In news:R90um.81567$OO7.66610@text.news.virginmedia.com,
Brian Gaff <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> typed:
> I'd not be totally hard on employers though, often the support needed
> from Government to give blind people a job, is not forthcoming unless
> the job is a done deal, and its a catch 22 situation.

In the U.S. it's even worse. Under the Americans with Disabliities Act (ADA)
businesses are required to accomodate disabled employees (special equipment
among other things), but the government does not provide any assistance,
monetary or otherwise. The ADA is one of those do-gooder acts that have done
more harm than good.

Yes, mind you there are lots of those box ticking acts around over here as
well.
I could list subsidised transport which does not allow blind people to 'see'
what it is costing them till the end of the trip, and then only the word of
the driver.
Government requiring volunteers get so many criminal and other record checks
before they can work with 'the blind' that it can take over three months to
get the person vetted, and by then they have given up.

etc etc.

Seems to me some common sense in the thinking of do gooding is needed
unless its just a sop to say something is being done when its not.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"nomius" <nomius@myisp.net> wrote in message
news:h9aedq$48i$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> In news:R90um.81567$OO7.66610@text.news.virginmedia.com,
> Brian Gaff <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> typed:
>> I'd not be totally hard on employers though, often the support needed
>> from Government to give blind people a job, is not forthcoming unless
>> the job is a done deal, and its a catch 22 situation.
>
> In the U.S. it's even worse. Under the Americans with Disabliities Act
> (ADA) businesses are required to accomodate disabled employees (special
> equipment among other things), but the government does not provide any
> assistance, monetary or otherwise. The ADA is one of those do-gooder acts
> that have done more harm than good.
>
>
>

In message <Zzkum.81886$OO7.674@text.news.virginmedia.com>, Brian Gaff
<briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> writes
>Government requiring volunteers get so many criminal and other record checks
>before they can work with 'the blind' that it can take over three months to
>get the person vetted, and by then they have given up.
>
Not forgetting the 64 quid you might have to fork out and the fact that
you have to be vetted for *each* of your working with people be it for
work or leisure. My daughter has - at the last count - four of these
certificates, renewed yearly. Am I glad that in each case her employers
have been paying for them.
>
>etc etc.
>
I refuse to do any voluntary work that brings me into direct contact
with people. Thank goodness there's still plenty that can be done
without being face to face.

Sincerely Chris
--
Chris McMillan
sig line taking a holiday

I don't have time to go in to details, but when.gov gets involved
even the best intentions can lead to disaster.
In defense of the ADA I will say that there are major tax breaks for
employers that provide special equiptment for disabled workers. On
the other hand it has led to many lawsuits that for me are frivalous,
filed by people who don't want to meet the nondisabled world half
way, and its biggest weakness is that it generally makes no provission
for getting people to work in small business.(I think businesses that
employ under 10 have no obligations, and are generally ignored by .gov
agencies looking to place disabled workers)
But what do you expect in a world where if I help an injured person
and they live and their outcome is less than perfect I can be sued/
the government promotes me leaving them to die.

Brian Gaff wrote:
> Yes, mind you there are lots of those box ticking acts around over here as
> well.
> I could list subsidised transport which does not allow blind people to 'see'
> what it is costing them till the end of the trip, and then only the word of
> the driver.
> Government requiring volunteers get so many criminal and other record checks
> before they can work with 'the blind' that it can take over three months to
> get the person vetted, and by then they have given up.
>
> etc etc.
>
> Seems to me some common sense in the thinking of do gooding is needed
> unless its just a sop to say something is being done when its not.
>
> Brian
>
> --
> Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
> Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
> in the display name may be lost.
> Blind user, so no pictures please!
> "nomius" <nomius@myisp.net> wrote in message
> news:h9aedq$48i$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> > In news:R90um.81567$OO7.66610@text.news.virginmedia.com,
> > Brian Gaff <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> typed:
> >> I'd not be totally hard on employers though, often the support needed
> >> from Government to give blind people a job, is not forthcoming unless
> >> the job is a done deal, and its a catch 22 situation.
> >
> > In the U.S. it's even worse. Under the Americans with Disabliities Act
> > (ADA) businesses are required to accomodate disabled employees (special
> > equipment among other things), but the government does not provide any
> > assistance, monetary or otherwise. The ADA is one of those do-gooder acts
> > that have done more harm than good.
> >
> >
> >