I raise a serious matter brought to me by a constituent, a disabled woman who was in receipt of the employment support scheme. This support was fundamental. It enabled her to carry out her role, be productive and build a career on an equal basis with others. On the basis that this support was in place, she made the major decision to progress her career. Like any other employee, she successfully convinced a new employer that she should take on a more senior management role. She did so in good faith with the reasonable expectation that the employment support which enabled her to perform her role would continue with her just as her skills, experience and qualifications did and indeed do for every other worker. She was shocked to discover this support would not transfer with her and would not be available to her new employer. This happened during the probation period where performance, productivity and the ability to carry out core tasks under heightened scrutiny are required. The removal of this support placed her in an impossible position. She now feels being unable to meet productivity expectations, not because of inability or incompetence but because the reasonable support that enabled her to do the job has been withdrawn. In effect, she is being penalised for ambition. Remaining in her previous role would have preserved her support. Her decision to progress her career has resulted in its removal. This places her at a significant disadvantage compared with her non-disabled peers and amounts to discrimination in practice. Article 27 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities requires prohibition of discrimination in all matters concerning employment and obliges states to ensure reasonable accommodation and adopt measures that enable disabled people to enter, remain and progress in employment. The employment support scheme is such a measure. It directly enables her to work and develop a career on an equal basis with others. Replacing it with a wage subsidy scheme does little or nothing to support career progression at middle or senior management levels where success depends on personal supports for the employee rather wage subsidies to employers. I ask that the removal of this scheme from those who currently avail of it and wish to progress their careers be reviewed in light of the principles of providing reasonable accommodation, expectations, obligations under the employment equality Act, the commitment of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the employment pillar of the equality and disability strategy.

Sentiment score: 0.41

I thank the Minister for his update. The maximum rate under the wage subsidy scheme is 50% of the minimum wage. State policy tells employers that disabled people can only work at entry level. We should come at it from the other side and build capacity and value by creating a pathway for those with a disability to progress to the highest levels they can attain which is important for those people. The core issue is that the new wage subsidy scheme is framed in terms of compensating an employer for an employee's perceived lack of ability. That is not empowerment, it is charity. The employment support scheme supports those with a disability to do a job to the fullest and has never been about a defect but about enabling people to contribute on an equal basis with others. The resources it has provided to this woman have allowed her to perform to the highest standard. This benefits her, her employers, her colleagues and wider society, which is very important for people with disabilities.

Sentiment score: 0.29