NGO Comments on the draft text
Draft article 22 - RIGHT TO WORK

World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry
Intervention on Article 22 (The Right to Work)

The World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry would like to reaffirm this article especially sub-section (a) that States Parties shall take appropriate steps to safeguard and promote the realization of the right to work, including measures to promote a labor market and work environment that are open, inclusive and accessible to all persons with disabilities. One reason for the support of this article is that public services employment application forms often ask about past medical history of mental illness. It would be good if it was to help the person to cope with the work but it is used negatively to screen the person out.

We would also like to see that subsection (h) is retained as per draft because it provides explicit protection in all aspects of employment.

We oppose the idea of sheltered workshops for people with psychosocial disabilities because this leads to segregation in the work environment but would like to have reasonable accommodation as provided for in subsection (e). We would also like equal pay for equal work as indicated in (h) to protect against economic exploitation which can happen in sheltered workshops.

Intervention by (Australian) National Association of Community Legal Centres, People with Disability Australia Incorporated, Australian Federation of Disability Organisations

Mr Chairman:

Thank you for this opportunity to address the Ad Hoc Committee.

We strongly support the intervention of the ILO in proposing amendments to Article 22, and in particular welcome the suggested reference in the chapeau to “women and men” with disability, a reference which effectively deals with the Working Group’s concerns at FN 87.

In a similar vein, we would like to propose amendments dealing with the particular situations and vulnerabilities of young people and geographically isolated people with disability. These groups experience aggravated forms of discrimination, oppression, and lack of equal access to employment opportunities.

As regards children and young people, we suggest the insertion in the chapeau of the words “of lawful working age” after the phrase “women and men with disabilities”. We believe that this proposal directly tackles the issue of the forced labour of young people with disability, and effectively undermines any argument that people with disability not of lawful working age have a “right” to be employed, when they should instead be receiving an education.

In respect of geographically isolated persons with disability, we note the way in which this issue is addressed within the Bangkok draft, and we suggest the creation of a new paragraph within the Article in substantially similar terms:

“States Parties shall ensure that the measures articulated in paragraph 1 are implemented and apply equally and without discrimination to people with disability in rural or remote areas, in small island communities, or in scattered populations”.

We also support the ILO’s suggested amendment to sub par ( c ) proposing alternative forms of employment. The ILO amendment will ensure that work in such alternative forms of employment does not become a permanent situation for people with disability, and that planning and services to facilitate a person’s entry or re-entry into the open labour market will be provided.

It is also important to note that such alternative forms of employment are not stated to lie outside States Parties’ labour laws governing working conditions, including laws dealing with the principle of equal pay for work of equal value referred to in sub par (g). Accordingly, workers in such alternative forms of employment shall be entitled to the same rates of pay as workers in the open market performing work of similar value.

We would suggest, however, that the reference to such alternative forms of employment be further amended by requiring that such forms of employment be provided within inclusive, mainstream employment settings. Such a requirement would ensure that the transitional nature of the alternative employment forms are emphasised, and that permanent and totally segregated employment services for people with disability are avoided.

We also recommend that:

Sub-pars (b) to (d) inclusive are amended to commence with the words “Ensure that”, along with necessary consequential amendments, rather than with the phrases “enable”, “promote” and “encourage” respectively;

Sub-par ( c ) is amended to insert the words “maintaining and” before the word “retaining employment”;

Sub-par (d) is amended to insert the words “services to support people with disability in the workplace” after the words “wage subsidies”;

Sub-par (g) is amended to insert the words “workplace training” after the words “continuance of employment”;

Sub-par (h) is amended to add the words “at all levels” after the words “public sector”.

We further suggest the insertion of a new sub-par (j) to provide as follows:

“Incorporate the measures referred to in sub-paragraphs ( a ) to (i) of this Article into domestic legislation.”

Thank you.