DISABILTY DISCRIMINATION ACT INQUIRY

FROM: Mark Hunter
Phone 
Qld

I believe the DDA has had limited effect on large government organisations because the request associated with the development and implementation of a Disability Action Plan, in the context of the Act is not prescriptive. This has meant that large organisations have been able to make public commitments to addressing issues associated with disability in either the client group or workforce, and not been held accountable under the Act.

This has meant that an organisation does not have to have a Reasonable Adjustment policy, thus allowing the organisation to avoid positive action. It also has allowed organisations to fail to train adequately, it managers and leaders in the understanding of such issues as unjustifiable hardship. This has resulted in inappropriate behaviour with regard to employees with disabilities. It has also resulted in creating misunderstanding with regard to whose is responsible for RA.

The DDA needs to clearly state that such training and development must be part of an obligatory. DAP [Disability Action Plan].

The DDA has failed to address effectively the issue of harassment in the workplace. This also results from the lack of a clear directive to organisations, particularly government departments to have a DAP in which a clear commitment is given to address the above issue.

The DDA needs to focus on disability in the wider context of Diversity.

Measurement of effectiveness needs to be incorporated into the DAP for each government organisation. This could be extended to organisations in the private sector with specific encouragements.

Within large government departments in Qld, there is a broad range of activities that could be related to the effectiveness of the DDA. This range extends from little or no action whatsoever in some particularly large government departments, to comprehensive action plans in others [eg. Emergency Services, Police].