A disability inclusion badge should signal commitment. What matters is whether that commitment translates into practice.
I experienced two very different approaches to accessibility from organisations participating in the same Disability Confident scheme.
Both knew from the beginning that I needed a qualified BSL interpreter for my interview. This was not a personal preference or an additional benefit. It was the adjustment needed for me to participate fairly.
The first organisation held Disability Confident Leader status, the highest level of the scheme.
Yet when my interview was confirmed, no interpreter had been arranged. The interview could not go ahead, and I received a rejection email that same day.
Communication about what had happened was delayed and conflicting. I eventually decided not to pursue the application any further.
The second organisation held Disability Confident Employer status, one level below Leader.
Something went wrong there too. But the response was different.
They acknowledged the problem, apologised, confirmed an interpreter and listened when I explained why a particular interpreting provider was not suitable. They rearranged the interview with the adjustments in place.
I felt respected and able to move forward.
Two organisations. The same scheme. Different levels of recognition. Very different experiences.
These experiences do not tell us everything about either organisation. But they raise an important question about what disability inclusion recognition actually means when someone needs access in practice.
A higher level of recognition suggests a stronger commitment. But who is responsible for ensuring that commitment reaches the people arranging interviews, communicating with candidates and making decisions?
The issue is not whether organisations ever make mistakes. Mistakes happen.
The issue is what happens afterwards.
Are access requirements treated as part of the recruitment process from the beginning? Are concerns taken seriously? When something fails, does the organisation acknowledge its responsibility and put things right?
I also want to recognise the organisation that responded well. It demonstrated that getting accessibility right is not necessarily about never making a mistake. It is also about listening, taking responsibility and acting when something needs correcting.
Reasonable adjustments are not favours. Employers have responsibilities that exist regardless of whether they display a disability inclusion badge.
A badge may recognise an organisation's commitments.
But those commitments must also be visible in its decisions, communication and actions.
THE QUESTION
What does it reveal when an organisation's recognised commitment to disability inclusion does not match someone's experience of accessing its services or opportunities?
