Discover Top Posts Tagged with #s is working

(This post is about the US, because that's what the original was about and that's where I live. Not a lawyer, not an HR person, just got a management (CSM) certification and a lot of opinions)

I saw a post going around about how lifting requirements (i.e. must be able to lift up to 50 lbs) in job notices for desk jobs are ableist. And I stayed out of it, because like, that was an activism space post, and I have management/hiring advice, though I am a disabled person who has had to restrict my job duties due to physical limitations. Essentially, while I do see where people are coming from, I really don't think the situation is as it is being presented, and targeting lift requirements as an example of ableism in hiring is like arguing about the color of the mailbox when the house is on fire.

The whole deal with lifting requirements and why they need to be in job descriptions is that they're actually workman's comp statements in disguise. That number (or 50 lbs, for a desk job, or a much higher number for other jobs, it's state by state) is your threshold for how much weight you can be expected to handle and still file a workman's comp claim. They should be replaced with something like:

The incumbent is restricted to a lift/push/pull limit of X pounds under [workman's comp statute] and can be reasonably expected to safely address loads under that threshold.

because that's what the regulations actually reflect. That's a statement of your legal protections: you are legally indemnified for injuries while handling under that weight, and you are not protected for injuries when over your limit, unless you can demonstrate you were under duress from your employer. (I have no idea whether you'd still get workman's comp if you had a total lift ban as an ADA accommodation, certainly there's case law. Management; not a lawyer.)

The truth is, in the vast majority of cases, nobody gives a shit about what you can lift, and I mean that in the best way and the worst way.

If you can't lift what it requires, apply anyway. It's the simplest accommodation in the world. Loads of able-bodied people just don't lift shit and make other people do it. An organization who wants you there will work around it.

[Big caveat: Just because you think it's a desk job does not automatically mean there's no lifting. My job requires 0 lifting. We've got other jobs in the office that look exactly as sedentary on paper, but they require you to lift stuff 15 lb over your head while working alone in an isolated, unmonitored area. We cannot hire someone who cannot boost 20 lb 6 feet in the air, and we are not required to. If we like you but you can't lift 20 lb, we'll have the hiring manager keep your name on the recruiting list for new positions without lift requirements, as we do with anybody we like who doesn't get hired.]

This is the bad part and it sucks ass, but you already know it's true:

People who don't want to hire you because you are visibly disabled won't use lift requirements against you. In fact, that's a stupid thing to do if you're trying to get away with discrimination. Bigots know how not to hire people from protected classes, and step one is never, ever bringing up things connected to those classes. Very unfortunately, it is incredibly hard to nail someone on discrimination during the hiring process, because they essentially have to write down or say to your face, "We cannot hire you because you are [protected class], and we don't want any of you people working here." Discrimination in hiring is usually not acted on until it's been going on for ages, and more than likely, you are another data point.

Bigots who already hated the mere concept of you before you even applied are going to reject you on things like "not the right fit" and "just a bad feeling" and "didn't send a cover letter" and "didn't like their tone" and "said um too many times" and "company culture." Your rights in the hiring process are practically nil. For state government hiring, you often have the right to have your application reviewed and sent to the hiring official, but this is not a federal requirement. They don't even have to hire you if you were the only person who applied!

I don't want you to get any kind of impression like I'm happy about any of this shit. My team is 100% disabled, thank you very much, not on purpose but because I poached every damn one of them from inside the organization from other managers who didn't appreciate their greatness. Job applicants need considerably more protection than they have.

It's miserable for applicants, but all this fuckery is also interminable for hiring officials (this usage is inconsistent, but here, it means me, the person who actually interviews and selects candidates to join my team, not the person who runs recruiting, processes applications, and liaises with applicants for the whole organization). Luckily my biggest obstacles in hiring have retired, but I cannot stand having my hands tied by having to work with someone whose motivations I have to question. Just let me hire the best candidate. Nothing else matters. If they can lift their laptop so they can switch between in office and WFH, I reckon it's fine.

Anyway, if you learn anything from this post, let it be this:

DON'T FUCKIN MOVE FURNITURE AT WORK IF YOUR UPPER WEIGHT LIMIT IS 50 POUNDS. Furniture is heavier than you think and you will not the fuck get paid out for it. If your boss insists that you must, you 1) say the words "workman's comp" in their face and 2) ask them to put it in writing that they are requiring you to do it. If you do not have proof that they made you do it and you get hurt, you are on the hook.

Sometimes it is painfully obvious that my mother, among the many, many roles she filled for the company she worked for for 21 years, handled insurance, workman's comp, and HR. Being a second generation manager is a lot.

#s is working

Trending Tags

Recently Viewed Tags

#s is working