Disabled people report high levels of harassment worldwide, often based on intersectional characteristics such as race, gender and age. However, while #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter have highlighted ongoing experiences of sexual and racial harassment, disability harassment has received little attention.
This book focuses on legal measures to combat disability harassment at work. It sets disability harassment in its international context, including its human rights framework, and confronts the lack of empirical information by evaluating the Irish legal framework in practice.
It explores the capacity of the law to address intersectional harassment, particularly that faced by disabled women, and outlines the barriers to effective legal solutions.
4.1 Introduction This chapter outlines the social and legal context for disability harassment in Ireland. Ireland is a member of the EU; as such, it is bound by EU law, including the FED, making it a suitable comparator for other EU member states or for states with an EU legal legacy, such as the UK. It has also ratified the CRPD, making its experience relevant to the many jurisdictions that have ratified that convention. Ireland’s legislative provisions on disability harassment are comprehensive and, in most respects, exemplify compliance with both the
The French version of this book was the winner of the 2022 Grand Prix de la Protection Sociale.
Over the years, many disability-related rights have been legally recognized, but how has this changed the everyday lives of people with disabilities?
Drawing on biographical interviews collected from individuals with either mobility or visual impairments in France, this book analyzes the reception of disability policies in the fields of education, employment, social rights and accessibility. It examines to what extent these policies contribute to the realization of the associated rights among disabled people. The book demonstrates that the rights associated with disability suffer from major implementation flaws, while shedding light on the very active role of disabled citizens in the realization of their rights.
AR: [The 2005 Act] placed a major emphasis on the rights of disabled people, on citizenship. What does that discourse mean to you? CL: Well I think there’s a lot of blather really. It’s a lot of hot air. That’s what they say on the face of it, in the media, but behind the talk there aren’t necessarily things being put in place. I think there’s still an overall mentality – I don’t know if it’s specific to France or if it’s actually specific to disability, but I’ve had people who’ve looked elsewhere tell me it’s not the same in other places. [In France] there
of the realization of rights in employment is more complex than in the other areas analysed in this book. Unlike educational or social policies, where the public authorities have a central responsibility for the implementation of policies and the (non-)realization of users’ rights, in the field of employment their action, in a capitalist market economy, takes the form of mediation in relations between employers and employees. Although the state has been able to put in place, in the field of disability, binding measures vis-à-vis companies with the quota scheme
Disability-related rights in France have been first and foremost social rights. 1 From collective compensation for work-related injuries (1898) to the incorporation of the disability risk in the general Sécurité sociale (public health care) system (1945), and from assistance for the infirm (1905) to the disabled adult benefit (1971), the rights of disabled persons have been integral features of the rise of the modern welfare state. Indeed, even prior to its recognition as a policy category in 1975 and later in the Law of 11 February 2005, disability was
Why talk about ‘fragile’ rights? In the field of disability, the idea of fragility is more commonly associated with people themselves than with their rights. In contrast to the classic image of fragile disabled people as passive objects of protection, the experiences described in this book show active subjects, endowed with reflexivity, critical capacity, and a potential for innovation. Their rights, on the other hand, deserve to be described as ‘fragile’: often imprecise from the moment they are legally enshrined, they suffer from major shortcomings in terms
1.1 Introduction Persons with disabilities experience high levels of harassment 1 and are particularly exposed to intersectional harassment based on multiple characteristics, such as race, gender and age. 2 However, while sexual and racial harassment have received considerable attention from legal scholars, there has been little in-depth analysis of disability harassment law. 3 There has also been surprisingly little discussion of the human rights framework, the effectiveness of legal measures seeking to address disability harassment or the reasons for
of school and learning environments to make them accessible according to a universal design that would also allow for the provision of specific accommodations where necessary (see Table 2.1 ). The ideal scenario evoked both in Disability Studies and in many political speeches about education is thus a progression from being enclosed within specialized educational institutions to liberation via school inclusion. To what extent does a comparison of the school experiences of different generations of disabled people corroborate this scenario? Accounts from people
disparity in access to features of life that many nondisabled people take for granted is deeply revealing of the social status of disabled people. Beginning in the 1980s, their demands to increase their freedom of movement occupied a central role in the actions of advocacy associations that quickly came to be represented by a single word: accessibility ( Mor 2018 ). For disabled people to be able to enjoy unobstructed, spontaneous mobility, the physical environment must be rendered fully accessible. This key axiom of the disability movement has gradually gained some