Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Additional Information
    • Author-Supplied Keywords:
      Americans with disabilities
      Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
      investigation outcomes
      Learning disabilities (LD)
      workplace discrimination
    • Abstract:
      BACKGROUND: This article derives from data provided by the National EEOC ADA Research Project at VCU. It is intended to document whether and how the findings of an EEOC investigation are different when allegations of workplace discrimination derived from persons with Learning Disabilities (LD) are compared to those derived from a General Disability Population (GENDIS). This particular article deals squarely with merit of the allegation upon closure of the investigation. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain differences in outcomes of investigations involving allegations derived from persons with LD vs. GENDIS. METHODS: Database mining and descriptive and non-parametric analyses of merit vs. non-merit closures were compared, as well as CHAID analysis of those factors which drive the difference in closure rates between the two groups. RESULTS: Findings indicate that in general proportion of merit for both groups is about the same. However, there are profound differences in the subcategories "settlements with benefits" (higher for LD) and conciliation failure (lower for LD; the EEOC finds merit but the employer does not concur). With respect to the CHAID analysis, only one predictor value was associated with a significant differentiation of the merit rate within LD: Merit rates were markedly higher for LD in the age group 18-21. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of EEOC investigations derived from persons with LD are not unique. Any history of LD as an "atypical" condition that is poorly understood or of questionable legitimacy is not confirmed by the "behavior" of the ADA implementation process. Indeed the only differentiation between the two groups derives from LD allegations in the narrow age band 19-21 years, wherein the veracity of their charges is elevated by 37%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
    • Abstract:
      Copyright of Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation is the property of IOS Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
    • Author Affiliations:
      1Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
      2Department of Rehabilitation Counseling, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
      3Center for Rehabilitation Science and Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
    • ISSN:
      1052-2263
    • Accession Number:
      10.3233/JVR-160856
    • Accession Number:
      121330226
  • Citations
    • ABNT:
      MCMAHON, M. et al. Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, [s. l.], v. 46, n. 2, p. 203–208, 2017. DOI 10.3233/JVR-160856. Disponível em: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=asn&AN=121330226&custid=s8280428. Acesso em: 16 jul. 2020.
    • AMA:
      McMahon M, McMahon BT, West SL, Conway JP, Lemieux M. Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2017;46(2):203-208. doi:10.3233/JVR-160856.
    • AMA11:
      McMahon M, McMahon BT, West SL, Conway JP, Lemieux M. Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2017;46(2):203-208. doi:10.3233/JVR-160856
    • APA:
      McMahon, M., McMahon, B. T., West, S. L., Conway, J. P., & Lemieux, M. (2017). Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 46(2), 203–208. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-160856
    • Chicago/Turabian: Author-Date:
      McMahon, Megan, Brian T. McMahon, Steven L. West, Joseph P. Conway, and Michaela Lemieux. 2017. “Actual vs. Perceived Workplace Discrimination Involving Charging Parties with Learning Disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project.” Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 46 (2): 203–8. doi:10.3233/JVR-160856.
    • Harvard:
      McMahon, M. et al. (2017) ‘Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project’, Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 46(2), pp. 203–208. doi: 10.3233/JVR-160856.
    • Harvard: Australian:
      McMahon, M, McMahon, BT, West, SL, Conway, JP & Lemieux, M 2017, ‘Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project’, Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 203–208, viewed 16 July 2020, .
    • MLA:
      McMahon, Megan, et al. “Actual vs. Perceived Workplace Discrimination Involving Charging Parties with Learning Disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project.” Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, vol. 46, no. 2, Mar. 2017, pp. 203–208. EBSCOhost, doi:10.3233/JVR-160856.
    • Chicago/Turabian: Humanities:
      McMahon, Megan, Brian T. McMahon, Steven L. West, Joseph P. Conway, and Michaela Lemieux. “Actual vs. Perceived Workplace Discrimination Involving Charging Parties with Learning Disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project.” Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation 46, no. 2 (March 2017): 203–8. doi:10.3233/JVR-160856.
    • Vancouver/ICMJE:
      McMahon M, McMahon BT, West SL, Conway JP, Lemieux M. Actual vs. perceived workplace discrimination involving charging parties with learning disabilities: The National EEOC ADA Research Project. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation [Internet]. 2017 Mar [cited 2020 Jul 16];46(2):203–8. Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=asn&AN=121330226&custid=s8280428