![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
AtW Cap & changes: You're too expensive!
Mar. 14th, 2015 11:34 pmA few days ago a sudden announcement by Mark Harper minister for Disabled People appeared. It outlined some changes to Access to Work (AtW) the government scheme to assess and fund some of disabled people's support needs in the workplace in order to include us fully in society.
£1 into AtW = £1.48 out to economy
Before I criticise this latest cut to AtW - it is important to keep in mind that in 2005 government research showed that for every £1 spent on AtW that the treasury found the economy benefited by £1.48 due to disabled people being able to contribute to tax compared to having to claim unemployment benefits and other people being employed to work for and with disabled employees.
The two main concerns I have are:
1) The £40,800 cap on AtW awards per year.
2) The linking of eligibility to AtW for self-employed people to Universal Credit rules.
The cap, who it affects and why
The cap will affect less than 1% of AtW users who need the kind of support which cannot currently be entirely or reliably provided by technology to do their work to a high standard like a non-disabled person.
This is likely to be some Deaf/HOH people needing high amounts of "communication support" including:
British Sign Language (BSL)/English interpreters,
Speech to Text Reporters (STTRs),
Lipspeakers,
Electronic Notetakers
(Unless specified "communication support" in this post means any or all of these).
This will also affect disabled people with severe or multiple impairments who
may require a variety of solutions which cost-wise add up to more than the cap.. Deafblind people for example might need communication support AND other support such as travel.
Communication support - why is it so expensive?
It isn't just anyone who can provide high quality communication support for deaf, HOH and deafblind people. Training to become a communication support professional takes 5-10 years with them having to meet high language and accuracy standards. Suggestions in the announcement that the government will implement translation services frameworks are worrying when various professional communication support workers' groups believe the standards will be forgotten in order to cut costs.
I personally have had cheaper services provided to me instead of STTR. BSL users often get fobbed off with people who have no BSL/English interpreting qualifications and sometimes almost no signing skills. Deaf people are often ignored or dismissed when we try to explain that the "professional" that has been booked for us is not appropriate. It is vital that the quality of our professionals are not dumbed down.
There are fewer than 25 STTR operators and 25 lipspeakers in the UK so they often have to travel and stay overnight in hotel accommodation to work for their clients. Deaf BSL users in rural areas may live some distance from their nearest BSL/English interpreters. These factors both add to the cost. It is really only people living in London who don't regularly have travel as an issue. I'm in Birmingham and my nearest STTR ops and Electronic notetaker is 90-120 mins away.
It's 2015 can't Communication Support work remotely over the internet
There is also a fear that many deaf people will be pushed to use cheaper remote services. There is a place for video relay for BSL or remote STTR and electronic notetaking but they are only appropriate for some situations and quality can be reduced. I doubt it is even possible to do lipspeaking or hands on signing remotely.
Remote BSL/English and STTR also have issues of managing the technology at the user's end:
Getting high quality audio from the speaker to the communication professional via fast/reliable Internet connection.
A way of viewing the sign or captions that are produced.
Sounds simple? Despite being a techie I haven't yet worked out how to do remote STTR reliably!
Remote service provision also has latency issues, ESPECIALLY when using cellular Internet connections:
Time for audio from speaker to reach communication professional
Time for video or captions to reach the deaf person
An extra second or two doesn't seem like much, but it makes a huge difference to the intelligibility and ability to follow the speech in real-time.
I can't comment heavily on remote BSL services but signing friends say they are much less good and they should be listened to!
Deaf people need to be able to use their strongest communication method
I am also worried that as STTR is more expensive per hour than BSL that in future people will be pushed to use BSL even if sign is not their strongest language. Or when it seems more convenient to use text methods that BSL users will be expected to use them instead of BSL.
Can't you just get the hearing folk to type?
I also know of deaf people pushed to use a "manual typing system" which requires colleagues or clients to type to them. Most deaf people can and will use typing or writing at times to overcome hearing people's inability to communicate in BSL or with clear lip patterns, but it's low quality communication and is not appropriate for anything other than basic conversations!
Most people speak at around 200 words per minute but even professional typists can only type at around 50 words per minute. In my experience most hearing people type REALLY slowly which is boring! BSL is an entirely different language from English, which is why we have BSL/English interpreters.
Self employed - you'd better not be part time, or have a low income if you want Access to Work!
The linking of self-employment Access to Work funding with Universal Credit sounds good in words alone, but this becomes linked to minimum hourly earnings and minimum number of hours worked in the self-employment. I don't really know much about this but Alison writing as @deaf on twitter and Facebook has written more about this and I've tried to do a bit of reading myself but honestly got lost in Jobcentre Bureaucratese.
It seems that Universal Credit has a number of issues which Johny Void outlines. If you're not earning enough in your self-employment you will be deemed to not be working enough hours and forced to deal with jobcentre hideous disablism and become ineligible for Access to Work. I also don't know how this is going to work for disabled people who have part-time businesses and used to be able to get AtW to assist them in equality for those.
Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment
Some deaf and disabled people will get Personal Independence Payment so may be OK with AtW and eligibility but others such as those who are just deaf often can't get Personal Independence Payment so will have to work more hours to get the same eligibility... How is that fair?
Sacrifice the few for the many - apparently
The narrative around this 1% is that the needs of the few are being sacrificed to free up money for "mental health interventions" and the "many" rather than more money being put into services to focus on mental health support systems.
ETA: I don't know if those affected by the Universal Credit eligibility rules means that those affected is higher than 1%. I suspect it is. I will try and find data/%.
This narrative relies on people thinking £40,800 is a lot of money and that it's not unreasonable to have a hard limit or only support those working 'full time'... I think this is also a focus on people whose support needs can be resolved with one-off interventions and a narrative that anyone who needs ongoing support is "too demanding" "too needy" "too expensive" and "can no longer be afforded". This was already covered in the Snowdon Trust's 2013 A shared view survey report about Disabled Students' Allowances caps which have very similar issues to the AtW ones.
This announcement changes Access to Work from principled equality to a cost-prioritised system where equality is conditional. There were legitimate requests for an arbitration panel to cover those people with high-cost awards as there might be very good reasons such as multiple-impairments, or high demand jobs like being the leader of an organisation so having long hours and high costs but this seems to have been ignored. There is no right of appeal from Access to Work as it's not a right or entitlement but reframed as a "benefit" which is claimed by shirkers and scroungers!
As a deaf and disabled person I am SICK of being told: "you are too expensive"!
I'm not directly affected now/yet, because I only need occasional STTR at the moment but I am already feeling scared to push my career in directions of my purported-strengths because I fear I won't be able to manage and sustain the communication support that I will need to perform to a high standard and not become ill from audio-overload. It would only take 12 hours a week of remote-STTR or 6 in-person STTR for me to max that cap.
And don't believe for a second most employers can afford, or are willing to pick up the remaining costs - cos they won't. Employers already discriminate in recruitment of disabled people and this will worsen. Where a disabled person is employed they will be told they can't have the support, have to use cheaper/inferior alternatives and not have the support they need to perform to their best ability. Disabled students sometimes have to use cheaper/inferior alternatives now due to DSA caps. AtW caps will further limit deaf and disabled people's ability to develop and progress within the workplace!
I have written to my MP this evening to ask him to challenge the government about this and at least bring back in an arbitration panel for people who feel the decision is unfair but I honestly don't know what else I can do other than ask others to write to their MPs and the DWP.
Do we need to ask for an impact assessment here? Can we challenge this legally? Judicial review somehow?
Other reactions to the Access to Work cuts in no particular order
British Deaf Association (BDA) (BSL + English): https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=868566606538995
Alison Bryan (English): http://www.twitter.com/deaf
National Deaf Children's Society (NDCS) (English): http://www.ndcs.org.uk/for_the_media/press_releases/statement_in_4.html
Disability News Service (English): http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/access-to-work-plans-for-new-cap-on-awards-is-huge-concern/
Stop Changes to Access to Work (English): https://stopchanges2atw.wordpress.com/2015/03/12/stop-changes-to-access-to-work-response-to-ministerial-statement/
Neil Crowther (English): https://makingrightsmakesense.wordpress.com/2015/03/12/a-cap-on-talent/
£1 into AtW = £1.48 out to economy
Before I criticise this latest cut to AtW - it is important to keep in mind that in 2005 government research showed that for every £1 spent on AtW that the treasury found the economy benefited by £1.48 due to disabled people being able to contribute to tax compared to having to claim unemployment benefits and other people being employed to work for and with disabled employees.
The two main concerns I have are:
1) The £40,800 cap on AtW awards per year.
2) The linking of eligibility to AtW for self-employed people to Universal Credit rules.
The cap, who it affects and why
The cap will affect less than 1% of AtW users who need the kind of support which cannot currently be entirely or reliably provided by technology to do their work to a high standard like a non-disabled person.
This is likely to be some Deaf/HOH people needing high amounts of "communication support" including:
(Unless specified "communication support" in this post means any or all of these).
This will also affect disabled people with severe or multiple impairments who
may require a variety of solutions which cost-wise add up to more than the cap.. Deafblind people for example might need communication support AND other support such as travel.
Communication support - why is it so expensive?
It isn't just anyone who can provide high quality communication support for deaf, HOH and deafblind people. Training to become a communication support professional takes 5-10 years with them having to meet high language and accuracy standards. Suggestions in the announcement that the government will implement translation services frameworks are worrying when various professional communication support workers' groups believe the standards will be forgotten in order to cut costs.
I personally have had cheaper services provided to me instead of STTR. BSL users often get fobbed off with people who have no BSL/English interpreting qualifications and sometimes almost no signing skills. Deaf people are often ignored or dismissed when we try to explain that the "professional" that has been booked for us is not appropriate. It is vital that the quality of our professionals are not dumbed down.
There are fewer than 25 STTR operators and 25 lipspeakers in the UK so they often have to travel and stay overnight in hotel accommodation to work for their clients. Deaf BSL users in rural areas may live some distance from their nearest BSL/English interpreters. These factors both add to the cost. It is really only people living in London who don't regularly have travel as an issue. I'm in Birmingham and my nearest STTR ops and Electronic notetaker is 90-120 mins away.
It's 2015 can't Communication Support work remotely over the internet
There is also a fear that many deaf people will be pushed to use cheaper remote services. There is a place for video relay for BSL or remote STTR and electronic notetaking but they are only appropriate for some situations and quality can be reduced. I doubt it is even possible to do lipspeaking or hands on signing remotely.
Remote BSL/English and STTR also have issues of managing the technology at the user's end:
Sounds simple? Despite being a techie I haven't yet worked out how to do remote STTR reliably!
Remote service provision also has latency issues, ESPECIALLY when using cellular Internet connections:
An extra second or two doesn't seem like much, but it makes a huge difference to the intelligibility and ability to follow the speech in real-time.
I can't comment heavily on remote BSL services but signing friends say they are much less good and they should be listened to!
Deaf people need to be able to use their strongest communication method
I am also worried that as STTR is more expensive per hour than BSL that in future people will be pushed to use BSL even if sign is not their strongest language. Or when it seems more convenient to use text methods that BSL users will be expected to use them instead of BSL.
Can't you just get the hearing folk to type?
I also know of deaf people pushed to use a "manual typing system" which requires colleagues or clients to type to them. Most deaf people can and will use typing or writing at times to overcome hearing people's inability to communicate in BSL or with clear lip patterns, but it's low quality communication and is not appropriate for anything other than basic conversations!
Most people speak at around 200 words per minute but even professional typists can only type at around 50 words per minute. In my experience most hearing people type REALLY slowly which is boring! BSL is an entirely different language from English, which is why we have BSL/English interpreters.
Self employed - you'd better not be part time, or have a low income if you want Access to Work!
The linking of self-employment Access to Work funding with Universal Credit sounds good in words alone, but this becomes linked to minimum hourly earnings and minimum number of hours worked in the self-employment. I don't really know much about this but Alison writing as @deaf on twitter and Facebook has written more about this and I've tried to do a bit of reading myself but honestly got lost in Jobcentre Bureaucratese.
It seems that Universal Credit has a number of issues which Johny Void outlines. If you're not earning enough in your self-employment you will be deemed to not be working enough hours and forced to deal with jobcentre hideous disablism and become ineligible for Access to Work. I also don't know how this is going to work for disabled people who have part-time businesses and used to be able to get AtW to assist them in equality for those.
Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment
Some deaf and disabled people will get Personal Independence Payment so may be OK with AtW and eligibility but others such as those who are just deaf often can't get Personal Independence Payment so will have to work more hours to get the same eligibility... How is that fair?
Sacrifice the few for the many - apparently
The narrative around this 1% is that the needs of the few are being sacrificed to free up money for "mental health interventions" and the "many" rather than more money being put into services to focus on mental health support systems.
ETA: I don't know if those affected by the Universal Credit eligibility rules means that those affected is higher than 1%. I suspect it is. I will try and find data/%.
This narrative relies on people thinking £40,800 is a lot of money and that it's not unreasonable to have a hard limit or only support those working 'full time'... I think this is also a focus on people whose support needs can be resolved with one-off interventions and a narrative that anyone who needs ongoing support is "too demanding" "too needy" "too expensive" and "can no longer be afforded". This was already covered in the Snowdon Trust's 2013 A shared view survey report about Disabled Students' Allowances caps which have very similar issues to the AtW ones.
This announcement changes Access to Work from principled equality to a cost-prioritised system where equality is conditional. There were legitimate requests for an arbitration panel to cover those people with high-cost awards as there might be very good reasons such as multiple-impairments, or high demand jobs like being the leader of an organisation so having long hours and high costs but this seems to have been ignored. There is no right of appeal from Access to Work as it's not a right or entitlement but reframed as a "benefit" which is claimed by shirkers and scroungers!
As a deaf and disabled person I am SICK of being told: "you are too expensive"!
I'm not directly affected now/yet, because I only need occasional STTR at the moment but I am already feeling scared to push my career in directions of my purported-strengths because I fear I won't be able to manage and sustain the communication support that I will need to perform to a high standard and not become ill from audio-overload. It would only take 12 hours a week of remote-STTR or 6 in-person STTR for me to max that cap.
And don't believe for a second most employers can afford, or are willing to pick up the remaining costs - cos they won't. Employers already discriminate in recruitment of disabled people and this will worsen. Where a disabled person is employed they will be told they can't have the support, have to use cheaper/inferior alternatives and not have the support they need to perform to their best ability. Disabled students sometimes have to use cheaper/inferior alternatives now due to DSA caps. AtW caps will further limit deaf and disabled people's ability to develop and progress within the workplace!
I have written to my MP this evening to ask him to challenge the government about this and at least bring back in an arbitration panel for people who feel the decision is unfair but I honestly don't know what else I can do other than ask others to write to their MPs and the DWP.
Do we need to ask for an impact assessment here? Can we challenge this legally? Judicial review somehow?
Other reactions to the Access to Work cuts in no particular order
British Deaf Association (BDA) (BSL + English): https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=868566606538995
Alison Bryan (English): http://www.twitter.com/deaf
National Deaf Children's Society (NDCS) (English): http://www.ndcs.org.uk/for_the_media/press_releases/statement_in_4.html
Disability News Service (English): http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/access-to-work-plans-for-new-cap-on-awards-is-huge-concern/
Stop Changes to Access to Work (English): https://stopchanges2atw.wordpress.com/2015/03/12/stop-changes-to-access-to-work-response-to-ministerial-statement/
Neil Crowther (English): https://makingrightsmakesense.wordpress.com/2015/03/12/a-cap-on-talent/
