Despite pressure from lobbyists, DOL secretary Hilda Solis is standing firm on the proposed new rule for contractors hiring people with disabilities.
Government officials continue to wrangle with the private business sector over the proposed rule requiring government contractors to track recruiting and hiring practices of people with disabilities, with Marjorie Censer’s May 27 Washington Post article providing some of the deepest insights — and sharpest remarks — from both side since the comment period began back in December of last year.
The 60-day public comment period on the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs is long over; and both sides have been taking their case to the public via the media with new facts and figures. In Censer’s article, “Contractors Air Concerns About Hiring Proposal,” the OFCCP provides insights into its mathematical formulation of 7% as the goal contractors should target with regards to recruiting and hiring people with disabilities:
The office came up with a goal of 7 percent by adding 5.7 percent — the estimated percent of the civilian labor force with a disability — with 1.7 percent — the percentage of those who are not in the labor force but might be interested in working if an opportunity became available.
Not to be outnumber-crunched, private businesses are submitting six-figure estimates for additional costs incurred should the rule proposal go into effect; and Censer says 10 groups representing various business sectors submitted a joint letter to Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis last week that characterized the requirements as “impractical and unachievable” as well as a “genuine barrier” to increasing employment opportunities for people with disabilities.
Assistant labor secretary Kathleen Martinez, who heads up the DOL’s Office of Disability Employment Policy disputed the increased cost assertion in part during a March interview with Disaboom.com. Government contractors are already required by Executive Order to “track and maintain data on their personnel activity and workforce composition” with regards to gender and ethnicity, says Martinez, adding individuals with disabilities to the ledger is nothing more than an attempt to quantify efforts to achieve a diverse workforce.
But HR Policy Association president Dan Yates tells Censer that assigning “rigid numbers” to “good faith efforts” is exactly the root of the issue. But with recovery from the global recession still on shaky ground, getting a government contract is vital to the survival of many businesses here in the U.S., where one in four people are employed by a company with a government contract. Censer closes her article with a quote from the OFCCP that indicates they are in no mood to budge on this issue:
Being a federal contractor is a privilege, not a right… [W]ith that privilege comes a responsibility to treat workers fairly and make sure that good jobs are within reach of all qualified candidates.
What’s your take on the proposed rule? Will it help provide more opportunities for individuals with disabilities? Does asking for employees to self-identify as disabled violate the Americans with Disabilities Act? Share your thoughts in the comments section.
Image by U.S. Department of Agriculture, used under its Creative Commons license.