • Off-site
      support for those who do not disclose their disability

    They also provide a range of services to employers including;

    • Recruitment and selection
    • On-the-job training
      with new employees
    • Follow-up and back-up
    • Re-training of employees
      should they move from one duty to another or if a new skill is required
    • Advice and training
      to co-workers about issues related to employing people with disabilities.[13]

    Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR)
    figures indicate that as at January 2005, there were 227 organisations
    across Australia providing DOES services from 324 outlets. Further, DOES
    agencies assist approximately 46,000 people with disability each year.[14]

    The DOES program was transferred from the Department
    of Family and Community Services (FaCS) to DEWR in early 2005. From
    1 July 2006, the Commonwealth Budget allows for funding for an additional
    21,000 DOES places over three years (see further below).

    It is difficult to assess the effectiveness of DOES
    programs. FaCS reports on DOES outcomes have consistently shown that
    around 50 per cent of service users are in jobs, and in 2001-02, 39
    per cent of those people were working more than 30 hours a week.[15] However, ACOSS recently
    estimated that there is a less than 20 per cent chance that an average
    DSP recipient would obtain ongoing fulltime employment in a mainstream
    job within twelve months of participating in an employment program.[16]

    Some submissions to the Inquiry noted that these services
    have considerable benefits, including specialist knowledge of disability
    related issues and access to wage subsidies and workplace modifications.[17]

    Others expressed a number of concerns about the manner
    in which the DOES program is funded. In particular, there was concern

    (a)  The cap on
    Commonwealth funded places in DOES; and

    (b)   The transition to a Case Based Funding (CBF) model.

    Capped places in DOES

    Several submissions suggest that the cap on the number of places available
    in DOES leads to unmet needs and long waiting lists.[18]

    ... service providers [are forced] to turn away some job seekers
    or make them wait months for a service. Sitting on a long waiting
    list - particularly for people who face other barriers to employment
    - is a significant discouragement.[19]

    Various organisations and employment services argued that the cap should
    be removed.[20]
    For example, the Brotherhood of St Laurence recommended:

    more places in disability open employment services, preferably by
    removing the funding appropriation cap. This could be done administratively
    or by amending the Disability Services Act 1986 to introduce an entitlement
    to employment service job assistance to the current target group (those
    people with permanent disabilities who need ongoing support to achieve
    sustainable open employment).[21]

    Others asked for an overall increase in investment into DOES.[22]

    As noted above, the May 2005 Budget provides funding for an additional
    21,000 places in DOES for three years starting from 1 July 2006.

    17,000 of those places are for people with disability
    who, from 1 July 2006:

    (a)    are
    assessed to have a capacity to work between 15 and 29 hours per week
    at award wages; and

    (b)   do
    not need ongoing assistance for more than two years.

    These people will have part-time work obligations
    under the new welfare reforms (and will receive the Newstart Allowance). Although
    there is an allocation for an extra 17,000 DOES places, funding will
    be provided on a demand-driven (as opposed to capped) basis.

    The extra funding for the remaining 4,000 places are
    for people who:

    (a)    do
    not have participation requirements;

    (b)   need
    support for more than two years; or

    (c)    cannot
    work at award wages.[23]

    These places will be capped. Thus the cap on
    the provision of DOES services remains for those capable of working
    under 15 hours per week and who therefore receive the DSP. Consequently,
    if a service has reached the limit of DSP clients for which it is contracted
    to provide services, it either has to service that person out of its
    own funds or turn the client away.

    (b) Transition to case based funding

    From 1 July 2005 all agencies providing DOES to new clients will be
    funded by the government through a case-based funding (CBF) model rather
    than 'block' funding.

    This means that rather than general funding allocated on the basis
    of the number of DOES places allocated to a particular agency, the funding
    will vary depending on the number of persons serviced by that agency,
    the assessed needs of each person and the outcomes achieved by the agency.[24]

    The idea behind the transition to case based funding for DOES is that
    the funding will better reflect the individual needs of the clients.
    For example, an agency servicing a person with higher needs will receive
    a higher level of funding.

    Several submissions to the Inquiry suggest that, in principle, a move
    to a funding model that focuses on the varying needs of job seekers
    should lead to improvements in the services provided. [25]

    However, submissions also suggest that while an individualised assessment
    is a good idea in principle, the restrictions within DEWR's proposed
    case based funding model will mean that the needs of some groups will
    not be met.

    For example the NSW Council for Intellectual Disability (NSW CID) states
    that while the CBF Model is a positive step toward focusing on a person's
    individual requirements, the real costs of providing an appropriate
    employment service for a person with an intellectual disability is likely
    to be greater than the highest funding band available under the CBF
    NSW CID further argues that the model has limited funding for people
    whose initial placements do not work out.[27]

    ACROD suggests that there may be similar concerns for people with a
    psychiatric disability and recommends that:

    The structure and levels of funding for employment assistance programs
    should be reviewed to ensure that they do not unintentionally create
    disincentives to servicing particular disability groups.[28]

    Other submissions expressed concern about the operational impact of
    case based funding for DOES. For example, the Disability Services Commission
    of Western Australia suggests that the movement to case based funding
    has led to a significant range of uncertainties for service providers
    which impact on their capacity to deliver quality services to people
    with disability.[29]

    ACROD argues that the move to case based funding supports an argument
    for reducing the cap on all disability open employment services,
    as the system reduces financial risk to government:

    ... because, under that system, fees are paid to service providers
    only on the basis of services delivered and employment outcomes achieved.
    Unfilled places attract no payments.[30]

    Job Network (JN)

    Job Network is a national network of community and private organisations
    contracted by the Federal Government to find jobs for unemployed people.

    In the past, Job Network members provided employment services to people
    with disability who did not have support needs for more than
    26 weeks after getting a job and DOES provided employment services to
    those who did have ongoing support needs.[31]
    Some Job Network members had staff with speciality disability training
    and others did not.

    Changes announced in the Commonwealth Budget mean that the boundaries
    between Disability Open Employment Services and Job Network agencies
    will be less clear. As discussed above, from 1 July 2005, Job Network
    agencies can directly register any job seeker, including those who are
    on the Disability Support Pension and who have ongoing needs. DEWR hopes
    to develop a simplified process of cross referral between agencies in
    the event that Job Network is not the most appropriate place for a job

    Some submissions suggested that because Job Network places are funded
    according to successful job placement outcomes, there is less incentive
    to focus on clients with higher needs.[32] For example,
    the Australian National Organisation of the Unemployed state that:

    The Star Rating performance assessment encourages Job Network members
    to focus on easy to place job seekers. The more difficult clients
    are either churned through a series of activities programmes which
    attract lucrative government fees, or are simply consigned to the
    too hard basket.[33]

    Job Futures suggested that:

    There is currently no additional funding under Job Network to place
    people with a disability which may result in some providers viewing
    people with a disability as a 'higher cost' employment outcome.[34]

    Furthermore, the episodic nature of some disabilities is not reflected
    in Job Network outcomes. Consequently, a person with disability whose
    capacity to work fluctuates may be perceived as a client who is harder
    to place and receive a reduced service.[35]

    The Government announced funding for an additional 31,700 places in
    Job Network over three years starting 1 July 2006. These places will
    be for people with disability who have been assessed with a work capacity
    for 15-29 hours a week.[36]

    Job Network and the DEWR DSP Pilot

    In October 2004, DEWR published the initial results of a trial conducted
    to explore strategies to engage DSP recipients with Job Network services.[37]

    The pilot involved 12 disability specialist
    Job Network providers in 37 sites across Australia. They were required
    to develop marketing and communication strategies to encourage eligible
    DSP recipients to approach a Job Network member for employment assistance
    and to liaise, network and engage with employers.[38]

    Over 1,100 job
    seekers registered their interest in participating in the pilot study.
    Eight hundred of these people were eligible for the services and 671
    applicants commenced the program, receiving immediate access to the
    highest level of assistance available. Thirty six percent of those participants
    remaining on the program were successfully placed in employment or education.
    Out of all job seekers placed, 39 per cent were in casual employment,
    31 per cent were in part-time positions, 22 percent were in full-time
    employment, and 8 percent had entered into education.[39]

    Amongst other things, the Pilot results indicate that DSP recipients
    are more likely to engage with Job Network when they are directly approached
    and assisted in navigating the services.[40]

    While the Pilot indicates the potential of Job Network to service DSP
    recipients, there have been some criticisms of the Pilot. In particular
    there is concern that the Job Network trial participants
    were not reflective of Job Network members generally because they were
    specialist services. The suggestion is that while there would be a very
    steep learning curve for many Job Network providers, DOES already have
    the necessary skills and it therefore makes little sense to divert people
    with disability to Job Network.[41]

    Job Network and people with mental illness

    A number of submissions expressed concern about the adequacy of Job
    Network services for people with mental illness. For example, the Network
    for Carers of People with a Mental Illness suggest that:

    • Case loads are too high for provision of an effective service. Consequently
      contact times and ability to provide one-on-one post-placement support
      are reduced.
    • Support is focussed around a three month and six month outcome period,
      making it inflexible in relation to the episodic nature of mental illness.
    • There may be no formal training or recruitment requirements regarding
      knowledge of mental health.
    • There is no structure for family involvement in services.[42]

    UnitingCare and Scope Victoria suggest that Job Network members require
    further training in order to work effectively with clients with mental

    Commonwealth Rehabilitation Services
    Australia (CRS)

    As discussed in
    Chapter 6, whereas Job Network services are intended to assist those
    people with disability who do not have support needs for more than 26
    weeks, and DOES are intended to assist those people who do have ongoing
    support needs, Commonwealth Rehabilitation Services Australia (CRS)
    provides vocational, rehabilitation and employment assistance to people
    disability who acquire an injury, medical condition or specific disability
    and require rehabilitation assistance to get back into work. These people
    may have needs both on a preliminary and ongoing basis. [44]

    Some of the services provided by CRS include:

    • assessment of the person's abilities and their vocational, physical
      or psychological needs;
    • disability management strategies;
    • advice and counselling on employment options;
    • development of a persons' work related skills and abilities;
    • increasing participant motivation through professional motivational
    • on-the-job assessment, workplace training and job search training
    • assistance with job redesign, alternative duties or workplace modifications;
    • a client supported in the workplace for up to three months
    • career planning
      sessions (funded by Department of Education, Science and Training
      - DEST).[45]

    The Commonwealth government announced funding for an additional 42,000
    vocational rehabilitation places over three years from 1 July 2006.
    It is not clear how much of that funding will go to CRS in particular.[46]

     5.2.5 Personal Support Program (PSP)

    The Personal Support Program (PSP) is intended to bridge the gap between
    crisis assistance and employment assistance programs. It provides help
    to people whose non-vocational barriers (such as mental health issues,
    drug or gambling problems, homelessness or social isolation) prevent
    them from getting a job or benefiting from Job Network or other employment
    assistance services.[47]

    The program is open to people of workforce age receiving income support
    (including the DSP), as well as those aged 15-20 who do not receive
    any payment but are registered as job seekers with Centrelink. Eligibility
    for the PSP is assessed by Centrelink. The program is funded to assist
    45,000 participants in 2004-05.[48]

    The Federal Government currently funds
    148 organisations covering 600 sites across Australia to deliver PSP
    services. Of the 600 Australian sites, 230
    are non-metropolitan sites. There are approximately 60 sites
    (10%) registered as having a speciality in mental health and 10 sites
    registered as having a speciality in physical/intellectual disabilities.

    Services provided by the PSP can include assessment (such as psychological
    assessment or functional capacity assessment), counselling (general
    counselling, or for specific issues such as grief counselling), referral
    and advocacy (linking participants into their community and accessing
    services), practical support (such as assistance to find stable housing
    or with transport) and development of personal skills (for example anger
    management or self-esteem training).

    Several submissions suggest that this is a useful program for those
    with multiple barriers to workforce participation, particularly those
    with a mental illness. However its effectiveness is limited by inadequate
    funding and poor links with employment programs.[49]

    The 2005 Standing Committee Working for Australia Report recommended

    [T]he Australian Government initiate further cross-portfolio coordination
    to increase the provision of places in holistic type projects (through
    the Personal Support Program, Green Corps and traineeship programs)
    which assist the long-term unemployed enter the labour force.[50]

    There are indications in the 2005 Budget papers that that funding for
    the PSP will increase.[51]

    Disability Recruitment Coordinator

    As discussed in Chapter 2, Disability
    Works Australia has been contracted by the Department of Family and
    Community Services to act as the national Disability Recruitment Coordinator.
    They operate as a central point of contact for employers and facilitate
    recruitment on a large scale. The Inquiry heard that while this may
    be a successful strategy for large employers, it may not adequately
    address the needs of small and medium employers. [52]

    Funding for employment services

    Some of the submissions to the Inquiry argued for increased government
    funding for employment services:

    Australia currently has one of the lowest funding rates as a percentage
    of GDP spent on employment programs in the western world. If governments
    are serious about meeting skills shortages and placing people with
    disabilities into employment hey need to dramatically increase spending
    on employment programs.[53]

    The Inquiry has already noted that the 2005-06 Commonwealth Budget
    did announce additional funding for extra places in DOES, JN and vocational
    rehabilitation services over the next three years. However, as discussed
    above, several groups are of the view that the way in which the funding
    is managed, and the caps on certain types of services, will not provide
    the optimum outcomes.

    Coordination of services

    A large number of submissions expressed
    concern to the Inquiry about coordination between services available
    to people with disability. [54] The issue is well
    explained by the Disability Council of NSW:

    People with disability can receive more than one service in a day
    that is to meet their disability-related needs. It is essential that
    these services are coordinated across jurisdictions and delivered
    in a flexible and reliable manner so that they do not hinder a person
    from the pursuit or retention of employment. By way of example, the
    provision of in home support service for people with a physical disability.[55]

    Many of these problems arise because some services are Commonwealth
    government programs and others are State and Territory programs. For
    example, employment services are Commonwealth funded and rehabilitation
    services are generally State-funded:

    The fact that employment support services are funded federally and
    rehabilitation is funded by the states compounds the lack of coordination.
    State-funded programs will often focus on social and recreational
    activities that although important to do not assist people to develop
    the necessary skills and stamina to become more prepared for employment.
    Employment support workers often find they are not able to assist
    a jobseeker because they are not 'work ready' and need more support
    than the pre-vocational opportunities that exist can provide. It is
    not clear to the state funded services exactly what is meant by 'not
    work ready' and what role their programs can play to assist people
    to become more work ready. These programs are also not always funded
    to provide the level of support required and community programs such
    as neighbourhood houses etc. do not always have the skills and resources
    to provide them either.[56]

    Some submissions called for greater integration between vocational
    and clinical services. For example, the Centre of Full Employment and
    Equity argues that there is:

    Growing recognition that the integration of clinical and vocational
    approaches is likely to be most effective in improving employment
    outcomes of people with mental health conditions.[57]

    Social Firms Australia argues that there needs to be:

    A commitment from Commonwealth and State governments to support more
    collaboration between the clinical, rehabilitation and employment
    sectors with more transfer of specialist skills between them.[58]

    Many of the submissions concerning mental illness mention the need
    for better coordination between employment and mental health services.[59]
    For example, the Mental Illness Fellowship of Victoria states that :

    The split between state funded health services and commonwealth funded
    employment services also presents a major barrier to providing an
    integrated approach. An integrated approach allows for rapid placement,
    individually tailored and responsive employment support, and coordination
    of vocational and treatment goals.[60]

    Waghorn and Lloyd suggest that the inter-sectoral collaboration called
    for in the National Mental Health Strategy has not eventuated.[61]

    Specific disability employment specialists

    Groups representing people with mental illness, vision impairment and
    Deafness or hearing impairment all highlighted the need for specialist
    services in those areas.

    People with mental illness

    People with mental illness may require specialised services, including
    assistance with pre-vocational issues, social preparation for employment,
    and flexible post-placement support.[62]
    As noted earlier, there is a general concern that there are insufficient
    numbers of specialist trained staff in Job Network services.

    The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP)
    highlighted the magnitude of the problem:

    A report by the . Department of Family and Community Services shows
    that people with psychiatric disabilities make up the largest proportion
    of those using publicly funded disability employment services, but
    achieve the lowest outcome rates.[63]

    The RANZCP argued that:

    It is essential to examine the current situation regarding the current
    situation of services for people with mental illness. Mental health,
    employment and disability support are served by multiple agencies
    across both the public and private sector social support system, and
    an unemployed person recovering from a mental illness must navigate
    several systems. Gaining data on the real life experiences of people
    who use these systems would be beneficial in planning for service

    Other submissions suggest that some of the problems in providing appropriate
    specialist employment services for people with a mental illness may
    be overcome by locating employment services in the same place as public
    mental health services.[65]

    Waghorn and Lloyd suggest a need for more innovative approaches for
    people with mental illness:

    Demonstration projects specialising in cutting-edge vocational services
    for people with mental illness are needed in a range of Australian
    urban and rural sites to assess the feasibility of more evidence based
    practices and the range of methods by which the inter-sectoral problems
    can be overcome.[66]

    There are a few examples of open employment services focussing on people
    with a mental illness including members of Ostara Australia[67]
    and Open Minds in Brisbane.[68]

    People who are Deaf and hearing impaired

    The Australian Association of the Deaf highlights that general employment
    services and even broad-based disability employment services do not
    have a good understanding of Deaf people's needs.[69]
    These specific needs include access to funding for interpreters and
    accessible phones (TTYs), including an internet relay system. Staff
    in employment agencies may also need to spend more time explaining the
    various processes with Deaf and hearing impaired clients.[70]

    The Australian Federation of Deaf Societies and ACE National Network
    describe how the absence of Auslan interpreters hinder communication
    between caseworkers and their clients and make job interviews impossible
    in some circumstances.[71]
    The Australian Federation of Deaf Societies provided the following example:

    An employment service refused to pay for an interpreter for a job
    interview for a Deaf client despite the clear requirement for an Auslan
    interpreter. Being unaware of her rights, the Deaf client did not
    press the issue and instead the client's mother was used as a notetaker
    during the job interview.[72]

    The Deafness Forum of Australia recommended training for employment
    service staff so they can better understand the wide variety of hearing
    impairments and communication strategies to deal with them.[73]

    Blind and visually impaired people

    A vision impaired individual told
    the Inquiry that the Australian Government Jobsearch website is not
    'JAWS' friendly (JAWS is a screen reader for blind and vision impaired
    people). She stated that while Centrelink and other employment service
    providers have computers with advertised positions, these computers
    are not fitted with any screen reading or large print software products.

    Blind Citizens of Australia highlights that job classifieds in print
    form are inaccessible to people who are blind or vision impaired, and
    ads using the internet medium are, in most cases, not configured for
    adaptive technology used by people who are blind or vision impaired.
    Even when a job can be accessed electronically, the electronic application
    forms are usually in an inaccessible format. Further, job details and
    application forms mailed to recipients in print form are often useless
    to people who are blind or vision impaired.[75]

    5.2.10 Employment services for graduates

    A number of submissions suggest that the needs of specific client groups
    are not being met, and call for the establishment of a greater range
    of dedicated employment services, for example services focussing on
    recent school leavers,[76]
    and retrenched workers.[77]

    In particular, the National Regional Disability Liaison Officers and
    Disability Co-Ordination Officers Network (RDLO) and Disability Employment
    Action Centre (DEAC) highlight that there are an insufficient number
    of employment services that can properly assist graduates with disability
    to find a job.[78]

    DEAC suggests that the current service models are not designed to meet
    the meet the needs of graduates with disability.[79]
    RDLO suggests that there is an erroneous assumption that graduates with
    disability do not need special assistance on the basis that 'if they
    have got this far, they will know what to do':

    there appears to be a pre-conceived view from within government departments
    and employment organisations that graduates with a disability do not
    have issues in accessing employment because they have formal tertiary
    qualifications. As a result no services or support structures are
    made available.[80]

    How might private recruitment agencies assist people with disability?

    Not all people with disability will use government-funded employment
    services to help them find a job. Many job vacancies, particularly more
    senior professional positions, are advertised through private recruitment

    Several submissions expressed concern that the both the private and
    public sector increasingly used recruitment agencies without ensuring
    that they use non-discriminatory selection criteria and practices.[81]
    For example, the Australian Federation of Deaf Societies reports:

    The increasing use of external recruitment agencies by public and
    private sector organisations creates an additional barrier for job
    seekers. Such agencies will obviously vary in their policies and attitudes
    towards people with a disability and these will not necessarily reflect
    the view of the client for whom they act.[82]

    Blind Citizens Australia recommends that:

    Government agencies that outsource recruitment should revise their
    contracts to make explicit the requirement that recruitment organisations
    actively encourage expressions of interest and applications from people
    with disabilities. Targets for the participation of people with disabilities
    in the recruitment process should be included in the contracts.[83]

    Manpower, itself a recruitment agency, informed the Inquiry that recruitment
    providers are not skilled in disability issues:

    Support for the placement of [people with a disability] is negligible,
    with no guidelines or standards provided, and a general lack of consideration
    for this work sector.[84]

    Westpac notes that people with disability seem not to use recruitment
    agencies because those agencies are not properly trained or have not
    made the appropriate adjustments. Westpac has therefore tried other
    approaches to targeting people with disability in their recruitment
    IBM and National Australia Bank also note that they have preferred recruitment
    agencies - who have the appropriate expertise and approach - in order
    to encourage hiring people with disability.[86]

    Some submissions noted the inaccessibility of recruitment agencies
    for people who are blind and vision impaired. For example, recruitment
    agencies are generally not equipped with adaptive technology.[87]
    They argue that significant education of recruitment agencies and their
    peak body may overcome some of these barriers.[88]

    From 2002 to 2004 the Equal Opportunity Commission
    of Victoria (EOCV) conducted an inquiry into the recruitment industry's
    awareness and understanding of Victoria's equal opportunity laws and
    practice. The inquiry identified the potential role of the recruitment
    industry to ensure appropriate selection practices for job seekers with
    disability (amongst other disadvantaged groups).

    The EOCV reported that recruiters felt that
    they were sometimes hamstrung by employers who wanted to influence the
    type of people referred to them. In the face of this pressure by employers,
    76 per cent of respondents (people who had agreed to participate in
    the survey with the EOCV) said they always made every possible effort
    to comply with Victorian equal opportunity laws. Nine out of 10 agreed
    that they tried to inform or educate businesses about the law. However,
    in exploring the practices of recruitment agents, a further 33 per cent
    agreed that they sometimes rule out candidates even though they know
    they should not do so.[89]

    What are some of the recruitment strategies of large employers?

    Submissions from three large companies outlined their strategies to
    encourage recruitment of people with disability.

    IBM told the Inquiry that its strategies include:

    • Partner with Disability Works Australia . to tap into the national
      disability candidate pool for all available roles
    • Partner with
      universities to put direct campaigning in place for proactive hiring
      of graduates with a disability
    • Engage preferred recruitment supplier [recruitment agencies] to
      source professionals with a disability through education and incentives
    • Choose [recruitment agencies] that support IBM's diversity initiatives
    • Engage employees through IBM's Employee Referral program which encourages
      employees to refer their peers with a disability to IBM
    • Provide work experience placements for students with a disability
    • Provide disability awareness training for IBM Recruitment Specialists
      and Hiring Managers to raise awareness.
    • Participate in the Willing and Able Mentoring Program, an external
      national mentoring program for tertiary students with a disability
      that builds the pipeline of candidates with a disability for the corporate

    Westpac told the Inquiry that in order to recruit people with disability,

    currently broadcasts our entry level job vacancies in to Disability
    Employment Services through Disability WORKS Australia. This ensures
    that jobseekers with a disability have an opportunity to apply for
    vacant roles that come up in our high volume area within Westpac.
    We have also held briefings for Disability Employment Service providers
    so that they are familiar with our recruitment processes and can adequately
    prepare their jobseekers for interview and assessment.[91]

    The National Australia Bank described the following recruitment strategy:

    The National either directly or through its preferred suppliers sends
    all externally advertised positions to [Disability Works Australia
    - DWA] . They in turn liaise with Disability Employment Services
    across Australia to source candidates for the vacancies.

    DWA conducts pre-screening for candidates and provides reasonable
    adjustment advice and eduction and support direct to the hiring managers
    and to the preferred suppliers of candidates.[92]

    How might the job selection process be improved for people with

    Identifying an appropriate position to apply for - with or without
    the help of an employment service or recruitment agency - is only the
    first step in the job seeking process. The person must then apply for
    the job, and in some circumstances, participate in an interview.

    Selection practices can have a significant impact on whether a person
    with disability is appointed to a position.

    The 2005 Standing Committee Working for Australia Report recommends

    [T]he Australian Government, in consultation with the peak disability
    agencies, recruitment services and business and industry organisations,
    develop guidelines on appropriate criteria and protocols for the recruitment
    of people with a disability.[93]

    Issues considered in this section include:

    1.  Disclosure
    of disability in a job application or interview

    2.  Using
    appropriate selection criteria

    3.  Addressing
    discrimination in the selection process

    4.  Accessibility
    of the selection process.

    5.5.1 Disclosure of disability

    For people with a disability whether to disclose or not to disclose
    it is a bit like being between a rock and a hard place - damned if
    you do and damned if you don't. The benefits may be that the employer
    can provide simple equipment or re-organise working arrangement to
    improve job efficiency. The disadvantage may be that other employees
    and/or managers will focus on the disability rather than a person's
    skills and ability to do the job, and may discriminate against that

    Submissions to the Inquiry suggest that the question of whether to
    disclose a disability during the job seeking and application process
    may be confronting and can have a very real impact on the chances of
    finding a job.[95]

    DEAC told the Inquiry that disclosure is particularly difficult for
    people with mental illness and can have an almost immediate and catastrophic
    effect on their prospect for future employment and continuing employment.[96]
    beyondblue argues that:

    Disclosure of conditions to employers often results in an inability
    to obtain further work, or if in current employment, people being
    undermined, denied promotional opportunities, and in some cases resulting
    in demotion or job loss.[97]

    People with HIV/AIDS face similar issues. The National Association
    of People Living with HIV/AIDS reported that:

    43.3% of people living with HIV/AIDS currently in work [have] not
    disclosed their HIV status to anyone at their workplace with the most
    common difficulties for those who do want to maintain confidentiality
    at work being gossip and explaining absences from work, for doctors
    appointments and other treatment related matters . there are cases
    known to NAPWA where people have lost their jobs because of their
    HIV status.[98]

    The Disability Discrimination Legal Centre NSW suggested that:

    Guidelines need to be developed and instituted on the issue
    of whether and, if so, when, a person with a disability should disclose
    that they have a disability and what rights and protections that person
    has and what obligations and limitations bind the employer in that

    The RDLO has developed a website resource regarding disclosure. The
    site provides information about disclosure, clarifies legal obligations
    and rights and suggests practical steps to take in relation to disclosure
    for both employers and potential employees.[100]

    Vocational professionals may also be able to assist with the process
    of disclosure through strategic disclosure to employers and other third

    The use of explicit strategies to counter workplace stigma, and structured
    counselling to optimise disclosure strategies, are also expected to
    enhance outcomes in psychiatric vocational rehabilitation by improving
    job commencement and job retention. Strategies are needed throughout
    vocational rehabilitation to counter past and present stigma and strategically
    manage disclosure of personal mental health information in the workplace.[101]

    The question of whether or not to disclose is often precipitated by
    the need for people with disability to explain significant gaps in their
    work history.[102]

    Ensuring appropriate selection criteria

    As discussed in Chapters 2 and 6, good job matching is an important
    feature of the recruitment process.

    Sometimes job advertisements list selection criteria that are not necessarily
    vital for the job. The consequence may be that the selection processes
    can work against people with disability in situations where they are
    actually well suited to a position.

    Several submissions suggest that selection criteria requiring a drivers
    licence may exclude a range of people with disability despite the fact
    that driving (as opposed to independent travel) may not be an essential
    part of the job.[103]

    Centacare gave an example of where a lengthy selection process for
    a supermarket job puts a person with an intellectual disability at a
    great disadvantage, even though he or she could do the actual job as
    well as any other person. Similarly, a person with dyslexia may not
    pass a written selection test, but may still be a good pastry chef.[104]

    The Australian Federation of Deaf Societies noted that selection criteria
    for many positions require oral and written communication skills even
    when a position requires little communication that cannot be achieved
    by other means (for example written notes, email, SMS (short messaging
    services) and National Relay Services as well as speech and lipreading
    in some circumstances).[105]

    Australians for Diversity Employment suggested that where a position
    has anything to do with people with disability, the advertisement should
    contain the words 'people with disabilities are encouraged to apply'.[106]
    The Australian Public Service Commission also recommended that public
    sector agencies should promote their commitment to equal opportunity.[107]

    Discrimination in selection processes

    Many submissions suggest that people with disability experience discrimination
    in the recruitment and selection process.

    A fear of discrimination may be experienced by people who submit applications
    through disability-specific employment agencies, as this tends to highlight
    that the applicant has a disability.[108]

    DEAC told the Inquiry that graduates with disability do, at times,
    encounter discrimination in the process of finding and applying for
    employment because of their disability and that graduates whose disability
    is visible can experience more difficulty in securing employment.[109]

    Several submissions suggested that staff involved in writing position
    descriptions, recruitment and selection criteria should be trained to
    avoid potentially discriminatory practices.

    The Disability Discrimination Legal Centre told the Inquiry that:

    The protection afforded by the disability discrimination laws really
    only operates once a person with a disability has gained employment.
    Protection is far more limited in the pre-employment recruitment phase.
    The recruitment process needs to be made more transparent so that
    there is more objectivity and merits-assessment in that process, rather
    than subjective influences that are often based on false, discriminatory
    and misguided preconceptions. People with a disability need attainable
    rights and protection during the recruitment phase.[110]

    The Welfare Rights Centre recommends:

    A change to discrimination legislation to forbid questions as to
    mental illness on pre employment questioning. Only when the job is
    obtained and one is considering accommodating the mental illness should
    this questioning appear.[111]

    The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth), and possible amendments
    to that legislation to improve its effectiveness, is discussed in some
    detail in the 2004 Productivity Commission Review of the Disability
    Discrimination Act 1992
    The Government released its response to that report in January 2005,
    accepting many of the Productivity Commission's recommendations for
    reform in full or in part.[113]
    Draft legislation to implement that response is expected to be available
    in coming months.

    Accessibility of the selection process

    Some people with disability have difficulties in engaging in recruitment
    processes for accessibility reasons. For example the hearing impaired
    may have trouble engaging in oral information sessions or interviews
    and those with physical disabilities may have trouble travelling to
    the employment services and interviews.

    The Australian Public Service Commission recommended that public sector
    agencies ensure that the methods of accessing information about a position
    and submitting a job application process are not discriminatory.[114]

    5.6  Self-employment
    and the New
    Enterprise Incentive Scheme (NEIS)

    Maybe the underlying philosophy of entrepreneurship is that people
    who wanted to set up their own businesses had to be driven by a strong
    sense of self-interest and if someone was hungry enough for success,
    they would achieve it by one means or another. However, for people
    with a disability, the overarching philosophy has been one of supporting
    them in society. It is only in the past decade that this philosophy
    has been added to by people with a disability demanding that they
    play an equal part in society. While there may not be a deafening
    clamor of people with a disability, especially from ethnic backgrounds,
    wanting to set up their own businesses, the option should be open
    to them nonetheless, as this option is also open to all other people.

    Self-employment is an option for any person wanting to enter the open
    work place, whether or not they have a disability.[116]
    For some people, this choice may be driven by an entrepreneurial desire.[117]
    For others is an employment opportunity that allows greater control
    over day-to-day life and the future.[118]

    For some people with disability the option to work as a consultant,
    start an independent business or work from home may be particularly
    attractive depending on:

    • the nature of disability
    • difficulties in adapting to an employer-employee relationship in
      the open marketplace
    • difficulties in accessing assistance with personal care in the workplace
    • concerns about stigma in the workplace; or
    • a need for flexible working hours.

    Several submissions suggest that people with disability need assistance
    to start their own home business:

    The Chambers of Commerce in conjunction with a government department
    [should] establish an advisory service to assist mental health consumers
    work through all the legal and financial requirements of establishing
    a home business in the market of their choice, including affordable
    education sessions/workshops/seminars on how to establish a home business,
    the pitfalls, the legislative requirements and so forth. To assist
    consumers to make informed decisions on whether this is a viable option.[119]

    Family Advocacy suggest that the option of self-employment is particularly
    important for people with high support needs. They note a government-funded
    model in the United States which has assisted many people with high
    support needs:

    Griffin and Hammis[120] provide a framework that has guided many people
    with high support needs in the US into self employment in small businesses.
    In the US grants available for the establishment of small businesses
    have been available to assist in these projects and funds for the
    support of individuals have been available to provide support to people
    with high support needs in small businesses. [121]

    DEAC Legal Services notes that graduates with disability are more likely
    to work part-time and be self-employed.[122].

    The Commonwealth New Enterprise Incentive Scheme (NEIS) is a self-employment
    program for unemployed people who wish to start their own independent

    The New Enterprise Incentive
    Scheme (NEIS) is an Australian Government initiative that helps eligible
    unemployed people to start and run their new, viable small business.
    For the first year of the business, NEIS is there to train, support
    and help the participant to become self-supporting and independent.
    NEIS participants undertake an accredited 3 month small business management
    course. In the first year, business advice and mentor support helps
    the business become successful. NEIS provides this support through
    a network of private, community and government organisations known
    as NEIS providers, which are local organisations such as Business
    Enterprise Centres; TAFE Small Business Centres; community organisations
    and private sector organisations contracted by the Department of Employment
    and Workplace Relations to deliver NEIS throughout Australia.[123]

    Acceptance into the NEIS is competitive and the ability to meet all
    the criteria does not guarantee entry and assistance. Applicants are
    evaluated on both personal and business criteria including:

    Personal Criteria

    To participate in the New Enterprise Incentive Scheme (NEIS)
    you must be eligible for the full range of Job Network Services and:

    • be at least 18 years of age at the time of signing a NEIS Participant
    • be available to participate in Training and work full time in the
    • be in receipt of an allowance specified by DEWR from time to time
      as NEIS eligible
    • not be an undischarged bankrupt
    • agree to hold and maintain a controlling interest in the business
      during the terms of the NEIS Participant Agreement
      have not received NEIS assistance in the previous 2
      have not received NEIS assistance previously for a similar
      business activity.

    Business Criteria

    Proposed NEIS businesses must:

    • have never operated on a commercial basis
    • be independent, reputable and legal
      be assessed as commercially viable by a NEIS provider
      and approved by DEWR
      not involve the purchase of takeover of an existing
    • not compete directly with existing businesses, unless it can be
      demonstrated that there is an unsatisfied demand for the product or
      service, or that the product or service is to be provided in a new

    The 2005 budget announced funding for an additional
    1000 places in NEIS under this criteria.[125] However, the Inquiry heard that the NEIS scheme
    does not generally meet the needs of people with disability.[126]

    One of the problems identified by Action on Disability within Ethnic
    Communities (ADEC) is that the scheme does not specifically target people
    with disability in the eligibility criteria:

    In order to improve the participation rate of people with a disability
    in NEIS, one of the issues that needs to be addressed is that of targeting.
    Though existing agreements between NEIS providers and DEWR only mention
    targeting of the program to disadvantaged groups, including people
    with a disability, there are no formal guidelines on targeting and
    there are no requirements on managing agents to target particular

    In particular, the ability to participate full time in training and
    work may be a barrier for many people with disability.

    ADEC recommends the following changes to NEIS to enable people with
    disability the opportunity to become self-employed:

    • The development of a NEIS
      program specifically targeting people with disabilities, encouraging
      people from ethnic backgrounds to participate;
    • Clear identification
      of the barriers and issues confronting people with a disability from
      seeking self-employment;
    • Development
      of training options suitable for people with a disability who want
      to establish an enterprise;
    • Establishment of a supportive,
      self-help network of people with a disability who are interested in
    • Encouragement of people
      with a disabilities to see themselves as potential business people,
      rather than dependents or employees, or worse, unemployable;
    • Self-employment as a
      positive alternative to employment, in an environment where discrimination
      on the grounds of disability is felt by many people with a disability,
      especially people from ethnic backgrounds;
    • Changes in
      attitudes from continuing dependence to fostering independence.[127]

    Similarly, Family Advocacy makes the following recommendation:

    That Government grants for small business are made available
    for the establishment of small businesses designed specifically to facilitate
    work opportunities for people with disability.[128]

    Australians for Diversity Employment suggest that Commonwealth, State
    and Territory governments should demonstrate leadership and specifically
    encourage people with disability to apply for consultancy projects in
    tendering processes:

    In order to promote self employment opportunities by PWD, it is important
    that a pro-active approach is taken to getting PWD to undertake these
    consultancy services where possible. The tendering process should
    stipulate 'Submissions from people with disabilities are encouraged.'[129]

    ACE National Network suggests
    that the Workplace Modifications Scheme be expanded so that people with
    disability who are, or seeking to be, self-employed can obtain appropriate
    financial assistance to establish a workplace.[130]


    The job seeking process has several elements, including the process
    of identifying an appropriate position, applying for the job and participating
    in a selection process.

    Most people who are on income support will use a government-funded
    employment services to assist them through this process. The 2005 Budget
    announced a variety of changes to the structure and funding of those
    employment services. Some of those changes commenced on 1 July 2005
    and some will commence on 1 July 2006. It is therefore too early to
    assess the impact of those changes on the employment rates for people
    with disability.

    Nevertheless, the Inquiry received many submissions expressing concern
    about government-funded employment services. In particular the submissions
    highlight the following major concerns:

    • the transition to Case Based Funding for people with high needs;
    • the ability of Job Network to provide the appropriate service to
      people with disability;
    • retaining a cap on places in DOES for people on the Disability Support
      Pension from 1 July 2006;
    • inadequate funding for the Personal Support Program;
    • poor coordination between Commonwealth and State services available
      to people with disability.

    It is important to keep in mind, however, that not all people with
    disability will use government-funded employment services. Private recruiting
    agencies are increasingly used by both the public and private sector.
    The submissions recommend that they be encouraged to take up inclusive
    selection practices and that employers identify 'preferred agencies'.

    Regarding the application and selection process, the submissions suggest
    that there be better guidance for interviewees (for example, whether
    or not to disclose a mental illness) and interviewers (for example,
    how to ensure that the process is accessible and non-discriminatory).

    Finally, it is important not to ignore self-employment as an option
    for people with disability to participate in the open marketplace. The
    development of a NEIS program that takes into account any additional
    needs of people with disabilities may assist in making this a more realistic

    Back to contents page | Next chapter

    Endnotes: Chapter 5

    The Inquiry notes that its submission deadline preceded the Budget announcements,
    however the Inquiry has included those comments that remain relevant.

    3] Submission 43, Job Futures, p2.

    4] Submission 76, Stepping Stone Clubhouse, p18.

    5] Submission 49, Disability Council of NSW, p6.

    6] Submission 72, Scope Employment, p4.

    7] DEWR, Fact Sheet, Welfare to Work - Increasing participation of people
    with a disability at….

    8] Australian Government, Budget 2005-06, Budget Paper No.2, Employment
    and Workplace Relations

    9] Submission 85, DDLC, p41.

    10] Submission 85, DDLC, p43.

    11] Submission 41, Edge, p2; Submission 72, Scope Victoria, p9.

    12] Submission 27, DEAC, p12. See also Submission 76, Stepping Stone Clubhouse,

    [14] DEWR, Next Steps for Disability Open Employment Services,
    DEWR, January 2005 at 2, available at Disability%20OE%20Paper%20-%2017Jan.doc.
    Submission 85, DDLC, p20.

    15] Submission 100, Brotherhood of St Laurence, p3.

    16] Submission 100, Brotherhood of St Laurence, p3.

    17] Submission 72, Scope Employment, p12.

    18] Submission 49, Disability Council of NSW, p6; Submission 68, ACE National
    Network, p8. See also Submission 100, Brotherhood of St Laurence, p5;
    Submission 72, Scope Victoria, p12.

    19] Submission 114, ACROD, p2.

    20] Submission 72, Scope Employment, p7; Submission 107, Uniting Care
    Australia, p5; Submission 27, DEAC, p13.

    21] Submission 100, Brotherhood of St Laurence, p7. A similar recommendation
    is made in Submission 68, ACE National Network, p8.

    22] Submission 68, ACE National Network, p8. See also Submission 100,
    Brotherhood of St Laurence, p3.

    24] For more detailed information about case-based funding see
    See also Issues Paper 5, Mapping of Commonwealth Government Services,

    25] See for example, Submission 21, Disability Services Commission WA,
    p2; Submission 114, ACROD, p3; Submission 72, Scope Victoria, p16.

    26] Submission 45, NSW Council for Intellectual Disability, p10-11.

    27] Submission 45, NSW Council for Intellectual Disability, p10-11. See
    also the presentation by Phil Tuckerman from Job Support during the
    Inquiry's Sydney Roundtable on 31 March 2005 at….

    28] Submission 114, ACROD, p4.

    29] Submission 21, Disability Services Commission WA, p2.

    30] Submission 114, ACROD, p3.

    31] Issues Paper 5, p9.

    32] Submission 43, Job Futures, p4. See also, Submission 42, Villamanta
    Legal Service, p7; Submission 76, Stepping Stone Clubhouse, p10.

    33] Submission 12, The Australian National Organization of the Unemployed,
    p8. See also Submission 43, Job Futures, p4 See also, Submission 48,
    Network for Carers of People with a Mental Illness, p6.

    34] Submission 43, Job Futures, p4.

    35] Submission 43, Job Futures, p4.

    [38] Employment Analysis and Evaluation Group, Job Network Disability
    Support Pension Pilot: Interim Evaluation Report
    , Canberra, Department
    of Employment and Workplace Relations, October 2004, at 4, available

    [39] Employment Analysis and Evaluation Group, Job Network Disability
    Support Pension Pilot: Interim Evaluation Report
    , Canberra, Department
    of Employment and Workplace Relations, October 2004, at 5, available

    40] Submission 85, DDLC, p21.

    41] See for example Submission 12, ANOU, p9.

    42] Submission 48, Network for Carers of People with a Mental Illness,
    p6; Submission 76, Stepping Stone Clubhouse, p10.

    43] Submission 107, UnitingCare, p3; Submission 72, Scope Victoria, p11.

    45] Issues Paper 5, Mapping of Commonwealth Government Services, p3 at…

    47] Submission 48, Network for Carers of People with a Mental Illness,

    49] Submission 100, Brotherhood of St Laurence, p8; Submission 48, Network
    of Carers for People with a Mental Illness, p7; Submission 68, ACE,

    50] House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Workplace
    Relations and Workforce Participation, Working for Australia's future:
    Increasing participation in the workforce
    , March 2005, Recommendation
    7, p131.

    51] See DEWR Fact Sheet, Welfare to Work - Increasing participation of
    people with a disability at….

    52] Submission 85, Disability Discrimination Legal Centre NSW, p47.

    53] Submission 73, RDLO Network, p16; Submission 114, ACROD, p2; Submission
    68, ACE National Network, p8. See also Submission 100, Brotherhood of
    St Laurence, p3.

    54] See for example, Submission 19, Action on Disability within Ethnic
    Communities, p2; Submission 11, Department of Families and Communities
    SA, p3; Submission 17, Family Advocacy, p2; Submission 30, Mental Illness
    Fellowship Victoria, p5; Submission 45, NSW CID, p13; Submission 52,
    Ability Technology, p2; Submission 54, SANE, p2; Submission 77, RBS.RVIB.VAF
    Limited p4; Submission 92, Social Firms Australia, p4; Submission 109,
    Waghorn and Llyod, p27-28; Submission 119, Parents and Professional
    Advocates ACT, p8; Submission 126, South Australian Government, p16.

    55] Submission 49, DCNSW, p8.

    56] Submission 92, Social Firms Australia, p4.

    57] Submission 58, Centre of Full Employment and Equity, p6.

    58] Submission 92, Social Firms Australia, p5.

    59] Submission 109, Waghorn and Lloyd, p18.

    60] Submission 30, Mental Illness Fellowship of Victoria, p5.

    61] Submission 109, Waghorn and Lloyd, p4.

    62] Submission 68, ACE National Network, p6; Submission 105, Hanlon.

    63] Submission 53, RANZCP, p2.

    64] Submission 53, RANZCP, p3.

    65] Submission 69, Mental Illness Fellowship of Australia, p5-6; Submission
    109, Waghorn and Lloyd, p21.

    66] Submission 109, Waghorn and Lloyd, p31.

    67] Ostara Australia:

    68] Open Minds:

    69] Submission 32, Australian Association of the Deaf, p6.

    70] Submission 32, Australian Association of the Deaf, p6. See also Submission
    79, Australian Federation of Deaf Societies, p7; Submission 40, Australian
    Sign Languages Interpreters Association, p2.

    71] Submission 79, Australian Federation of Deaf Societies, p7; Submission
    68, ACE, p6.

    72] Submission 79, Australian Federation of Deaf Societies, p7.

    73] Submission 50, Deafness Forum of Australia, p10.

    74] Submission 71, Pearce, p1.

    75] Submission 80, Blind Citizens Australia, p7-8.

    76] Submission 85, DDLC, p23-26, 62.

    77] Submission 85, DDLC, p62.

    78] Submission 73, RDLO, p2-5; Submission 73A, RDLO, p1-3; Submission
    27, DEAC, p8-9.

    79] Submission 27, DEAC Legal Services, p12.

    80] Submission 73A, National Regional Disability Liaison Officers and
    Disability Co-Ordination Officers Network, p3.

    81] Submission 44, Australians for Diversity Employment, p2.

    82] Submission 79, Australian Federation of Deaf Societies, p5.

    83] Submission 80, Blind Citizens Australia, p22.

    84] Submission 34, Manpower, p6.

    85] Submission 95, Westpac.

    86] Submission 65, IBM, p2; Submission 127, National Australia Bank, p2.

    87] Submission 77, RBS.RVIB.VAF Limited, p5; Submission 80, Blind Citizens
    Australia, p21.

    88] Submission 77, RBS.RVIB.VAF Limited, pp5-6. See also Submission 73,
    RDLO Network, p9.

    89] Submission 118, EOCV, p9.

    90] Submission 65, IBM, p2.

    91] Submission 95, Westpac.

    92] Submission 127, National Australia Bank, p2.

    93] Working for Australia Report, Recommendation 20, p170.

    94] Submission 27, DEAC, p3. See also, Submission 64, WCIG, p1.

    95] Submission 118, EOCV, p4; Submission 10, Davies, p5; Submission 85,
    DDLC, p12-13.

    96] Submission 27, DEAC, p3. See also Submission 30, Social Firms Australia,
    p4; Submission 26, National Network of Private Psychiatric Sector Consumers
    and Carers, p2; Submission 105, Hanlon, p9; Submission 48, Network for
    Carers of People with a Mental Illness, p3; Submission 87, Welfare Rights
    Centre, p9.

    97] Submission 70, beyondblue, p2.

    98] Submission 91, National Association of People Living with HIV/AIDS,

    99] Submission 85, DDLC, p61. See also Submission 77B, RBS.RVIB.VAF Limited,

    100] Submission 85, DDLC, p19,

    101] Submission 109, Waghorn and Lloyd, p33.

    102] Submission 48, The Network for Carers of People with a Mental Illness,
    p3. See also Submission 10, Davies, p7.

    103] Submission 99, City of Darebin Disability Working Party, p2; Submission
    44, Australians for Diversity Employment, p2; Submission 84, Name Witheld,
    p6; Submission 71, Pearce, p2.

    104] Submission 46, Centacare, p3.

    105] Submission 79, Australian Federation of Deaf Societies, pp9-10.

    106] Submission 44, Australians for Diversity Employment, p4.

    107] Submission 113A, Australian Public Service Commission, p2. See also
    Submission 60A, TAFE NSW, p1.

    108] Submission 99, City of Darebin, p2.

    109] Submission 27, DEAC, p9.

    110] Submission 85, DDLC, p61.

    111] Submission 87, Welfare Rights Centre, p10.

    112] Productivity Commission Inquiry Report, Review of the Disability
    Discrimination Act 1992
    , No 30, April 2004 see

    114] Submission 113A, Australian Public Service Commission, p2.

    115] Submission 19, ADEC, p3.

    116] See for example: Submission 7, Name withheld, p1.

    117] Submission 19, ADEC, p3.

    118] Submission 17, Family Advocacy, p6.

    119] Submission 2, Casey, p8.

    120] Cited in Submission 17, Family Advocacy, page 6: Griffin, C., &
    Hammis, D., Making self employment work for people with disabilities,
    Paul Brookes Publishing, Baltimore 2003.

    121] Submission 17, Family Advocacy, p6.

    122] Submission 27, DEAC Legal Services, p9.

    125] See DEWR Presentation to Budget Sessions at

    126] Submission 19, ADEC, p2.

    127] Submission 19, ADEC, p5.

    128] Submission 17, Family Advocacy, p6.

    129] Submission 44, Australians for Diversity Employment.

    130] Submission 68, ACE National Network, p6. See further Chapter
    2 on the Workplace Modifications Scheme.