CAN-ASC-1.1 Standard on employment: Public Review Draft – Annex D (informative) Intersectional accessibility lens

Note: This Annex is not a mandatory part of this Standard.

D.1 Intersectionality

The concept of intersectionality was coined by American legal and critical race expert Kimberlé Crenshaw in the late 1980s to explain how race intersects with gender to produce unique barriers for Black women not faced by White women or Black men.

D.2 Defining the core components of an intersectional accessibility lens

An intersectional accessibility lens is the analytical framework that starts with/ centres experiences of people with (a) disability(ies). This analytical framework is used to examine the complex, cumulative ways multiple forms of discrimination and oppression overlap, interact, or intersect.

The following are the core components of an intersectional accessibility lens:

  1. Various grounds of discrimination that may be included in an intersectional analysis may include, but are not limited to:
    1. ableism,
    2. racism,
    3. sexism,
    4. homophobia,
    5. transphobia,
    6. classism, and
    7. ageism, etc.
  2. Cumulative effects of these various types of discrimination produce a unique and distinct form of discrimination and oppression, which may otherwise not be apparent and is different from each separate grounds of discrimination.
  3. Intersectionality is not only about identity. It also considers the historical, social and political context underlying systemic inequities and institutions and the power relationships that shape and affect the experiences of individuals and communities. This results in excluding some people and privileging others.

For example:

  1. A racialized woman with a disability will experience oppression differently than a non-racialized man with a disability. In addition to ableism, a racialized woman with a disability also experiences racism and sexism, whereas a non-racialized man with a disability may experience ableism but have white male privilege.
  2. A blind transgender woman with a learning disability will experience oppression differently than an Indigenous woman with a mobility disability. A blind transgender woman with a learning disability will experience multiple forms of ableism and transphobia, whereas the Indigenous woman with a mobility disability will experience ableism and racism

D.3 Benefits of an intersectional accessibility lens

At the individual and organizational level, the organization can:

  1. become more aware of accessibility issues and better understand inequities in the workplace for persons with disabilities with multiple identities, from accessing the workplace and in the workplace;
  2. have an inclusive, positive, and respectful work environment;
  3. identify how initiatives could be tailored to be inclusive of people with disabilities;
  4. incorporate diverse perspectives of people with disabilities to strengthen the capacity of work teams;
  5. recruit and retain workers who are representative of the communities;
  6. develop and provide better results in services and programs that are responsive to all clients and communities; and
  7. identify and address systemic barriers and inequities in accessing and benefitting from the initiative.

Adopted from:  City of Ottawa and City for All Women Initiative, “Equity and Inclusion Lens Handbook.” Version 2018. Expanded from page 6.

Adopted from: Introduction to GBA Plus - Women and Gender Equality Canada

D.4 Questions

Questions to ask at outset:

  1. How does each element or stage (development, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation) of an initiative, policy, program, procedure, process, or service affect persons with disabilities in general? As a manager? As a worker?
  2. Next, how does it affect diverse disabilities and diverse identities, such as for:
    1. persons with multiple disabilities?
    2. women with disabilities?
    3. Indigenous persons with disabilities? (First Nations, Inuit, Metis)
    4. racialized people with disabilities? (Black, South Asian, Chinese, etc.)
    5. LGBTQ2+ people with disabilities?
    6. Muslims and other religious minorities with disabilities?
    7. etc.
  3. Taking a whole person approach which enables full and equitable participation of all workers by examining answers to the following questions:
    1. Are diverse disabilities and diverse identities represented and involved throughout all processes from planning to implementation, including in the decision-making process?
    2. What could be contributing to that exclusion?
    3. Who is important to be brought into the process in a meaningful way?
  4. In asking these questions, do my experiences, biases, and assumptions limit my understanding of the impact on people with disabilities in general and specifically people with multiple disabilities and diverse identities?