4 out of 10 companies won’t employ people with "mental illness"
Many partners/spouses/family members are critical of the fact that whoever in their family with Bipolar (or other mental illness) might not be working or is in and out of work “can’t hold a job down”. Often this is manifest by them saying “they’ve never worked”, “they’ve been unemployed for years”, “they don’t want to work” etc. Just read various entries in my blog and you’ll see these comments listed.
So, I’ve been researching work place discrimination. Is it true that all these people who are unemployed are “lazy”, “can’t be bothered” “unreliable” “don’t want to work” etc? Or is it that they can’t get work due to their history of mental illness?
Well, I’m posting some research for you all showing just how big a problem it is for people with mental health problems to work and to find work. Here are some excerpts from Professor Thornicroft’s work “Actions Speak Louder than Word” report for the Mental Health Foundation.
20% of the general population are unemployed.
35% of physically disabled people are unemployed.
80% of people with mental health illnesses are unemployed.
This is the highest rate of unemployment amongst all categories of people and substantially higher than amongst physically disabled people (Nice to know I’m in a “category”).
It is clear that although the primary disability can affect a person’s ability to find and keep work, the flexibility of the employment environment also plays a large part in shaping how far people with diagnoses of mental illness are included in the workforce. The figures are formidable in England:
- 33% of people with mental health problems say that they have been dismissed or forced to resign from their jobs,
- 40% say that they were denied a job because of their history of psychiatric treatment
- 60% say that they have been put off applying for a job as they expect to be dealt with unfairly.Indeed for some people discrimination in the work place is far greater than in any other domain
But this unemployment rate is not due to people being “lazy”: One survey found that people with mental disorders had the highest ‘want to work’ rate i.e. 86% of people with mental illness wanted to find a job, compared to 52% of the disabled people interviewed wanted to find a job.
Why is finding and keeping a job so difficult for so many people with a diagnosis of
mental illness?
One explanation is that employers discriminate against applicants who declare a history of psychiatric treatment. In a study of 200 Human Resource Officers in UK companies, vignettes of job applicants were submitted which were identical except for the presence or absence of a diagnosis of depression. The mention of a mental illness significantly reduced the chances of employment, compared with a history of diabetes. This differential treatment was made based upon perceptions of potential poor work performance, rather than expectations of future absenteeism.
Similar results came from another national study of employers in Britain. Fewer that 40% said that they would
consider employing a person with a history of mental health problems, compared with 60% for people with
a physical disability, and about 80% for long-term unemployed people and lone parents 74;89;90. One possible check to such direct discrimination are the policies of Occupational Health departments, but fewer than half of employers in the UK, for example, have such staff.
A real dilemma faced by people with a history of psychiatric treatment is whether to disclose this when applying for a job. From what we have seen there are strong reasons to believe that disclosure will reduce the likelihood of success. On the other hand, failure to disclose may break an employment contract, and also mean that the person is not able to ask for modifications to the job to make it more manageable (usually called ‘reasonable adjustments’) under the Disability Discrimination Act.
So there is no easy solution to this dilemma, or how to describe gaps in the employment
history. One approach is to make a balance sheet of advantages and disadvantages of declaring a history of
mental illness, and to use this in making a decision.
The other is to become self employed where possible as this circumvents any need to disclose it at all!
Here is a definition of Stigma: “stigma projects the fear and anxiety felt by members of the general population onto the person with the diagnosis. People with a diagnosis do not really carry a mark that sets them aside.”
So there is no mark on us and yet we are set aside. What are the reasons for this?
Do write in and let me know your employment experiences…..
Steve, I wrote to Ofsted following your comment and this is their reply. They do not say that someone with a mental health illness should not be working with children. If you are going to base your assessment of an application around their mental health problem then surely good practice and fairness would say that you should get a full medical report from their psychiatrist. This would be the only way to obtain an informed view on their suitability to work with children.
Here is the email from Ofsted:
Thank you for your email.
Ofsted do not do suitability checks for members of staff, these are the responsibility of the child care provider.
Providers should make decisions of suitability using evidence from:
references;
full employment history;
qualifications;
interviews;
identity checks;
any other checks undertaken, for example medical suitability.
Providers should notify all people connected with their provision who work directly with children that they expect them to declare to them all convictions and/or cautions; as well as court orders which may disqualify them from working with children or affect their suitability to do so.
Providers will also have to have regard to any statutory guidance issued relating to the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 once these come into force with the intended introduction of a new vetting and barring scheme for those working with children and vulnerable adults from autumn 2008.
If you have any concerns regarding an individual who has been deemed suitable to work in a child care provision then please contact Ofsted with the details.
Should you require any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact us.
Regards,
Cara Daley
Customer Service Advisor
Ofsted – National Business Unit
TEL: 08456 404040
Hi Steve, thanks for your input. I’m very interested in your comment, in particular about Ofsted and them “not permitting any child to be placed in danger”. I can wholly understand that you wouldn’t want to employ someone who may be abusive to children or put them in danger. However, how do you assess this as an employer? This isn’t a rhetorical question – I am genuinely interested in what processes or checks that you, as an employer, would conduct to determine whether or not a potential employee is dangerous in any way.
What guidance do Ofsted give on employing people with mental health problems in a day care setting?
I own a day care centre and our regulatory body (Ofsted) will not permit any child to be placed in danger – clearly someone with any mental illness that could result in a person becoming abusive etc could not only serioulsy upset children but potential put them in a position of danger – therefore I certainly wouldnt be keen on employing someone to carry out childcare who has this condition – for any other role within the business then I wouldnt have any issues at all and would welcome anyone as an employee.
Emma, I have checked out what the CRB is about. I don’t know how much you know about it but the information is as follows:
Criminal Record Bureau Disclosures (CRB) are often required by employers for those working with children and other vulnerable people. As the name says though, it is a check for CRIMINAL records, which is entirely different from a police record showing that you have been detained by the police under the Mental Health Act. YOU HAVE NOT COMMITTED A CRIMINAL OFFENCE, purely by being detained under the Mental Health Act (unless, of course, it was in conjunction with a criminal act).
If you haven’t already done so, contact the CRB and ask them whether your situation will affect your employment:
http://www.crb.gov.uk.
You could also check with the Department for Children Schools and Families to see whether the fact that you have been diagnosed will prevent you from being able to work with children:
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/index.htm.
Hi Emma. I’m glad to hear that you are in recovery. I hope your diagnosis has been helpful for you, has it? Do you believe it or agree with the diagnosis? I have been checking s136 to see if there is anything in it to determine whether or not the fact that the police were able to detain you under that section would be allowed to be shown on your CRB report. I will investigate and get back to you on it as I haven’t come across that issue before…..I hope it won’t affect you though.
Are there any other readers out there who have had their mental health illness show up on a CRB check?
Hi Jean-Jacques. Thanks for taking the time to comment. I agree wholeheartedly that employers shouldn’t fire someone for being ill and that, in theory, you can take an employer to court for discrimination if you can prove it. I am also an employment lawyer specialising in discrimination. I believe that the more accountable these employers are made to be, the more cautious they will become in flouting the law. There only needs to be a few high profile cases with lots of negative media coverage for employers to start listening up.
Unfortunately,though, I am frequently dealing with cases where it is clear that the employer has discriminated against someone but the employee has to be brave enough, strong enough and financially able to sue the employer. This is tricky for a lot of people. I myself sued my former law firm and won an out of court settlement but it was very stressful and I took a risk that my settlement would cover my legal fees (which it did as I settled for compensation plus my legal fees). However, there is a problem proving discrimination against an employer who may have exceptionally good ways of covering up what they have done or said, especially if they have retained a very good lawyer to defend them!
Still, I firmly believe that as many of us as possible could stand up to some of these employers who are guilty of discrimination, then gradually attitudes might change.
I think the way to change employer attitudes ultimately though is through education rather than suing them. If they are taught to differentiate between those employees who really are too ill to work, and those who are managing their condition well, then they may become less prejudiced. This will take time and resources but it wasn’t long ago that women were sacked when they became pregnant and Nelso Mandela was in jail so there’s hope!!
Good luck to you in your own work….
hi , i have been diagnosed as having BPD ,
I wouldent normally tell my employer because i am in ‘recovery’ and it hasnt effected me for 5months
The only trouble is the turning point for me was just over 5 months ago when i was taken by police under section 136 , and i believe itll show up on my CRB check when it comes thro , because i work with children i doubt ill be kept on =(
i’m bipolar and there’s a lot of discrimination outhere. I would never say i’m bipolar in the workplace. If something happens and they want to fire you even after having a manic episode at work, they will have to answer to the law because it”s an ilness, not intentional and that you cant fire someone for being ill. You can easily sue them for that and chances are you’ll win. The other thing that might happen is that they’ll put you on disability for a certain period of time. But unless a doctor says you can work ever, you can eventually go back to work. We shouldn’t carry the weight of justify our mental illness to employers. it’s like any other illness and most of the time you can work in between episodes. But we might have to settle it in court.