4 ms·

People in wheelchairs leave their homes all the time. Apple has buses and offices that I'm sure are wheelchair accessible. Apple probably offers pretty good ins

People in wheelchairs leave their homes all the time. Apple has buses and offices that I'm sure are wheelchair accessible. Apple probably offers pretty good insurance to get a motorized wheelchair if needed. If someone really can't make it to the office physically, I'm sure the policies are somewhat more nuanced. I understand it may be more difficult for certain people, but I guess to me it's a non sequitur. Doing different things is varying levels of difficult for different people. Is the conclusion that nobody should ask you to do anything inconvenient?

Octoth0rpe 4y ago
> I understand it may be more difficult for certain people If you can understand that, then you should understand that certain people will make rational decisions to minimize their difficulty. Remote work positions are more available now, and such people will likely naturally gravitate towards them. Consequently, non-remote positions will be disproportionally more able-bodied, which is exactly the point of the Apple employee statement.
- thebean11 4y ago
  Yeah maybe. I'd be curious to know how big of a factor it actually is. Would an extraverted person using a wheelchair prefer to work from home, or go in? I'd be hesitant to assume something like that is necessarily the biggest factor for somebody. It could certainly trend that way though. I don't see that as super problematic.
  - lghh 4y ago
    They have that option. Apple's offices are not going away. The letter specifically mentions that.
    - thebean11 4y ago
      Yeah sure. What I'm getting at is that it's not necessarily unjust to ask someone in a wheelchair to go somewhere in person for their job, and I'm not convinced most people in a wheelchair would see it that way.
burkaman 4y ago
The conclusion is that we should remove barriers whenever possible. Climbing a mountain is more difficult for people in a wheelchair, but that's just the way it is, we can't make the mountain equally accessible for everyone. Climbing the stairs of a skyscraper is more difficult for people in a wheelchair, but it doesn't have to be that way, we can install an elevator. Extend that to everything. We shouldn't ask people to do something inconvenient when we could make it convenient.
- thebean11 4y ago
  I guess in my mind accessible buildings, accessible transportation to and from work, insurance that makes it easy to get high quality treatment and medical devices are akin to "installing the elevator" in your analogy. Part of the job is getting to the top of the skyscraper and those things make it easier.
  - burkaman 4y ago
    > Part of the job is getting to the top of the skyscraper I guess that's the core disagreement here. The people who wrote this letter do not think getting to the top of the skyscraper is an important part of the job worth sacrificing even a small amount of accessibility, and the executives do.
- conductr 4y ago
  Chewing is so inconvenient. Feeding tubes for everyone! That’s a joke… we need the flexibility to cater to those who require it. We don’t need to make the baseline match the minimum. I think ADA and other items do well in this regard. So, just let a person WFH if attendance is overly inconvenient. It’s not the standard expectation. If working in the office is a baseline then It doesn’t mean they get to move to another country then claim the commute is now inconvenient. I think this wasn’t really much of an issue before Covid. Why is it now?
  - burkaman 4y ago
    > I think this wasn’t really much of an issue before Covid. Why is it now? It was. The ADA was the result of an enormous amount of struggle and activism, and that movement continues to the present. Reach out to a local disability rights organization (I guarantee there's one near you) and ask if they had any concerns about office work before Covid. I'd also recommend the documentary Crip Camp if you're not familiar with this part of American history. Edit: Here's an article from the start of the pandemic with lots of quotes relevant to your question. Sorry for the archive link, the site seems to be down right now. > Watching these accommodations become available in a wide-spread way so quickly has been really painful. It hurts not only because I could have benefited from accommodations like this throughout my education, but because there are so many others who could have benefited, or were forced to drop out of school, or quit their jobs because their school or employer told them they were impossible to accommodate. These accommodations have always been possible but acknowledging that requires acknowledging the ableism behind their denial. - https://web.archive.org/web/20200329102738/https://www.teenvogue.com/story/disabled-people-react-to-coronavirus-work-from-home-accommodations https://web.archive.org/web/20200329102738/https://www.teenv... It's a quick read and it's very good, I recommend reading it. Most of the issues discussed could be most easily addressed by allowing full remote work. Also, many of the people quoted have "invisible disabilities" - you may have coworkers like them without realizing it. This isn't just about ramps and elevators and other common accommodations.

Octoth0rpe 4y ago

> I understand it may be more difficult for certain people If you can understand that, then you should understand that certain people will make rational decisions to minimize their difficulty. Remote work positions are more available now, and such people will likely naturally gravitate towards them. Consequently, non-remote positions will be disproportionally more able-bodied, which is exactly the point of the Apple employee statement.

thebean11 4y ago
Yeah maybe. I'd be curious to know how big of a factor it actually is. Would an extraverted person using a wheelchair prefer to work from home, or go in? I'd be hesitant to assume something like that is necessarily the biggest factor for somebody. It could certainly trend that way though. I don't see that as super problematic.
- lghh 4y ago
  They have that option. Apple's offices are not going away. The letter specifically mentions that.
  - thebean11 4y ago
    Yeah sure. What I'm getting at is that it's not necessarily unjust to ask someone in a wheelchair to go somewhere in person for their job, and I'm not convinced most people in a wheelchair would see it that way.

burkaman 4y ago

The conclusion is that we should remove barriers whenever possible. Climbing a mountain is more difficult for people in a wheelchair, but that's just the way it is, we can't make the mountain equally accessible for everyone. Climbing the stairs of a skyscraper is more difficult for people in a wheelchair, but it doesn't have to be that way, we can install an elevator. Extend that to everything. We shouldn't ask people to do something inconvenient when we could make it convenient.

thebean11 4y ago
I guess in my mind accessible buildings, accessible transportation to and from work, insurance that makes it easy to get high quality treatment and medical devices are akin to "installing the elevator" in your analogy. Part of the job is getting to the top of the skyscraper and those things make it easier.
- burkaman 4y ago
  > Part of the job is getting to the top of the skyscraper I guess that's the core disagreement here. The people who wrote this letter do not think getting to the top of the skyscraper is an important part of the job worth sacrificing even a small amount of accessibility, and the executives do.
conductr 4y ago
Chewing is so inconvenient. Feeding tubes for everyone! That’s a joke… we need the flexibility to cater to those who require it. We don’t need to make the baseline match the minimum. I think ADA and other items do well in this regard. So, just let a person WFH if attendance is overly inconvenient. It’s not the standard expectation. If working in the office is a baseline then It doesn’t mean they get to move to another country then claim the commute is now inconvenient. I think this wasn’t really much of an issue before Covid. Why is it now?
- burkaman 4y ago
  > I think this wasn’t really much of an issue before Covid. Why is it now? It was. The ADA was the result of an enormous amount of struggle and activism, and that movement continues to the present. Reach out to a local disability rights organization (I guarantee there's one near you) and ask if they had any concerns about office work before Covid. I'd also recommend the documentary Crip Camp if you're not familiar with this part of American history. Edit: Here's an article from the start of the pandemic with lots of quotes relevant to your question. Sorry for the archive link, the site seems to be down right now. > Watching these accommodations become available in a wide-spread way so quickly has been really painful. It hurts not only because I could have benefited from accommodations like this throughout my education, but because there are so many others who could have benefited, or were forced to drop out of school, or quit their jobs because their school or employer told them they were impossible to accommodate. These accommodations have always been possible but acknowledging that requires acknowledging the ableism behind their denial. - https://web.archive.org/web/20200329102738/https://www.teenvogue.com/story/disabled-people-react-to-coronavirus-work-from-home-accommodations https://web.archive.org/web/20200329102738/https://www.teenv... It's a quick read and it's very good, I recommend reading it. Most of the issues discussed could be most easily addressed by allowing full remote work. Also, many of the people quoted have "invisible disabilities" - you may have coworkers like them without realizing it. This isn't just about ramps and elevators and other common accommodations.