IV Flexible working for particular groups of workers

Supporting employees with invisible disabilities via flexible work

Introduction

Disability is broadly defined as impaired physical or psychological functioning (Bautista et al., 2019). Although traditionally people tend to associate the term ‘disability’ with visible disabilities such as amputation, or blindness, many disabilities have no visible characteristics. In the literature, the former is referred to as visible and the latter as invisible disability (Saal et al., 2014). Individuals with invisible disabilities face with unique challenges in the workplace. However, researchers as well as managers and policy makers have just recently started recognizing these challenges. Although there are some efforts to define invisible disabilities (Lingsom, 2008) and include them in workplace disability legislation (Catano et al., 2017; McDowell & Fossey, 2015), the needs of employees with invisible disabilities are not yet well understood.

One of the reasons behind the slow, and imperfect, progress addressing the needs of invisibly disabled workers is that the term invisible disabilities covers a diverse group of people with complex needs. From stage 4 cancer to mild depression, invisible disabilities can be in many forms, shapes, and levels (Santuzzi et al., 2014). Moreover, individuals experience each of these disabilities in an idiosyncratic way (i.e. two people with the “exact” same condition can have significantly different capacities (Goodman et al., 2015)). Therefore, finding a common solution to this problem may not be easy.

Efforts to find a common solution that will address the unique needs of all workers with different types of invisible disabilities contribute to the difficulty of finding such a solution. It is an unrealistic objective to expect managers and policy makers to come up with a one-size-fits-all solution when employees with invisible disabilities and their medical professionals struggle to find optimal solutions. Recognizing the diverse needs that can result from a single condition, let alone the many conditions covered under the umbrella term of invisible disabilities, we suggest workplaces provide flexibility (i.e. flexible work arrangements; Timms et al., 2015) to their employees and let them choose the best arrangement that works for them.

Throughout this chapter, we will briefly present the unique challenges associated with invisible disabilities at work. Then, we will provide an overview of different flexible work arrangement types. The third section will explore the barriers preventing individuals with invisible disabilities from accessing flexible work arrangements. The chapter will conclude with recommendations for future research and organizational practice.

Understanding the challenges for workers with invisible disabilities

Invisible disabilities are defined as “a wide range of physical and psychological conditions that often have no visible manifestation or have visible features that are not clearly connected to a disability” (Santuzzi et al., 2014, p. 204). Examples of some conditions which could qualify as an invisible disability include mental health disorders such as attention deficit disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, autoimmune diseases such as arthritis or AIDS, other chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, multiple chemical sensitivity, allergies, diabetes, or sleep disorders (Santuzzi et al., 2014). As one can see, invisible disabilities covers a wide range of conditions that may prevent people from fully engaging in their work.

The defining characteristics of invisible disabilities is that observers are unable to tell whether a person has a disability or not (Santuzzi et al., 2014). Although this may seem like an unimportant distinction, employees with invisible disabilities experience unique challenges at work. First, invisibly disabled employees can be, and typically are, perceived as healthy, abled individuals (Prince, 2017). Therefore, supervisors may not recognize fluctuations in performance as related to an invisible disability. When a disability is visible, the visual cues serve as a reminder and a form of proof that functional limitations exist and will impact how any employee is able to complete their work (e.g., using an elevator if they are unable to use the stairs). However, when the functional limitation is invisible, observers can easily forget about the disability. Even when workers decide to share their condition with their employers, because it is unseen, managers and colleagues may struggle to understand the difficulties experienced by employees with invisible disabilities (Lindsay et ah, 2018). For example, in Biricik Gulseren and Kelloway’s (2017) qualitative study on chronic pain sufferers, one participant reported that despite being open and candid about how light triggers her migraines, her colleagues needed to be reminded to leave the lights off every time she had a migraine.

Second, unlike visibly disabled employees, employees with invisible disabilities have the option to withhold their condition from their employer (Bonaccio et al., 2019). Although at first glance, the autonomy of deciding to disclose or not seems like an advantage for invisibly disabled employees, this is problematic from an identity as well as a legal protection perspective. From a legislative perspective, many developed countries such as Canada, the USA, and the UK require disclosure of the disability as the first step in asking for accommodation or adjustments in the workplace (Prince, 2017). Besides

Supporting employees with invisible disabilities 169 accommodation, the positive outcomes of disclosure include legal protection, greater freedom, increased comfort, and reduced stress due to concealment. Additionally, a greater understanding of employee capabilities will allow supervisors to provide the needed supports for performance enhancement and equitable career advancement (Prince, 2017).

Despite the advantages of disclosure, many workers still avoid sharing details of their condition with their employers (Lingsom, 2008). One of the most commonly cited reasons motivating concealment is the fear of stigmatization (Davis, 2005). Stigmatization refers to negative evaluations by others based on an individual’s characteristics (Lingsom, 2008). For invisibly disabled employees, fear of stigmatization is common (Davis, 2008; Dimoff et al., 2016). Previous research has confirmed that the fear of stigmatization is grounded. For example, in Pescosolido et al.’s (2010) study, they found that between 47% and 74% of the general public were unwilling to work with a person who has a type of mental disability.

Choosing to conceal one’s status as an individual with an invisible disability can result in mental health issues resulting from the gap between disabled identity and abled reputation. Workers with invisible disabilities are likely to incorporate this into their identity and live authentically (Prince, 2017). Additionally, concealing aspects of one’s identity is an effortful experience that requires constant monitoring, and active concealment. Several studies show that invisibly disabled individuals suffer from feelings of isolation (Beatty & Kirby, 2006), psychological strain at work (Ragins et al., 2007), and cognitive exhaustion (Smart & Wegner, 2000) due to the mismatch between how they see themselves and how others see them. Some studies have demonstrated higher prevalence rates of mental health issues among invisibly disabled workers compared to those with a visible disability (e.g., Quinn & Ernshaw, 2011).