The Act is not adaptable, it is not distinct in nature and it is costly to implement (Reynolds, 1995). These factors have allowed the public to disregard the members of the society that were supposed to be protected by the Law. It has been difficult to distinguish the groups that are protected by the Act, to ensure the Act is understood and applicable, the Act should be refined, reworded and simplified to ensure that it is easily understood and adapted (Lande, 1998).
Employers have in a greater way been able to deny disabled people employment although the disabled person may be in a position to perform most of the responsibilities; they are not given the opportunity to prove their ability to perform. The employer refuses to hire the person not on the basis of inability to perform but because they are physically disabled (Shaw, 2008). Whenever an employee is terminated due to disabilities they bear great responsibilities of proving their disabilities were actually not affecting their output as employees (Hermes, 2008.
The Act does not also provide for the job security when an employee is injured in the course of duty, many employees are dismissed because their output reduce after they get injured. The Act should have a provision for workers compensation when they are injured and it should also demand for the retention of the employee. Although the output of the employee might drop, the company/employer should assign the right duties but should not contemplate dismissal at any cost (Sparks, 1998, p.5). The Act that was aimed at empowering the disabled people has been working against them, since its enactment in 1990; more than 7.2% of the disabled men have become unemployed (DeLeire, 2000, p.694).
There should be financial incentives to employers that comply with the Act; these incentives might include tax breaks to the companies that retained and rewarded he disabled employees accordingly. There should be strict measures directed to the employers that do not comply with the Act, to stop discrimination against the disabled. Litigation might take long, thus they penalties should be stiff to avoid a repeat of the same in future. Although heavy investments have been directed towards betterment of the lives of the disable, their agony is still a reality.
References
Shaw, K. (2008). The Disability Rights Movement -- The ADA Today. Academic Search Premier 4(2), 20-25.
Meneghello, R., & Russon, H. (2008). Creating a Movement: The First 18 Years of the ADA. Academic Search Premier. 4, 21-25.
Hermes, J. (2008). Attempt to Broaden Disabilities Act Concerns Some College Officials. Chronicle of Higher Education. 40, A23-A23
Lande, R. (1998). Disability law: Problems and proposals. Southern Medical Journal, 6, 518.
Reynolds, L. (1995). Conservatives add the ADA to their regulatory hit list. HR Focus Journal. 710(9), 1.
Sparks, G. (1998, October). 'Light duty' programs require heavy thinking by employers. Wenatchee Business Journal. 110, C5.
DeLeire, T. (2000). The Wage and Employment Effects of the Americans with…
