A report on the reasons for the limited integration of people with disabilities in the labour market in Spain concludes that here is no uniform approach regarding the inclusion of issues affecting disabled workers in collective agreements. The report finds that these issues are dealt with in a marginal and uncoordinated way and recommends specific training for those negotiating collective agreements.
The report on the impact of social dialogue on workers with disabilities (in Spanish, 1.32 MB PDF) was published in April 2015 jointly by the ONCE Foundation, the General Workers’ Union (UGT) and the Largo Caballero Foundation. The report provides information on the inclusion of people with disabilities in the labour market in Spain, describes how collective agreements relate to workers with disabilities and points to the limitations these workers may experience in relation to social dialogue. The project involved a combination of desk-based research, in-depth interviews with experts, and case studies.
The report first analyses the factors which determine and limit the inclusion of people with disabilities in the labour market. Data from the National Institute of Statistics (INE) show that, in 2010, people without disabilities had an employment rate of 60.6% (67.1% for men and 54.1% for women), whereas people with disabilities had an employment rate of only 27.7% (31.4% for men and 23.3% for women). Workers with disabilities form a very diverse group, with differences in matters such as disability level, gender, age and qualifications. Based on desk research, the report concludes that the higher the level of qualifications gained by those with disabilities, the easier their access to the labour market. According to 2010 data from INE, people with disabilities have an average activity rate of 36%, which increases to 60% for those with tertiary level education.
The report goes on to analyse a selection of collective agreements from a database (REGCON) maintained by the Ministry of Employment and Social Security. A sample of 437 collective agreements, all published between 2008 and 2012, was studied. Company, national and autonomous community levels were represented in the sample but overall it was not representative because:
The analysis involved a search for specific terms in the texts of the agreements such as ‘disability’, ‘functional limitation’, ‘limited capacity’ and ‘LISMI’ (the acronym for the Law for the Social Integration of the Disabled). The following conclusions were drawn from the analysis.
The information obtained from in-depth interviews with 14 people with different professional profiles (including associations representing people with disabilities, labour intermediation, workers’ representatives, labour inspectorate and legal experts) and case studies (four companies with the specific policy of employing people with disabilities) suggested there was no systematic knowledge of the role played by social dialogue in facilitating the inclusion of people with disabilities in the labour market. The study identified as one cause of this knowledge gap the limited training or knowledge in this field undergone by the negotiators and representatives taking part in social dialogue.
Some interviewees explained that the issue of ‘disabilities’ is not a priority in social dialogue and that other subjects tend to come first: these include matters such as economic conditions and salaries, particularly within the context of the economic and financial crisis. However, the report argues that lack of knowledge among social dialogue actors is also probably a key reason why ‘disabilities’ are not a priority.
Another important factor is the limited labour integration of people with disabilities. Indeed, it is mainly in the companies where people with disabilities are a significant presence that there is more specific development of terms and conditions particularly aimed at this group in collective agreements – for instance, equality criteria and promotion possibilities.
A number of proposals for improvement were drawn from the interviews and case studies.
From a social dialogue perspective, the report shows that the labour market condition of people with disabilities in Spain is dealt with in a marginal and uncoordinated way. Not surprisingly, the report's authors express the view that all collective agreements (particularly sector-level ones) should include sections and clauses specifically aimed at people with disabilities, and that these should be less ‘declarative’ and more ‘operative’.
One of the report's main conclusions is that if more people with disabilities were in employment, it would be more common to find clauses in collective agreements referring to them. Thus, the authors recommend the development and improvement of labour intermediation and guidance services which could improve the labour inclusion of people with disabilities. The report highlights the importance of fiscal initiatives and public programmes promoting the employment of people with disabilities (particularly in small enterprises) and points to the need to differentiate these measures according to the degree/type of disability in order to promote diversity among those employed.
The report also underlines the need to offer specific training for social partners (particularly those negotiating collective agreements) to encourage them to draft more clauses related to disabilities in collective agreements – even in companies with only a few disabled workers. The authors recommend an awareness-raising plan for all stakeholders to involve them in improving the labour conditions of people with disabilities.