ADA Diaries of Arizona

The gallery for the ADA Diaries of Arizona is built and ready for your stories.
View your History . . . AZ Originals
Please help us transcribe these voices to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the ADA and make these documents accessible to all who have access to the online world.
Preserve your Legacy . . . Transcribe

A Vote for Justice

Community Prompt:

I urge Congress to enact, and the President to support and to sign, legislation such as the Americans with Disability Act of 1988, which will effectively protect all persons with disabilities against discrimination on basis of handicap.

I, furthermore, urge the establishment of those basic human support systems necessary to make rights real in every day life, and which will enable all people with disabilities to achieve their full potential for independence, productivity and quality of life in the mainstream of society.

I have personnally experienced and/or observed the following discrimination against people with disabilities:

 

Accessible to All Pages: 87 of 170

 

Testimonies 14

Letters 7

Articles 0

Petitions 0

Official 3

Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled Report: Architecture / Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled Report: Employment /Navajo / Hopi Protection and Advocacy Fact Sheet

  • Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled Report: Architecture

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    I. Introduction

    II. Legislative Framework

    III. Highlights of Findings of the Architectural Accessibility Subcommittee

    IV. Highlights of Findings of the Employment Subcommittee

    V. Summary of Recommendations

    Attachment 1- Ad Hoc Committee au the Disabled Establishment and Appointments

    ARCHITECTURAL ACCESSIBILITY SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT

    I. Survey Background

    II. Survey Findings

    III. Summary

    Attachment 1 – Architectural Accessibility Worksheet

    Attachment 2 – List of Phoenix Buildings Surveyed

    Attachment 3 – Architectural Accessibility Checklist

    EMPLOYMENT SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT

    I. Recruitment

    II. The Hiring Process

    III. Job Analysis/Testing

    IV. Interviewing

    V. Newly Disabled Employees

    VI. Upward Mobility

    VII. Survey/Disability Awareness Training

    VIII. Policies and Procedures

    IX. Summary
    Attachment 1 – Self Identification Form

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    I. INTRODUCTION

    This report has been prepared to document and assess the degree of architectural accessibility of facilities owned, leased, or rented by the City of Phoenix, and the employment practices adhered to by the City with respect to Qualified disabled job applicants and employees. It will focus on the observations, findings, and subsequent recommendations pursuant to the charge of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled Report which 1s to:

    A. Review the City’s facilities to be sure that no architectural
    barriers exist that will prohibit access.

    B. Review the City’s personnel policies) including recruitment, hiring,
    and promotions, with the goal of ensuring there are no needless
    restrictions or barriers to employment of the physically impaired.

    C. Review the City’s present building code.

    In Order to effectively and efficiently carry out the assigned tasks,
    the Committee was separated into two subcommittees employing two complimentary approaches: (a) the Architectural Accessibility Subcommittee surveyed a cross­ section of City-owned or operated facilities and (b) the Employment Subcommittee held a series of meetings with the Equal Opportunity Department and key City Personnel Department representatives and conducted an in-depth ana1ysis of the City’s personnel policies and procedures. Additionally, each subcommittee reviewed existing literature applicable to the charge, extracting specific segments for inclusion in this report.

    II. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

    A. The observations and recommendations of the Architectural Accessibility Subcommittee are based on compliance with applicable Federal, State, and Municipal codes, regulations, and statutes. Of greatest impact are:

    1. Sections 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

    2. Arizona’s Building Access Act (A.R.S. 11 34-401 to 34-439,
    Annotated).

    3. Uniform Building Code.

    4. The City of Phoenix Building Safety Code, Part 29, Chapter 8.

    B. The Employment Subcommittee Report sought consistency with Federal,

    State, and Municipal Affirmative Action guidelines and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) directives to include:

    1. The Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972

    2. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973

    3. Enacting regulations of the Department of Labor (DOL), Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Revenue Sharing (DRS), and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) as related to Sections 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

    4. State of Arizona Affirmative Action Guidelines

    5. City of Phoenix Personnel Rules

    III. HIGHLIGHTS OF FINDINGS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ACCESSIBILITY SUBCOMMITTEE.

    A. Accessibility Survey

    On-site accessibility surveys of twenty-eight facilities owned or
    operated by the City of Phoenix reveal that:

    1. 68% of the facilities surveyed have either an insufficient number
    of parking spaces reserved for disabled drivers or the reserved
    spaces are inappropriately designed to accommodate the needs of
    disabled drivers.

    2. 25% of the facilities surveyed contained barriers in the route of
    travel from the parking lot to the entrance to the building.

    3. 14% of the sites surveyed had inaccessible programs.

    4. 68% of all sites surveyed have either inaccessible rest room
    entrances or toilet booths, with 46% having inaccessible lavatories.

    5. 32% of the facilities that provide drinking water have inaccessible
    water fountains.

    B. During July of 1986, a 504 Self-Evaluation Process was conducted by the City’s Parks, Recreation, and Library Department. This was an effort to evaluate the accessibility of the Department’s facilities and/or programs.

    The subsequent report describes the department’s efforts in serving the handi­capped community, its shortcomings, and recommendations for the future to improve accessibility for all citizens. Since this report addresses issues regarding both accessibility and employment, it has been incorporated into
    this Ad Hoc Committee report.

    C.
    The City of Phoenix Building Code is patterned after the Arizona
    Uniform Building Code. The Building Safety Advisory Board provides input to the Building Safety Department in this regard. This department regulates new construction but does not function retroactively or require retrofitting buildings constructed prior to 1977, to comply with the Code.

    The primary responsibility of the Code is in reference to life and safety and requires structural changes only if a safety hazard is imminent. Although a building must be in compliance with the City of Phoenix Code before a permit (or certificate of occupancy) is issued, this requirement is not strictly adhered to with respect to accessibility to disabled persons. Part 29, Chapter 8 of the
    City Code specifically addresses accessibility, but there is only one staff person designated for the sore purpose of reviewing all plans in reference to accessibility. Approximately 300 plans are submitted per mouth for commercial buildings and some 30,000 permits are issued per year within the City of

    Phoenix. The Code was formulated to address accessibility of entrances and sanitary facilities and inspect for compliance in these two areas only.

    IV. HIGHLIGHTS OF FINDINGS OF THE EMPLOYMENT SUBCOMMITTEE

    A. Recruitment

    Efforts to recruit disabled job applicants include,

    1. Mailing position announcements to agencies representing persons with disabilities

    2. Standard Classified advertisements in a variety of newspapers.

    3. A City of Phoenix direct telephone line, containing a recorded listing of job openings. This information is frequently unavailable to deaf persons requiring a TDD (Telecommunication Device for the Deaf) for telephone communication.

    4. Utilization of the Equal Opportunity Department and Personnel
    Department Career Development/Resource Files for notification
    of various minorities, including persons with disabilities, of
    available positions.

    B. The Hiring Process

    Position Announcements are generated, with tests being administered to those applicants meeting minimum qualifications. Five Preference

    Points are added to the test scores of applicants identifying themselves as disabled. All applicant information is input into Personnel Applicant Tracking System (PATS), which generates a Certification List. The Certification List is forwarded to the selecting official/interviewer having an opening. Copies of applications are not forwarded with the Certification Lists; rather the selecting official / interviewers are encouraged to go to the Personnel Department to review them. The Personnel Department is notified of the selection.

    C. Job Analysis Testing

    Job analysis is performed every two to three years by the Personnel
    Department, utilizing input from the incumbent (whenever possible)
    and supervisor, focusing primarily on task performance. Physical
    requirements are not generally included in this Job Analysis. When
    candidates having disabilities are being considered for positions,
    the hiring department is responsible for providing reasonable
    accommodations. This is accomplished by:

    1. Coordinating through the Affirmative Action Division J who
    conducts an accommodation analysis/assessment.

    2. Consulting with a Rehabilitation Engineer, if appropriate.

    No record exists of the accommodations now in place or their adequacy. It is necessary that a survey of disabled employees be conducted to effectively record and monitor accommodations provided.

    This will also prove beneficial in implementing accommodations in an expeditious manner or future disabled candidates.

    Reasonable accommodations are provided in testing disabled job
    applicants, including:

    1. Sign language interpreters for deaf applicants

    2. Readers for blind applicants

    3. Separate testing area for blind or deaf applicants to maintain
    the integrity of the testing system

    4. Architecturally accessible test sites

    D. Interviewing

    A Supervisor’s Manual, with a Supervisor’s Guide on Selection
    Interviews, is distributed by the Personnel Department providing a
    generalized guide for interviewing techniques. This manual
    includes only minimal reference to the disabled applicant. No
    training for interviewing techniques is provided unless it is
    requested. Training, to include interviewing techniques concerning
    disabled applicants, of new supervisors/managers would result in
    consistent interviewing by personnel charged with the responsibility
    of hiring throughout the City’s numerous departments.

    E. Newly Disabled Employees

    Two programs are currently in existence to address the concerns of
    employees who become disabled as a result of an on-the-job injury,
    serious illness, etc.

    1. Light Duty Program: Light duty job assignments to last from two to six months

    2. Permanently Disabled Employee Program: Employees’ abilities are assessed and efforts are made to provide appropriate relocation or, if necessary, review retirement eligibility and consideration of termination.

    3. No data exists relative to placement or termination of newly
    disabled employees, rendering it impossible to accurately
    assess the effectiveness of this program at this time.

    F. Upward Mobility

    The frequency or infrequency of promotions of disabled employees
    cannot be determined at this time due to the non-existence of adequate data tracking information in this area.

    The Personnel Applicant Tracking System
    (PAIS) information is limited to the hiring process. Information gathered in the course of a survey to be conducted over the next year should be incorporated into a comprehensive reporting system utilizing the data obtained from the time of application, hire and changes in position/status] and its integrity maintained.

    G. Survey and Disability Awareness Training

    A survey of all disabled City of Phoenix employees is needed to
    determine:

    1. the total number of disabled employees,

    2. what their disabilities are,

    3. in what job classifications they are,

    4. accommodations provided and adequacy of same,

    5. promotions, demotions and disability related terminations, and

    6. disability related concerns of disabled and non-disabled
    employees.

    In addition to a survey of disabled employees, it is recommended
    that disability awareness training be conducted in each department
    over a twelve month period. Participants of this training will be
    department heads, managers, supervisors and E.O. Liaisons.
    This training should emphasize sensitivity, awareness and increased
    knowledge, thereby creating a positive and receptive atmosphere for
    disabled and non-disabled employees.

    H. Policies and Procedures

    This section is to designate those City employees in the classified
    services, set forth the rights and privileges of those employees,
    and to state the City’s obligations in establishing and maintaining
    a merit system. This section will address methods governing
    appointment, tenure, promotion/demotion, transfer, layoff, separate-
    tion, discipline and other incidents of employment relating to City
    employees. There exists omission of reference to disabled
    employees, and terminology and procedures are obsolete. Revision
    should be made through appropriate guidelines/Council approval.

    I. Equal Opportunity Committee

    It is recommended that consideration be given to the formation of a
    committee of employees of all levels from each of the City’s
    departments. This committee should meet periodically, and seek to
    bring to light concerns, provide input regarding standard operating
    procedures, and to heighten sensitivity and awareness.

    SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

    A. Architectural Accessibility

    It is hoped this information will help inaugurate a City program to
    correct the inexpensive violations such as more and wider reserved
    (handicap) parking spaces with proper signage, curb cuts and accessible routes to the bu11ding and the program(s) it houses, adjust door closures and large pull type hardware, paper cups or the
    availability of paper cups at or near drinking~ fountains that are
    currently inaccessible. Simultaneously, a program to modify at
    least one restroom in each building to be accessible to wheelchair
    users must be launched with appropriate funding.

    The prevention of this scenario reoccurring is dependent upon the
    rigid enforcement of the standards specified in the Arizona Revised
    Statutes prior to the construction, acquisition, or leasing of any
    building for City purposes.

    Additionally, in those instances where Federal guidelines apply,
    Section 504 requirements are such that the present scope of the
    various City departments must be broadened beyond the basic areas of parking lots, curb cuts, walkway, drinking fountains, and rest­rooms. All amenities should be reviewed to ensure accessibility to the greatest extent possible The intent of the 504 requirements
    are such that the disabled community should be consulted on a con­
    tonal basis to ensure reasonable accommodation and accessibility.

    Advisory committees may be appointed by each department director
    and consist of disabled individuals and/or representatives of
    qualified organizations of disabled persons to assist in the review
    process by establishing acceptable standards and acting as a con­
    tonal source of information. An alternative to this individual
    departmental approach would be the creation of a Commission on
    Disability Concerns, which will be discussed in detail later in
    this report.

    Employment Subcommittee Recommendations

    1. Explore avenues by which to provide agencies serving the disabled with job opening information for openings for which a small number of applications will be accepted. In the alternative, it is recommended that those applicants responding to
    those specific openings through these agencies be accepted.

    2. Installation of a direct telephone line and TDD (Telecommunication Device for the Deaf). This device shall contain a listing of job openings identical to that available to hearing job seekers a The availability of this service should be made
    known to the general public periodically. Additionally, Personnel Department staff should be trained in the use of the TDD and how to recognize the signal when a TDD call is received from a hearing impaired caller.

    3. The general public should be informed that the Personnel
    Department of the City of Phoenix is accessible to disabled
    Persons, and that accommodations, such as readers, sign
    language interpreters, etc., are available.

    4. It is recommended that the Equal Opportunity Department and
    the Personnel Department be more assertive regarding disabled
    applicants to determine if those disabled applicants appearing
    on the Certification Lists are, in fact, being interviewed and
    reasonable accommodations provided. The Equal Opportunity
    Department should monitor the selection/hiring process.

    5. The statement by the City of Phoenix. “equal opportunity
    employer, M/F” should be modified to include disabled applicants
    It is recommended that a simple, concise statement be
    used: “M/F/H,” or “The City of Phoenix is an Equal Opportunity
    Employer.”

    6. The format of the Certification List should be redesigned to
    uniformly reflect disability in the same manner as sex,
    ethnicity, etc. Additionally, copies of the applications of
    those appearing on the Certification List be forwarded to the
    department having the opening.

    7. Specific information concerning reasonable accommodations
    provided disabled employees should be maintained and recorded,
    and be readily available to assist in addressing the accommodation
    needs of newly disabled employees, new employees, or applicants having disabilities.

    8. Separate statistical data should be maintained relative to
    placement or termination of employees who become disabled.
    Additionally, data should be maintained on promotions, demotions,
    training, transfers and official reprimands of disabled employees.

    9. A survey of disabled City of Phoenix employees should be conducted and incorporated into a comprehensive reporting system
    utilizing the data obtained from the time of application, hire, and changes in position/status, and its confidentialityand integrity maintained This survey should be annualized.

    10. A self-identification form should be provided to newly hired,
    disabled employee bearing the same contents as the survey questionnaire.

    This should be forwarded to the Equal Opportunity Department for appropriate recording.

    11. Disability Awareness and Sensitivity Training should be
    provided for each department, over a twelve month period
    commencing September, 1987. Immediately following each
    training session, a survey of that department’s employees
    should be conducted.

    12. Consideration should be given to the formation of a committee
    comprised of employees of all levels. Representative of each
    department to express concerns. Provide input to standard
    operating procedures, and heighten sensitivity and awareness.

    C. A Commission on Disability Concerns

    1. It is essential to know with some degree of precision the number,
    characteristics, and primary concerns of disabled persons in the Phoenix Metropolitan area Distribution of certain state and municipal revenues depend upon such knowledge.

    Efficiency considerations dictate that programs and funds to serve disabled persons and to ameliorate their general condition. be allocated in accordance with these needs and the geographic distribution of persons with disabilities throughout the City of Phoenix.

    2. It is this Committee’s strongest recommendation that consideration be given to the creation of the Phoenix Commission on Disability Concerns. Of the Commissions already in existence serving the City of Phoenix. none are designated the specific responsibility of addressing the concerns of the disabled population. Such a Commission should be provided with sufficient support services and ongoing funding adequate to implement a three-phase program.

    (a) A thorough search should be conducted of existing sources of
    disability data and outline an appropriate methodology for
    deriving the best estimates of the number of disabled Phoenix
    residents and obtain a response-based prioritization of needs.

    (b) During the second phase, an actual census of all disabled
    residents should be conducted (not limited to developmentally
    disabled adults between the ages of 16 and 64). Simultaneously,
    a computerized data based information and referral service
    should be established providing a centralized, one-stop contact
    for quick and accurate response and/or referral regarding any
    disability related issue.

    (c) Supplementary funding sources should be obtained through
    Federal and State agencies as well as private sector grant
    programs, as available. These funds should be used to provide
    periodic monitoring of municipal programs and facilities to
    ensure that discrimination does not occur against people with
    disabilities. This third phase would necessitate a close working
    relationship with the City of Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department,
    and the Mayor’s Committee on Employment of
    the Handicapped.

    3.The acquisition of additional funds in the third phase with matching
    funds from the City, should ensure the continued existence of the Phoenix Commission on Disability Concerns, and thus provide for long-range representation of the disabled residents of Phoenix.

    Mr. Bill Scott J Chair
    Mr. Chairman:
    The Architectural Accessibility Subcommittee was directed to survey a significant number of City-owned or operated facilities to determine the level of compliance with regulations and accepted standards of accessibility to the handicapped.

    I. Survey Background:
    The compliance criteria was the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards. This document presents uniform standards for the design, construction, and alteration of buildings so that physically handicapped persons will have ready access to and use of them 1n accordance with the Architectural Barriers Act, 42 1.S.C. 4151-5157.

    The document embodies an agreement to minimize the differences between the standards previously used by four agencies (the General Services Administration, the Departments of Housing and Urban Development and Defense, and the United States Postal Service) that” are authorized to issue standards under the Architectural Barriers Act, and between those standards and the access standards recommended for facilities that are not federally funded or constructed.

    The four standard-setting agencies establish and enforce standards for design, construction, and alteration of particular types of buildings and facilities. The General Services Administration (GSA) prescribes standards for all buildings subject to the Architectural Barriers Act that are not covered by standards issued by the other three standard-setting agencies; the Department of Defense (DoD) prescribes standards for DoD installations; the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HOD) prescribes standards for residential structures covered by the Architectural Barriers Act except those funded or constructed by DoD; and the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) prescribes standards for postal facilities. Each of the four agencies issues standards in accordance with its statutory authority.

    To ensure compliance with the standards, Congress established the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (ATBCB) in Section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (the Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. 792. The ATBCB is composed of members representing eleven Federal agencies (the four standard-setting agencies; the departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Interior, Justice, Labor, and Transportation; and the Veterans Administration) and eleven members appointed by the President from the general public. A 1978 amendment to Section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act added to the ATBCB’s functions the” responsibility to issue minimum guidelines (Guidelines) and requirements for the standards established by the four standard setting agencies. The final rule that established the Guidelines now in effect was published 10 the Federal Register on August 4, 1982 (47 FR 33862) and is codified at 36 CFR part 1190.

    The four standard-setting agencies determined that the uniform standards adopted by them would, as much as possible, not only comply with the Guidelines adopted by the ATBCB but also be Consistent with the standards published by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for general use. ANSI is a nongovernmental national organization that publishes a wide variety of recommended standards. ANSI’s standards for barrier-free design are developed by a committee made up of 52 organizations representing associations of handicapped people, rehabilitation professionals, design professionals, builders, and manufacturers.

    The standards, which are called ANSI Al17.l, “Specifications for Making Buildings and Facilities Accessible to J and Usable by, Physically Handicapped People,” are developed using the consensus process. The original ANSI Al17.l, adopted in 1961, formed the technical basis for the first accessibility standards adopted by the federal government and most state governments.

    The current edition, ANSI AlI7.1-1980, is based on research funded by HOD. It has generally been accepted by the private sector and has been recommended for use in model state and local building codes by the Council of American Building Officials.

    In keeping with the objective of uniformity between federal requirements and those commonly applied by state and local governments. the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) follows ANSI Al17.l-1980 in format. Both the UFAS 8cope provisions, which establish the minimum number of elements and spaces required to comply with standards, and the UFAS technical requirements meet or exceed the comparable provisions of the Guidelines.

    The UFAS was published in the Federal Register on August 7, 1984 (49 FR 31528). Each of the standard-setting agencies has taken action in accordance with its own procedures, including internally prescribed rule making and the Administrative Procedure Act where applicable, to incorporate the DFAS in its own standards, resolutions, or other directives. GSA adopted the UFAS in 41 CFR 101-19.6, effective August 7, 1984. HOD adopted the UFAS in 24 CFR part 40, effective October 4, 1984. USPS adopted the OFAS in Handbook RE-4, “Standards for Facility Accessibility by the Physically Handicapped,” effective November 15, 1984. DoD adopted the UFAS by revising Chapter 18 of DoD 4270.l-M, “Construction Criteria,” by memorandum dated May 8, 1985.

    II. Survey Findings:

    The subcommittee members reviewed the standards as a group in the field to acquaint themselves with their application, regardless of the level of experience in conducting such surveys. Several members use wheelchairs and one was blind.

    The significance of the standards was evident in the very early stages of this “training program” and there was some astonishment on the part of some members not previously exposed to the concerns of the disabled population.

    The task of applying all the standards against all of the proposed buildings would be horrendous. Two approaches were decided upon to successfully complete the assignment. One was to select representative locations from the submitted listing of City-owned or operated buildings and the other was to develop e capsulated check list that would identify problems in the order of their importance.

    The checklist 1s provided as an Attachment. It was arranged essentially in the order in which a casual or first time visitor encountered the location.

    The following excerpt from the standards reflects one desired goal, and item number one on the checklist shows how this was summarized to catch the ~feel~ of the parking services provided.
    If parking spaces are provided for employees or visitors, or both, then accessible spaces, complying with 4.6, shall be provided in each.

    EXCEPTION: This does not apply to parking provided for official government vehicles owned or leased by the government and used exclusively for government purposes.

    The result was that thirty-two (32) percent of all sites surveyed did not have an appropriate number of reserved spaces for the handicapped

    Thirty-six (36) percent of all sites surveyed did ~ have spaces
    reserved that set the standards for size.

    For a site to be accessible, it must have at least one accessible route complying with the standards within the boundary of the site from public transportation stop, accessible parking spaces, passenger loading zones if provided, and public streets or sidewalks to an accessible building entrance.

    Fourteen (14) percent of all sites surveyed did not have a neces
    sary curb cut on an otherwise accessible route.

    Only one (1) site did not have a necessary ramp on the accessible
    route.

    Ten (10) percent of all sites surveyed had entrance doors that were difficult to operate due to excessive opening pressure or improper , hardware.

    Program accessibility is slightly value, but was approached with the question–~Can a physically disabled person access the service or participate in the program that is housed in the building? If the site was the Water Department) the surveyor, after parking and gaining access to the building, simply asked,

    Can I pay my water bill from a wheelchair?

    Fourteen (14) percent of the sites surveyed had inaccessible
    programs.

    Public use restrooms are dealt with extensively in all standard publications. The essentials really amount to a few concerns 1s it identified?, can I get through the door?, is the toilet booth door wide enough for a wheelchair?, is the mirror low enough to use from a seated position?, and can I reach the towels?

    If toilet facilities are provided, then each public and common use toilet room shall comply with 4.22. Other toilet rooms shall be adaptable. If bathing facilities are provided, then each public and common use bathroom shall comply with 4.23. Accessible toilet rooms and bathing facilities shall be on an accessible route.

    Twenty-nine (29) percent of all sites surveyed had inaccessible
    door openings to the restrooms.

    Thirty-nine (39) percent of all sites surveyed had inaccessible
    toilet booths.

    Forty-six (46) percent of all sites surveyed had inaccessible
    lavatories.

    If drinking fountains or water coolers are provided, approximately 50 percent of those provided on each floor shall comply with 4.15 and shall be on an accessible route. If only one drinking fountain or water cooler is provided on any floor, it shall comply with 4.15.

    Thirty-two (32) percent of all surveyed sites that provided drink
    ing fountains were found to have inaccessible fountains.

    III. SUMMARY

    If the buildings and programs surveyed represent an average of the architectural barriers still existing in the City of Phoenix, it is clear that attention must be directed toward the eradication 6f these barriers. It should also be noted that cost cannot be used as an excuse in some of the categories such as parking and drinking water, nor can the absence of an accessible. route or an inaccessible program be tolerated J even for a minimal’ length of time. This leaves only the category of toilet rooms with a high rate of violations Bnd cost factors.

    It is hoped this information will help inaugurate a City program to
    correct the inexpensive violations such as more and wider reserved
    parking spaces (properly signed), curb cuts and accessible routes to the building Bnd the program it houses, adjusted door closers and large pull type hardware, paper cups or the availability of paper cups at or near drinking fountains that are currently inaccessible.

    Simultaneously, a program to modify at least one restroom in each building to be accessible to wheelchairs must be launched with appropriate funding.

    The prevention of this scenario recurring is dependent upon the rigid enforcement of the standards specified in the Arizona Revised Statutes prior to the construction, acquisition, or leasing of any building for City purposes.

    Respectfully submitted,

  • Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled Report: Employment

    Mr. Chairman:

    The Employment Subcommittee of the Phoenix Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled has addressed the employment/personnel practices concerning persons with disabilities in the City of Phoenix. The following represents our findings and recommendations, and is submitted for inclusion in the final report of the Phoenix Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled.

    I. RECRUITMENT

    Job Opening notifications: Requisitions are received from the City of Phoenix departments by the Personnel Department. Based on the notification/request, a position opening announcement may be generated.

    A. Position Announcements are mailed to agencies for the handicapped. A mailing list 1s maintained in the Personnel Department, and is updated via agency contact, i.e., the agencies are sent a form to complete concerning type. clientele and number served. Addition to the mailing list is made when an agency initially visits/contacts the Personnel Department. The list is updated periodically by mailing Questionnaires requesting current information.

    B. Position Announcements are mailed to the aforementioned agencies on

    Thursday afternoon or Friday morning~ each week (generally received from the Print Shop Thursday morning for Monday recruitments). Length of time positions are open for recruitment varies, and is reflected on each Position Announcement.

    C. All applications are considered accepted, unless the maximum number of applications have been received (reflected on the announcement is a “limited number” of applications being accepted for a particular position, i.e., only the first 100 applications will be accepted/ considered, or only 100 applications will be given out). Generally, these are positions which, historically, attract large numbers of applicants.

    1. Comments to this subcommittee indicate that in some instances, positions are limited to a much smaller number, i.e., twenty or less, which renders it difficult, if not impossible, to deliver au application to meet that criteria. This is of particular concern as it relates to disabled persons who learned of the opening through an agency on the mailing list, or someone who cannot obtain job opening information over the telephone. Typically, an agency receives the job announcements and contacts its disabled clients. Upon determining they meet the minimum Qualifications, they refer clients to the City Personnel Department to apply for position(s) pursuant to the

    announcement, only to find .that the maximum number of applications has been received.

    2. It is recommended that avenues be explored to provide agencies on the mailing list with the job opening information other than through the mail’ in situations wherein only a small number of applications will be accepted. In the alternative, it is recommended that applications from those responding to job announcements through those agencies be accepted.

    D. A telephone number is advertised from time to time which, when called, provides a listing of the position openings, or positions for which applications are being taken. We are informed that hearing impaired individuals can telephone the Personnel Department and a member of staff will provide this information. This is not advertised, and it is not always possible to get a response to the TDD (Telecommunications Device).

    It Is, therefore, recommended that a direct TDD line and TDD unit be installed and that it contain the information identical to that provided to hearing individuals. In addition, it 1s recommended that Personnel Department staff be oriented regarding the use of the TDD and recognizing its signal when a TDD call is received 80 that calls can be received and questions answered. It is recommended that the availability of job opening~ information through the TDD number be made known to the general public from time to time. It is recommended that the general public be informed that the Personnel Department of the City of Phoenix is accessible, and that accommodation -Is available, such as readers, interpreters, etc.

    E. This Committee is informed that selective recruitment of disabled applicants does not take place other than mentioned above. However, the Equal Opportunity Department maintains a Career Development File (Applicant Supply File) of minorities and females, including those with disabilities. When a position is available and ao affirmative action need exists, the applicant Is notified and encouraged to apply. Inasmuch as this Committee did oat review this file because of its confidentiality, we cannot determine if it contains applications of individuals with disabilities proportionate to those of minorities and females.

    F. A more assertive role is recommended on the part of the Personnel Department and Equal Opportunity Department regarding disabled applicants, to determine if those appearing on the Certification Lists are, in fact, being interviewed, as well as identifying the need for strengthening job accommodations/job analysis availability to those making hiring decisions, or interviewing and awareness of abilities of disabled applicants. In that regard, we recommend that the Equal Opportunity Department monitor the selection process and that assistance be provided io making selection decisions if an affirmative action need exists.

    Newspaper Advertisements appearing in the Arizona Republic and
    Phoenix Gazette as recent as July, 1987, state that the City of
    Phoenix is an Equal Opportunity Employer, and state: “equal opportunity employer m/f. R We recommend modification to include disabled applicants, i.e., Rm/f/b,R or simply state that the City of Phoenix is an Equal Opportunity Employer.

    II. THE HIRING PROCESS

    A. Position Announcements generated.

    B. Applications are received; those meeting minimum Qualifications are tested.

    1. Test are graded, and preference points added (five points for disability) to the score.

    2. A copy of the application and, particularly, the portion to be completed regarding disability 1s attached and identified as RAt~. lR and by reference made a part of this report~

    3. All applicant information is input (PATS/Personnel Applicant Tracking System)~ PER 00805, new employee input form attached, as -Att. 2” and by reference made a part of this report.

    C. Certification List is generated via PATS.

    1. Reflected oc the Certification List area:

    a. Name

    b. Social Security Number c:. Sex

    d. Ethnicity / Handicap

    2~ With the exception of the designation of a handicapping condition, all of the above items are clearly identifiable on the Certification List. “Handicap” is designated by an asterisk to the left of the name of the applicant having~ a disability; an explanation of the asterisk appears on the second page. Specific disability is not input to PATS; rather, “Y or N” (Yes or No) is input, generating the asterisk.

    Several examples were reviewed, 00 which the asterisk was so far to the left margin, that it was of little or no use in identifying a disabled applicant. It is recommended that the format of the Certification List be redesigned to uniformly reflect disability in the same manner as sex, ethnicity, etc.

    D. The Certification List 1s forwarded to the selecting official interviewer in the department, who:

    1. coordinates interviews;

    2. makes selection, job offer and arranges date of hire;

    3. advises those interviewed, but not selected, of the decisions (Since this does not always occur, we recommend that applicants, disabled or non-disabled” be informed of the hiring decision consistently and in accordance with procedure).

    E. The applications (or copies thereof) of those being interviewed are not forwarded by the Personnel Department. Those interviewing do not always to the Personnel Department to review the applications; however, they are encouraged to do so. Copies of those applications (those candidates being interviewed) should be provided to the person conducting the interview/making the selection decision) so that complete information can be reviewed on a consistent basis

    F. Upon noting the indicating disability, the interviewer telephones the Personnel Department to identify the disability. This information is provided by clerical staff, who read the information from the application.

    Since disabilities, even those similar in nature, vary, this is a
    major cause for concern. This information should be obtained from
    the disabled individual, and should be job related only in the
    interview. Since no statistics are available to determine the
    number of disabled applicant which are actually interviewed, or
    hired, it is impossible to measure the impact of the existing proce
    dure. However, it is important to note that historically, assump
    tions, or presumptions are made with minimal information and
    employment opportunities are negatively affected. This information
    should not be provided over the telephone; this Committee recommends that this practice cease

    G. The Certification List is retooled to the Personnel Department. Noted by interview in~ department on the List, are:

    1. selectee

    2. reason for nonselection

    3. whether candidates interviewed, but not selected, should remain on the Certification, or be removed from the List (Those removed from the List are to be notified of such removal and the reason, according to procedure). ~

    H. Date of hire, new employee orientation and training are coordinated and conducted by each individual department. Included in Disability Awareness Training should be techniques concerning the new employee with a disability and privacy rights associated with that person and his/her disability.

    III. JOB ANALYSIS/TESTING

    A. A Job Analysis is performed every two-three years, and is accomplished by the incumbent and supervisor Basically, the analysis addresses tasks performed. Physical requirements are oat always included. Job Analysis also takes place when a disabled candidate is being considered for a position by:

    1. asking the candidate;

    2. coordinating internally via the Equal Opportunity Department; and

    3. contacting a Rehabilitation Engineer, if appropriate.

    B. No record is maintained of accommodations, which are the primary responsibility of each department. It is anticipated that this will be rectified, over the next year, through the survey of disabled employees, which will include information regarding accommodations.

    That survey is more fully discussed later in this report. Tracking accommodations would be an invaluable resource for the City, in terms of more Quickly obtaining and putting into place accommodations for a disabled candidate. Very often, an example in place, working effectively, strengthens the decision to hire a disabled candidate (bear in mind, also, that accommodations are not always physical accommodations, but modification of work hours, adjustment of job tasks, etc.).

    c. Tests: A meeting took place with Donna Mathein to discuss sighting some of the tests (this Committee was advised that there are 700-800 tests). She expressed that the position of the City was that this would not be possible, in that the Integrity of the testing~ system would be violated. Ms. Mathein advised that disabled candidates are accommodated, and that the testing site is accessible (i.e., architecturally accessible, as well as readers and interpreters provided for visually and hearing impaired applicants, respectively further, that applicant and reader/interpreter, etc., are “tested in a separate area, simultaneous to nondisabled / non accommodated applicants, to maintain the integrity of the test.

    d. We recommend that these accommodations/accessibility be advertised from time to time so that disabled persons are aware that they exist. We find that even some agencies serving disabled clients are unaware of same.

    e. After completion, the tests are graded, the appropriate points added to the score information input (PATS), and the Certification List is generated.

    IV. INTERVIEWING.

    A. A Supervisor’s Manual is distributed by the Personnel Department. A copy is attached of that portion relating to Interviews, and by reference are made a part of this report.

    This is a generic guide for interviewing techniques, and is compare
    able to those provided to supervisors/managers in the public and
    private sector. While it includes minimal reference to the’disab1ed
    applicant (i.e., Queries should only be those which are job related),
    we make no recommendations to modify this guide at this time, for
    reason that these techniques can be addressed through inclusion in
    the interview training, as well as the proposed disability awareness
    training sessions.

    B. No specific interview training is provided unless it is requested. Existing training includes minimal reference to interviewing persons with disabilities (i.e.) an exercise entitled “Pick a Disability)”) wherein participants are asked to select a disability) and determine if they could continue to perform their present job duties with that disability after being given time, education/training, counseling and opportunity. This training has been conducted three times in the past twelve months.

    c. Modification to this training concerning techniques for interviewing disabled candidates is recommended, eliminating the “Pick s Disability” exercise, replacing it with specific, appropriate techniques of interviewing disabled candidates. If training were provided new supervisors/managers, as a matter of course, it would not only take place on a frequent, consistent basis, but would result in consistent interviewing throughout the City’s many departments.

    V. NEWLY DISABLED EMPLOYEES.

    This Section concerns those newly disabled employees ïïï disabled as a result of injury on the job) serious illness, etc. Two programs are in existence, in accordance with A.R. 2.34, a copy of which is attached, and by reference is made a part of this report. The following describes these placement programs.

    A. Light Dutv Program (For temporarily disabled employees):

    1. City Physician examines employee to determine ability to return to full-time, regular work status, or limited work status.

    2. City Physician notifies Personnel Department Safety Division that employee 1s able to return to limited work.

    3. Personnel Department assigns to light duty program; instructs employee when/where to report to work.

    4. Light Duty Assignment is a minimum of two months, and is reviewed according to established timeframes. At six months, a complete review takes place to determine if disability is permanent, and whether employee will ever be able to return to regular, full-time work. If determination is that it is permanent in nature, placement occurs under the Permanently Disabled Employee Program.

    B. Permanently Disabled Employee Program:

    1. Department Heads are responsible for notification to Personnel Department that an employee is unable to satisfactorily perform job duties as a result of physical problems.

    2. Personnel Department is responsible for identifying job classifications the permanently disabled employee could reasonably expected to succeed, considering experience, education, and physical limitations

    1. Personnel Department coordinates the transfer or demotion of employee, upon identifying a specific position vacancy, 8S well as provides counseling with the employee to facilitate the transfer, demotion, and reviews retirement eligibility.

    2. Other options are also explored, such as a temporary position, or anticipating a permanent position opening within a short period of time.

    3. This is a priority placement departments designated to be assigned the disabled employee in accordance with the guidelines of this program are instructed to disregard other placement sources.

    C. It is difficult to assess the success of these programs relative to placement of newly disabled employees, since no statistical data exists relative to placement or termination of newly disabled employees. It is recommended that this data be tracked statistically to determine its effectiveness and, additionally, to insure that the procedures are, in fact, being followed, and are consistent with federal and state discrimination guidelines.

    VI. UPWARD MOBILITY.

    A. It is not possible to determine at this time if, in fact, disabled employees are being promoted. While the fact that 8n employee has a disability is input (PATS) initially, no use is made of this information.

    It is recommended that the information gathered in the course of the
    survey to be conducted over the next year be incorporated into a
    comprehensive reporting system utilizing the data obtained from time of application, hire and changes in position/status Bod that its
    integrity be maintained.

    B. In. the process of seeking another position promotionally, employees must submit a current application. Comments made indicate: they frequently choose to decline to self-identify (a disability). The reason cited is employee concern that a disability would be a negative factor, thereby affection~ their promotional opportunities. Concern in this area is primarily that employees are reluctant, or fearful; further, it strengthens the need for disability awareness at all levels, most certainly to eliminate or’ lessen occasions when the disabled employee’s r1~hts may be violated under Federal or State law.

    VII. SURVEY/DISABILITY AWARENESS TRAINING.

    A. Initially, the Ad Hoc Committee identified, as a priority, the need for a survey of all disabled City of Phoenix employees for reason that there are no data to determine:

    1. the number of disabled employees
    2. what their disabilities are
    3. in what job classifications they are
    4. accommodations: a) provided; and b) adequacy
    5. promotions/upward mobility
    6. concerns of disabled employees

    B. City Equal Opportunity Department and Personnel Department staff expressed concern, indicating that a survey of disabled employees was conducted several years ago. This proved fruitless, since no analysis or report was made of that survey, and no record exists concerning its findings. It was further expressed that a survey now would be a lengthy undertaking; employees would “think up” disabilities; found less claims, and/or grievances would increase, and it would strengthen the reluctance to self-identify (disability).

    It is the position of the Ad Hoc Committee that a survey is, in fact. necessary and that it could be conducted positively and effectively.

    C. Meetings and discussions ‘between the Employment Subcommittee and the Equal. Opportunity Department were positive and productive; all avenues were explored and it was concluded that a survey could not successfully and positively be accomplished without the active participation of management (conduct survey of subordinates in their respective departments). In addition, a disability awareness seminar would take place (Richard Pimental/Windmills, May 13, 1987).

    D. It is proposed that disability awareness training be conducted in each department (management and Equal Opportunity Liaisons) over a twelve-month period of time (June 30, 1987 -June 30, 1988). Immediately following each training session, a survey of that department’s employees will be conducted (Refer to Disability Survey Questionnaire attached hereto). Two sessions will occur during the summer, 1987, to determine effectiveness and to make modifications, if necessary. A schedule will be made to insure total participation of all departments, with the sessions formally commencing in September, 1987.

    1. A proposed training format was submitted to this Committee; however, modifications were recommended to place emphasis on sensitivity/awareness, as opposed to the primary emphasis on policy/regulatory law/compliance. While we are cognizant of the importance of the City policy and relevant law, it is of prime importance that this training not only increase knowledge and awareness, but create a positive, receptive atmosphere in which to conduct the survey effectively.

    1. The Affirmative Action Plans (AAP) of each department will include the aforementioned tratutn~ to take place 1n the next year, as well as goals to include persons with disabilities. Concern/caution has been conveyed to the Equal Opportunity Department regarding specific positions for disabled

    employees/applicants, it being preferable to establish as a goal that a Qualified disabled person(s) would fill a position in that department, with reasonable accommodation, if necessary, to avoid “stereotyping” persons with similar disabilities into similar positions, “isolating,” or precluding disabled persons from positions fo: which they are, in fact, Qualified.

    E. The Survey Questionnaire has been drafted, utilizing input from this Committee, and is attached hereto and by reference made a part of this report.

    VIII. POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

    A. This particular area posed a definite challenge to the Employment Subcommittee, due to the fact that few policies and procedures exist relative to disabled employees and applicants.

    The Employment Progress Report was furnished to the Subcommittee in January, and we visited the Equal Opportunity Department for the purpose of reviewing the. various procedural manuals. Copies were requested and furnished, which are discussed in this portion of the Employment Subcommittee Report.

    B~ Personnel Rules, City of Phoenix, Arizona, adopted 11-3-81; Revision dated 11-26-86, affecting:

    1. Rule l5b Vacation Leave With Pay
    2. Rule l5b Sick Leave With Pay
    3. Rule 15b.2 Accrual of Vacation Credits
    4. Rule 15b.3 Vacation Rate of Pay and Assessment
    5. Rule 15c.3 Rate of Sick Leave Pay and Assessment
    6. Rule l5c.2 Qualifications for Sick Leave
    7. Rule lac Eligibility (for reinstatement)
    8. Rule 1 -Definitions
    9. Rule lO.b Disqualification of Probationer
    10. Rule 3a.2 General Duties of the Personnel Director
    11. Rule 2l.b Reasons for Dismissal

    C. The Revision appears to be a “draft” and the transmittal memorandum states complete revised .set would be issued as soon as possible.

    For purpose of this report, we address those portions of the Personnel Rules affecting disabled employees and applicants, or those which omit reference to same.

    1. PERSONNEL RULES, SECTION 1

    Section 1. Purpose and Policy

    It 1s the P9rpose of this Chapter to designate those City employees in the classified services set forth the rights and privileges of those employees; and to state the City’s obligations in establishing and maintaining a merit system.

    The City has determined the necessity of establishlng a merit system of personnel administration based on merit principles-and professional methods governing the appointment, tenure, promotion, transfer, layoff, separation, discipline, and other incidents of employment relating to City employees These merit principles include:

    a. Recruiting, 6electin~ and advancing employees on the basis of their relative ability knowledge, and skills, including open consideration of Qualified application for initial appointments

    b~ Providing equitable and adequate compensation;

    C4 Training employees, as needed, to assure high-quality performance.

    d. Retaining employees on the basis of the adequacy of their performance, and separating employees whose inadequate performance cannot be corrected;

    e. Assuring impartial treatment of applicants and employees in all aspects of personnel administration without regard to political affiliation, race, color, national origin, sex, religious creed or handicap, and with proper regard for their privacy and constitutional rights 8S citizens; and

    f4 Assuring that employees are protected against coercion for political purposes and are prohibited from using their official authority for the purpose of interfering with or effecting the result of an election or a nomination for office.

    b4 Absent in this Section is reference to providing reasonable accommodations to an employee having a disability. It 1s recommended that the provision of reasonable accommodations be specifically made a part of this section by revision.

    2. PERSONNEL RULE 4 -FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES

    a. 4a -Discrimination:

    “No person In the City service shall be appointed or promoted to; or demoted or dismissed from, any position or in any way favored or discriminated against with respect to employment because of his political or religious opinions or affiliations; nor shall there be any discrimination 10 favor of, or against any applicant because of age, race, color, sex, handicap or nationality.

    An applicant, eligible or employee shall be considered solely on the basis of his qualifications as required by the position he seeks or holds relative to experience, training, personal and physical fitness, abilities, skills and knowledge.” (Emphasis supplied.)

    b. The term “physical fitness” infers that a person who is disabled shall not be considered for employment. Recognizing that some positions within the City have specific, physically demanding job duties) the primary considerations for employment are Qualifications) experience, training, skills and knowledge. Physical requirements for a position are cited in a job description, many of which can be performed with accommodation. Since this area should be addressed on an individual basis) we recommend

    “that the term “physical fitness” be deleted, or be specifically clarified pursuant to the foregoing reason.

    3. PERSONNEL ROLE 6 -REQUIREMENTS FOR ORIGINAL EMPLOYMENT

    B. 6a -Physical and Mental Fitness:

    “All applicants for City employment shall have sound physical and mental health. Physical impairments, not of a chronic or infectious nature) shall be favorably considered if the physical irregularities are of such kind that the applicants can be expected reasonably to meet the performance requirements of the positions they seek. The physical and mental Qualifications of persons entering the employment of the City may be evaluated by physicians. Such physicians shall “be designated by the City.”

    b. The inference here is that no physically or developmentally impaired persons are eligible candidates for employment. Reference must be made to reasonable accommodation. ParticlJlat’ concern in this regard) is “:”pig2on holing,” or precluding a disabled applicant from consideration. It 1s recommended that it read:

    “Physical impairments shall be favorably considered if the disabilities are such that the applicant be expected to reasonably meet the performance requirements of the positions they seek, with reasonable accommodation, if needed. Each disabled applicant will be viewed on an individual basis, and may be evaluated by physicians, to be designated by the City.”

    4. PERSONNEL ROLE 7′-RECRUITMENT AND OUALIFICATION EXAMINATION

    a. “7c2 -Does not meet the physical and mental health requirements of the class of position to which he seeks appointment.”

    Recommend deletion of Rule 7c2 in its entirety, for reason that a disabled applicant must first have the opportunity to be considered for an employment opportunity, after which disabilities are discussed (i.e., by what means one performs job duties, accommodations, etc.). As it now stands, a disabled applicant can automatically be presumed physically or mentally unfit for a class of position on the face of “being disabled.”

    b. 7e -Examination of Applicants:

    “Examinations to measure the qualifications of applicants shall be conducted by the Personnel Director and his staff or by persons designated by the Personnel Director to assist him.

    In order to qualify for employment, a candidate may be required to make a passing grade 1n each part of the

    examination. This is in reference to any test type or rating including, but oot limited to, knowledge, demonstration, physical, personal fitness or other related testing measurements.” (Emphasis Supplied)

    c. Recommend addition of the fact that accommodation will be provided to disabled applicants, i.e., readers and interpreters for the visually and hearing impaired, respectively, etc.

    5. PERSONNEL RULE 21 -DISMISSAL

    a. “21b -Reasons for Dismissal:

    The tenure of every employee in the classified service shall be during acceptable conduct and satisfactory performance of duties. Failure to meet such standards of conduct and work performance for any of the following listed reasons, such list not to be considered sufficient
    by the Board to uphold the action of the appointing authority in dismissing an employee.

    b. That the employee has some permanent chronic physical or medical ailment or defect which incapacitates him for the performance of bias duties

    c. Consistent with policy concerning~ placement of permanently disabled employees, we recommend modification of this Rule to add after exhausting placement pursuant to A.R. 2.34, Placement of Permanently Disabled Employees.

    D. Employment Progress Report. The 1985-86 Employment Progress Report was furnished to this Committee in response to its request for reports) policies and procedures concerning disabled employees. Thirty Departments report affirmative action goals and status in this report.

    1. Five departments refer to the “handicapped” in summarizing departmental plans and accomplishments. as follows:

    a. The Equal Opportunity Department has a staff member on the Mayor’s Committee for Employment of the Handicapped.

    b. The Management and Budget Department is continuing vigorous recruitment efforts to attract minorities. females and handicapped persons into the Management Intern Program.

    c. The Parks, Recreation and Library Department 1s updating the Department’s handicapped accessibility survey.

    d. Personnel Department accommodated a handicapped employee by transferring her from another City department where her frequent absences due to a chronic illness could not be tolerated ~n that department.

    e. Public Information Department -Full scale campaigns were successful for Ability Counts Luncheon and speech and hearing impaired festival ïïï Include all material (releases, publications) videotapes) ads, etc.) references to accessibility for handicapped and E.O. wherever they apply ï ï ï Produce publications that are lEO-related for EO Department and others. Result: Numerous publications were produced including materials for the Ability Counts
    Luncheon. the speech and hearing impaired festival, ï

    1. Each department reports on minorities and females, with no data relative to disabled employees.

    2. As a result of meetings with the Equal Opportunity Department since the inception of this Committee, positive action has taken place) with recommendations being discussed and implemented, some of which effect the Employment Progress Report and the appropriate inclusion of data, goals and training concerning disabled employees and applicants. This i8 more fully discussed later in this report.

    1. Throughout the Employment Progress Report, statements appear that ” will not discriminate against any employee because of ral::.e, color, religion, sex or national origin ïïï ” No∑ mention is made of handicapped employees. Recommendation is made that this be revised to include the disabled wherever that statement is made.

    E. MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES

    1. MP 4.101 Personnel and Pay -Position Requisition and Certification of Eligible’s
    (Copy attached and by reference made a part of this report.)
    It 1s recommended that affirmative action needs be reflected on
    the Requisition form and a copy be forwarded to the Equal
    Opportunity Department so that disabled candidates on the Cert.
    List are, in fact, interviewed and considered affirmatively,
    and/or the position be viewed as an upward mobility opportunity
    for a disabled employee, the Equal Opportunity Department
    following up regarding encouraging the disabled employee to
    consider applying for the opening.

    2. MP 4.402 Light Duty -Discussed earlier in this report.

    F. ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS

    1. AR 2.61 Personnel and Pay -Grievance Procedure

    8. -1. Purpose

    This regulation does not apply to allegations claiming violation of the specific express terms of a negotiated Memorandum of Understanding (MOO). Should management and the official representative recognized by a Memorandum of Understanding mutually agree that a particular complaint is not grieve able under its negotiated procedure, the employee(s) affected may apply for relief under the provision8 of this A.R.

    The purpose of this grievance procedure is to provide a just and equitable method for the prompt resolution of grievances without discrimination, coercion, restraint or reprisal against any employee who may submit or be involved in a grievance.

    b. -It is also important to recognize those actions that do not fall under the grievance procedure. These are actions for ~which there already exists another appeal procedure. Examples are:’

    Action Appeal

    (1) Suspension, demotion, Civil Service Board discharge (Pers. Rule 21)

    (2) Racial,’ ethnic or sex EEO Coordinator discrimination (A.R. 2.35)

    (3) Salaries Personnel Committee

    (4) Job Classifications Personnel Committee

    (5) Examination Results Personnel Director

    (6) Merit Increases Department Head

    (7) Performance Ratings Personnel Director

    (8) Violation of MOU As provided 10 MOU”

    c. Omitted in No.2 above is reference to discrimination based on handicap. We recommend revision to include handicap and, to be consistent and compatible with A.R. 2.35, that the inclusion of -race, religion, sex, age, handicap or national origin” be made.

    2. AR 2.35 Equal Employment Opportunity

    (Copy attached and by reference made a part of -this report.)

    s. “B. DEFINITION

    Discrimination, as used in this regulation, is any act taken because of race, religion, sex, age, handicap or national origin by a City employee or group of employees which unfairly and harmfully affects another employee or applicant in any aspect of City employment. Discrimination could occur in any process or function in achieving or maintaining City employment such as _in work assignments, working conditions, job classification, disciplinary actions, promotions, salaries, performance ratings and merit increases, interpretations of City rules and regulations, or other aspects of City employment which affects employees or job applicants unequally.

    b. We recommend inclusion of accommodations in this definition as a reason for discriminatory action.

    3. Requested, but not received, were copies of City Council Reports relative to employment of persons with disabilities.

    IX. SUMMARY:

    A. At the request of the Equal Oppo~tuQlty Department, Employment Subcommittee Members ~contacted various organizations to determine what programs were in place for disabled employees, recruitment, etc. Inasmuch 88 that does not affect this report, it will be submitted to the Equal Opportunity Department under separate cover. Also to have been covered was a poll of comparable cities by Equal Opportunity Department staff; however, that was delayed by the Equal Opportunity Department. That department can pursue that poll In the manner most suitable to them.

    B. In addition to the recommendations contained 1n this report, consideration should be given to the formaclon of a committee, to meet periodically, comprised of employees of all levels J ~representative of each department, to bring~ to light concerns J input and to increase sensitivity/awareness. This Committee could be coupled with minority issues. or the issues relative to affirmative action. Very often, through employee participation such as this, potential problem areas are detected, and addressed/resolved effectively and minimally.

    C. It has been encouraging to witness some of our recommendations implemented 88 we have worked together with the Equal Opportunity Department. This Committee anticipates involvement from time to time in the future to monitor the training program, survey and other recommendations, and will provide assistance, when appropriate.

    Respectfully submitted,

    Donna Noland, Chairperson Employment Subcommittee Phoenix Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled

    Committee wishes to express its ~gratitude to the following individuals for their assistance. advice, and cooperation in the drafting of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Disabled Annual Report:

    James A. Colley, Director, Parks, Recreation and Library, City of Phoenix

    “Len Engelhard, Employee Services Administrator, Personnel Department~, City ‘of phoenix

    Ross Hildebrandt, Director, Bul1din~ and Safety Department, City of ‘Pboenlr

    Donna Matheln, Affirmative Action Division Administrator, Equal Opportunity Department, City of Phoenix

    James P. Walsh, Former Special Assistant to the Mayor, City of Phoenix

    Bruce Young and Gary Phillips, Liaisons to the Committee, Equal Opportunity Department, City of Phoenix

    * Jane.Leddent, Law Student, Arizona State University

  • Navajo / Hopi Protection and Advocacy Fact Sheet

    –JUNE, 1988

    With the help of the Navajo’ Nation Council on the Handicapped a local legal aid program has applied for funds to establish a protection and advocacy (P&A) system to serve the developmentally disabled population of the Navajo and Hopi Nations.

    The proposal to the Federal Administration on Developmental Disabilities, Contract Management, 200 Independence Avenue, S.W., HHH Building -Room 349F, Washington, D.C. 20201,

    ATTENTION: HDS-88-3 Priority 3-B, requests $130,000 for a two year demonstration project. Additional funding in-kind contributions totaling over $50,000 will come from state bar foundations, the local legal services program, state protection and advocacy systems, and tribal and private service organizations. The project will implement a key recommendation of two recent needs assessments conducted by the Navajo Nation and Save the Children.

    The Navajo and Hopi Indian reservations cover over 35,000 square miles of rugged desert and plateau in the states of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. The area is Horne to over 200,000 tribal members. As many as 20,000 may have some degree of developmental disability. Many of these individuals live in isolated areas without paved roads, nearby medical and educational facilities, or modern housing and utilities. The dominant languages and cultures are Native American. Poverty and unemployment rates are many times the national averages.

    Despite their best efforts it is very difficult for state P&A programs to adequately serve the reservations. P&A funding is limited everywhere. State P&A offices are hundreds of miles from the reservations in Phoenix, Albuqerque and Salt Lake city.

    State P&A attorneys are licensed only in one state, have no tribal bar admissions, and lack the expertise in the complex body of federal Indian law which is essential to reservation practice. Most bnportantly, state P&A staff lack the language skills and cultural sensitivity needed to serve Native American people.

    The demonstration project will be housed within a reservation-wide legal aid program which has an almost entirely Native staff and significant Indian law experience.

    This project will chart the course toward better P&A services in the Navajo and Hopi Nations. Long-term funding will be needed to maintain those services. Central to such funding is amendment of the Developmentally Disabled Assistance and Bill of Rights Act to provide that tribes, like states, may receive funds to contract for the operation of independent P&A systems.

    Such federal assistance and a continued partnership with tribes and non-profit groups can give Native American persons with developmental disabilities equal opportunity to protect their legal and human rights.

AZ Transcribers 4

Reserve some Page’s . . . Pledge

22 AZ Video Histories Available for Transcription

Reserve a Video to Transcribe . . . Contact Us
ADA- Diaries_AZ_Gallery_Sidebar_300

Links

Legacy Preservation Toolkit ADA Legacy Project Elected Officials of AZ/USA Disability Organizations of AZ Disability History Organizations It’s Our Story Links

We Plus You

It’s Our Story aims to provide an
innovative and dynamic exploration of
disability life that calls upon all variety
of media and voices. We need your
support, enthusiasm, and story to
achieve our goals.

Add your imprint to the growing
tapestry of disability representation.
Send us images of your successes,
your artwork, your hardships and
achievements, your passions
and your pains.

In whatever form or media you
choose, add your own perspective to
Images That Matter ,hosted on the
It’s Our Story Flickr site.

Post your proudest moments, your
biggest challenges, and any positive
change imagery that promotes
independent living, self-determination,
and the pursuit of happiness in fully
inclusive societies.

We can’t wait to share your story!

Promote your Pride!

Contribute