The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#2[flagged]
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#3I think one of the easier changes is to have more informational sharing in an organization. Those in charge often feel psychologically safe with an informational advantage - but it's probably less useful than they feel. That mutual trust will benefit the entire organisation, and not just autistics who may need to do first-order logical inference rather than just copying what others are doing.
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#4[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#5[flagged]
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#6[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#7I think one of the easier changes is to have more informational sharing in an organization. Those in charge often feel psychologically safe with an informational advantage - but it's probably less useful than they feel. That mutual trust will benefit the entire organisation, and not just autistics who may need to do first-order logical inference rather than just copying what others are doing.
[deleted]
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#8I think this item from the executive summary is particularly significant:
e.13 The report notes that many of the changes employers could make that would help recruit, retain and develop autistic people would also benefit people with other types of neurodiversity and disability, and non-disabled people. Adopting a universal “inclusion by design” approach, so an autistic person need not disclose their autism to secure the support they need, could reduce the need for separate workplace adjustments and the stigma this can sometimes entail, as well as improving overall productivity and reducing costs.
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#9I think one of the easier changes is to have more informational sharing in an organization. Those in charge often feel psychologically safe with an informational advantage - but it's probably less useful than they feel. That mutual trust will benefit the entire organisation, and not just autistics who may need to do first-order logical inference rather than just copying what others are doing.
> Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.
Seems somewhat at odds with your call for "mutual trust."
Re: The Buckland Review of Autism Employment
#10I think this item from the executive summary is particularly significant: e.13 The report notes that many of the changes employers could make that would help recruit, retain and develop autistic people would also benefit people with other types of neurodiversity and disability, and non-disabled people. Adopting a universal “inclusion by design” approach, so an autistic person need not disclose their autism to secure…
This is absolutely correct (curb-cut effect) but it’s also why employers will fight it.
The reason neurodiversity is such an issue for employers is that there’s no good way to measure people for talent (everyone needs to believe they are atypically talented in order to invent in the corporate “meritocracy,” even though it’s not a real one.) So instead they run on a system of blame and shared suffering, an attrition tournament that serves no purpose but is the best a company can come up with. Autistic people need exemption to thrive, but this is something everyone else wants—to be evaluated on merit rather than suffering—but that the firm, politically, will never be able to achieve.
Autism is an exaggerated version of the human experience. In many ways we are less robotic and more intensely human, with our hyper focus and extreme sensory experiences. Although we’re only about 5 percent of the population, there is a universality about us that makes us impossible for private sector firms to accommodate. If they treat us well, they have to treat everyone well, which is something executives will never stand for.