J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
DOI 10.1007/s10926-011-9336-y
Getting Hired: Successfully Employed People with Disabilities
Offer Advice on Disclosure, Interviewing, and Job Search
Lita H. Jans • H. Stephen Kaye • Erica C. Jones
Published online: 22 October 2011
 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011
Abstract Introduction Many people with disabilities
want to work, but face employment barriers that have
resulted in dismal employment rates. Successfully
employed people with disabilities have valuable experience
that can help others seeking employment, yet research lit-
erature provides little information about their strategies for
discussing disabilities with employers and negotiating the
hiring process. Method In five focus groups, 41 people
competitively employed for at least 5 years discussed
employment experiences related to their varied disabilities.
The sample excluded people in disability-related jobs or
self-employed. Data were coded and analyzed using a
grounded theory method. Results Disclosure and discussion
decisions were influenced by the nature of disability (vis-
ible, hidden, stigmatized, multiple), whether and when
people needed accommodations, and the perceived ‘‘dis-
ability-friendliness’’ of organizations. Qualitative data
analysis suggested guidelines for whether, when, and how
to discuss disability, while acknowledging the complexity
of decision-making depending on workplace culture and
personal choices. Interview strategies included ways to
emphasize strengths, gather information about duties and
work environment, handle inappropriate questions, and
L. H. Jans (&)
E. C. Jones
DBTAC, Pacific ADA Center, Center on Disability, Public
Health Institute, 555 12th Street, Suite 1030, Oakland, CA
94607, USA
e-mail: research1@adapacific.org
E. C. Jones
e-mail: ericaj@adapacific.org
H. S. Kaye
Institute for Health & Aging, University of California San
Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
e-mail: steve.kaye@ucsf.edu
address unspoken employer concerns. Participants gave
disability-specific advice to help job-seekers balance their
abilities and interests, and use networking and other
approaches to find favorable opportunities. Concluding that
people with disabilities must work harder than others to get
a job, they described approaches and tools to help others
achieve success. Conclusions Findings suggest approaches
to assist job-seekers to make decisions about disclosing or
discussing their disability, present themselves in a straight-
forward, disability-positive manner, and find satisfying
work based on their skills and interests.
Keywords People with disabilities
Employment

Disability disclosure
Social stigma
Introduction
More than two decades after the enactment of the Ameri-
cans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the employment situa-
tion for working-age adults with disabilities remains
dismal. Only one in five adults with disabilities is working,
compared to nearly seven in ten adults without disabilities
[1]. Yet surveys of people with disabilities indicate that
most want to work [2]. There are myriad reasons for this
bleak employment picture, including employer discrimi-
nation and reluctance to hire, exclusionary corporate cul-
tures, and public policies that create work disincentives.
People with disabilities, many of whom live in poverty,
often struggle with lack of education and training, absence
of support services, and barriers to transportation, physical
access, health care, and the accommodations they need to
be able to work [3].
Research has examined factors at the level of systems-
change, work cultures, and employer attitudes that affect
123
156
hiring and status of people with disabilities in organizations
[4–6], and some explorations of work cultures have
included the voices of people with disabilities [7]. Changes
in organizations and policies are critical for improving the
employment picture for people with disabilities, and many
factors that affect employment are clearly beyond an
individual’s control. But without ‘‘blaming the victims’’ of
discrimination nor minimizing the systems-level changes
that are needed, it is also important to empower people
with disabilities in areas where they may have some control
over employment outcomes, such as disability disclosure
and their own attitudes, behaviors, and skills in negotiating
the hiring process. The responses of a person with dis-
ability provide feedback that modifies other people’s per-
ceptions, beliefs, and behaviors, and can even change
organizational norms. Thus, ‘‘it is important that…
researchers examine disabled individuals’ responses and
strategies for overcoming unfair treatment in organiza-
tions’’ [8].
Few research studies have described the ways that
people with disabilities go about getting hired. Advice is
contained in practical literature aimed at people with dis-
abilities and service providers, more than in systematic
academic studies. For example, expert opinion generally
supports effective disclosure of disability status to potential
employers [9–11]. Advocacy organizations and service
providers have developed tips and suggestions about dis-
ability disclosure [12–21]. Electronic postings by people
with disabilities and articles about their experiences also
provide personal perspectives on the merits and disadvan-
tages of disclosure (e.g., [22, 23]). But the research liter-
ature provides relatively little information, especially from
the perspective of people with disabilities.
Experimental studies of the effects of disclosure of
disability in interviews have investigated the relationship
between person characteristics and employment decisions
[24–29]. Using raters (usually college students but occa-
sionally human resources personnel), these studies examine
the effects of different kinds of disabilities and the timing
of disability disclosure on employment decisions, by
manipulating characteristics of hypothetical applicants
(such as presence or absence of disability, nature of dis-
ability, and other characteristics), and the nature of the job.
These studies are helpful for understanding observers’
biases in perceiving the competence of people with dis-
abilities, and provide knowledge about the ways that
stigma associated with disability impedes employment and
advancement of people with disabilities. However, deci-
sions about disclosure in the real world are complex and
multifaceted and these studies excluded the experience of
people with disabilities.
Research that surveys people with disabilities about
employment issues has focused mainly on barriers to
123
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
employment and accommodations [30–35]. Some
researchers have used qualitative interviews with people
with disabilities to better understand their lived experiences
and to research interventions that might empower them
[36–41].
People with mental health disabilities face particular
barriers to employment; and the literature has investigated
their employment concerns using both quantitative and
qualitative methods [42–48]. Stigma (negative and inac-
curate beliefs and stereotypes that are often internalized by
people with disabilities) has been a focus of much research
on people with mental health disabilities, and it affects
people with other types of disabilities as well [49–51]. The
literature on mental health disabilities has often included
the voices of people with these disabilities in discussions
about their employment barriers and strategies [43–46], an
approach that is especially important with marginalized
groups.
Existing literature that explores the qualitative experi-
ences of people with disabilities has focused more on
barriers to employment than on characteristics and expe-
riences that promote success. Employed people with dis-
abilities hold a wealth of information about how to obtain
work that can help others who would like to work. But the
research literature provides few guidelines or examples
based on the experiences of employees with disabilities and
how they disclose relevant information about their dis-
abilities to their employers and negotiate the hiring pro-
cess. While most studies that include the qualitative
experiences of people with disabilities focused on a par-
ticular disability type, this study used a cross-disability
focus group approach that allowed exploration of com-
monalities and differences among people with various
types of disabilities discussing their successes together.
Method
Research Design
This study focuses on the lived experiences of successfully
employed people with disabilities to explore how they
obtained employment, especially their decisions about
disclosure or discussion of disability status and other
interview and job-finding strategies.
A grounded theory qualitative design [52] was chosen to
delve into the experiences and daily realities of successful
people with disabilities in the workplace. Grounded theory
provides a systematic method for developing concepts,
models, and theory from data, encouraging researchers to
‘‘put aside preconceived ideas and discover what is most
important to participants’’ [46]. Qualitative research cap-
tures the voices of people with disabilities, rarely
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165 157

documented in the research literature, which are essential Table 1 Demographic characteristics of participants (n = 41)
to the study of complex multilayered disability issues [5, n %
41, 45]. Building on previous studies that focused on
identifying the barriers to employment, we solicited par- Sex
ticipants’ solutions and strategies for overcoming Male 21 51.2
employment barriers and difficulties. Female 20 48.8
Age
Participants 29 or younger 4 9.8
30–39 5 12.2
Qualitative data were collected from five focus groups 40–49 15 36.6
conducted with a total of 41 successfully employed people 50–59 13 31.7
with disabilities in three states (California, Hawaii, 60 or older 4 9.8
Nevada) within Federal Region IX. Participants were Education level
recruited by local organizational partners of the DBTAC- Less than high school 1 2.4
Pacific ADA Center, one of ten regional Disability and High school degree or GED 4 9.8
Business Technical Assistance Centers (DBTAC) that Some college 7 17.1
provide education and technical assistance on the ADA to 2-year college degree 7 17.1
promote full participation of people with disabilities in 4-year college degree 15 36.6
society. Selection criteria specified that participants had Graduate degree 7 17.1
been gainfully employed for at least 5 years and were Disability
employed during the past 2 years. The study excluded Mobility only 6 14.6
people employed in disability-related jobs or self- Vision only 6 14.6
employed. Participants were selected to include a mix of Hearing/speech only 5 12.2
different disabilities (with one group exclusively for people Other only 2 4.9
who were Deaf or hard of hearing) and a variety of ethnic More than one disability 22 53.7
and racial groups (with one group primarily Latino/ Hidden disability 13 31.7
Hispanic).
Any mental health disability 6 14.6
Participants included 21 men and 20 women, who ran-
Race/Ethnicity
ged in age from 24 to 64 years (mean 46 years). More than
White only 14 34.1
two-thirds (70.7%) had graduated from college. The typical
Asian/Pacific Islander only 14 34.1
disabilities were mobility and sensory, with more than half
Latino/Hispanic only 5 12.2
(53.7%) reporting multiple disabilities. Nearly one-third of
Black/African American only 3 7.3
the group (31.7%) had a hidden disability, and about fifteen
More than one race/ethnicity 5 12.2
percent (14.6%) had a mental health disability. The group
was highly diverse in race and ethnicity, with about two-
thirds of participants (65.9%) identifying as members of
minority groups or multi-racial. A summary of demo- obtaining and advancing on the job, with an emphasis on
graphic details is shown in Table 1. Participants worked in decisions about disclosure or discussion of disability status.
13 different industries and held a wide range of jobs, as The participants were encouraged to discuss successes
shown in Table 2. Of the 41 focus group members, 20 more than barriers, and to reflect on their own experiences
(48.8%) worked for private for-profit companies and 21 and strategies that might be helpful to other people with
(51.2%) worked in federal, state, or local government jobs. disabilities who are seeking work or advancement. All
Participants had worked in their current jobs for a median focus groups were transcribed using Computer Assisted
of 6 years. About one-third of the group (34.1%) currently Real-time Transcription (CART), which facilitated the
supervised others. They supervised between 1 and 40 participation of people with hearing loss and other dis-
employees, with an average of 9 supervisees. abilities, as well as providing verbatim transcripts.

Data Collection Procedures Data Analysis

The first author facilitated the focus groups, and the third Data analysis was conducted using the procedures outlined
author introduced, observed, and assisted with the groups. in the grounded theory method [52]. The first and second
Focus group participants shared their experiences in authors conducted independent open coding of the verba-
response to open-ended questions about the process of tim transcripts from each focus group, marking and

123
158 J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165

Table 2 Characteristics of participants’ employment (n = 41) [37]. To protect participants’ privacy, their names and any
n %
potentially identifying textual materials have been
changed.
Industry type: North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS)
Construction (23) 3 7.3 Results
Manufacturing (31–33) 2 4.9
Wholesale trade (42) 1 2.4 Disclosing and Discussing Disability
Retail trade (44–45) 2 4.9
Transportation and warehousing (48–49) 1 2.4 Lively discussions ensued in the focus groups about whe-
Information (51) 3 7.3 ther, when, and how to talk with employers about dis-
Finance and insurance (52) 3 7.3 abilities. The cross-disability focus groups allowed people
Professional, scientific, and technical (54) 10 24.4 with different needs and situations to debate the pros and
Educational services (61) 4 9.8 cons of talking with employers, engaging in animated
Health care and social assistance (62) 4 4.9 dialogue with each other and offering feedback and per-
Arts, entertainment, and recreation (71) 2 4.9 spectives based on their own experiences. Although the
Accommodation and food services (72) 1 2.4 participants often disagreed about the need for and timing
Public administration (92) 5 12.2 of disability disclosure, it was clear from their discussions
Job type: major Standard Occupational Classification that disclosure or acknowledgement of disability involves
(SOC) complex personal decisions. Approaches to talking with
Management (11-0000) 6 14.6 employers differed according to the nature of the disability;
Business and financial operations (13-0000) 4 9.8 in particular, the visibility of the disability and the level of
Computer and mathematical (15-0000) 2 4.9 stigma associated with the disability. These factors and
Architecture and engineering (17-0000) 2 4.9 their effect on participants’ approaches to disclosing and
Life, physical, and social science (19-0000) 1 2.4 discussing disability with employers are summarized in
Community and social services (21-0000) 3 7.3 Fig. 1.
Legal (23-0000) 2 4.9 Many participants felt that it was important to develop a
Education, training, and library (25-0000) 4 9.8 well-thought-out ‘‘narrative’’ about their disability that
Arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media (27-0000) 1 2.4 emphasizes what they can contribute. Participants gener-
Healthcare practitioners and technical (29-0000) 2 4.9 ally recommended discussion of disability with employers,
Food preparation and serving related (35-0000) 1 2.4 especially when accommodations were needed. They noted
Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance 1 2.4 that some people may avoid a frank discussion with a
(37-0000) potential employer because they erroneously believe their
Personal care and service (39-0000) 1 2.4 disabilities are ‘‘hidden’’ but the employer might dismiss
Sales and related (41-0000) 4 9.8 the applicant as different or not fitting in.
Office and administrative support (43-0000) 4 9.8
Construction and extraction (47-0000) 2 4.9
Production (51-0000) 1 2.4

identifying participant responses and grouping them by

themes. Memoing, a process of creating descriptive notes
based on the identified themes and quotations, was used to
analyze patterns and group responses. Coding differences
were discussed until consensus was reached on the cate-
gories and their relationships to each other. The resulting
model included seven broad categories; the findings pre-
sented here are drawn primarily from three categories most
relevant to obtaining a job: Disclosure or Acknowledgment
of Disability, Interview Strategies, and Job-Finding Strat-
egies. In presenting the results, we made systematic efforts
to choose representative quotes that accurately reflect the
content, range, and context of the respondents’ experiences Fig. 1 Whether and when to discuss or disclose disability

123
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
Whether to Disclose/Acknowledge Disability
People’s opinions about disclosure were strongly influ-
enced by the nature of their disabilities, including visibility,
stigma associated with the disability, and number of dis-
abilities. They also made decisions about disclosure based
on the type of organization and their perceptions about the
‘‘disability-friendliness’’ of the culture.
Visible Disabilities In general, people with more visible
disabilities, including those who used wheelchairs, white
canes, or other assistive devices, thought it was important
to discuss their disability early in the employment process,
usually during the job interview. People with obvious
disabilities characterized discussion with employers as an
acknowledgement more than a disclosure of disability.
They took the opportunity to put the interviewer at ease and
to proactively emphasize how they handle their disabilities
so they do not affect doing the job well. Mark, a teacher
who uses a wheelchair, thought it was important to vol-
unteer information about his visible disability in a simple,
straightforward manner in the context of how he could do
the job.
I say it one time and it is over. I am here to do the job,
and now it is on the table.
Hidden Disabilities About one-third of respondents
reported having a disability that other people might not
recognize. People with hidden disabilities characterized
disability disclosure as a personal choice. Some of them
openly disclosed their hidden disability in the job interview
just like those with visible disabilities, using the interview as
a chance to explain how they would do the job with a dis-
ability. Those who revealed their non-visible disability in job
interviews were also generally open with coworkers, and
they thought that revealing their disability and requesting
accommodations made it easier to get promotions.
However, others with hidden disabilities said they would
never reveal their disability in an interview, fearing it
would jeopardize their chances of even being considered
for the job. Their experiences also convinced them that
disclosure to employers or co-workers, even after they
were hired, might put their careers at risk. Janis, for
example, holds a high-profile political job and feared the
consequences of openly talking about her disability (an
autoimmune disorder that causes extreme fatigue). She
chose to disclose her disability to only the fewest number
of people necessary to get the accommodations she needed.
I didn’t want co-workers knowing… I am just a pri-
vate person… I don’t wear a sign that says, ‘‘I have a
disability.’’ That is my personal choice.
159
However, some people with visible disabilities made a
strong case that even hidden disabilities should be dis-
closed because they would become obvious on the job or
even detected in the interview. In their opinion, people may
think their disabilities are hidden but others notice some-
thing different about them. These advocates of disclosure
thought, for example, that many employers would be more
comfortable hiring a person with a mental health disability
who addressed the disability directly as opposed to the
employer noticing something unusual about the candidate
and thinking that they would not fit into the work envi-
ronment. Disclosure advocates suggested that people who
plan not to disclose a disability that they think is hidden
should get feedback from others before concluding that the
disability is not visible.
On the other hand, some people with hidden disabilities
made the case that they would have been denied employ-
ment if they disclosed their disabilities. As one respondent
put it, ‘‘You could disclose and then you quietly disqualify
yourself.’’ Lotta, who works in wholesale and retail trade
and has multiple disabling medical conditions, did not
disclose to one employer that she had a disability until she
had finished the job.
And he said, ‘‘If I had known that, I wouldn’t have
hired you. But you’ve done so much good work.’’ He
said, ‘‘How in the world have you functioned?’’
Based on this and other experiences, Lotta was con-
vinced that her hidden disability was ‘‘personal’’ and not to
be disclosed to just anyone. As she described it, ‘‘People
have to win my confidence for me to tell them certain
things.’’
Some participants went to great lengths to avoid
revealing their disability in an initial interview, because
they were convinced that they would not be hired with a
disability. For example, several group members with
hearing impairments who could lip read and communicate
orally elected to try to ‘‘pass’’ as hearing people during job
interviews. As John, a carpenter, described it, ‘‘Being Deaf
would make it hard for me to get in (the door).’’ Frank also
decided not to tell the employer that he was Deaf until he
was offered the job, saying, ‘‘I convinced you that I could
work.’’
Highly Stigmatized Disabilities For people with mental
health disabilities, which are more stigmatized than other
disabilities, disclosure issues were especially complex and
challenging. Group members with mental health disabili-
ties generally choose to ‘‘manage’’ their disabilities
themselves without bringing them up to employers at all.
However, the decision not to disclose sometimes inter-
123
160
fered with their work. Jerry, for example, works as an
account manager for a design firm, and the medications
he takes to control his bipolar disorder make it hard for
him to concentrate. Since he chose not to reveal his
disability to his employer, he could not ask for accom-
modations, such as a quieter work space or extra time to
complete assignments, which could improve his produc-
tivity. Jerry was quite clear about his decision but also
indicated that it made him feel emotionally insecure and
unprotected.
I would never disclose (my mental disability) because
it’s not like you’re forgiven. You’re in a business.
This is not like being among friends… (In the job
interview,) I deemed it none of his business. So I
didn’t tell him. But, you know, I felt like a pipe, and
there were little holes in the pipe and water was
coming out of it.
Multiple Disabilities More than half of respondents have
more than one disability, which is common among people
with disabilities but rarely addressed in the literature on
disclosure. They sometimes chose to disclose one disability
first, such as a long-standing visual impairment that
required accommodation, and then later disclose another
disability that had less impact on their ability to do the job,
such as a milder hearing loss. One respondent acknowl-
edged his mobility impairment, a visible disability, but did
not disclose his diabetes, a hidden disability.
Type of Industry or Organization Respondents’ decisions
about whether or not to disclose their disability depended
on the types of organizations and industries where they
sought employment. Participants noted that having a dis-
ability could be an advantage in federal and state govern-
ment jobs, and they encouraged applicants to always
disclose their disabilities when applying for government
jobs. They also discussed the advantages of disclosing
disability when applying to organizations with a disability
mission, as well as disability-related jobs in other organi-
zations, such as diversity coordinator positions. (The focus
groups excluded people currently employed in disability-
related jobs, but many had previous experience in those
jobs.)
However, some participants found that certain industries
and organizations were very unfriendly to disability and
they developed their disclosure strategies accordingly. For
example, Larry, a casino worker, believed that he would
never get a job if he disclosed his back injury and so he
worked without accommodations despite ongoing pain. As
he put it, ‘‘Casinos can hire anyone they want to. And that’s
a reality, you know.’’
123
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
When to Disclose/Acknowledge Disability
Respondents who disclosed or discussed their disability
differed as to when they did so. An important consideration
was whether they needed accommodations during the
interview, needed no accommodations for the interview but
needed them in the workplace, or needed no accommoda-
tions at all.
Before the Interview People who needed an accommo-
dation during the job interview, such as Deaf individuals
who required an interpreter, usually let the employer know
about the disability and requested the accommodation.
Lucinda, who works as a supply technician and is Deaf,
stated concisely, ‘‘You have to set up the interpreter in
advance or it is a waste of time.’’ Lana, a city manager who
has a visual disability, said it was important to ask
beforehand whether there was a written portion of the job
interview and, if so, to request accommodations.
During the Interview Most people with visible disabili-
ties who did not need interview accommodations thought
it was much better to wait to disclose their disabilities in
person, so they could discuss their disability while
gauging the interviewer’s response. Joe, who works as a
financial specialist and uses a wheelchair, described his
approach:
It works for me to be upfront. So I always pushed for
the opportunity to get a face-to-face interview or
discussion with someone.
For some participants, the decision about whether or not
to discuss their disability during the interview depended on
cues they picked up from the potential employer. They said
it was important for candidates to be alert to possible
unexpressed questions, fears, or discomfort on the part of
the interviewer and to confidently address those concerns.
Will, who works as a contract manager in the aerospace
industry and has multiple disabilities, talked about devel-
oping good listening skills and ‘‘reading’’ the interviewer
in order to decide what to discuss about his disabilities:
You have to be interviewing the interviewer, that’s
very important, too. And in doing that, you can pick
up on what you need to tell them.
After a Job is Offered Some respondents cautioned
against disclosing a disability before a job offer is at hand;
others specifically recommended mentioning the disability
upon receipt of the offer, for example, to begin a dialogue
about workplace accommodations. A few respondents
recommended waiting until after working at the job for a
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
while. One reason was to demonstrate their abilities on the
job before discussing the disability; another was to reduce
the likelihood of discrimination by waiting until the pro-
bationary period is over. However, other participants
pointed out that deciding not to disclose during the pro-
bationary period could backfire by negatively affecting
performance:
If you work for 90 days without accommodation,
how can you all of a sudden say you’re going to need
one? They’re going to say you worked for 90 days
without it, you might as well continue on.
How to Disclose/Acknowledge Disability
People who advocated disability discussion in the initial
employment interview stressed the importance of a sim-
ple, straightforward disclosure that focused on job per-
formance and stayed away from details of the disability
that were not relevant to the job. Peggy Sue, who works
as a financial specialist and is a short-statured person,
remarked,
Am I going to tell them my medical history? Hell, no.
That is personal. Not going there. I am just going to
tell you what I can and can’t do. When I do it, I do it
with a smile. It is… not a big deal.
Emphasizing the ability to get the job done, while not
making a ‘‘big deal’’ out of the disclosure, was a strategy
also employed by Simone, a teacher with visual and
hearing impairments who refers to her disabilities as ‘‘an
inconvenience’’:
I would be up front, but I wouldn’t totally harp on it.
And I would totally go into what you can do and tell
them your accommodations right away so they know
what you can do. So they know how to deal with it.
Focus group participants also recommended that people
who are planning to discuss their disabilities develop ahead
of time some concise statements about how they will
handle the disability on the job. They advocated practicing
before the interview and getting feedback from others so
that they can comfortably choose which statements to
share, depending on the situation.
Focus group members also suggested that job seekers
address possible employer concerns about productivity,
costs such as health insurance or accommodations, dis-
ruptions to routines, co-worker attitudes, or customer atti-
tudes, even when those concerns were not directly
expressed.
A further suggestion was to have someone who is
known to the employer vouch for the applicant and speak
to any possible concerns about how the disability might
161
affect job performance. For example, the person could ask
a prior employer serving as a reference to reassure the
potential employer that the person can do the job and to try
to ease any fears about hiring a person with a disability.
Other Interview Strategies
Aside from issues of disclosing or discussing the disability,
focus group participants had several recommendations for
successfully navigating a job interview. Some of these
apply equally to anyone seeking a job:
• Appear self-confident and enthusiastic, and show a
positive attitude;
• Work on people skills and demonstrate them during the
interview; and
• Practice and prepare for the interview.
In addition, participants described the following aspects
of the job interview that were especially important to
applicants with disabilities.
Sell Your Abilities
While the recommendation to trumpet your skills applies to
all job applicants, people with disabilities need to place
particular emphasis on their capabilities and qualifications
to do the job. Some said that they emphasized their skills
by ‘‘downplaying’’ their disability in the interview. For
example, Sandra, a computer specialist who has a mobility
impairment, described her interview strategy:
Part of being disabled is… you have to do extra work.
You have to be assertive without being aggressive…
You have to act like you don’t have a disability.
Others, however, openly used their disability experi-
ences to highlight their skills. Will, who works in the
aerospace industry and is an amputee, was asked in an
interview to give an example of how he handled a diffi-
cult situation. He described a situation related to his
disability, being careful to do it in a way that enhanced
the employer’s perception of his skills in dealing with the
issue.
Inquire About Job Duties and Work Environment
Participants recommended asking questions about the job
duties and work environment to help think in advance
about accommodations and approaches to doing the job.
For Jill, a lawyer with a learning disability, this meant
asking about expectations, workloads, deadlines, noise
level, and the need for math skills, since she knew that her
123
162
disability affected functioning in those areas. Jill described
her thinking about this:
Part of it… is knowing ahead of time how that
environment might impact me… So I find myself
asking more questions than I used to.
Handle inappropriate questions. Participants warned
applicants to be prepared for interview questions that are
insensitive, improper, or illegal. Simone, a teacher with
vision and hearing disabilities, was taken off guard when
an interviewer remarked, ‘‘Well, I really am not supposed
to ask you this, but I’m just curious. You know, what’s the
prognosis of your vision?’’ Feeling flustered, Simone
talked about her prognosis, but wished that she had pre-
pared for the possibility of such an inappropriate question,
which might have made it easier to deflect it.
Job-Finding Strategies
Participants described many job-finding strategies that
were not specific to job seekers with disabilities, but useful
to any candidate. For example, they said to:
• Have realistic expectations of the type of job one could
reasonably get;
• Use networking and connections to find open positions;
• Take advantage of volunteer positions, internships, and
temporary work to make connections with potential
employers; and
• Be persistent and assertive, keep applying.
They also explored the following issues and strategies
that are especially vital for people with disabilities.
Balance Abilities and Interests
Participants urged job-seekers to develop their skills to do
work that they truly enjoy: ‘‘Have the passion to do what
you love.’’ While all job seekers must look at the fit
between their skills, abilities, and interests and a possible
career or job, people with disabilities have the added
consideration of choosing an occupation that is compatible
with any limitations that are associated with their disabil-
ities. For example, Mary, who works as an environmental
health specialist and has a significant hearing impairment,
stated, ‘‘I knew I had to pick something that I could do, not
so much listening and being on the phone.’’ Another par-
ticipant with a mobility impairment chose a computer-
related career. Participants urged job-seekers to make
realistic choices given the limitations of their disabilities,
but also cautioned against buying into stereotypes about
what people with disabilities can and cannot do. In many
cases, accommodations make it possible for people with
123
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
disabilities to do tasks that they otherwise could not
accomplish.
Seek Opportunities more Favorable to People
with Disabilities
Participants encouraged job-seekers with disabilities to
look for disability-friendly careers. The focus groups were
designed to select people who were not currently working
in disability-related jobs, such as those that serve people
with disabilities or those that provide disability and
diversity expertise within non-disability organizations.
However, many participants had gotten their ‘‘foot in the
door’’ in disability organizations or jobs, and they recom-
mended this as a strategy. Even in organizations without
specific disability missions, disability could be an advan-
tage. For example, a family lawyer believed she was asked
to join the firm in part because of her personal disability
experience as well as her skills in working with clients with
disabilities.
In a similar vein, participants recommended careers in
government, where disability was recognized as an asset
rather than a liability. Many participants viewed federal
and state government as model employers for people with
disabilities, noting that government entities were more
likely to hire people with disabilities, to provide assistive
technology and other accommodations, and to try to
enforce equal opportunity for people with disabilities.
Networking is Especially Essential for People
with Disabilities
While all job candidates profit from networking, the par-
ticipants thought that those with disabilities needed to pay
particular attention to developing and nurturing connec-
tions with others to support them in the job search. They
cultivated connections with other people with disabilities
(including those with similar disabilities and those who
work in their field of work). These disability resources
were essential for learning about available jobs and prob-
lem-solving about possible accommodations. Participants
also suggested that it was important to find someone who
could vouch for their abilities as a means of overcoming
employer resistance to hiring people with disabilities.
People with Disabilities Must Work Harder to Get a Job
Across the focus groups, participants consistently affirmed
that people with disabilities must make an extra effort to
get hired. They encouraged job seekers to obtain as much
education and skills as possible, and urged them not to
become discouraged with a protracted job search.
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
Discussion
Disclosure Decisions
All of the people with disabilities in this study have suc-
cessfully navigated the world of employment and found
work that is satisfying to them, making them a minority
among people with disabilities in this country. Although
they are all successful, they have different approaches, and
their discussions revealed complex issues related to dis-
ability disclosure. In the groups, there was often a tension
between those who advocated open disclosure and dis-
cussion of disability with potential employers and those
who chose not to disclose at all or to disclose rarely.
To those with obvious disabilities, the issue seemed
fairly simple. They acknowledged their disability, and
worked to put the interviewer at ease, focusing on the
positive and how they can do the job well. Some people
with hidden disabilities also decided to be ‘‘up front’’ about
their disabilities and took a stance similar to those with
obvious disabilities. This approach made for consonance
between internal and external image: these successful
people had a disability-positive self-image, and confidently
communicated that to others. They were able to proactively
address potential unspoken employer concerns about the
impact of disability on the workplace, a strategy that was
recommended to other job-seekers. Having directly dis-
cussed their disability, they could easily bring up the topic
of accommodations that would enable them to do an
excellent job.
Many with hidden disabilities, and especially those with
stigmatized disabilities, struggled internally over decisions
about disability disclosure; most decided not to disclose
their disabilities. To them, disability was personal and
private. Their stories were often wrenching, and they dealt
with fears that disability disclosure would harm their
careers, even after decades of success. Depending on the
extent of their disclosure, they had little or no access to
accommodations that might have made their jobs easier.
Nevertheless, these people have been successfully working
for many years and made their choices based on their best
understanding of themselves and their workplace cultures.
The cross-disability focus groups made it possible for
people with different experiences and approaches to dis-
ability disclosure to come together and explore the com-
plexity of the issues. More than half of the respondents had
multiple disabilities, with some visible and some hidden.
Some group members pointed out to other group members
that the disabilities they thought were hidden were quite
visible, suggesting the importance of receiving feedback
from different sources before concluding that a disability is
not visible. Although the groups on the whole advocated
proactive discussion of disability with employers, they also
163
stressed that each person and each situation is unique. They
urged each person with a disability to develop a narrative
that emphasizes his or her strengths (whether or not dis-
ability is disclosed).
Other Interview Strategies
While some of the participants’ interview strategies per-
tained to any job-seeker, they also identified disability-
relevant interview issues. A universal strategy like ‘‘tooting
your own horn’’ or selling your abilities was discussed with
particular adaptations to disability. Some chose to
‘‘downplay’’ their disability, focusing on their skills and
abilities to do the job. Others wove their disability into the
narrative, giving disability-related examples of success to
show employers that they brought unique, positive qualities
to the job as a result of disability experiences. Participants
also stressed the importance of learning in detail about the
job duties and work environment, asking more questions
than other job applicants might ask. This information
allowed them to consider possible accommodations or
other strategies that would help them do the job. Applicants
with disabilities also had to prepare for possible inappro-
priate questions and think ahead how to handle them.
Job-Finding Strategies
To find satisfying work, all job seekers must evaluate their
own abilities and interests and look for a good fit with a
career or job. People with disabilities have the added
dimension of needing to choose a career or job that is
compatible with any disability-related limitations. The
focus group participants suggested that job-seekers take
their own limitations into account to set realistic goals. But
they also warned against stereotyped ideas that limit
options and urged people to learn as much as possible
about accommodations that make many different jobs
accessible to people with disabilities.
Networking and other ways to connect with supportive
others were described as even more important for people
with disabilities than for other job seekers. For example,
when potential employers were not familiar with disability,
participants sometimes asked a reference, especially one
who is known to the employer, to address disability issues
with the employer, helping to reassure them that disability
barriers can be overcome through appropriate accommo-
dations and that the candidate will perform well.
For the focus groups, we deliberately recruited people
who were not in disability-related jobs, such as those
providing services to people with disabilities, training
about disability, promoting disability diversity within a
company, or advocating for disability rights. We wanted to
learn more about how people survive and thrive in the
123
164
general competitive job market as opposed to jobs where
disability is already recognized as an asset or possibly a
requirement. Given this selection criterion for current
employment, it was notable how many participants said
they had gained entrance to the workplace by working in a
disability-related job. Many carried over from these dis-
ability-related experiences the conviction that disability
can be an asset rather than a liability, and that their unique
experiences as people with disabilities added value to their
work. For example, an attorney in a family law practice had
previously worked in a disability-related job. She described
that work and her personal experiences with disability as
‘‘a plus’’ for her and a way to get ahead. Colleagues
referred to her, in part because they recognized that her
disability experience made her sensitive to clients’ expe-
riences with adversity.
The research underlined the importance of job seekers
presenting themselves in a straightforward, disability-
positive manner and focusing on how well they can do the
job. Job applicants with disabilities can use the advice and
tools articulated by these successful employees to persevere
in finding satisfying work based on their skills and interests.
Acknowledgment This research was funded by the National Insti-
tute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, U.S. Department of
Education, under grant #H133A060098.
References
1. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Persons with a disability: Labor force
characteristics: 2009. News release. Washington DC: US
Department of Labor; 2010.
2. Ali M, Schur L, Blanck P. What types of jobs do people with
disabilities want? J Occup Rehab. 2010;21:199–210.
3. National Council on Disability. Empowerment for Americans
with disabilities: Breaking barriers to careers and full employ-
ment. Washington, DC: Author; 2007.
4. Habeck R, Kregel J, Head C, Yasuda S. Salient and subtle aspects
of demand side approaches for employment retention: Lessons
for public policymakers. J Vocat Rehabil. 2007;26:21–7.
5. Schur L, Kruse D, Blanck P. Corporate culture and the employ-
ment of persons with disability. Behav Sci Law. 2005;23:3–20.
6. Kaye HS, Jans LJ, Jones EC. Why don’t employers hire and
retain workers with disabilities? J Occup Rehab. 2011;Mar 13
(Epub ahead of print).
7. Gilbride D, Stensrud R, Vangergoot D, Golden K. Identification
of the characteristics of work environments and employers open
to hiring and accommodating people with disabilities. Rehabil
Couns Bull. 2003;46(3):130–8.
8. Stone DL, Colella A. A model of factors affecting the treatment
of disabled individuals in organizations. Acad Manage Rev.
1996;21(2):352–401.
9. Bolles RN, Brown DS. Job-hunting for the so-called handicapped
or people who have disabilities. Berkeley: Ten Speed Press; 2001.
10. Kissane SF. Career success for people with physical disabilities.
Lincolnwood: VGM Career Books; 1996.
11. Ryan DJ. Job search handbook for people with disabilities. Jist
Publishing; 2001.
123
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
12. Buchanan LA. The disclosure dilemma for advocates. The George
Washingon Heath Resource Center; 2003 [cited 2011 Jul 6].
Available from: http://www.pacer.org/c3/curriculum/Session3/
handouts/The%20Disclosure%20Dilemma%20for%20Advocates.
pdf
13. Job Accommodation Network. Disability disclosure and inter-
viewing techniques for persons with disabilities; 2008 [cited 2011
Jul 7]. Available from: http://askjan.org/corner/vol01iss13.htm
14. Leuchovius D, Fager S. Understanding one’s disability can lead
to success for youth seeking jobs; 2006 [cited 2011 Jul 7].
Available from: http://www.pacer.org/tatra/resources/jobSucc
ess.asp
15. National Center on Workforce and Disability—Adult. Disclosure
of a non-apparent or hidden disability. University of Massachu-
setts Boston Institute for Community Inclusion; 2003 [cited 2011
Jul 7]. Available from: http://www.onestops.info/print.php?
article_id=107
16. National Collaborative for Workforce and Disability for Youth.
Disclosure workbook. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational
Leadership; 2005 [cited 2011 Jul 7]. Available from: http://www.
ncwd-youth.info/411-on-disability-disclosure
17. National Collaborative for Workforce and Disability for Youth.
The 411 on disability disclosure: A workbook for families, edu-
cators, youth service professionals, and other adult allies who
care about youth with disabilities. Washington, DC: Institute for
Educational Leadership; 2009 [cited 2011 Jul 7]. Available from:
http://www.ncwd-youth.info/sites/default/files/The_411_On_Disability_
Disclosure_for_Adults.doc
18. Office of Disability Employment Policy. Advising youth with
disabilities on disclosure: Tips for service providers; 2008 [cited
2011 Jul 7]. Available from: http://www.dol.gov/odep/pubs/
fact/advising.htm
19. Pacer Center. Disclosing a disability in a job interview; 1996
[cited 2011 Jul 8]. Available from: http://www.pacer.org/tatra/
resources/POD/disclosedisability.asp
20. Pimentel R. The art of disclosing your disability; 2007 [cited
2011 Jul 7]. Available from: http://www.miltwright.com/articles/
ArtOfDisclosingYourDisability.pdf
21. Virginia Commonwealth University. Disclosure decisions to get
the job. Virginia Commonwealth University Rehabilitation
Research and Training Center on Workplace Supports and Job
Retention; 2006 [cited 2011 Jul 7]. Available from: http://www.
worksupport.com/documents/disclosure_decisions1.pdf
22. PennyRdr. Should you tell, or not? How? And when? And, what
if you don’t? Then what? [cited 2011 Jul 6]. Available from:
http://community.gettinghired.com/blogs/pennyforyourthoughts/
archive/2009/04/08/should-you-tell-or-not-how-and-when-and-
what-if-you-don-t-then-what.aspx
23. Frase M. An underestimated talent pool: Able, eager people who
are blind or visually impaired want to work; now it’s up to
employers. HR Magazine. 2009[cited 2011 Jul 7];54(4). Avail-
able from: http://www.shrm.org/Publications/hrmagazine/Editorial
Content/Pages/0409frase.aspx
24. Bell BS, Klein KJ. Effects of disability, gender, and job level
on ratings of job applicants. Rehabil Psychol. 2001;46(3):
229–46.
25. Gouvier WD, Systma-Jordan S, Mayville S. Patterns of dis-
crimination in hiring job applicants with disabilities: The role of
disability type, job complexity, and public contact. Rehabil
Psychol. 2003;48(3):175–81.
26. Hebl MR, Skorinko JL. Acknowledging one’s physical disability
in the interview: Does ‘‘when’’ make a difference? J Appl Soc
Psychol. 2005;35(12):2477–92.
27. Louvet E. Social judgment toward job applicants with disabili-
ties: perception of personal qualities and competence. Rehabil
Psychol. 2007;52(3):297–303.
J Occup Rehabil (2012) 22:155–165
28. McLaughlin ME, Bell MP. Stringer, DY. Stigma and acceptance
of persons with disabilities: understudied aspects of workforce
diversity. Group Organ Manage. 2004;29:302–33.
29. Roberts L, Macan TH. Disability disclosure effects on employ-
ment interview ratings of applicants with nonvisible disabilities.
Rehabil Psychol. 2006;51(3):239–46.
30. Allaire SH, Wei L, LaValley MP. Work barriers experienced and
job accommodations used by persons with arthritis and other
rheumatic diseases. Rehabil Couns Bull. 2003;46(3):147–56.
31. Baldridge DC, Viega JF. Toward a greater understanding of the
willingness to request an accommodation: can requesters’ beliefs
disable the Americans with Disabilities Act? Acad Manage Rev.
2001;28(1):85–99.
32. Baldridge DC, Veiga JF. The impact of anticipated social con-
sequences on recurring disability accommodation requests.
J Manage. 2006;32(1):158–79.
33. Balser DB. Predictors of workplace accommodations for
employees with mobility-related disabilities. Admin Soc. 2007;
39:656–83.
34. Hernandez B. The disability and employment survey: assessing
employment concerns among people with disabilities and racial/
ethnic minorities. J Appl Rehabil Counsel. 2009;40(1):4–13.
35. Snyder LA, Carmichael JS, Blackwell LV, Cleveland JN,
Thornton GC III. Perceptions of discrimination and justice among
employees with disabilities. Employ Responsib Rights J. 2010;
22:5–19.
36. Oden K, Hernandez B, Hidalgo MA. Payoffs of participatory
action research: Racial and ethnic minorities with disabilities
reflect on their research experiences. Commun Dev (Columb).
2010;41(1):21–31.
37. Robert PM, Harlan SL. Mechanisms of disability discrimination
in large bureaucratic organizations: ascriptive inequalities in the
workplace. Sociol Quart. 2006;47:599–630.
38. Shier M, Graham JR, Jones ME. Barriers to employment as
experienced by disabled people: a qualitative analysis in Calgary
and Regina, Canada. Disabil Soc. 2009;24(1):63–75.
39. Varekamp I, Verbeek JH, van Dijk FJ. How can we help
employees with chronic diseases to stay at work? A review of
interventions aimed at job retention and based on an empower-
ment perspective. Int Arch Occ Env Hea. 2006;80(2):87–97.
40. Varekamp I, Heutink A, Landman S, Koning C, de Vries G, van
Dijk FJ. Facilitating empowerment in employees with chronic
disease: Qualitative analysis of the process of change. J Occup
Rehabil. 2009;19:398–408.
165
41. Wilson-Kovacs D, Ryan MK, Haslam SA, Rabinovich A. ‘Just
because you can get a wheelchair in the building doesn’t neces-
sarily mean that you can still participate’: barriers to the career
advancement of disabled professionals. Disabil Soc. 2008;
23(7):705–17.
42. Cook JA. Employment barriers for persons with psychiatric dis-
abilities: update of a report for the President’s Commission.
Psychiatr Serv. 2006 Oct;57(10):1391–405.
43. Dalgin RS, Gilbride D. Perspectives of people with psychiatric
disabilities on employment disclosure. Psychiatr Rehabil J.
2003;26(3):306–10.
44. Ellison ML, Russinova Z, MacDonald-Wilson KL, Lyass A.
Patterns and correlates of workplace disclosure among profes-
sionals and managers with psychiatric conditions. J Vocat
Rehabil. 2003;18(1):3–13.
45. Goldberg SG, Killeen MB, O’Day B. The disclosure conundrum:
how people with psychiatric disabilities navigate employment.
Psychol Public Pol L. 2005;11(3):463–500.
46. Honey A. The impact of mental illness on employment: con-
sumers’ perspectives. Work. 2003;20:267–76.
47. MacDonald-Wilson K, Rogers SE, Massaro JM, Lyass A, Crean,
T. An investigation of reasonable workplace accommodations for
people with psychiatric disabilities: quantitative findings from a
multi-site study. Community Ment Hlt J. 2002;38(1):35–50.
48. Marrone J, Gandolfo C, Gold M, Hoff D. Just doing it: helping
people with mental illness get good jobs. J Appl Rehabil Counsel.
1998;29(1):37–48.
49. Corrigan PW. Dealing with stigma through personal disclosure.
In Corrigan PW, editor. On the stigma of mental illness: practical
strategies for research and social change. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association; 2005. p. 257–80.
50. Corrigan PW, Kleinlein P. The impact of mental illness stigma.
In: Corrigan PW, editor. On the stigma of mental illness: practical
strategies for research and social change. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association; 2005. p. 11–44.
51. Corrigan PW, Calabrese JD. Strategies for assessing and dimin-
ishing self-stigma. In: Corrigan PW, editor. On the stigma of
mental illness: practical strategies for research and social change.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2005.
p. 239–56.
52. Corbin JM, Strauss AC. Basics of qualitative research: techniques
and procedures for developing grounded theory. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage; 2008.
123