Sheltered workplace in disability employment: Different practices from European Union countries

Öz

Disabled individuals experience many difficulties in participating in employment. Work-life is vital for these individuals who are excluded from the labor market and have difficulty participating in employment because it directly improves their quality of life. Employment policies for disabled individuals, who are the target of social policies because they are a disadvantaged group, are implemented worldwide. However, there is no consensus regarding sheltered workplaces. Therefore, there is a need to examine successful policy examples. At this point, it is reported in the literature that the employment of disabled people in European Union countries is high, and these countries have effective social policies. Therefore, this study aims to explain sheltered workplaces in European Union member countries and provide policy recommendations by discussing the current situation of sheltered workplaces in these countries. Sheltered workplace is beneficial in terms of being a temporary employment model that provides rehabilitation of severely disabled individuals. In addition, prioritizing the transition to the normal labor market of individuals whose rehabilitation processes are completed by ensuring regular follow-up can highlight sheltered workplace as a model that improves rather than isolating.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Disability
• Employment
• Social policy
• Sheltered workplace

Engelli istihdamında korumalı iş yeri: Avrupa Birliği ülkelerinden farklı uygulamalar

Öz

Engelli bireyler istihdama katılım noktasında birçok güçlük yaşamaktadır. İşgücü piyasasından dışlanan ve istihdama katılımda zorlanan engelli bireyler için iş hayatı doğrudan yaşam kalitelerini artırması yönüyle büyük bir öneme sahiptir. Dezavantajlı bir grup olmaları açısından sosyal politikaların hedefinde yer alan engelli bireylere yönelik istihdam politikaları dünya genelinde uygulanmakta fakat özellikle engel oranı yüksek olan bireyler için normal işgücü piyasasına katılımları öncesinde düşünülen korumalı iş yeri uygulamasına ilişkin görüş birliği bulunmamaktadır. Dolayısıyla başarılı uygulama örneklerinin incelenmesine ihtiyaç vardır. Bu noktada Avrupa Birliği ülkelerinde etkili sosyal politikaların uygulanması sayesinde engelli istihdamının yüksek olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bu çalışma kapsamında, korumalı iş yeri uygulamasına yaygın bir şekilde başvuran Avrupa Birliği üye ülkelerindeki uygulama pratiklerinin açıklanması ve korumalı iş yeri uygulamasının bu ülkelerdeki mevcut durumunun tartışılması yoluyla politika önerileri sağlanması amaçlanmıştır. Korumalı iş yeri uygulamasının engel oranı yüksek olan bireylerin rehabilitasyonunun sağlandığı geçici bir istihdam modeli olması açısından faydalı olduğu söylenebilir. Bununla birlikte düzenli olarak takip edilmesi sağlanarak rehabilitasyon süreçleri tamamlanan bireylerin normal işgücü piyasasına geçişinin öncelik haline getirilmesi, korumalı iş yeri uygulamasını izole eden yerine geliştiren bir model olması yönüyle öne çıkarabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Engellilik
• İstihdam
• Sosyal Politika
• Korumalı İş Yeri

Kaynakça

1. Akyıldız, Y. (2021). İnsana yakışır iş uygulamasının yapısal ve psiko-sosyal boyutta değerlendirilmesi: ILO ve sosyal çalışma uygulamaları. Kent Akademisi, 14(4), 1219-1234. https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.950224
2. Andzik, N. R., & Chung, Y. C. (2022). Augmentative and alternative communication for adults with complex communication needs: a review of single-case research. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 43(3), 182-194. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1525740121991478
3. Arslan, K. O. (2015). İnsan onuru kavramı ve koruma tedbirleri bağlamında temel bir ilke olarak insan onurunun korunması. Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, (120), 155-172. https://tbbdergisi.barobirlik.org.tr/m2015-120-1511
4. Atanasova, A. (2023). Narrowing the employment gap for people with disabilities. The Need for Effective Policy Implementation (December 4, 2023). ETUI Research Paper - Policy Brief, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4652537
5. Atanasova, I., Krastev, V., Parvanov, P., & Todorov, I. (2019). European Union Legislation for encouraging the social entrepreneurship for people with disabilities. Economics & Law, 1(2), 59-69.
6. Athamanah, L. S., Cushing, L. S., Fastzkie, E. M., & Brown, E. R. (2024). Natural supports in competitive integrated employment: A scoping review. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-240017
7. Babahanoğlu, R., & Kaya, N. G. (2023). Engelli çocuğa sahip ebeveynlerin yaşam doyum düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(3), 886-898. https://doi.org/10.33437/ksusbd.1326435
8. Birleşmiş Milletler. (2009). Engelli Hakları Sözleşmesi. https://dspace.ceid.org.tr/ xmlui/handle/1/633

9. Castro Núñez, R. B., Martín Barroso, V., & Santero Sánchez, R. (2020). Wage cost-reducing policies and employment stability for people with disabilities in the Spanish labor market. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 30(4), 202-212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207319848070
10. Cimera, R. E., Wehman, P., West, M., & Burgess, S. (2012). Do sheltered workshops enhance employment outcomes for adults with autism spectrum disorder? Autism, 16(1), 87-94. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361311408129
11. Çavuş, Ö. H., & Tekin, A. (2015). Türkiye’de engellilerin istihdam yöntemi olarak korumalı işyeri. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 145-165https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/deuiibfd/issue/22716/242442
12. De Pierrefeu, I., & Charbonneau, C. (2014). Two" hybrid" vocational services for people with a severe mental illness in France and Quebec. L'encephale, 40, 66-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.encep.2014.04.003
13. Ezer, B. (2022). Türk hukukunda korumalı işyeri uygulaması ve engellilerin korumalı işyerlerinde istihdam edilmesinin esasları. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 534-565. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/ article-file/2470697
14. Favalli, S., & Ferri, D. (2016). Defining disability in the European Union Nondiscrimination Legislation: Judicial Activism and legislative restraints. European Public Law, 22(3). https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2016033
15. Fortune, N., Curryer, B., Badland, H., Smith-Merry, J., Devine, A., Stancliffe, R. J., & Llewellyn, G. (2022). Do area-level environmental factors ınfluence employment for people with disability? A scoping review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159082
16. Galer, D. (2014). A place to work like any other? Sheltered workshops in Canada, 1970-1985. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 3(2), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.15353/ cjds.v3i2.155
17. Garrels, V., & Sigstad, H. M. H. (2021). Employment for persons with intellectual disability in the Nordic countries: A scoping review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 34(4), 993-1007. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12880
18. Geiger, B. B., Van Der Wel, K. A., & Tøge, A. G. (2017). Success and failure in narrowing the disability employment gap: comparing levels and trends across Europe 2002–2014. BMC public health, 17(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4938-8
19. Genç, Y., & Çat, G. (2013). Engellilerin istihdamı ve sosyal içerme ilişkisi. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi, 8(1), 363-394 https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/akademik incelemeler/issue/1545/18983
20. Gerşil, G. S., & Yemişci, D. A. (2020). Korumalı işyeri kapsamında zihinsel engelli istihdamı: Manisa OSB yönetiminde Zeki Projesi örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(3), 1125-1153. https://doi.org/10.16953/deusosbil.753110
21. Hemphill, E., & Kulik, C. T. (2017). The tyranny of fit: Yet another barrier to mainstream employment for disabled people in sheltered employment. Social Policy & Administration, 51(7), 1119-1134. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12220
22. Jacob, U. S., & Pillay, J. (2022). Studies related to employment of persons with intellectual disability: A systematic review. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-230035
23. Kirby, N. (1986). Have sheltered workshops a future? Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 12(3), 187-202. https://doi.org/10.3109/1366825860 9084082
24. Krekó, J., & Telegdy, Á. (2022). The effects of a disability employment quota when compliance is cheaper than defiance. IZA Discussion Paper No. 15726. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4281281
25. Lejeune, A. (2022). Disability rights and cross-national disparities in Europe. Current history, 121(833), 90-95. https://doi.org/10.1525/curh.2022.121.833.90
26. Lejeune, A. (2023). Fighting for sheltered workshops or for inclusive workplaces? Trade unions pursuing disability rights in Belgium. Disability & Society, 38(2), 228-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1921702
27. Loch, F., & Federspiel, E. (2024, June). Supporting employee engagement and knowledge transfer via gamification in the context of sheltered workplaces: A literature review and ınterview study. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 94-111). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-031-60884-1_7
28. López-Penabad, M. C., Maside-Sanfiz, J. M., Torrelles-Manent, J., & López-Andión, C. (2021). Performance evaluation of sheltered workshops. Does legal status matter? Sustainability, 13(3), 1100. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031100
29. Mandiberg, J. M. (2016). Social enterprise in mental health: An overview. Journal of Policy Practice, 15(1-2), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/15588742.2016.1109960
30. Maside-Sanfiz, J. M., López-Penabad, M. C., Iglesias-Casal, A., & Torrelles Manent, J. (2024). Determinants of the profitability of Sheltered Workshops: efficiency and effects of the COVID-19 crisis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03435-1
31. Mitra, S., & Palmer, M. (2023). Economics of disability. Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics, 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57365-6_340-1
32. Mittag, O., Kotkas, T., Reese, C., Kampling, H., Groskreutz, H., de Boer, W., & Welti, F. (2018). Intervention policies and social security in case of reduced working capacity in the Netherlands, Finland and Germany: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Public Health, 63, 1081-1088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-018-1133-3
33. Nettles, J. L. (2013). From sheltered workshops to integrated employment: A long transition. LC Journal of Special Education, 8(1), 9. https://digitalshowcase.lynchburg.edu/lc-journal-of-special-education/vol8/iss1/9
34. Özbek, A. B., & Girli, A. (2023). Transition from sheltered workplace: Vocational skills are not the main concern. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 17446295231193190. https://doi.org/10.1177/17446295231193190
35. Revillard, A. (2023). The disability employment quota, between social policy and antidiscrimination. Global Social Policy, 23(1), 92-108. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/14680181221138558
36. Richard, S., & Hennekam, S. (2021). When can a disability quota system empower disabled individuals in the workplace? The case of France. Work, Employment and Society, 35(5), 837-855. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017020946672
37. Richard, S., Lemaire, C., & Church-Morel, A. (2021). Beyond identity consciousness: Human resource management practices and mental health conditions in sheltered workshops. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 32(15), 3218-3243. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1893787
38. Salamon, G., Field-Werners, U., Strobl, S., Hübl, V., & Diem, A. (2024). Facing the complex challenges of people with epidermolysis bullosa in Austria: a mixed methods study on burdens and helpful practices. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 19(1), 211. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-024-03163-4
39. Sargeant, M., Radevich-Katsaroumpa, E., & Innesti, A. (2018). Disability quotas: Past or future policy? Economic and Industrial Democracy, 39(3), 404-421. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0143831X16639655
40. Scharle, Á., & Váradi, B. (2015). Barriers to welfare reform in the CEE: The case of employment rehabilitation services. Growth–Innovation–Competitiveness: Fostering Cohesion in Central and Eastern Europe. Working Paper Series, (5.06).
41. Suijkerbuijk, Y. B., Schaafsma, F. G., van Mechelen, J. C., Ojajärvi, A., Corbière, M., & Anema, J. R. (2017). Interventions for obtaining and maintaining employment in adults with severe mental illness, a network meta‐analysis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (9). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011867.pub2
42. Taylor, J. P., Avellone, L., Wehman, P., & Brooke, V. (2023). The efficacy of competitive integrated employment versus segregated employment for persons with disabilities: A systematic review. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 58(1), 63-78. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-221225
43. Tınar, Y. (2020, June). Yerel yönetimlerce engellilere sunulan istihdam hizmetleri: İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi Engelliler Müdürlüğü örneği. In Journal of Social Policy Conferences (No. 78, pp. 429-453). Istanbul University. https://doi.org/ 10.26650/jspc.2020.78.0011
44. Van der Torre, L., & Fenger, M. (2014). Policy innovations for including disabled people in the labour market: A study of innovative practices of Dutch sheltered work companies. International Social Security Review, 67(2), 67-84. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/issr.12038
45. Van Heijster, H., Van Berkel, J., Bakker, M., Boot, C., & De Vet, E. (2023). Process evaluation of workplace health promotion in a sheltered workplace: A care ethics perspective. Health promotion international, 38(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/heapro/daad031
46. Vornholt, K., Villotti, P., Muschalla, B., Bauer, J., Colella, A., Zijlstra, F., & Corbière, M. (2018). Disability and employment–overview and highlights. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(1), 40-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1359432X.2017.1387536
47. Zwan, R., & Beer, P. (2021). The disability employment gap in European countries: What is the role of labour market policy? Journal of European Social Policy, 31(4), 473-486. https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211002435