Monday, September 20, 1998
First job interview still hurts
Load of questions insulted applicant
BY DEBORAH KENDRICK
The Cincinnati Enquirer
I'll never forget my first job offer. Not so much because of the offer itself, but because of its tragic and sudden demise.
Just a few short weeks from that rude ejection from college life into the world of work, I was offered an entry-level spot in news operations at a television station in my hometown, Toledo.
They had my writing samples, college transcripts and letters of recommendation - on paper and over the phone, I looked pretty good.
The face-to-face interview, (a mere formality, my would-be employer had assured me) changed everything.
''How did you get here?'' this would-be employer wanted to know. ''Who typed your letter? Who wrote these samples for you?''
The ''problem'' was that he had not been prepared for a blind person. When I walked through that door, guide dog at my side, my job disappeared. He could not believe that I could do the job because he could not imagine himself, without sight, doing anything.
It was not yet illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities. The truth is that even if it had been illegal, I'm not sure I would have pursued the job any further. I was only 20 years old. The humiliation was like nothing I had experienced to date.
Mitsubishi case
Last week, with the strength of public law 101-336 (the Americans with Disabilities Act) and perhaps some change in social attitudes, Mitsubishi Motor Manufacturing of America was forced to pay out $3 million to settle the complaints of 87 individuals who believed themselves to be discriminated against in the company's hiring procedures.
These applicants were made conditional job offers; when the requisite medical exam revealed any physical imperfections, all offers were withdrawn.
Asthma, diabetes, hearing impairment and back injury were among the offending imperfections for which Mitsubishi now has to pay 87 people anywhere from $10,000 to $120,000 for the discriminatory behavior. The company is also in the process of revising hiring policies and retraining personnel in charge of hiring.
It tickles my funny bone to think that all this discriminatory activity took place at the Mitsubishi factory in Normal, Ill. But employers everywhere are committing similar offenses, and probably more out of ignorance than malice.
In short, it is not legal to require that a worker possess a certain trait or skill if that ability is not directly related to an essential function of the job.
Driving, for example, is an ''essential job function'' for an ambulance driver, a truck driver or a taxi driver. It is illegal to require a driving license for a position of teacher or social worker or retail sales representative. Getting to and from the job is necessary for most workers, but requiring that a worker drive himself there is often discriminatory.
A physical examination requirement is OK, but excluding a worker because of conditions discovered in the physical that are not related to the job is illegal.
Insulting and rude
It's OK to wonder how someone with a situation different from your own gets the job done. As an employer, it's definitely not OK to eliminate an applicant because of your own preconceived notions of how a disability will coincide with job performance.
Today, it would not be legal for an employer to insult an applicant, as I was so insulted at age 20, with a barrage of questions like ''How did you get here?'' and ''Who really typed your letter?''
Perhaps a more significant rule to remember for then - and today - is that such condescension is just plain rude and inappropriate.
Deborah Kendrick, a Cincinnati free-lance writer, is a nationally recognized advocate for people with disabilities. Write: Deborah Kendrick, Cincinnati Enquirer, 312 Elm St., Cincinnati 45202; e-mail: 71340.473@compuserve.com.
KENDRICK ARCHIVE
