Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 1

DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICY

DEPARTMENT A: ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC POLICY

Study on Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with

Disabilities

Case study: FRANCE

IP/A/EMPL/2016-20 March 2017

PE 602.067 EN

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

2 PE 602.067

This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. AUTHORS

Istituto per la Ricerca Sociale (IRS): Manuela Samek LODOVICI, Project Leader Nicola ORLANDO, Operative coordinator

Research Team Daniela LOI, Serena Marianna DRUFUCA, Nicola ORLANDO, Flavia PESCE.

Country experts: Denmark: Bent GREVE - University of Roskilde France: Anne EYDOUX - CNAM Germany: Flavia PESCE - IRS Italy: Flavia PESCE - IRS Poland: Malgorzata GRABAREK and Izabela PRZYBYSZ - ISP Spain: Elvira GONZÁLEZ GAGO and Nuria GUILLÓ RODRÍGUEZ - Abay Analistas UK: Kari P HADJIVASSILIOU and Chiara MANZONI - IES

RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR

Dr. Marion SCHMID-DRÜNER

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Laurent HAMERS

LINGUISTIC VERSIONS

Original: EN

ABOUT THE EDITOR

Policy departments provide in-house and external expertise to support EP committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU internal policies. To contact Policy Department A or to subscribe to its newsletter please write to: Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policy European Parliament B-1047 Brussels E-mail: Poldep-Economy-Science@ep.europa.eu Manuscript completed in June 2017 © European Union, 2017 This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/supporting-analyses DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 3

Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5

1. INTRODUCTION 6

2. THE NATIONAL DEBATE ON THE CONCEPT AND DEFINITION OF ‘MULTIPLE DISCRIMINATION’ IN RELATION TO ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT FOR WOMEN WITH DISABILITIES 7

2.1 Definitions of multiple discrimination 7 2.1.1 Intersectional approach 7 2.1.2 Gender stereotypes in everyday life 8

3. THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF DISABLED WOMEN IN FRANCE 10

3.1 Statistical approaches and data sources 10 3.2 Education 11 3.3 Situation as regards activity and employment 12

3.3.1 Employment, activity and unemployment 12 3.3.2 Work–life balance 13 3.3.3 Labour market segregation 14

3.4 Precariousness and (arduous) working conditions 15 3.4.1 Employment precariousness 15 3.4.2 Arduous working conditions 16

4. THE NATIONAL LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK ON DISABILITY AND EMPLOYMENT IN A GENDER PERSPECTIVE, AND EFFECTIVENESS IN ADDRESSING INTERSECTORAL DISCRIMINATION 18

4.1 Legal framework 18 4.1.1 Equal rights and opportunities Act (2005) 18 4.1.2 Assessment of the legal framework 19

4.2 Policy framework 19 4.2.1 Obligation to employ disabled workers 19 4.2.2 Protected employment and adapted firms 20 4.2.3 Active measures 21 4.2.4 Income support: The handicapped adult allowance (AAH) 22

4.3 The role of the European structural funds 22

5. EXAMPLES OF GOOD PRACTICES 25

5.1 Paris Digital House 25 5.2 The lobbying of the NGO Women to Act, Women to Tell, FDFA 25 5.3 The action of the Defender of Rights 26 5.4 Other possible good practices 26

6. CURRENT AND FUTURE POLICY CHALLENGES ACCORDING TO NATIONAL STAKEHOLDERS 28

6.1 Proposals submitted in the public debate 28 6.2 Multiple discrimination against disabled women is hardly on the agenda 29

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

4 PE 602.067

6.3 Current and future policy challenges 30

7. CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS 32

7.1 Conclusions 32 7.2 Policy implications 33

ANNEXES 35

ANNEX I - LISTS OF DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED 35 ANNEX II - LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS INTERVIEWED 36 ANNEX III – GOOD PRACTICE FICHE - Digital House in Paris 37

Main study : http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067_EN.pdf Annexes 1 2 3 4: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN01)_EN.pdf Spain Case Study: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN02)_EN.pdf Italy Case Study: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN03)_EN.pdf Poland Case Study: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN04)_EN.pdf UK Case Study: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN05)_EN.pdf Germany Case Study: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN06)_EN.pdf Denmark Case Study: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN07)_EN.pdf France Case Study: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/602067/IPOL_STU(2017)602067(ANN08)_EN.pdf

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In France, multiple discrimination against disabled women as regards employment is hardly an issue in the research or policy agenda. Until the last few years, discrimination against disabled women was only exceptionally addressed. The publication of a report of the Public Defender of Rights1 has provided an interesting survey on this topic and contributed to placing it in the public debate.

The present report examines the national debate on multiple discrimination in relation to the employment of women with disabilities. It shows that multiple discrimination are essentially documented by researchers who only exceptionally focus on disabled women. Two fields have been the object of attention: intersectional discrimination and gender stereotypes.

Relying on existing (sometimes disparate or incomplete) data, the report also explores the socio-economic conditions of disabled women in France. It shows that disabled women face specific difficulties of access to employment and specific constraints when it comes to work–life balance. As disabled workers and as women, they are confronted with the ‘double segregation’ of the labour market. They are particularly concerned with the vertical segregation that traps many of them on a sticky floor. Only 1 % of women with an administrative recognition of disability have access to an executive position (vs. 10 % of their male counterparts). Their employment opportunities are also limited by the horizontal segregation that confines them in a limited range of sectors and occupations. In particular, nearly one in two (47 %) women with an administrative recognition of disability work part-time (vs. 16 % of their male counterparts). They are not spared from precariousness and arduous working conditions. As far as working conditions are concerned, they are in a paradoxical situation: the arduousness is hardly recognised in female-dominated sectors and occupations so that (despite recent evolutions) they remain under-represented among those who benefit from an administrative recognition of disability. However, they concentrate in some sectors (like the healthcare or the cleaning sectors) and occupations (nurses, cleaners, etc.) where a rise in occupational diseases is observed.

The report analyses the French legal and policy framework as regards disabled persons. It underlines the lack (if not the absence) of gendered policies and integrated policies able to address the situation of disabled women as regards employment. It shows that good practices are rare, and suffer from a lack of visibility. It also suggests that actors in the field of disability hardly know how to mobilise European structural funds.

Relying on interviews with national stakeholders, the report finally addresses current and future policy challenges as regards disabled women’s employment. It concludes that there is a need to produce systematic and continuous gendered data, to develop integrated policies, to enforce disabled women’s rights and access to their rights, to pay specific attention to the quality of their employment and to their working conditions, and to improve their social protection.

1 Bechrouri N., Benichou S., Blanchard R., Demangeon M., Levesque C., (2016), L’emploi des femmes en situation

de handicap. Analyse exploratoire sur les discriminations multiples, Rapport du Défenseur des droits November, 86 p.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

6 PE 602.067

1. INTRODUCTION In France, multiple discrimination against disabled women is not really an issue in the research/study or policy agenda. Discrimination against disabled women is only exceptionally addressed by researchers (with the notable exception of Velche, 2002) or NGOs2. It is only since November 2016, with the publication of a report of the Defender of Rights3, that the issue has gained visibility. This report was initiated in a joint committee on gender equality, where the NGO Women to Tell, Women to Act (Femmes pour le dire, femmes pour agir, FDFA) warned about disabled women’s difficulties in access to employment. Following this warning, the Defender of Rights decided to explore the under-representation of disabled women in employment in order to highlight its causes and to elaborate recommendations. This has led to the previously mentioned report on disabled women’s employment. This report notably examines the role of education in the construction of the career path of disabled women, their situation as regards activity and employment, as well as their working conditions.

The present report largely relies on this report of the Defender of Rights, at least for Sections 2 and 3 as well as on statistics published by DARES, Ministry of Employment. It will first examine the national debate as regards multiple discrimination in relation to access to employment for women with disabilities (2). It will then examine the socio-economic conditions of disabled women in France (3) and describe, adopting a gender perspective, the national legal and policy framework on disability and employment. Examples of good practices are scarce and lack visibility; some will however be evoked (4). Current and future policy challenges according to national stakeholders will finally be developed (6). The conclusion will focus on policy challenges (7).

2 Practhis, (2010), Femmes en situation de handicap et emploi, Pôle de ressources, d’accompagnement et de

coordination sur le travail, le handicap et l’insertion socioprofessionnelle, December, 17 p. 3 See note no 1.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 7

2. THE NATIONAL DEBATE ON THE CONCEPT AND DEFINITION OF ‘MULTIPLE DISCRIMINATION’ IN RELATION TO ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT FOR WOMEN WITH DISABILITIES

In France, it is hard to speak of an important national debate about multiple discrimination as regards the access to employment of women with disabilities. This debate is mostly driven by the work of European institutions such as the European Parliament4. The 2016 report of the Defender of Rights however addresses intersectionality and multiple discrimination concerning disabled women’s employment.

2.1 Definitions of multiple discrimination The 2016 report of the Defender of Rights has explored the definition of multiple discrimination, underlying the specificity of the so-called intersectional discrimination that women with disabilities face. It has also illustrated the crucial role of gender stereotypes affecting women with disabilities.

2.1.1 Intersectional approach The report of the Defender of Rights5, relying on the European literature6, distinguishes three categories of multiple discrimination: ‘sequential’ multiple discrimination (‘when a person suffers discrimination on different grounds on separate occasions’), ‘additive’ multiple discrimination (‘when a person is discriminated against on the same occasion but in two different ways’), and ‘intersectional’ discrimination (‘when discrimination does not simply consist of the addition of two sources of discrimination’) where synergy effects result in a ‘qualitatively different’ kind of discrimination.

The Defender of Rights’ report refers to the intersectional approach initially developed by Crenshaw to analyse the intersection of gender and ethnicity7. The report suggests extending this approach to women with disabilities: ‘discrimination in employment faced by disabled women would be better approached in this intersectional perspective’8. According to the Defender of Rights, such a perspective would be a way to reveal the situation of women with disabilities. Otherwise, there is a risk of staying focused on the discrimination suffered by able-bodied women as far as gender discrimination is concerned, or on the discrimination faced by disabled men as far as discrimination against disabled people is concerned.

Such an intersectional approach of the discrimination suffered by women with disabilities has essentially been promoted at the International9 and European10 levels. In France, the intersectional approach is a field for researchers11, and mostly remains out of the public debate. It has however been developed in a report of the High Authority to Combat

4 Davaki K., Marzo C., Narminio E., Arvanitidou M., (2013), Discrimination generated by intersection of gender

and disability, Directorate General for Internal Policies, Policy Department C - Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament, 96 p.

5 See note no. 1. 6 Fredman S., (2016), Intersectional discrimination in EU gender equality and non-discrimination law, European

network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, European Commission, Directorate General for Justice and Consumers, Directorate D — Equality, May, 88 p.

7 Crenshaw K., (1989), ‘Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique and anti-discrimination doctrine, feminist theories and antiracist policies’, University of Chicago Legal Forum, pp. 139–167.

8 See note no. 1, p.9. 9 United Nations, (2006), Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and Optional Protocol, 13

December. 10 See note no. 5. 11 Mercat-Bruns M., (2015), ‘Les discriminations multiples et l’identité au travail au croisement des questions

d’égalité et de libertés’, Revue de droit du travail, pp. 28–38, January.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

8 PE 602.067

Discrimination (Haute autorité de lutte contre les discriminations, Halde) regarding immigrant women or women with an immigrant background12.

As far as women with disabilities are concerned, several researches and studies have underlined the role of multiple discrimination in France, suggesting interest in an intersectional approach13. However, the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights is the first attempt to put this question in the public debate.

The 10th Barometer on the perceptions of discrimination as regards employment14 has confirmed the importance of intersectional discrimination. It notably revealed that more than one in two (56 %) women in a situation of disability declared she has experienced discrimination (vs. 41 % of their male counterparts and 46 % of all women).

The 2016 report of the Defender of Rights shows that it is difficult to rely on a multiple discrimination approach (whether cumulative or intersectional) in court judgements. The French legislation does not explicitly recognise multiple discrimination. Among the 4 846 claims received by the Defender of Rights in 2015 as regards the fight against discrimination, 8.3 % were related to disabilities and only 3.1 % to gender: ‘these claimants only very rarely clearly evoked a “double” discrimination’15. According to Marie Mercat-Bruns, lecturer in private law, those who claim for multiple discrimination ‘less easily win their case than those who contest a discrimination founded on a unique criterion’16. On several occasions, the Defender of Rights had denounced multiple discrimination related to gender and disability but the administrative judge did not follow its recommendations.

2.1.2 Gender stereotypes in everyday life Generally speaking, as underlined in the Defender of Rights 2016 report, disabled women tend to suffer intensified gender stereotypes.

In her research paper relying on disabled women’s interviews about their experience, Justine Solano17 showed that gender and disability combine to exacerbate stereotypes: ’as a reflection in a magnifying mirror, gender aggravates disability and disability aggravates gender’. According to the sociologist Dominique Pioggi18, disabled men and women do not behave the same and are faced with different forms of (gendered) stereotypes:

• ‘Some elements suggest that we witness a reinforcement of gender stereotypes. Men are more often struggling with justice while women are rather demanding social entitlements.

• We also notice that women are more in contact with social services than their male counterparts. Men more than women claim for justice and for compensation,

12 Kachoukh F., (2011), ‘L’ombre portée des assignations identitaires’, Hommes et migrations, 1292, p. 12-23. 13 Velche D. (2002), ‘Accès à l’emploi en milieu ordinaire: une double discrimination bien connue et peut-être une

raison d’espérer’, quoted in Bechrouri et al., 2016, p. 28; Practhis, (2010), Femmes en situation de handicap et emploi, Pôle de ressources, d’accompagnement et de coordination sur le travail, le handicap et l’insertion socioprofessionnelle, December, 17 p.

14 Defender of Rights, (2017), 10è barometre de la perception des discriminations dans l’emploi, March. 15 See note no. 1. 16 See note no. 10. 17 Solano, J., (2012–2013), Être femme et handicapée : quel féminisme hors du monde des valides ?, Mémoire

sous la direction d'Isabelle Lacoue-Labarthe, Institut d’études politiques de Toulouse, 85 p. 18 Pioggi D., (2009), ‘L’approche de genre dans la déconstruction sociale du handicap’, synthèse de la journée, in

Saint-Pé M.-C. et Lely S., L’approche de genre dans la déconstruction sociale du handicap, Actes de la journée d’étude à l’Institut international de Recherche-action, 14 juin 2008.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 9

they expect the assistance of an attorney. Women are more often requesting support.

• Furthermore, women are placed under guardianship as soon as they do not assume the role traditionally devoted to them. For men, placement under guardianship rather occurs in case of troubles linked to the management of their money resources.

• Arguments to support a demand are not similar: men have to plead they are not dangerous, and demonstrate they are employable and have relatives; women must prove they establish non-conflictual relations and have a family.

• The stigmatisation is the same, but takes different forms, following gender stereotypes. These representations have to be deconstructed, by the persons as well as by professionals and associations’.

Stereotypes specifically affect disabled women at work. Their invisibility in a number of social spheres and the absence of positive models make them particularly vulnerable to stereotypes that contribute to limiting their educational and career opportunities and choices.

Several studies quoted in the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights have pointed out such stereotypes against disabled workers. For instance, managers tend to overestimate the prevalence of ‘severe disabilities’ and thus do not correctly perceive the adaptations of working environments that may (or may not) be needed19. Due to such stereotypes, disabled persons may be led to lower their ambitions as regards both education and employment. According to the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights, ‘the absence of a “role model” confirms existing stereotypes and prevents from considering a future outside the boundaries of a very limited range of possibilities’ 20.

The recognition of disabilities due to accidents at work well illustrates the negative impact of gender stereotypes at work. Accidents at work, which mostly affect men, are better recognised and often assimilated to war wounds. On the contrary, musculoskeletal disorders that typically affect women have only been recognised as occupational diseases since 2003. According to the Defender of Rights, gender stereotypes still have a negative impact on disabled women’s access to administrative recognition of disability as well as to social entitlements for disabled persons21.

19 IMS, Entreprendre pour la cité, (2011), Les stéréotypes sur les personnes handicapées : comprendre et agir

dans l’entreprise, April, Practical guide (56 p.) and Study (7 p.), April. 20 See note no. 1. 21 See note no.1.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

10 PE 602.067

3. THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF DISABLED WOMEN IN FRANCE

According to the Defender of Rights22, ‘the literature review revealed a blatant lack of studies and researches on the situation of disabled women, especially in the field of employment’. The socio-economic conditions of disabled women as regards employment may however be described through different data sources relying on various statistical approaches. These data allow for analysing disabled women’s levels and opportunities of education as well as their situation as regards activity and employment.

3.1 Statistical approaches and data sources There are two major statistical definitions of disabled persons in France: one relying on the administrative recognition of disabilities defining the population ‘recognised as disabled’, and another relying on a declarative basis, defining the population ‘in a situation of disability’ in accordance with the approach promoted by the 2005 law. In 2013, more than 5.53 million persons were in a situation of disability; among them, less than a half (2.38 million) benefitted from an administrative recognition of disability.

Considering different definitions of disability is important from a gender perspective. While women are less liable than men to benefit from an administrative recognition of disability (1.11 million vs. 1.27 million men), they more often declare health trouble limiting their routine activities (2.89 million women vs. 2.65 million men). The heterogeneity of disabilities is also an issue: being in a situation of disability may mean being in a wheelchair, being blind or deaf, being mentally disabled, being visibly or invisibly impaired, being born or became disabled etc. Due to a lack of gendered data we will not consider this heterogeneity, even if it crucially affects disabled men and women’s employment opportunities and the nature of the discrimination, stereotypes and other barriers that they are confronted with in their everyday as well as in their working lives.

Table 1: Distribution of the population by age, sex and type of disability, 2013 % People with an administrati-ve

recognition of disability* People in a situation of disability**

Total population aged 15-64

Age Women Men Women Men Women Men

15-24 4 5 6 6 17 18

25-39 16 18 17 18 29 29

40-49 26 23 23 23 22 22

50-64 54 54 54 53 32 31

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100

Headcount 1 109 000 1 276 000 2 890 000 2 645 000 20 060 000 19 380 000

(*) People who declare they have ‘an administrative recognition of a disability or a loss of independence’. (**) People who either declare they have ‘an administrative recognition of a disability or a loss of independence’ or that they suffer both from ‘a chronic or long-lasting illness or health problem’ and ‘are limited in usual ordinary activities for at least six months due to a health problem’. Scope: People aged 15–64 living in an ordinary household (not living in institution), metropolitan France. Source: Insee, Employment survey, 2013, DARES, Ministry of Employment’s treatment.

22 See note no.1.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 11

As far as employment is concerned, statistics also focus on those who benefit from the obligation to employ disabled workers (Obligation d’emploi des travailleurs handicapés, OETH, see below Section 4.2). In 2013, 386 700 workers were beneficiaries of the OETH in firms of 20 or more employees in the private sector or in state-owned industrial and commercial establishments (Etablissements publics à caractère industriel et commercial, Epic). Among them, only 42 % were women.

Recent gendered data relying on the employment survey of the National Institute for Statistic and Economic Studies (Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques, Insee) are mostly provided by the DARES, Ministry of Employment. Note that in 2011, the European ad hoc module topic of this survey was dedicated to the employment of disabled persons, providing additional data. Key figures and scoreboards are also regularly provided by the association managing the fund for the integration of disabled persons (Association de gestion du fonds pour l’insertion des personnes handicapées, Agefiph) and the fund for the integration of disabled persons into the public service (Fonds pour l’insertion des personnes handicapées dans la function publique, FIPHFP).

In 1998–2002, an important survey entitled Disabilities, incapacities, dependencies (Handicaps, incapacités, dépendances, HID) was led by the Insee and the Research Institute on Disability (Institut fédératif de recherches sur le handicap, IFRH). This survey revealed for the first time the specific vulnerability of disabled women in employment23. In 2008, another survey (rather similar to the HID survey) was led by the Insee and the Drees – Ministry of Social Affairs. Named Disability-Health (Handicap-santé), it includes two modules: households (ménages – HSM) and institutions (institutions – HIS).

3.2 Education The influence on education of both gender and disability are well known, but intersectional approaches are scarce. Recent statistics from the French Labour force survey, provided by the Insee and DARES, Ministry of Employment24, show that women with disabilities (as well as men with disabilities) are more at risk of having at best the certificate of secondary education than their able-bodied counterparts.

These data also show that women with a recognised disability are more liable than their male counterpart to have A Levels (or equivalent) or to be graduates (28 % vs. 22 %). But an

23 Velche Dominique, (2001), ‘Les femmes handicapées et le travail’, Actes des journées pour l’Egalité des chances

organisées par la Ville de Grenoble ; Velche D. (2002), ‘Accès à l’emploi en milieu ordinaire: une double discrimination bien connue et peut-être une raison d’espérer’, quoted in Bechrouri et al., 2016, p. 28.

24 Barhoumi M., Chabanon L., (2015), ‘Emploi et chômage des personnes handicapées’, Synthèse.Stat’, Dares, No 17, novembre.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

12 PE 602.067

important gap remains with the total female population (52 % women have passed the baccalaureate or have graduated).

Table 2: Distribution of the population by level of education, sex and type of disability (%)

% People with an administrati-ve recognition of disability*

People in a situation of disability**

Total population aged 15-64

Education level

Women Men Women Men Women Men

Two years degree or above

15 11 19 14 31 27

A Levels or equivalent

13 11 15 13 21 19

NVQ/GNVQ, Level 1, 2

26 33 24 33 20 26

Certificate of secondary education or no degree

47 45 42 40 28 28

(*) People who declare they have ‘an administrative recognition of a disability or a loss of independence’. (**) People who either declare they have ‘an administrative recognition of a disability or a loss of independence’ or that they suffer both from ‘a chronic or long-lasting illness or health problem’ and ‘are limited in usual ordinary activities for at least six months due to a health problem’. Scope: People aged 15–64 living in an ordinary household (not living in institution), metropolitan France. Source: Insee, Employment survey, 2013, DARES, Ministry of Employment’s treatment. It has to be noted that the date of occurrence of a disability is important: men and women who become disabled when adult, for instance due to an accident, have more chances to graduate. Similarly, they have more chances to be well integrated into employment, especially if they had a first professional experience before disability occurred. Furthermore, age is not neutral. Ageing persons are more exposed to disability, while ageing disabled persons tend to witness an aggravation of their situation.

3.3 Situation as regards activity and employment Recent statistics of the DARES, Ministry of Employment, the Agefiph and FIPHFP, mostly relying on the Insee Employment survey, provide data as to disabled women’s situation on the labour market. These data suggest that they face specific difficulties regarding employment.

3.3.1 Employment, activity and unemployment Data provided by the Insee Employment survey show that a majority of the persons (55%) with an administrative recognition of disability were inactive in 2013: they did not work and did not look for a job. This was also the case of nearly one in two (46%) persons in a situation of disability. Gender is an aggravating factor: 57% women with an administrative recognition of disability, and 49% of women in a situation of disability, were inactive. The activity rate of women in a situation of disability is significantly below the activity rate of women (51% vs. 68%).

When active, disabled people are overexposed to unemployment (nearly twice as many as able-bodied people). In 2013, 18 % of those with an administrative recognition of disability and 14 % of those in a situation of disability were unemployed, versus 10 % of the able-bodied. While able-bodied women and men displayed the same unemployment rate (10 %), disabled women were slightly less exposed to unemployment than disabled men: 17 % of women with an administrative recognition of disability were unemployed, versus 19 % of

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 13

their male counterparts; and 13 % of women in a situation of disability were unemployed versus 15 % of their male counterparts. This might be due to the fact that disabled women who are not in employment are less liable than their male counterpart to look for a job. As stated by Margaret Maruani ‘inactivity is a socially acceptable status for women but it remains hardly imaginable for men’25. According to the Defender of Rights26, another consequence is that inactive men are more liable to ask for an administrative recognition of their disability, because it makes their inactivity situation more acceptable.

Table 3: Activity, employment and unemployment, sex and type of disability, 2013

% People with an administrative recognition of disability*

People in a situation of disability**

Total population aged 15-64

Labour market situation

Women Men Women Men Women Men

Activity rate 43 47 51 57 68 76

Employment rate 36 38 45 49 61 68

Unemployment rate

17 19 13 15 10 10

(*) People who declare they have ‘an administrative recognition of a disability or a loss of independence’. (**) People who either declare they have ‘an administrative recognition of a disability or a loss of independence’ or that they suffer both from ‘a chronic or long-lasting illness or health problem’ and ‘are limited in usual ordinary activities for at least six months due to a health problem’. Scope: People aged 15–64 living in an ordinary household (not living in institution), metropolitan France. Source: Insee, Employment survey, 2013, DARES, Ministry of Employment’s treatment.

Paradoxically, the unemployment rate of recognised disabled workers has decreased since the crisis, from 22 % in 2008 to 18 % in 2013, especially for women (-5 p.p. vs. -3 p.p. for men). However, this decrease covers an increase of the number of persons who are recognised disabled. All in all, despite the decrease of their unemployment rate, unemployed disabled persons are more numerous than they were in 2008.

The employment rate better reveals disabled women’s difficulties in the labour market. While 61 % of women (and 68 % of men) are employed, only 36 % of women with an administrative recognition of disability (vs. 38 % of their male counterparts) and 45 % of women in a situation of disability (vs 49 % of their male counterparts) are employed. In the recent period, however, disabled women’s employment rate has slightly increased (from 31 % in 2011 to 36 % in 2013) while disabled men’s employment rate has stagnated at about 38 %.

3.3.2 Work–life balance Disabled women become mothers less often, especially when they were born disabled. But as women they are nevertheless exposed to discrimination related to their eventual pregnancy. As mothers, they are exposed to aggravated difficulties to reconcile their work and family life that may oblige them to withdraw from employment or to opt for a part-time job. According to the FDFA, ‘reconciling employment and family life is more difficult for disabled women: managing one’s family and professional life, together with the time devoted to training, and eventually to healthcare or rehabilitation, may appear insurmountable’ 27.

25 Maruani M., (2004), ‘Activité, précarité chômage, toujours plus ?’, Revue de l’OFCE, No 3/90, pp. 95–115. 26 See note no. 1. 27 Lemière S., dir. (2013), L’accès à l’emploi des femmes : une question de politiques…, Ministère des droits des

femmes, La documentation française, December, 178 p.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

14 PE 602.067

The specific needs of disabled parents (and mothers), as well as the wage and career penalties they may suffer, are not taken into account in social and family policies.

Similarly, according to the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights28, the needs of parents of disabled children (or carers of dependant relatives) are not met. The education and healthcare systems are not sufficient to meet the needs of disabled children and dependent persons, while existing benefits do not fully compensate for the income and career penalties due to a carer’s withdrawal from employment. This especially penalises women who represent a majority of those who withdraw (either totally or partially) from employment to care for their children (or dependant relatives).

3.3.3 Labour market segregation According to the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights29, women in a situation of disability are ‘faced with a double segregation limiting their vocational choice and their opportunities of access and return to employment’. They are exposed to both the gender segregation and the segregation regarding disability. Several forms of segregation can be distinguished: vertical and horizontal (sector and occupational) segregation.

Vertical segregation: sticky floor and glass ceiling

Disabled persons remain overexposed to unemployment and low-skilled work, even when they have a university degree. Women are especially concerned as if they were always remaining on a sticky floor.

Disabled workers are over-represented in low-skilled employment30. Among working people with an administrative recognition of disability, 67 % were either manual (blue-collar) or non-manual (white-collar) workers in 2011, versus half of the total working population. Only 7 % were executives in 2011 (vs. 17 % of the total working population), illustrating a glass-ceiling effect. This glass ceiling is even more marked for women, and tends to set up an impassable line for disabled women. While 21 % of working men were executives in 2011, only 10 % of men with an administrative recognition of disability were in such a position of responsibility. But among women with an administrative recognition of disability, only 1 % was executive (vs. 14 % of working women). As stated by the Defenders of Rights, being disabled ‘practically annihilates women’s opportunities to obtain an executive position’31.

Recent data provided by the DARES, Ministry of Employment do not allow the cross-checking of the effects of disability, gender and education. However, the survey Disability, incapacity, dependency (that dates back to 1999) had revealed the vertical segregation imposed on disabled women. Relying on this survey, Dominique Velche32 had pointed out that ‘sex is

28 See note no. 1. 29 See note no. 1. 30 Amrous N., Barhoumi M., Biausque V., (2013), ‘L’accès à l’emploi des personnes handicapées en 2011’, Dares

analyses, No 066, October. 31 See note no. 1. 32 Velche D. (2002), ‘Accès à l’emploi en milieu ordinaire: une double discrimination bien connue et peut-être une

raison d’espérer’, quoted in Bechrouri et al., 2016, p. 28.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 15

decisive: the rate of access to ordinary employment of graduated beneficiaries of the obligation to employ disabled workers is 66.9 % for men but only 22.8 % for women’.

Horizontal segregation: sector and occupations

Disabled persons are faced with a double form of sector segregation. First, they either work in so-called ordinary or in protected employment. Second, they face public and private sector segregation.

Disabled women remain under-represented in protected employment where industrial and technical activities still predominate (see below, Section 4.2.1). As far as ordinary employment is concerned, private and public employers with at least 20 employees are subjected to the obligation to employ disabled workers (obligation d’emploi des travailleurs handicapés, OETH) for up to 6 % of their headcount. In the private sector, women constitute a minority of all workers. They represent 42 % of those employed by public and private employers with at least 20 employees, and the same proportion of workers who benefit from the OETH33. In the public sector where women represent a large majority of workers (62 %), those benefitting from the OETH are also a majority, but their share is lower (57 %).

Women are concentrated in a much smaller number of occupations than men. Many of them work in occupations related to care work or services: secretaries, administrative white-collar work in the public sector, nurses, caregivers, saleswomen, cleaners, home helpers, teachers, etc. For disabled women, the gender occupational segregation adversely combines with the employment segregation that limits the scope of opportunities for disabled persons. According to the Defender of Rights34, ‘as regards horizontal segregation, a magnifying effect seems to affect disabled women’, because occupations where disabled persons are employed are mostly ‘male’ occupations. All in all, sector and occupational segregation negatively combine to restrain disabled women’s opportunities to a very limited range of occupations.

3.4 Precariousness and (arduous) working conditions According to the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights35, there is a lack of gendered data on the employment precariousness of disabled women and its impact on their remunerations. Similarly, their working conditions are not well known. The evolution of the recognition of the arduousness they face at work and the dynamic of public prevention policies may play a crucial role.

3.4.1 Employment precariousness DARES data36 show that workers with an administrative recognition of disability and workers in a situation of disability are over-represented among permanent employees (83 % and 80 % respectively in 2013, vs. 77 % of the able-bodied). This is especially the case of women: 85 % of those with an administrative recognition of disability and 83 % of those in a situation of disability have a permanent contract. These data also show that the exposure of disabled persons to fixed-term and other short-term contracts is not very different to the exposure of able-bodied persons: women and men with an administrative recognition of disability are a little more exposed while women and men in a situation of disability are a little less exposed. The difference rather lies in non-wage work. The share of non-wage workers in the total

33 Chabanon L., (2016), ‘L’obligation d’emploi des travailleurs handicapés. Comment les établissements s’en

acquittent-ils ?’, Dares analyses, No 064, November, 10 p. 34 See note no. 1. 35 See note no. 1. 36 See note no. 28.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

16 PE 602.067

working population is 11 % (15 % for men and 7 % for women) but diminishes to 8 % for workers in a situation of disability (9 % for men, 6 % for women) and drops down to 4 % for those with an administrative recognition of disability. It is only 1 % for women in this situation (vs. 6 % for their male counterparts).

Part-time work is a major form of employment precariousness for disabled workers: 30 % of those with an administrative recognition of disability and 26 % of those in a situation of disability were working part-time in 2013 (vs. 18 % of the able-bodied). Disabled women are particularly affected: nearly one in two (47 %) disabled women with a recognition of disability was a part-timer (vs. 16 % of their male counterparts); 40 % women in a situation of disability were part-timers (vs. 10 % of their male counterparts).

DARES, Ministry of Employment data also show that disabled women are over-represented in the most precarious active employment measures (see below, Section 4.2.2).

3.4.2 Arduous working conditions The 2016 report of the Defender of Rights37 suggests that in many cases disabled women have to wait a long time before their employer takes their needs into consideration or decides to adapt their workstation. As a consequence, they are liable to be exposed to unduly arduous working conditions.

Arduous working conditions are better recognised in male than in female occupations, even if things are gradually changing. Consequently, women’s workplace accidents or occupational diseases remain less recognised than men’s. Due to this lack of visibility, there is a lack of dedicated prevention policies, so women’s workplace accidents and occupational diseases are rising while men’s are diminishing.

Women are less represented in the population benefitting from the obligation to employ disabled workers (OETH), not only because they are less represented in sectors and occupations with a lot of workplace accidents, but also because their exposure to arduous work and occupational diseases is not well recognised. According to DARES and Insee data38, most of the workers benefitting from the OETH and from recognition of a workplace accident or an occupational disease are men (76 % in 2011), notably in the industry and construction sectors. On the contrary, most of those who benefit from invalidity pension (61 % in 2011) because they have lost their working capacity due to an accident or to a disease which is not related to their occupation are women.

According to the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights, data from the National Health Insurance Fund (Caisse nationale d’assurance maladie, Cnamts) show that this situation is changing. Recognised occupational diseases have considerably increased between 2001 and 2012, especially among women: + 170 % (vs. + 91 % among men). The increase is notably important (+ 300 %) in the service sector (banks, insurance, administration, cleaning, health) where women are over-represented. It is however not possible to say to what extent this increase is due to a better recognition of occupational diseases or to a deterioration of working conditions in these sectors.

Prevention policies against workplace accidents and occupational diseases still focus more on ‘male’ occupations and forms of arduousness. According to the National Agency for the Improvement of Working Conditions (Agence nationale pour l’amélioration des conditions de travail, Anact), the number of workplace accidents has globally decreased

37 See note no. 1. 38 See note no. 23.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 17

(by 15 %) between 2001 and 201539. But it only benefitted men (-28 %), while the number of workplace accidents has considerably increased for women (+28 %). According to the Anact, there is a need to learn from the recognition of new occupational diseases (depression, burn-out, musculoskeletal disorders, etc.) and to adopt gendered prevention policies in order to stop the increase of women’s workplace accidents.

39 Chappert F., Therry P., (2016), Photographie statistique des accidents du travail, des accidents de trajet et des

maladies professionnelles en France selon le sexe entre 2001 et 2015, Anact, March, 16 p.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

18 PE 602.067

4. THE NATIONAL LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK ON DISABILITY AND EMPLOYMENT IN A GENDER PERSPECTIVE, AND EFFECTIVENESS IN ADDRESSING INTERSECTORAL DISCRIMINATION

According to the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights, ‘currently, public policies towards persons in a situation of disability have not taken the gender dimension into account in their actions’40. The main pillar of the present legal framework regarding the education, social protection and employment of disabled workers, is the law of 11 February 2005. This law however does not address multiple discrimination.

4.1 Legal framework The Law No 2005-102 of 11 February 2005 for equal rights and opportunities, promoting the participation and citizenship of disabled persons, has reformed the Law 75-534 of 30 June 1975 in favour of disabled persons, and the Law 87-517 of 10 July 1987 in favour of the employment of disabled persons. The 1975 law gave two missions to the Technical Commission for Orientation and Occupational Retraining (Cotorep): the recognition of disability and the support to retraining. The 1987 law defined the conditions for the employment obligation imposing on all (public and private) employers of 20 employees or more to employ at least 6 % disabled workers in their total workforce. Those employers who did not comply with the law had to pay a contribution to a dedicated fund.

The French legal framework is quite elaborate, but its implementation remains unsatisfactory.

4.1.1 Equal rights and opportunities Act (2005) The 2005 law promoted non-discrimination principles and aimed at ensuring equality of rights and opportunities for disabled persons in five fields:

1. Social benefits: a right to compensation provides for the public coverage of expenditure (human and technical support) related to disability. The law provides for the gradual implementation of a so-called universal benefit; initially subordinated to age and resources conditions, it should extend to every disabled person whatever his/her age and resources.

2. Education: a right to school integration provides for disabled children’s education in the school closest to their place of residence, with appropriate accommodation to ensure continuous education and a regular assessment of children’s competences and needs.

3. Obligation to employ disabled workers: the law provides for a strengthened incentive and penalty mechanism in order to enforce the existing obligation to employ 6 % disabled workers in private companies with 20 or more employees as well as in the public sector (Law No 87-517 of 10 July 1987). Since 2009, employers may comply with the employment obligation by directly employing disabled workers, by subcontracting with establishments and services for support through work (Esat), or by recruiting trainees. They may also sign a collective agreement regarding disabled workers’ employment. Otherwise, they have to pay a contribution to dedicated funds.

4. Accessibility: the law aims at improving the accessibility of public spaces, transport as well as to new buildings. It also provides for incentive and sanction mechanisms.

5. Administrative simplification: the law provides for the creation of Departmental houses for persons with disabilities (Maisons départementales des personnes

40 See note no. 1.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 19

handicapées, MDPH), a one-stop-shop merging previous commissions within the Commission of Rights and Autonomy of Disabled Persons (Commission des droits et de l’autonomie des personnes handicapées, CDAPH).

4.1.2 Assessment of the legal framework The implementation of the 2005 law is assessed every three years on the occasion of the national conference on disability. The 2008 conference focused on disabled workers’ integration into employment as well as on the evolution of the AAH allowance. The 2011 conference has again focused on integration into employment as well as on disabled children’s education in an ordinary environment. The 2014 conference has focused on several topics: employment, accessibility, youth, prevention and access to care.

In general, these conferences note some advances but point out the insufficiencies of the implementation of the law. For instance, the employment obligation quota is still not met 30 years after the implementation of the 1987 law. The accessibility to the city objective is also far from being met. Noticing the postponement of this objective, the 2014 National conference has provided for new schedules programming the delayed implementation of this objective.

4.2 Policy framework The policy framework mostly relies on the obligation to employ disabled workers, in protected employment and adapted firms as well as in active labour market programmes. Disabled persons may also benefit from dedicated social entitlements, whether employed (in low-paid jobs) or not. None of these policies addresses multiple discrimination.

4.2.1 Obligation to employ disabled workers Private employers (as well as state-owned industrial and commercial establishments) of 20 employees or more have to take appropriate measures to facilitate disabled workers’ access to jobs corresponding to their qualification, and/or to maintain disabled workers in their job as well as to undertake adequate training in accordance with their needs. Every year, the employer has to submit an administrative declaration. In case the 6 % employment quota is not reached, the employer has to pay a contribution to a fund dedicated to the integration of disabled workers into employment: the Agefiph (Association de gestion du fonds pour l'insertion professionnelle des personnes handicapées) for private employers and the FIPHFP (Fonds pour l'insertion des personnes handicapées dans la fonction publique) for public employers. Sanctions are computed according to the size of the firm. In 2016, non-compliant firms had to pay, for each missing disabled employee, from EUR 3 904 (firms of 20 to 199 employees) to EUR 4 880 (between 200 and 749 employees), and up to EUR 5 856 (firms of more than 750 employees).

Workers who benefit from the obligation to employ disabled persons are: persons recognised as disabled workers by the CDAPH; victims of a workplace accident or an occupational disease (AT-MP) whose degree of permanent incapacity is estimated as at least 10 % and are beneficiaries of an invalidity pension; recipients of an invalidity pension whose invalidity reduces their working capacities or their earning potential by at least two thirds; invalidity

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

20 PE 602.067

card holders; recipients of the handicapped adult allowance (Allocation adulte handicap, AAH); war pensioners and the like (war widows and orphans, firefighters).

Table 4: Characteristics of OETH beneficiaries, 2013

% RQTH AT-MP Invalidity pension

Invalidity card

AAH War pensioners and the like

Together

Women 43

24 61 41 34 80 58

Men 57 76 39 59 66 20 42

Source: Agefiph-DARES, DOETH – firms of 20 employees or more and state-owned industrial and commercial establishments.

Private employers of 20 employees or more are subject to the obligation to employ disabled workers for up to 6 % of their headcount. In 2013, 386 700 beneficiaries of the OETH were employed in the private sector and in state-owned industrial and commercial establishments. Women represented a minority (42 %) of these workers. However, between 2009 and 2013, workers benefitting from the OETH increased by 25 % in the private sector, which is mostly due to the increase of women benefitting from the OETH (+ 55 000 vs. + 24 000 men). This evolution is not well documented. The Defender of Rights (Bechrouri et al., 2016, p. 35) suggests that working women may have benefitted from a better recognition of their disability. Employers often try to reach the 6 % quota by encouraging some of their employees to ask for their recognition as disabled workers (RQTH). Since women represent a majority of the workers whose disability is not recognised, they could be first affected. However, it is not possible to say if this evolution reflects a better recognition of women’s disabilities or firms’ attempts to avoid the recruitment of disabled workers needing an adaptation of their workstation (in accordance with the 2005 law).

In the public service, there were 207 800 beneficiaries of the OETH in 201341. Women represented a majority (57 %) of these workers, but the share of women among OETH workers was below their share of total public service workers (62 %). It has to be noted that the share of women among those benefitting from the OETH in the hospital public service is particularly high (72 %), possibly reflecting the arduous working conditions of female-dominated occupations, such as nurses and caregivers.

The employment quota is not met; gender data are missing as to the male and female percentage of OETH workers. In the private sector, the global share of disabled workers was 4 % in 2013. One quarter (26 %) of the 100 000 establishments of 20 employees or more complied with the 6 % quota by employing directly disabled workers. Near to one quarter of the establishments used indirect employment (mostly subcontracting), but only 11 % reached the 6 % quota; 30 % of subcontractors were adapted firms. Some establishments (9 %) only comply with the law by paying a contribution42.

4.2.2 Protected employment and adapted firms Protected employment relies on medico-social structures named institutions and services of support through work (Etablissements et services d’aide par le travail, Esat), where only disabled persons oriented by the CDAPH can work. In 2014, about 119 000 persons worked

41 See note no. 23. 42 Chabanon L., (2016), ‘L’obligation d’emploi des travailleurs handicapés. Comment les établissements s’en

acquittent-ils ?’, Dares analyses, No 064, November, 10 p.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 21

in Esat where they benefitted from guaranteed remunerations; they are not recognised as wage workers according to the Labour code. There are no recent gendered data regarding people working in Esat, but it is likely that women are still under-represented.

Adapted firms (Entreprises adaptées, EA) are a specific kind of firm that must count at least 80 % disabled workers benefitting from a regular employment contract. About 31 000 persons worked in adapted firms. Disabled women remain under-represented in adapted firms as well as in protected employment where industrial and technical activities still predominate. Only 50 % of adapted firms of 50 employees or more comply with the law and have elaborated an agreement or a plan for gender equality. Among those of less than 50 employees, the proportion drops to 13 %43. However, the share of women working in adapted firms is slightly increasing (37 % in 2013 vs. 34 % in 2008), notably due to a diversification of existing activities in these structure (more administrative and tertiary activities).

4.2.3 Active labour market programmes Disabled workers are in general over-represented in active labour market programmes, due to the fact that these programmes are partly targeted to vulnerable workers. For disabled women, active measures tend to exacerbate the gender segregation of employment. All in all, disabled men and women do not benefit from the same measures.

Disabled women particularly concentrate in subsidised contracts of the non-market sector, deemed to offer poor employment conditions (in terms of working time and remuneration) and low employment opportunities when compared with subsidised employment in the market sector. According to DARES data44, 4 499 workers with an administrative recognition of disability had a new subsidised contract in the market sector in 2014, but only 38 % were women (vs. 41 % women among all beneficiaries). Meanwhile, 16 197 workers with an administrative recognition of disability had a new subsidised contract in the non-market sector, and 60 % were women (vs. 65 % women among all beneficiaries).

Disabled women are under-represented in apprenticeship contracts but over-represented in professionalisation contracts. In 2014, they represented only 28 % of the 2600 new apprenticeship contracts (where the share of women is 34 %) but 55 % of the 2 700 new professionalisation contracts (where the share of women is 51 %).

Agefiph data45 also show that disabled women benefit less than their male counterparts from dedicated integration measures. From January to September 2016, women represented half of the 56 467 disabled workers placed in a subsidised job by the NGO employment cap (Cap emploi) in charge of the disabled unemployed, probably due to a mobilisation in favour of gender equality. But they represented only 25 % of the 758 apprenticeship contracts and 48 % of the 1818 professional contracts subsidised by the Agefiph. They represented only 32 % of the 2 660 persons supported to create their own job and 41 % of the 2 309 beneficiaries of the aid for occupational integration (Aide à l’insertion professionnelle). This aid aims to encourage employers to recruit in ‘durable’ jobs (12 months or more) disabled people considered as the most remote from employment.

43 Seuret F., (2015), Pas assez de femmes dans les entreprises adaptées, Faire Face, 8 March. 44 See note no. 23. 45 Le Goareger C., Lenoir A., (2016), ‘Le tableau de bord. Emploi et chômage des personnes handicapées’, Chiffres

clés et synthèse, Agefiph, no 2016-4, 13 p.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

22 PE 602.067

4.2.4 Income support: The handicapped adult allowance (AAH) The Disabled adults allowance (Allocation aux adultes handicapés, AAH) was created in 1975 for those disabled aged 20 or more who cannot benefit from an old-age or invalidity allowance, or from a workplace accident pension. The entitlement to the AAH relies on medical and social criteria assessed by the Commissions for disabled persons’ rights and autonomy (Commissions pour les droits et l’autonomie des personnes handicapées, CDAPH). Adults whose rate of incapacity is at least 80 % (or between 50 % and 79 % for those recognised as having a ‘substantial and durable restriction as regards the access to employment’) may be entitled to the AAH.

The AAH is a differential means-tested allowance paid by local family funds (Caisses d’allocations familales, CAF). Since 1 April 2016, the AAH ceiling is EUR 808.16 for a single person and EUR 1,616.92 for a couple. A supplement of EUR 404.23 is provided for each dependent child. Recipients of the AAH receive the difference between the AAH ceiling and their income.

The 2005 law has provided for the possibility to combine the AAH with an activity income up to 1.1 times the minimum wage. In 2011, this rate has been increased so it is up to 1.35 times the minimum wage. Those who work in ‘ordinary’ employment can thus combine part of the allowance with their activity income; they have to fill in a quarterly report of their activity resources for the administration. Under certain conditions, AAH recipients may benefit from a complement for autonomous life (EUR 104.77) or a resource complement (EUR 179.31).

The AAH (eventually coupled with other allowances such as the housing allowance) is normally sufficient to ensure that recipient households’ incomes stay above the poverty line – which of course does not guarantee a ‘decent’ life.

At the end of 2014, 1.04 million persons benefitted from the AAH. Most of them were single persons without children, above the age of 40. The share of women was 49 %. From a gender perspective, it has to be noted that the AAH (like other minimum income schemes in France) is computed according to the household’s income. As a consequence, disabled persons who live in a couple may be ineligible if their partner’s income is above the ceiling. They thus have to rely on the support of their partner rather than on public support. Due to gender inequalities as regards personal incomes within households, women may be particularly penalised by this mode of computation. However gendered data do not exist.

Above the age of 65 (retirement age), former beneficiaries of the AAH are entitled to another minimum income scheme: The support allowance for ageing persons (Allocation de soutien aux personnes âgées, Aspa). The amount guaranteed by the Aspa still maintains recipient household’s incomes above the poverty line, but is lower than the one guaranteed by the AAH. Women are over-represented in the Aspa, due to their precarious occupational trajectories (less continuous, more often part-time). The situation of disabled women as regards employment suggests that due to their precariousness, they are more liable to be eligible for low pensions when ageing, and to have to rely on public (or on family) support.

4.3 The role of the European structural funds In France, at the national level, there are no legal, nor policy measures addressing discrimination and access to employment for women with disabilities.

As far as we can tell, the European structural funds are not much used in France to promote disabled women’s integration into employment. The only measure we have found is an integration site (Chantier d’insertion) that can hardly be considered as a good

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 23

practice as regards disabled women’s employment. This integration site – La Cistella de Marianne – benefitted from an ESF donation of EUR 30 000 for the year 2013 due to its commitment to gender equality. Integration sites (Chantiers d’insertion) aim to favour the integration into employment of vulnerable persons, including disabled persons. However, it is not possible to tell how many disabled persons were employed in the structure La Cistella de Marianne … and how many of them were women.

It has to be noted that most associations of disabled persons are not focused on the gender dimension. The disabled women’s association FDFA is a small association that lacks resources to ask for European funding. According to its President Maudy Piot46, ‘we would like to apply for European funds, but it is very, very complex, we do not know how to do it’.

46 Maudy Piot, Interview of 6 March 2017

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

24 PE 602.067

Table 5: Main legal and policy measures addressing discrimination and access to employment for women with disabilities

Name of the intervention and period

Main category of intervention

(infrastructure, business

support, social infrastructure, social services, labour market

policies, education and

training policies, social protection

and welfare policies, other)

Brief description

and beneficiaries

Level of responsibility

(EU, state, region, county,

town)

Resource allocation

(if possible)

Expected direct/indirect

effects in a gender

perspective (high, medium,

low) motivation

National/ regional measures

European Structural and Investment Funds

• ESF, 2012 / 2013

Social local infrastructure: Integration site La Cistella de Marianne.

The Integration site La Cistella de Marianne works in pre-ordering, provisioning, and distributing fresh fruit and vegetables, notably for NGOs and for a market in the city of Perpignan. The site obeys a strict parity principle: half of its employees are women in an occupational field that is male-dominated

The Integration site is local (Perpignan). It has been created by the National Association for the Development of Ethical Groceries (Association nationale pour le développement des épiceries solidaires, ANDES). For this Integration site, the ANDES signed a mixity contract with the Regional delegation for women’s rights of Languedoc-Roussillon

ESF: EUR 30 000 Total cost: EUR 529 600

21 employees benefitted from the measure in 2013, 87 % of the employees have been reintegrated: 57 % into durable employment, others into training or in other Integration sites. No gendered data are available and there is no information about the number of disabled men and women in the measure.

Source for La Cistella de Marianne: http://www.europe-en-france.gouv.fr/Rendez-vous-compte/Projets-exemplaires/Chantier-d-insertion-la-Cistella-de-Marianne/(language)/fre-FR Financement 2012 pour 2013.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 25

5. EXAMPLES OF GOOD PRACTICES Since the issue of multiple discrimination against disabled women is not really visible in the public debate, very few ‘good practices’ are reported, and when reported, they are barely assessed and documented. For Maudy Piot47, President of the FDFA, good practices ‘surely exist, but what I regret is that it is mostly one-time … compagnie do that for their own image, to be quoted in a report!’). We can however here evoke several apparently good practices on this issue. Due to the fact that they are poorly documented, reporting them in detail would need additional researches that are outside of the scope of the present work.

5.1 Paris Digital House As far as we can tell, the only documented good practice as regards the support to disabled women’s integration into employment is the Digital House created in November 2016 in Paris (see Annex III). This Digital House is located in the premises of the NGO Women to Tell, Women to Act, FDFA, where a crisis line for disabled women victims of violence is also located.

The Paris Digital House provides disabled women digital education and training as well as job-search support. The location of the workshop in the premises of the NGO FDFA facilitates access for disabled women and allows for those victims of violence who call the crisis line to come and participate in (among other activities) digital workshops. Computer workshops take place twice a month and offer digital courses lasting several months.

The Paris Digital House is part of a worldwide network of digital houses (118 in 2017) and is the 25th experience of this kind in France. Digital houses are funded by the Orange Foundation, linked to the Orange French telecom company. In general, these places are not dedicated to disabled women and rather aim to promote unskilled and precarious women’s digital training. They also provide them with job-search, retraining support, or with help to facilitate access to paid employment. Trainers are volunteers, employees of the Orange telecom company.

The Orange Foundation launches every year a call for tender to subsidise new digital houses. In 2016, it has given the FDFA a subsidy of EUR 12 000 to finance hardware and software equipment for the computer workshops and to pay for the refurbishment of the office dedicated to job-search support, as well as to beauty and well-being workshops. Since this digital house is newly implemented it is not possible to assess its achievements.

5.2 The lobbying of the NGO Women to Act, Women to Tell, FDFA The lobbying of the NGO FDFA may also be considered as a good practice per se. Founded in 2003, the association Women to tell, women to act, FDFA, gathers women (and men) in a situation of disability. Its main objective is ‘to combat all forms of discrimination and more particularly the double discrimination that women experience’. The FDFA commits itself to allow disabled women to ‘express their potential, to put their competencies in practice, to fully benefit from their entitlements and to participate to citizenship and social life’.48

The association promotes disabled women’s employment. Its President Maudy Piot had for instance presented ‘15 proposals for disabled women’s employment’ at the 2014 National disability conference (see below). Maudy Piot also questioned the Defender of Rights about

47 Maudy Piot, Interview of 6 March 2017 48 http://gfph.dpi-europe.org/CommuniquePresse/les-personnes-en-situations/fdfaemploicnh2014.pdf.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

26 PE 602.067

the multiple discrimination experienced by disabled persons, originating its work on multiple discrimination against disabled women49.

The association also supports disabled women, especially those who are victims of discrimination or violence, including violence at work, through a hotline. In the premises of the association, they can meet a lawyer or a psychologist. Those who are victims of violence at work may be addressed to the European association against violence at work towards women (AVFT).

5.3 The action of the Defender of Rights The action of the Defender of Rights is also in a way a good practice, even if it is not dedicated to women with disabilities. This independent public institution has two missions: (i) supporting those persons whose rights are not respected and (ii) promoting equality in access to rights.

First, it has published a report dedicated to disabled women’s access to employment and multiple discrimination50. This report surely has contributed to make discrimination against disabled women more visible, at least in public administrations.

Second, the Defender of Rights notably supports those (disabled persons, women, unionists, foreigners, immigrants, or their descendants, etc.) who go through the courts to claim against discrimination. In its 2016 report, the Defender of Rights has provided examples of disabled women who have been through court. In most cases, they were discriminated due to employers’ denial of reasonable accommodation to allow them to access to (or maintaining in) employment. In line with the EU directives, the French legislation51 considers such a denial as discriminatory. Note that, according to the Defender of Rights, it is in most cases easier to plead discrimination along one criterion (disability or gender) instead of pleading multiple discrimination. The cases reported by the Defender of Rights concern discrimination against disabled persons.

5.4 Other possible good practices Other good practices are not sufficiently documented or visible to be described in detail.

The action of the CFDT union Working life and social dialogue unit is also worth noting. Unionists in charge of disability and with gender equality tend to consider both aspects of equality policies and be aware of multiple discrimination. Olivier Leclercq, Confederal secretary CFDT at the Working life and social dialogue unit, has evoked the fact that the union now (since 2016) speaks about gender equality and quality working life (EPQVT, égalité professionnelle et qualité de vie au travail) instead of quality working life (QVT). This approach aims at ‘thinking about gender and disability at the same time’52. However, it is still difficult to see the outcomes of this approach. The awareness of some unionists to both gender equality and disability issues may be due the (quite) long-term development of gender equality policies and/or disability policies. However, it is not clear whether this awareness is sufficient to produce important changes in the workplace where unions are often weak. According to Marika Demangeon53, Disability studies researcher at the Defender of Rights, ‘the signature of a nice agreement and the presence of a disability mission at the

49 See note no. 1. 50 See note no. 1. 51 Law No 2005-102 of 11 February 2005; Labour code; Law No 83-634 of 13 July 1983 regarding the general

status of civil servants 52 Olivier Leclercq, Interview of 20 March 2017 53 Marika Demangeon, Interview, 21 March 2017

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 27

company level are not always sufficient to make things change at the level of local establishments’.

Employment institutions dedicated to disabled workers, notably Cap emploi in charge of job-search support, may have taken actions to promote gender equality in dedicated employment policies measures. Administrative data suggest that such actions may have occurred: women now represent half of the disabled workers placed in a subsidised job by Cap emploi. However, such equality policies are not documented and the rise of women in subsidised jobs might be due to other factors. For instance, according to Sarah Benichou, Head of Unit at the Defender of Rights, the feminisation of employment in adapted firms might be attributed to both an increasing awareness and to the tertiarisation of work, together with the feminisation of administratively recognised disability. Nevertheless, according to Marika Demangeon, Disability studies researcher at the Defender of Rights, local partnerships exist. For instance, Cap emploi and the Delegation of women’s rights organised a Week for disabled workers’ employment (in 2014) and Women’s day (8 March 2017) jointly in the Department of Aveyron.

Another interesting action is the guide54 edited by the Centre Hubertine Auclerc to promote disabled women’s participation in feminist associations. However, these feminist associations are not necessarily dealing with employment so this guide may have a limited impact on women’s access to (or maintaining in) employment.

54 https://www.centre-hubertine-auclert.fr/sites/default/files/fichiers/guide-feminisme-handicap-web.pdf

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

28 PE 602.067

6. CURRENT AND FUTURE POLICY CHALLENGES ACCORDING TO NATIONAL STAKEHOLDERS

Some of the national stakeholders we have met have already submitted proposals to the public debate, but still meet difficulties to be followed or even heard. Interviews led in March 2017 (see Annex II) were an occasion to discuss current and future challenges with them.

6.1 Proposals submitted in the public debate Current policy challenges have been expressed and placed in the public debate by the FDFA, notably on the occasion of the 2014 National conference on disability (Box 1).

Box 1: The 15 proposals of the FDFA (2014) At the 2014 National disability conference, the NGO FDFA made 13 proposals as regards disabled women’s employment, vocational training, career and social protection: (1) Take the gender dimension into account within disability policies and value women’s work. (2) Promote gender inequalities awareness in structures supporting job-seekers. (3) Introduce a parity clause in the employment quota of 6 %. (4) Facilitate the access of women to sandwich courses and internship. (5) Increase awareness of employers as regards disabled women’s lifelong learning and validation of experience. (6) Reinforce job-search support to promote disabled women’s access to skills training, employment and career. (7) Help disabled women to find new activities and expand job opportunities. (8) Refuse to confine disabled women in lower-level, low-paid and subordinated positions. (9) Inform disabled women about advancement opportunities and career prospects. (10) Encourage disabled women’s application to positions of responsibility. (11) Develop coaching and mentoring practices that favour disabled women’s confidence. (12) Promote parity in applications and nominations to responsible positions. (13) Promote access to positions of responsibility in sport associations. (14) Increase awareness of labour unions and social partners, especially health and safety committees (CHSCT), to support disabled women victims of sexual harassment and violence at work. (15) Ensure a decent pension to disabled women, including those who have worked part-time. Source: http://gfph.dpi-europe.org/CommuniquePresse/les-personnes-en-situations/fdfaemploicnh2014.pdf

More recently, the report of the Defender of Rights 2016 has detailed its 12 recommendations to improve the knowledge of disabled women’s situation as regards employment and to fight against multiple discrimination (Box 2). Discussing these recommendations, Sarah Benichou said that ‘the Defender of Rights has no enforcement power, according to us it is soft law.’ But the Defender of Rights relies on its work to raise awareness and to contact actors dealing with disability, such as national stakeholders and the network of local Department houses for disabled persons (MDPH).

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 29

Box 2: The 12 recommendations of the Defender of Rights (2016) Recommendations of the Defender of Right’s 2016 report notably concern available data and knowledge about disabled women’s employment: (1) harmonise the definitions of disability in order to make national surveys more comparable; (2) improve the information system as regards administrative data from the MDPH to better capture the characteristics of the population benefitting from an administrative recognition of disability; (3) realise a gendered census of disabilities and public policies. Another set of recommendations addresses gender stereotypes and the representations of disabled women: (4) diversify the representations of women and disabled persons in all forms of communications; (5) make disabled women more visible and promote models of success to facilitate identification. As far as education is concerned, the Defender of Rights recommends to: (6) reinforce accessibility to schools and higher education, notably through supportive measures; (7) reinforce the fight against gender stereotypes in education; (8) integrate a mixity objective in education and orientation policies towards disabled children. To promote disabled women’s access to employment and career opportunities, the recommendations are to: (9) develop a gender approach in orientation and job-search support policies dedicated to disabled persons; (10) promote e-learning and telework to facilitate the integration of disabled persons, notably women; (11) launch prevention campaigns adapted to present occupational risks and addressing female-dominated arduous occupations; (12) include a gender approach in different topics of collective bargaining and action plans, notably as regards disabled workers. Source: Bechrouri et al., 2016.

Despite the introduction in the public debate of the FDFA and Defender of Right’s recommendations, it is still difficult to put multiple discrimination against disabled women on the agenda.

6.2 Multiple discrimination against disabled women is hardly on the agenda According to national stakeholders, the employment of women with disabilities and the fight against multiple discrimination is becoming more visible, but is still not really on the agenda.

Speaking about the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights, Marika Demangeon, Disability studies researcher in this institution, said:

‘In the report, we point out the fragmentation of actors (…). The report could have led to a dialogue between different spheres, actors dealing with gender equality and those dealing with disability. It does not work like that for now. It might change over time …’ (interview, 21 March 2017).

Maudy Piot, President of the disabled women’s association FDFA, has underlined the difficulties in placing these questions in the public debate and to put them on the agenda:

‘I believe that all associations [dealing with disability] are aware of double discrimination, women and disability (…) but there is no real work on double discrimination. We are the only association to raise the question. People listen to us, because we participate in all networks: CFHE (French council for European questions), Miprof (Inter-ministry mission for protecting women against violence and combating human trafficking) HCE (High council for gender equality), etc. But it never has been a priority, even if there is an evolution (…) I think there is an evolution but it is not given! We have to fight every time! (…) Women are not an important issue for our politicians, especially disabled women! (…) President of major associations are men, people [in Ministerial cabinets] address them, it is not

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

30 PE 602.067

often that they address me… I am well received, but they just gently tolerate me.’ (Interview, 6 March 2017).

Clémence Armand, in charge of employment and fighting against discrimination at the Service for Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, also recognises that disabled women are not seen as a public priority:

‘Unfortunately, nobody feels really concerned with women’s rights. So, disabled women … how to put it … (…) we should be able to change attitudes towards gender equality in order to develop an integrated approach of public policies. It is not yet the case.’ (Interview, 16 March 2017).

She said however that the Inter-ministry plan for gender equality of October 2016 evokes the necessity to impose gender equality objectives within public employment services operators and their partners, including those in charge of disabled persons (Cap emploi, Agefiph). She also spoke about a partnership between the Service for women’s rights and the Defender of Rights evoking intersectional discrimination regarding both disabled and migrant women.

6.3 Current and future policy challenges The stakeholders have evoked current and future policy challenges during the interviews. They insisted on the need to implement integrated policies, to better take into account multiplediscrimination and to combat gender stereotypes that specifically affect disabled women.

As regards multiple discrimination, Sarah Benichou, Head of Unit at the Defender of Rights, underlined the specificity of the Defender of Rights that deals with the various forms of discrimination. She promoted an integrated ‘trans-criterion’ and ‘intersectional approach’ in order to avoid separating different categories of discrimination. According to her, without such an approach, those who are discriminated along several criteria, disabled women in particular, remain unseen for all actors: ‘people talk about men in wheelchairs as far as disability is concerned and about women managers when it comes to gender equality. And disabled women remain invisible!’ She nevertheless pointed out that it is difficult to plead multiple discrimination through the courts though it would sometimes be meaningful from a sociological point of view: ‘the lack of reasonable workstation accommodation in hospitals actually concerns many women. It is systematic while in other [male-dominated] sectors, professional diseases are better recognised (…). Here there is an intersectional dimension’ (Interview, 21 March 2017).

Promoting integrated policies is a major challenge for Clémence Armand, in charge of employment and the fight against discrimination at the Service for Women’s rights and gender equality. She insisted on the need to implement ‘an integrated approach of public policies (even if it is a dream)’ and to ‘work on intersectionality and the mutual reinforcement of discrimination criteria’. Maudy Piot, President of the FDFA, has claimed for parity in the employment quota of 6 % disabled workers in firms: ‘3 % women, 3 % men!’ Clémence Armand supported such a proposal (‘it is also our approach’).

Gender stereotypes are for Clémence Armand an important issue: ‘in the collective unconscious women take care of children, dependent relatives, etc. So, when a woman cannot take care of herself and when in addition others have to take care of her, it’s hard.’

The enforcement of disabled women’s rights is considered an important challenge. According to Clémence Armand, the Defender of Rights is not sufficiently solicitated by women, and disabled women in particular. She suggested giving more resources to the labour inspectorate and to ‘inform all actors on these questions, on the particular situation of disabled women: labour unions, health and safety committees, occupational medicine, and many more.’ Olivier Leclercq, Confederal Secretary CFDT in the Working life and social

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 31

dialogue unit, has noticed that many women do not ask for the administrative recognition of their disability (RQTH) because they fear a negative impact on their working life. Part of his interventions consists of providing them information to allow them to ask for the recognition of their disability. Maudy Piot and Clémence Armand have also underlined the exposure of women with disabilities to gender-based violence. Marika Demangeon has emphasised the difficulties in reconciling maternity and working life.

The assessment and recognition of work arduousness is considered an important issue by several stakeholders. According to Clémence Armand, there is a lot to do as regards the assessment of work arduousness in female-dominated occupations, notably in the health and care sectors. Sarah Benichou shared this point of view, even pointing out that ‘hospital produces its own disabled workers’, often women.

As far as telework is concerned, Clémence Armand pointed out the risks of considering telework as a solution for disabled persons: ‘if it allows the employer not to comply with the obligation to adapt the workplace, it is a problem. And at home women do not socialise (…). But it may be important for their health, to help them complete their work week.’

The issue of family carers, who are mostly women, has also been evoked by Marika Demangeon and Olivier Leclerc. They have underlined the fact that most of those who care for their disabled children or relatives are women. According to Olivier Leclerc, ‘improving public care for disabled children or dependents would change their daily lives’.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

32 PE 602.067

7. CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS This conclusion will first summarise the state of existing knowledge in France about multiple discrimination and the situation of disabled women as regards employment. Then it will address existing policies and policy challenges.

7.1 Conclusions The question of multiple discrimination towards disabled women has been the subject of a few researches or studies in the 2000s in France. It has recently been brought into the public debate thanks to the lobbying of the NGO Women to Tell, Women to Act (FDFA) and to the publication of the 2016 report of the Defender of Rights on the topic55.

Researches on multiple discrimination have explored the way various discrimination criteria (such as gender and disability) may combine to produce intersectional discrimination. Women with disabilities are much concerned with such discrimination. Researches have also pointed out the role of stereotypes. Women with disabilities are faced with exacerbated stereotypes and can hardly rely on positive models to make them aware of their opportunities or support their professional ambitions.

Existing studies are rather unsystematic or discontinuous but published data already allow an appreciation of the difficulties that disabled women face as regards employment. These difficulties are largely due to the general segregation of employment, along both gender and disability criteria. This double segregation often makes the intersectional discrimination faced by women with disabilities a systematic discrimination.

As far as education is concerned, women with disabilities are more at risk than their able-bodied counterparts to have at best the certificate of secondary education. But whether disabled or not, they are more educated than their male counterparts … which does not reflect in their integration into employment. The low rate of disabled persons who graduate of course reflects the heterogeneity of disability. But this low rate also reflects actual difficulties of access to education faced by disabled girls and boys. The lack of adequate support and accessibility policies notably affects their educational opportunities.

The employment rate of women with disabilities reveals the difficulties they face in accessing (and maintaining in) employment. Only 45 % of women in a situation of disability are employed, versus 61 % of all women (and 49 % of disabled men). Most of those who do not work are inactive (49 %, vs. 4 3% of their male counterparts). But their high rate of unemployment (13 % vs. 10 % for able-bodied women) also illustrates their difficulties of integration (or reintegration) into employment.

Women with disabilities cumulate the difficulties that disabled persons face, and those that women face as regards employment. Finding a balance between work and family life often means women reconciling their working time with the time they eventually have to dedicate not only to their healthcare, but also (as women) to their relatives or children.

When in employment, women with disabilities face a double segregation as regards gender and disability. They are confronted with the vertical segregation of employment. Most of them remain wedged on a sticky floor due to both their situation of disability and to the fact that women are over-represented in occupations where career opportunities are low. Only 1 % of those with an administrative recognition of disability is manager (vs. 10 % of their male counterparts and 14 % of all employed women). What blocks their access to executive positions is more than a glass ceiling … something like a concrete ceiling. Women with

55 See note no. 1.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 33

disabilities are also confronted with the horizontal segregation of employment. As other women, they concentrate in a small number of sectors (services and public sector) and occupations (related to care, healthcare, education, cleaning, etc.). As disabled workers, their employment opportunities are limited all the more that protected employment is still dominated by industrial and technical activities and that in ordinary employment they benefit less from the obligation of employment than their male counterparts.

As far as the quality of employment is concerned, women with disabilities are overexposed to certain forms of precariousness. For instance, nearly one on two (47 %) women with an administrative recognition of disability, and 40 % of those in a situation of disability, work part-time. It is much more than for their male counterpart and for all employed women. At work, women with disabilities also suffer from arduous working conditions, for instance in the care and healthcare sector … and especially in hospitals that may be said to ‘produce’ their own disabled workers.

7.2 Policy implications In France, existing policies towards disabled persons provide for a dedicated income support scheme with incentives to work, as well as for a right to compensation. It also provides for an obligation to employ disabled workers and with institutions dedicated to the recognition of disabilities or to training and job-search support for disabled persons.

In the context of massive unemployment, these policies are far from being sufficient to ensure disabled workers’, and especially women’s, integration into employment. Moreover, accessibility policies remain underdeveloped, further restricting their opportunities of access to education and employment. As far as income support is concerned, the fact that the AAH is computed according to households’ income is liable to exclude many disabled persons, especially women, from public support. This global situation does not favour the awareness of the gender dimension of disabled persons’ difficulties as regards employment.

A first policy challenge is surely the knowledge of disabled women’s situation as regards employment, social protection and gender-based violence (domestic as well as in the workplace). Existing surveys as well as administrative data should allow for the publication of systematic and continuous gendered data so as to make the situation of disabled women more visible and to better orient policy measures. This is still not the case.

A second policy challenge is the implementation of integrated policies, to better account for the cumulative factors that hamper the integration of disabled workers into employment. The development of an integrated intersectional approach is a major issue to avoid leaving disabled women in the blind spot of integration policies. Promoting gender equality within institutions and organisations supporting disabled persons’ education, orientation and access to employment is a major issue. Launching communication campaigns would be a way to promote positive models of disabled women and to combat gender stereotypes that specifically affect them so as to widen their employment and career prospects.

A third policy challenge is the enforcement of disabled women’s rights and access to their rights. There is a need to improve accessibility in the city and to provide adequate support to those disabled children and adults who need it in their educational progression or professional career. Reinforcing sanctions against employers that do not respect the employment quota and introducing a parity clause in this quota could also help disabled women’s access to employment. It would also be necessary to reinforce human resources in labour inspectorates and occupational medicine, and to dedicate more resources to labour unions, health and safety committees, etc. In the public function as well as in firms and associations, dedicated training sessions would be useful to better inform employers and

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

34 PE 602.067

employees as well as their representatives about disabilities and gender inequalities. Introducing the item of disabled workers’ (and especially disabled women’s) working conditions and opportunities in negotiations and action plans could be a way to favour their promotion.

A fourth policy challenge is more specifically related to the quality of work and employment. First, there is a need to reduce disabled persons’ employment precariousness and to favour their job security. To improve the quality of their working life, promoting the adaptation of workposts is necessary. Telework may be part of the solution if and only if it combines with other forms of work in an adapted workplace as well as in the company of other colleagues. Progress in assessment and recognition of work arduousness in female-dominated sectors and occupations is also needed. Dedicated preventive policies must develop in female-dominated sectors and occupations, notably in the health and care sectors where many women are in a situation of disability and where occupational diseases are developing.

A fifth issue relates to the social protection of women with disabilities, whether in employment or not. There is a need to ensure an individual access to the income support AAH in order to avoid the exclusion of disabled persons who live in a couple from public support. Otherwise, many disabled women who live in a couple whose resources are above the administrative threshold will remain economically dependent on their able-bodied partner. There is also a need to ensure a decent pension to ageing disabled women, especially those who have had a discontinuous career or/and have worked part-time.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 35

ANNEXES

ANNEX I - LISTS OF DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED • Amrous N., Barhoumi M., Biausque V., (2013), ‘L’accès à l’emploi des personnes handicapées en

2011’, Dares analyses, No 066, October.

• Barhoumi M., Chabanon L., (2015), ‘Emploi et chômage des personnes handicapées’, Synthèse.Stat’, Dares, No 17, novembre.

• Bechrouri N., Benichou S., Blanchard R., Demangeon M., Levesque C., (2016), L’emploi des femmes en situation de handicap. Analyse exploratoire sur les discriminations multiples, Rapport du Défenseur des droits November, 86 p.

• Chabanon L., (2016), ‘L’obligation d’emploi des travailleurs handicapés. Comment les établissements s’en acquittent-ils ?’, Dares analyses, No 064, November, 10 p.

• Chappert F., Therry P., (2016), Photographie statistique des accidents du travail, des accidents de trajet et des maladies professionnelles en France selon le sexe entre 2001 et 2015, Anact, March, 16 p.

• Crenshaw K., (1989), ‘Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique and anti-discrimination doctrine, feminist theories and antiracist policies’, University of Chicago Legal Forum, pp. 139–167.

• Davaki K., Marzo C., Narminio E., Arvanitidou M., (2013), Discrimination generated by intersection of gender and disability, Directorate General for Internal Policies, Policy Department C - Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament, 96 p.

• Defender of Rights, (2017), 10è barometre de la perception des discriminations dans l’emploi, March.

• Fredman S., (2016), Intersectional discrimination in EU gender equality and non-discrimination law, European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, European Commission, Directorate General for Justice and Consumers, Directorate D — Equality, May, 88 p.

• IMS, Entreprendre pour la cité, (2011), Les stéréotypes sur les personnes handicapées : comprendre et agir dans l’entreprise, April, Practical guide (56 p.) and Study (7 p.), April.

• Kachoukh F., Marnas A., Maguer A., (2011), La discrimination multicritère à l'encontre des femmes immigrées ou issues de l'immigration sur le marché du travail, étude de la Haute autorité de lutte contre les discriminations (Halde), Synthèse, March, 6 p.

• Kachoukh F., (2011), ‘L’ombre portée des assignations identitaires’, Hommes et migrations, 1292, p. 12-23.

• Le Goareger C., Lenoir A., (2016), ‘Le tableau de bord. Emploi et chômage des personnes handicapées’, Chiffres clés et synthèse, Agefiph, no 2016-4, 13 p.

• Lemière S., dir. (2013), L’accès à l’emploi des femmes : une question de politiques…, Ministère des droits des femmes, La documentation française, December, 178 p.

• Maruani M., (2004), ‘Activité, précarité chômage, toujours plus ?’, Revue de l’OFCE, No 3/90, pp. 95–115.

• Pioggi D., (2009), ‘L’approche de genre dans la déconstruction sociale du handicap’, synthèse de la journée, in Saint-Pé M.-C. et Lely S., L’approche de genre dans la déconstruction sociale du handicap, Actes de la journée d’étude à l’Institut international de Recherche-action, 14 juin 2008.

• Ponthieux S., (2013), L’information statistique sexuée dans la statistique publique: état des lieux et pistes de réflexion, Insee, October, 50 p.

• Practhis, (2010), Femmes en situation de handicap et emploi, Pôle de ressources, d’accompagnement et de coordination sur le travail, le handicap et l’insertion socioprofessionnelle, December, 17 p.

Policy Department A: Economic and scientific policy

36 PE 602.067

• Mercat-Bruns M., (2015), ‘Les discriminations multiples et l’identité au travail au croisement des questions d’égalité et de libertés’, Revue de droit du travail, pp. 28–38, January.

• Seuret F., (2015), Pas assez de femmes dans les entreprises adaptées, Faire Face, 8 March.

• Solano, J., (2012–2013), Être femme et handicapée : quel féminisme hors du monde des valides ?, Mémoire sous la direction d'Isabelle Lacoue-Labarthe, Institut d’études politiques de Toulouse, 85 p.

• United Nations, (2006), Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and Optional Protocol, 13 December.

• Velche Dominique, (2001), ‘Les femmes handicapées et le travail’, Actes des journées pour l’Egalité des chances organisées par la Ville de Grenoble.

• Velche D. (2002), ‘Accès à l’emploi en milieu ordinaire: une double discrimination bien connue et peut-être une raison d’espérer’, quoted in Bechrouri et al., 2016, p. 28.

ANNEX II – LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS INTERVIEWED Several stakeholders have been met for the present report. They have greatly contributed to its content and should be thanked for it:

‒ Maudy Piot, President of the FDFA, 6 March 2017;

‒ Clémence Armand, Mission Head in charge of employment and fight against discrimination, Bureau for Gender Equality at Work, Service for Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, General Directorate for Social Cohesion (DGCS), 16 March 2017;

‒ Olivier Leclercq, Confederal secretary, Working life and social dialogue unit, CFDT union, member of the National advisory council of disabled persons (CNCPH), 20 March 2017;

‒ Sarah Benichou, Head of Unit, Department for the Promotion of Equality and Access to Rights;

‒ Marika Demangeon, Disability studies researcher, Department for the Promotion of Equality and Access to Rights, Defender of Rights, co-author of the report on Disabled women’s employment. Exploratory analysis on multiple discriminations, 21 March 2017.

The author of the present report remains of course responsible for its content.

Discrimination and Access to Employment for Female Workers with Disabilities

PE 602.067 37

ANNEX III – GOOD PRACTICE FICHE – Digital House in Paris Name/title of the practice/initiative Digital house in Paris Name of the responsible body for implementation

Women to tell, women to act, FDFA (NGO)

Type of instrument/intervention Training and job-search support for disabled women through computer workshops for digital education and training.

Period of implementation Inaugurated in November 2016, ongoing

Level and/or sector of implementation The Orange Foundation developed 118 Digital houses across the world. The Paris Digital House managed by the FDFA is the 25th digital house in France

Main goals and expected results The main goal is to promote job-search support and digital training for disabled women having difficulties of access to employment

Main actors involved Funder: Orange foundation (Foundation Orange); Orange is a French telecommunication company Manager: FDFA, a disabled women’s association

Short description of the policy/strategy

Digital houses aim to promote women’s digital training, providing them (notably unskilled women) with job-search support or retraining, or help them to access paid employment

Main target groups Disabled women, members of the NGO FDFA

Activities

The Paris Digital House is located in the premises of the NGO FDFA. Workshops take place twice a month

Other relevant aspects

Teachers are volunteers, employees of the Orange telecom company Free job-search and training programmes have to last at least six months, eventually one year

Financial coverage

The Orange Foundation gave a subsidy of EUR 12 000 to the FDFA in order to finance the necessary (hardware and software) equipment for the workshop, as well as the refurbishment of premises dedicated to work-search support, beauty and well-being

Main results/achievements to date according to available monitoring/evaluations Impossible to tell

Achievements in gender mainstreaming Impossible to tell

Innovative elements

The innovative element might be the digital dimension of job-search support and training that according to the President of the FDFA, Maudy Piot, represent an ‘opening to the outside world’ Another innovative element is that the workshop is located in the same premises as the crisis line for disabled women victims of violence (Ecoute violences femmes handicapées), so that they can benefit from the digital house

Reproducibility/transferability elements

Digital houses exist in several countries but are not all dedicated to disabled women – the usual target being unskilled precarious women

Sustainability [Specify the project sustainability and its fund-raising possibilities, etc.]

Unknown

Lessons learnt Impossible to tell

Additional comments (if any) Sources: https://www.fondationorange.com/Le-programme-Maisons-Digitales-agir-pour-l-autonomie-des-femmes; http://www.leparisien.fr/paris-75015/paris-une-maison-digitale-pour-guider-les-femmes-handicapees-vers-l-emploi-02-01-2017-6516885.php