Lessons for HR Professionals from the Job Search Experience of. Candidates with Disabilities. Presenters: Tania Lavin, Andy Traub, Peter Rutigliano

Transcription

1 This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. This text is to be used for communication purposes only. Lessons for HR Professionals from the Job Search Experience of Candidates with Disabilities Presenters: Tania Lavin, Andy Traub, Peter Rutigliano Tuesday, December 9, :00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. Prepared by Christy Azzarello, CART Provider. >>TANIA LAVIN: So in scanning the market for information about people with disabilities, there was little research on their job search experience. While there's a plethora of information on candidate experience there's little about people with disabilities specifically. We thought to fill that void with our own study. Our aim was to better understand what job seekers with disabilities feel as they go through the research process. We want to compare how their experience differed than people without disabilities. This information shared with employers like yourselves for recruitment practices. GettingHired ed the survey to candidates with disabilities within it's own data base. We had our sister company Aerotek the survey to recent applicants and receive responses from people without disability as well. And with the Aerotek survey we asked people to self-identify if they had a disability

2 to group accordingly. We had 328 responses from candidates with disabilities and 255 from people without disabilities. We discovered people with disabilities are actively looking for jobs with about 87 percent who said they would look for a job in the next 12 months. The good news for employers actively trying to recruit people with disabilities into the organization. The candidate pool is open to switching. We found 58 percent are looking for a full time position. And 36 percent are looking for part time. And 6 percent looking for a temporary position. Knowing that temporary work might provide an avenue for employers and candidates to test compatibility without commitment. We asked how open candidates with disabilities would be to a temporary assignment. 33 percent said they were open to it and that jumped up to 84 percent, who would be if there was a possibility of a position becoming permanent. One suggestion we can offer up to employers is to allow candidates with disabilities to prove skills on the job. The candidate can be given time to evaluate the employer's commitment to employing people with disabilities. We want to know what factors are important for candidates with disabilities when looking for a new opportunity. Not surprisingly the opportunity for consistent employment, was rated as most important. However a diversity and/or disability friendly environment was close behind as most important to their decision. A diverse or disability friendly environment also a top reason why people with disabilities will switch jobs. If they don't view their current organization is disability friendly, they will look for a another opportunity elsewhere. The top four are location and flexibility and we were able to refer from comments, means public transit and close to home and having flexible hours and a manager flexible to meet their unique needs. What's interesting is these four factors are more important than benefits and compensation.

3 What challenges or frustrations do job seekers with disabilities encounter during the search process? Almost 60 percent said they were frustrated by not enough positions that fit their skills and qualifications. And over 50 percent said job descriptions are too restrictive. It made us question if job descriptions are unnecessarily screening out applicants with disabilities. A lot of news stories have shown that employers automated application processes can disqualify a qualified applicant. I've heard a lot of talent acquisition teams talk about reviewing their job descriptions their application process, ACS's and assessments to see if they're asking for too much. So hopefully these reviews will encourage productive changes for people with and without disabilities. These results also made us think about employment branding and whether job descriptions appeal to people with disabilities. We know candidates are looking for a disability friendly and inclusive workplace. Let's think about how job descriptions embody our employment brand as a commitment to hiring and retaining people with disabilities. When do candidates disclose disability, if ever? Research shows 22 percent will disclose when they apply and 54 percent will prior to receiving an offer. That leaves 21 percent to disclose after the offer is made and 24 percent who will never disclose. Employers actively trying to recruit people with disabilities, it makes it difficult when only 54 percent disclose before an offer and fewer are disclosing early in the application process. What can we as employers do to encourage disclosure? We asked our candidates to really help us understand what factors are important when they're making the decision to choose to disclose or not disclose. As you'll see here, most important is job security. Other critical factors include disability inclusiveness or friendliness of the employer over all. Whether they are actively recruiting people with disabilities and whether they need to ask for accommodations. We asked about 14 different attributes and we expected a few of them might not be important to the decision to disclose.

4 But that actually wasn't the case. As you'll see there are a number of other factors, these are the bottom four that were the lowest ranked among the 14. None of these numbers strike me as low. So for employers there isn't one single action that we can do to encourage more people to disclose. There's a multitude of actions. To really increase the percentage of people disclosing before an offer or when they apply, we need to take a multifaceted approach. I'm going to pause for a moment and look at the respondent demographics. To compare versus candidates without disabilities. We were pleased with how our respondents with and without disabilities broke out by education level, occupation, and other notable demographic categories. You'll note we have a slightly higher number of women with disabilities than men respond without disabilities respond, however, we don't think this skews the results. We thought the demographics with comparable to reality as published by the census bureau. In reviewing the results there were two stark findings that jumped off the page when we looked at the comparison between candidates with and without disabilities. When we compared these candidates that they're less likely to be welcomed by potential employers and more likely to feel discriminated against by a potential employer. The numbers tie back to the screen. 36 percent of candidates have felt discriminated against by a potential employer, yet 59 percent of candidates with disabilities have. That difference is 23 percent. These impressions whether they're real or perceived have a lasting effect during a single search as well as subsequent job searchs. Let's explore some of the consequences. Thinking about equal and fair treatment. Remember, we're thinking specifically about candidates with disabilities that don't feel welcomed or felt some level of discrimination. These two groups are less likely to agree that potential employers treat candidates equally. That 55 percent, which made up the difference between 56 percent of candidates with disabilities who felt

5 welcome say that employers treat all candidates equally. But only one percent of those who do not feel welcomed feel this way. These two groups are more likely to have been asked an unethical question during an interview which may have led to feeling some level of discrimination. Post interview optimism. These two groups are less likely to feel discriminated optimistic after a phone or face-to-face interview. 70 percent of those who felt optimistic after a telephone interview, yet only 22 percent of those who do not feel welcomed felt optimistic. The differences while they're lower are still apparent when candidates reach the face-to-face stage it's apparent. It's important to note that candidates with disabilities are less optimistic at this stage versus candidates without disabilities. What's happening during these interactions? What can we do to better prepare hiring managers to make candidates feel welcomed and avoid feelings of discrimination during the interview process? The two groups are more frustrated by a lack of employer training and by workplaces not disability friendly. It seems apparent to them that better training could improve their experience and lead to feeling more welcomed. Lastly, disclosure becomes less of a reality when people do not feel welcomed or felt discriminated against. These two groups are more likely to say it's easier to find work if you don't disclose. And less likely to disclose their disability prior to receiving an offer. Impressions have a lasting effect that can undo all the ground work that so many professionals like yourselves have tried to lay. The results highlight several opportunities that we can take to improve their experience for job seekers with disabilities and increase disclosure rates. I'm going to turn over to Pete to discuss the tracker and what organizations are currently doing to promote disability improvement. >>PETER RUTIGLIANO: I'm sure as we look through the results some of them are sobering to

6 see. The good news is that, we're now at a moment in our history where we're really trying to make change in our treatment with employees with disabilities. We're starting to focus on this. And to that end, Sirota along with the National Organization on Disability, we put together a Disability Employment Tracker. That is, it's a tool we created to really help organizations at the company level really assess their disability employment program and really give them some tools by which to make things better. I'm going to show you results from the first round of data that we collected. We just started round two of data collection and you'll see where some of my results overlap with Tania's research. It's interesting as we go through it. Before I go into a lot of detail, let's talk about what the employment tracker is. The first thing is, it's free confidential assessment. It's an assessment given out to organizations just giving them information about how they're doing. There's an optional Veteran component which dove tails well given these populations share some of the same interest areas. It was developed with a very diverse group of organizations, it was really an opportunity for us to pull together companies that were doing a lot of work in the employees with disability spaces and figure out what is best practice and how we can move the dial. One of the things I really like about this is besides giving you feedback about your own program, we're able to benchmark and show how your company does relative to other companies which is a valuable tool. It's a way for you to track your own company's progress. So how we're doing now compared to the future. See where there might be opportunity and where you might excelling in your program. The last part, this is my favorite, is that it's not just giving a tool saying how you're doing it gives you valuable insights and really real-world examples of some of the policies and what other companies are doing and best practices. The tool is twofold. One is assessing how you're doing and comparing you to other groups but also providing training so we can move the dial and really help attend to some of the

7 needs of this population. Andy is going to go into more detail about how this is done but I'll hold that off and not steal his thunder. So what are we assessing as part of the Disability Employment Tracker? There are four main constructs we're looking at. The climate and culture. Specifically looking at what employee engagement look like and policies and procedures in the organization. Tania mentioned what is the leadership doing. Are we creating a disability friendly environment. A lot has to do with how leadership is portraying individuals with disabilities. Looking at the employee life cycle. What is it like for someone applying for a job, getting the job and long term, staying within the job and also accommodation throughout their years. So with this tool, measures recruitment, on boarding, development and training as well as some of the accommodation practices. We're also looking at tracking and measurement. What are the percentages of people hired compared to the percentage of people hired specifically with a disability. What type of annual surveys are used to collect data on an on going basis. We have to remember that employees with disabilities aren't necessarily a static group. They change over time as people become older, they're more likely to move into a disability status. We want to be able to track that in our tools. The last piece of it we look to results. What have you done in the past 12 months and your goals in the next 12 to 14 months to spell out where we are now and hoping to get to. That's important given some of the new regulatory changes going on. One of the things we tried to do, where possible, is really grab some data specifically around some of the key areas of the new DOL regulations regarding persons with disabilities. I'm sure many people on the phone are aware of this, but to make sure we're on the same page. There are certain utilization goals. That is we want about 7 percent of the organization comprised of people with disabilities. We want to invite people to self-identify. This goes

8 throughout the whole employee life cycle. I know Tania was mentioning about self-identifying themselves and disclosing this information during the pre-hiring process. But also post offer and within the job to give people the ability to identify themselves as an employee with a disability. We want to be able to measure and document some of the progress for things being held in the employee database. How we collect information, is it readily accessible? In addition to just collecting data we want to make things better for people with disabilities. So here we're looking at utilization rates and look into developing corrective action plans. Those are some of the key parts of regulations. Many people on the call are aware of these, but these are some of the pieces we hit within the survey. The survey is not just designed for companies that are government contractors. But one of the reasons why we're including this is once we have that avenue for employee contractors but also with regulations that have come down the pike it becomes best practice and people in the industry are looking, well, what are best practices. How should we work in this environment and what are the best ways to treat people and what are some of the policies and procedures we should have in an organization. It's one of the reasons why we also included that as part of our measurement tool. So just a brief screen shot of what the survey looks like. It's a brief survey. It's less than 40 questions for the employee with disability section and then the Veteran's section is only about 25 questions. Really an organization should be able to finish this within a half an hour provided they're a knowledge holder of this information. Andy will talk about how to get involved and take the survey. I'm going to show you some early data we have from round one of doing the survey. So round one of the survey, actually to be honest with you, we're surprised how well it was received. We had 46 percent of the Fortune 500 company, it represents a good

9 segment of the population. 73 percent are federal contractors, we figured that we'd get a lot of early adopters into the DOL ranks. But these are companies that are typically on the cutting edge of disability research. That's one of the reasons why you'll see some of the results are better than we would expect. What is nice is we had a good representation from companies, 20 percent under a thousand and up to about 20 percent up to 50 thousand. We had a nice spread but in addition we had a nice range of the industries. So we had health care and utility, technology, etc. We had a good response rate. We're happy in the first year. So what does the data look like? I mentioned these companies that were the first round taking the survey. These companies were on the cutting edge of disability research. They had successful diversity programs and it did look good. Three quarters of them had a diversity policy that referenced those with disabilities. Three quarters had a diversity champion specifically relevant to the disability sector. So right off the bat, these are high performing companies, it's a little higher than I would expect in the general population, keep that in mind as we move across. In the first round companies were working to meet the required new regulations. This was the early data and was surprising, a third of the company are tracking the ratio of employees with disability to hire. Keep in mind it was collected at the beginning of That was before the regulations started coming out. These were companies tracking previously or started moving the dial. The good news is about 17 percent had already reached the utilization goal of 7 percent employees identifying with a disability. If we look only at federal contractors a quarter of those had met that criteria. I should also point out that it's important to note that we didn't investigate by job category to simplify the survey, we just had a blanket statement about the overall percentage rate so it wasn't completely in line with the DOL ranks. But if you think about it, it gives a nice high level view of it. If it's 30 percent in a different job category, I'm sure the numbers aren't as high.

10 So how is disability doing as compared to diversity? Looking into those two as separate ways of identifying populations. By and large, notice this chart. The green bar represents diversity as an area of study where the blue represents disability. And you'll see across the board, people are doing a lot better specifically looking at diversity than within disability. You'll notice 83 percent of these companies really had a strong diversity policy and about 73 percent of those specifically reference employees with disabilities. That was a good result. What about specific resource groups around diversity, again, almost three quarters but less than 50 percent actually had a resource group specifically for people with disabilities. Similarly senior leaders promoting it. I mentioned before that Tania showed in her results the importance of creating a culture, perceived as disability friendly. 54 percent of Tania's data showed that people were seeking a diversity and disability friendlier environment. 76 percent of senior leaders promoting disability but only about 50 percent promoting specifically disability as a diversity segment. This is what we're seeing in our initial pilot data. Now, more in line with what Tania was speaking about earlier. What about recruiting and on boarding? Less than 50 percent of recruiters are being trained on disability employment needs. In Tania's data we're only seeing about 50 percent of people disclosing during the on boarding process and there's fear around that for specific reasons, we all heard stories about this. How much easier would it be for people to disclose if more than 50 percent of those recruiters had been trained on disability needs. What are the concerns that people with disabilities have when trying to get hired. Only about 50 percent of recruiting materials feature somebody with a disability. More over the accommodation is explained in only less than 40 percent of companies during the hiring process. I thought that was a low number. Hopefully we'll see changes within this over time.

11 If we want to go deeper and look at accessibility of materials, we found that less than 50 percent -- keep in mind by the way -- these are companies that are the cutting edge of disability research. High performing companies but less than 50 percent of the companies had website materials that were 508 compliant. And if people can't read the material on the website, those materials don't exist and only 50 percent were 508 compliant, that's a sobering number there. One limitation with this is, if anyone has experience with this, you know that third party products, there's a lot of variability so it's difficult making it completely 508 compliant, that might be one sticking point. But still, to that end I thought the number was low. I'm going to be talking more about training materials but when looking at alternative training materials being available for people with disabilities, with 24 percent of the companies, it took more than a week to get alternative versions of the training materials for accommodations. Specifically training and development, that's a strong employee value proposition. As people consider their employment opportunities, we notice that in terms of training, manager's annual disability training, only about a third of managers are being trained specifically about disability needs. Again, these are the cutting edge companies and only about a third of them are actually training people on this. We saw that only about 27 percent are training all staff on disability employment needs, so there's a need to improve this. Interesting too, some organizations will include as part of the performance reviews for employees a disability as a competency. What are some of the disability competencies the managers should know about. Some companies are reviewing that as a performance measure, that said, it's a small number. Less than 20 percent are actually doing that. Finally, what about tracking? In terms of tracking, we had 60 percent of the companies that were tracking employees with disabilities in their HRIS system, that number

12 surprised me even for companies on the cutting edge. 60 percent was a surprise to me, that's higher than I expected. What's really interesting is if you look at the other two numbers, they call into question the validity of the data in the 60 percent column, fewer than half invite employees to self-identify as an employees with a disability. If less than half of the companies are allowing employees to self-identify, how do they know that, and how accurate is it? Like I mentioned before, employees with disabilities is something that can happen over time, it's not a static set of people. It changes because people can acquire a disability over time. So really calls into question the data in the HRIS system. The last one I want to point out is as part of the DOL regulations we want to track how well we're doing and what is the treatment like for people with disabilities. I have been doing research with the NOD over the last 6 or 7 years and I noticed that the satisfaction of the organization and satisfaction with certain ways they're being treated is much lower for employees with disabilities versus the general population. So what a lot of companies are starting to do as part of their survey, where looking at the attitudes or engagement of employees across the board, only 20 percent are allowing people to self-identify as having a disability. It gives me the ability to look at my employees with disabilities and compare them to those without disabilities and see how well they're doing. And gives us an opportunity to look and see there's a shortfall in our organization. If our data is lower for people with disabilities what are we doing to keep their engagement from improving. So again, all really interesting information, notice there's been a lot of dovetailing of some of the data Tania was speaking to. I'm going to pass it over to Mike to talk about what it means to the organization. One thing, we will have an opportunity to speak specifically to the questions, we'll get to that. Andy? >>ANDY TRAUB: Thanks Pete. I'm going to have Tania continue on with some of the work she's been working through in talking about some of the data they have for applications for

13 employers. >>TANIA LAVIN: Some of the advice we heard from the GettingHired survey is presented here on this slide and on the next one and I know Andy will chime in with more recommendations. What the candidates reminded us is we need to treat all candidates equally and focus on their abilities not their disabilities. It seems simple, seems easy but it's not something that happens every day as we learned from their experiences in the survey results. We learned how important it is to stay focused on their primary needs so job descriptions are not too restrictive. You can read between the lines of some of these statements. Asking questions about qualifications and skills, keeping a focus on the primary needs of the position. Not only in conversations with the candidates but also writing the job descriptions we need to stay focused on the primary needs. And tying into some of the temporary or flexible working solutions comment I made before. Candidates are seeking out from temporary working solutions. Be it temporary work or flexible hours or job shadowing as a way to test out the candidate and them to test you out as well. Moving on to the next slide. If someone discloses an application process or before you interview them they reminded us we should prepare ourselves to learn as much as we can to learn about that disability before the interview. Research the disability, if and when a candidate discloses. It will prepare us and mitigate the chances of saying the wrong thing. Another way to avoid uncomfortable situations or discrimination is to invest in interview training and sensitivity training. Pete, from the tracker only one third of companies are offering this as an annual event. A lot of companies do it as a lifetime event where early on when you're a hiring manager or in the process you have training to help you with interview and sensitivity training. But it's really not revisited enough as you move through the process.

14 So a lot of hiring managers may hire a ton of candidates in a year but may not encounter candidates with disabilities at every event. It's important to refresh that. Lastly initiative will be more successful if it comes from the top. Pete mentioned senior level involvement from the top down. An integral part of the process and becomes integral to the company brand so every has buy in and headed in the right direction. With that I'll turn it over to Andy. >>ANDY TRAUB: (No response.) >>MIRANDA PAX: Andy, are you perhaps on mute? (Technical difficulties. No audio.) >>ANDY TRAUB: Too many times, the initiatives beginning with recruitment in the eyes of companies and those are things that we're still struggling with. It's not about necessarily recruiting, it's about retention. And oftentimes will refer to organizations as having a -- as actually having -- (Technical difficulties. Busy signal.) >>ANDY TRAUB: We're having more technical difficulty. Hello? >>MIRANDA PAX: I believe the technical difficulties have been resolved, I apologize to all those on the line. If you're able to keep going we can jump back in. >>ANDY TRAUB: Not sure where we finished up but the disability initiatives, obviously companies tend to look straight to recruitment and say go hire me people with disabilities, that's not exactly where we need to start. Disability initiatives need to start with internal

15 focus first to where we understand what our processes and systems and accommodations are that we can make. What type of training can we offer. By the time we go to hire an individual with disabilities all that internal processes and procedures need to be put in place already. What does disclosure look like in your company. It's a big component of what companies need to be able to figure out on the front side. The census bureau uses a figure of 1 out of 5 individuals is an individual with a disability. If you take that math and apply it to your company, you're already hiring people with disabilities in your company and not even know it. When we do training within an organization whether we're training managers, executives or even frontline staff, after every one of those disability etiquette trainings or management trainings, somebody will come up to one of us and say, I feel now that the company is actually doing something where I feel very comfortable being able to disclose my disability. And usually there's somebody from HR standing close by and their eyes light up like, whoa. Preparing internally you can help that disclosure. That's something that each company wrestles with as they go forward. How do we build the business case internally? Use this data. This information will be made available later and Miranda will talk about how. For us to be able to have an opportunity to hear firsthand, it's still very rich and take that and socialize that internally and build the case of what do we do next and how do we become a disability friendly employer. And how do we become a premier disability employer. So use this data. It's very powerful. Also, give people with disabilities in your workplace a voice. The company cannot garner all the benefits of hiring individuals with disabilities. If we have somebody who is actually sitting in a cubicle and they're an individual with disability and how they get it. But taking that individual and understanding they have a perspective that is unique to the rest of our employee population and harnessing that and let them help guide us through the process

16 of hiring and retaining and how to attract individuals with disabilities. Listen to what their voice is. Employee resource groups are fantastic way of doing that. Often times when we talk to the company and how things are set up, we get information back from the company saying well it's not just people with disabilities that want to be in the group, we have people without disabilities. Which happens with ERG's, however these are individuals who are vested parents of individuals with disabilities. There's also executives, this is not just a business thing but there's corporate and social responsibility we need to be able to look at. By providing them a voice you will have a much more rich employee pool. And then recognizing hiring individuals with disabilities should not be about charity. We talk about a lot with National Organization on Disability, they're not about corporate social responsibility, it can be a starting point, but it should not be the end point. And if you leave your disability employment initiative, that's in CSR corporate social responsibility, buckets and budgets are usually first to be empty. But it's a competitive advantage, which hiring individuals with disabilities can be. It can very much -- not only in getting funding but also get support from the top. Same jobs, same pay, same expectations. Not about a charitable event. Pete mentioned there's reporting and internal education to be done with the tracker. Once you have a report, it's rich. It shows where you stack up against your competition as well as other employers out there hiring individuals with disabilities. But that document can be socialized in the executive environment, diversity champions, actually socialize the results to your entire company. It's a great way to do show and tell of what we're actually doing in and the impact we're making in the space for our organizations. The employment tracker itself -- here's a sample report that you get back. It shows how you actually scored and shows where you rank within the sample size of that year. It also has two buttons on the right. One of the blue buttons is leading practices and under that is regulations and the orange button. So this is also an example of what the reports that

17 come back to you. There's a couple different layers. The first layer is leading practices. There's also links that take you directly to companies on what they're doing and provides that as a second level of information that you can leverage. And then if any of the questions relate directly to OFCCP regulations, for people not federal contractors on the phone, just because it's a regulation doesn't mean -- you're not a contractor don't have to worry about it -- really the regulations are great resources for you to build your employment disability hiring and D&I because there is a lot of information that's in the regulations on best practices. So what we do is link you straight back to the OFCCP. You can see what their regulation is and get a picture of the rules themselves. And also many responses from nonfederal contractors found great value in that information as well. And finally, we want to be able to give you opportunities to take the tracker, help some of that investigation and what we would like to do is offer you an address to sign up for the tracker. It is free. Takes about 40 minutes. All the things Pete mentioned about it. But it talks about diversity policy, resource groups, self ID, culture practices and at the conclusion of this webinar you want to send an to tracker@nod.org. You can take it this afternoon if you like. Our window is currently open. With that I will turn this back over to Miranda. >>MIRANDA PAX: Thank you, Andy. And thank you everyone for sticking with us. I see we still have a good crowd of participants on the line. We will at this point in time move into the Q&A section of the program. You can, just as a reminder, enter questions in the Q&A box on the right hand side of your screen. And we will have both Tania, Andy, and Pete available to answer any particular questions or if there are broad questions feel free to enter those too. I see a few people have asked about getting a copy of the presentation. We can certainly share that after today's webinar. Simply send a note in the Q&A box or an to info@nod.org and we can send you a copy of the presentation that way.

18 >>PETER RUTIGLIANO: One question I wanted to respond to. Someone mentioned about the survey itself, it's 40 questions and employees with disabilities might have difficulty taking the survey. I want to clarify something, this survey is not for individuals, but it's more about a company level survey. So we had one person for each a number of companies answer the survey as a representative for the company to talk about their disability employment program. So usually it would be, let's say, the person running the diversity and inclusion group or head VP of HR. And it's not for the general population. It's more to get a feel for how the company is performing. >>MIRANDA PAX: I see a question here about whether or not a company has already completed the survey. We can certainly provide that information, if you're interested in finding out whether your company has taken the survey, simply send an to tracker@nod.org and we'll let you know if another representative in your company has taken the survey. Are there any other questions, I know this is a lot of rich content both from the candidate side and then also from the company level side. Are there any questions for the presenters about any data or implications for employers on recruitment? There's a question here: What is the best for advertising a position set aside for a person with a disability? >>ANDY TRAUB: What we found is not necessarily saying, hey we want to hire individuals with disabilities for this position. But actually position the company itself, whether it be a disability friendly employer, done the work and advertise that you are a disability friendly employer, make sure you address the barriers you have. That's a great way for companies to start that process, for attracting candidates but also look at where you advertise and what networks you're pushing that through. You can find local organizations who have a disability side to them or a disability component, you can provide them a link. Before doing that,

19 organizations will want to know where you're at in your disability hiring practices. >>MIRANDA PAX: Thank you, Andy. Another question, which may be a good one for you also, relating to job posting and requirements, when posting online, if there's physical requirements should they be posted? >>ANDY TRAUB: Your central functions for the job, if there are physical requirements take an opportunity -- if you have those as central functions, I would ask that you take another critical eye and look at that because often times, you know, "you have to be able to lift 50 pounds" -- well there's technology and accommodations that can be used. If they are bona fide requirements put that on the front side versus the backside. An individual with disabilities is going to go through the process and then you don't want to say at the end -- "oh, by the way." So state that on the front side. Whether it be an individual with disability or not. Best practice is to provide that, you actually have in place. >>MIRANDA PAX: Thank you, Andy. Are there any other questions from the audience? Tania, I know that we moved quickly through your presentation, are there any additional points you'd like to share from the data from GettingHired in the survey we haven't had a chance to delve into yet? >>TANIA LAVIN: There are some additional facts. I did cut out some information comparing candidates with disabilities versus candidates without disabilities so if there's an interest I will cover them in length here, I could go on for a number of hours sharing all the results, it's all very interesting to me. But if there are certain questions anyone has about the data or a lens you'd like to look at it from, send a question to me or the team at NOD. I'd be happy to go through anything more. >>MIRANDA PAX: Thank you. I will bring up the contact information of our presenters. Feel free to reach out with any questions, and if you'd like a copy of the presentation feel free to us at info@nod.org. I'd like to give a big thank you to our presenters, our partner

20 Council Members GettingHired and Sirota. And thank you Tania, Pete, and Andy for the presentation. If there are any final questions follow up with us. Thank you all for joining. This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. This text is to be used for communication purposes only.