Re: Ethical Code?

February 7, 2003

On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Mr_ <mrsmith_1956@...> wrote:

> Well, I have " raised my ugly head " enough for now. I will go back

> into that dark cave where I abide and wait for the next unexpecting

> victim to wander unwaringly before me. Until then, farewell.

Thank you, Shelob!

Seriously, I agree with you wholeheartedly, Maurice. The need for

developing a " Code of Ethics " (which, by the way, is COMPLETELY the wrong

name for what is being proposed) is highly questionable. Here is why:

- Equal Employment Opportunity, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and a

number of other legal structures already cover most of the challenges

being discussed. I suggest that people who are lobbying for LPA to develop

a " Guide to Dealing with Little People " instead use that energy to educate

themselves on these laws and discover how much power they give you to

solve these problems on your own. We should not interpret a false need for

such a guide based on a request from one completely and utterly retarded

lawyer.

- Issues like whether an average-sized person should or should not kneel

to eye level to talk with an LP are things we can't even agree on within

our own community. I have heard some LPs say they hate that, yet many

others have no problem with it. Personally, I find it to be a tremendous

gesture of courtesy and respect. The last thing I want is LPA telling the

world " how to treat us " , especially if they're telling people to treat me

the wrong way! We can damn well educate people just fine by ourselves, and

if you haven't already learned how to do it, by golly you better start.

For the love of Mike, please let's at least change the name of this

proposed little person instruction manual from " Code of Ethics " to

something more logical, like:

- Proper Care and Handling of Little People

- The Human Resources Guide to Dealing with the Incredibly Short

- Midgets For Dummies

- How to Manage a Dwarf (Without Losing a Knee)

- Codpieces for Head-Patters

As Maurice said, a Code of Ethics implies OUR behavior, not the behavior

of others. An LPA Code of Ethics would contain such rules as:

- Thou shalt not kick the tall in the shin, or punch them in the balls.

- Thou shalt avert thine eyes in the presence of a short-skirted hottie.

- Thou shalt not enter limbo contests without advanced, written approval.

- When asked by children why you are so short, thou shalt not reply

" because I ate too many vegetables when I was a kid " .

I'm sorry. I'm obviously getting a bit carried away, but the bottom line

is that I just don't think the idea being discussed is really necessary.

- Dave

February 7, 2003

-Thou shalt not make thy fellow dwarf spit coke out through her nose

(it's not ladylike)

You two are a pair!!!! Good ones.

>

> > Well, I have " raised my ugly head " enough for now. I will go back

> > into that dark cave where I abide and wait for the next

unexpecting

> > victim to wander unwaringly before me. Until then, farewell.

>

> Thank you, Shelob!

>

> Seriously, I agree with you wholeheartedly, Maurice. The need for

> developing a " Code of Ethics " (which, by the way, is COMPLETELY the

wrong

> name for what is being proposed) is highly questionable. Here is

why:

>

> - Equal Employment Opportunity, the Americans with Disabilities Act,

and a

> number of other legal structures already cover most of the

challenges

> being discussed. I suggest that people who are lobbying for LPA to

develop

> a " Guide to Dealing with Little People " instead use that energy to

educate

> themselves on these laws and discover how much power they give you

to

> solve these problems on your own. We should not interpret a false

need for

> such a guide based on a request from one completely and utterly

retarded

> lawyer.

>

> - Issues like whether an average-sized person should or should not

kneel

> to eye level to talk with an LP are things we can't even agree on

within

> our own community. I have heard some LPs say they hate that, yet

many

> others have no problem with it. Personally, I find it to be a

tremendous

> gesture of courtesy and respect. The last thing I want is LPA

telling the

> world " how to treat us " , especially if they're telling people to

treat me

> the wrong way! We can damn well educate people just fine by

ourselves, and

> if you haven't already learned how to do it, by golly you better

start.

>

> For the love of Mike, please let's at least change the name of this

> proposed little person instruction manual from " Code of Ethics " to

> something more logical, like:

>

> - Proper Care and Handling of Little People

> - The Human Resources Guide to Dealing with the Incredibly Short

> - Midgets For Dummies

> - How to Manage a Dwarf (Without Losing a Knee)

> - Codpieces for Head-Patters

>

> As Maurice said, a Code of Ethics implies OUR behavior, not the

behavior

> of others. An LPA Code of Ethics would contain such rules as:

>

> - Thou shalt not kick the tall in the shin, or punch them in the

balls.

> - Thou shalt avert thine eyes in the presence of a short-skirted

hottie.

> - Thou shalt not enter limbo contests without advanced, written

approval.

> - When asked by children why you are so short, thou shalt not reply

> " because I ate too many vegetables when I was a kid " .

>

> I'm sorry. I'm obviously getting a bit carried away, but the bottom

line

> is that I just don't think the idea being discussed is really

necessary.

>

> - Dave

February 7, 2003

Dave B. wrote:

>Seriously, I agree with you wholeheartedly, Maurice. The need for developing a

" Code of Ethics " (which, by the way, is COMPLETELY the wrong name for what is

being proposed) is highly questionable. Here is why:

AMEN! Dave and Maurice are absolutely right!

The ADA already covers this for us. And " code of ethics " is the wrong term.

That applies internally (behavior of members, i.e. the form we sign at

conferences).

Another resource we have at our disposal (in addition to ADA laws) is your state

vocational rehabilitation office. Job hunters who have a disability (LPs

qualify) can sign up for their services. Not only do they help you find a job,

but once you are hired, they will accompany you to the job site to do a survey

to see what barriers need to be removed (i.e. stools at the desk, in the

bathroom), and will work with the company to physically accomodate your needs

(voc rehab pays for some of it, and gets the company to pay for the rest).

Also, voc rehab will do a follow up every few months to see how things are

going, and if the company is out of compliance with ADA laws, they will refer

you to an ADA-knowledgeable attorney who can litigate on your behalf.

Let's not reinvent the wheel, folks.

>- When asked by children why you are so short, thou shalt not reply " because I

ate too many vegetables when I was a kid " .

Hey! Hey stole my line!

-Bill Bradford

February 7, 2003

Three points, just as an average-size person thinking about this:

-- Yes, of course, the ADA covers this. But wouldn't an employer who has

just hired an LP want some pointers on what *specific* steps he or she ought

to consider to comply with the ADA? Access, yes; but what does that mean?

Stools? A specially designed chair? Modifications to the bathroom, the

elevator? What kind of modifications? No harassment, of course. But when you

get into gray areas, what constitutes harassment and what doesn't?

If an LP applies for work at Mc's, is it okay to say " You can't work

the fryolator " ? If I were the manager I would be worried, because though you

could supply a stool, the floors are covered with grease, and an LP's short

arms means she would be leaning over the hot oil farther than I would be

comfortable with. Obviously this is very legalistic and specific -- not the

sort of thing you could easily address in an LPA publication.

-- Which leads to another thought. ADA is a law. Laws are enforced through

the the promulgation of zillions of pages of regulations. Does anyone know

whether the federal government has ever come up with regulations for

applying the ADA as it pertains to LPs? If not, might that be a project for

LPA rather than trying to come up with some publication on our own?

-- Agreed, " Code of Ethics " is absolutely the wrong name for this. That

would be something internal. When I first suggested that *maybe* that's what

the lawyer meant by " Code of Ethics, " I didn't mean to suggest he was using

the phrase correctly!

Dan

On 2/7/03 8:52 PM, " Bradford " <tslug@...> wrote:

> Dave B. wrote:

>

>> Seriously, I agree with you wholeheartedly, Maurice. The need for developing

>> a " Code of Ethics " (which, by the way, is COMPLETELY the wrong name for what

>> is being proposed) is highly questionable. Here is why:

>

> AMEN! Dave and Maurice are absolutely right!

>

> The ADA already covers this for us. And " code of ethics " is the wrong term.

> That applies internally (behavior of members, i.e. the form we sign at

> conferences).

>

> Another resource we have at our disposal (in addition to ADA laws) is your

> state vocational rehabilitation office. Job hunters who have a disability

> (LPs qualify) can sign up for their services. Not only do they help you find

> a job, but once you are hired, they will accompany you to the job site to do a

> survey to see what barriers need to be removed (i.e. stools at the desk, in

> the bathroom), and will work with the company to physically accomodate your

> needs (voc rehab pays for some of it, and gets the company to pay for the

> rest). Also, voc rehab will do a follow up every few months to see how things

> are going, and if the company is out of compliance with ADA laws, they will

> refer you to an ADA-knowledgeable attorney who can litigate on your behalf.

>

> Let's not reinvent the wheel, folks.

>

>> - When asked by children why you are so short, thou shalt not reply " because

>> I ate too many vegetables when I was a kid " .

>

> Hey! Hey stole my line!

>

> -Bill Bradford

February 8, 2003

**** snip from Dave's email ****

Seriously, I agree with you wholeheartedly, Maurice. The need for

developing a " Code of Ethics " (which, by the way, is COMPLETELY the

wrong

name for what is being proposed) is highly questionable. Here is why:

**** end snip ****

Dave-- Are you arguing the correct title for this, or the need for such

a 'list' to be created in the first place? OR BOTH?

I'll concede that the term " code of ethics " is the wrong title (see my

previous email)... However I'll gladly debate the need for such a

'guide'. I like Helens suggestion of 'Awareness guide'. I see a very

broad use and value for something along these lines.

I'll also concede (again, see my previous email) that it's unlikely we

could ever agree on any of it, as no two LP's seem to have the same take

on how they want to be treated. That's fine because that might be the

first code- 1) " When speaking to the media, always speak on YOUR OWN

BEHALF, never elude that you represent all folks of short stature " .

Dave, you know this is a real issue that has been discussed in Board

meetings. I also agree that LPA (as an organization) has no right to

represent it's self as the authority on what LP " s like or dislike or how

as individual (regardless if member or not) they want to be treated.

But here is why this exercise of collecting ideas in this capacity I

believe is important. We, the elected officers/representatives of LPA,

are obliged to seek better understanding of our members and their needs,

particularly as it relates to public awareness.

Here's what on my mind....

We often see LP's interviewed on various media outlets. It was brought

up by one of the district directors last year in SLC " Does LPA have an

official media guide that represents the best cross section of LP's " ??

The answer? NO! The VP of PR is free to speak on behalf of LP's and

LPA and answer whatever questions are asked according to their best

intentions. I recall that this particular District Director was

appalled that someone could speak out on behalf of us all WITHOUT ANY

DOCUMENTED GUIDANCE.

Furthermore, We as an organization (in response to many, many concerns

of the negative public perceptions) have recently announced a " community

outreach program. The purpose of this program is to educate the public

about Lp's and dwarfism in general. One of the methods being seriously

considered for this program is to go into schools and speak to children.

I can also easily see a media talk show blitz that would attempt the

same objectives.

(see 2002 Annual Report for summary of this program).

Can you imagine the inconsistency of message that will result if we

don't boil the ocean and discover those common denominators of message?

If we start sending " official " communities outreach people, out to help

enlighten the public about what LP's are about -- I think a consistent

and reasonably common guide might be a good idea.

I've done a number of media interviews both before and during my term as

President. I often have my own personal opinions that are very

different than the (perceived) majority of LP's. I feel though-- a

responsibility while answering questions to put my own personal opinions

aside. For example I personally don't mind the term Midget-- But I

respect the majority. I usually state in interviews that LP's are as

different as can be, and I don't profess to be able to answer on behalf

of all lp's so I' can only offer MY personal opinion. I do go on to say

that the word Midget is generally considered offensive. Because I heard

a rumor that that was true.??

When people-- whether media folks, airport staff (I was asked by PDX to

give their staff 'sensitivity training specifically on the issues faced

by LP's) public school administrators, church clergy or whomever cares

to make themselves more aware of the specific issues and political

correctness (I hate that term) of LP's.

I think LPA should attempt to provide that sort of guidance. I believe

we can word these items in such a manner that is most accepting to us

all.

I think Betty's email says it all!!

Respectfully seeing it differently than you, but still loving you anyway

Matt

P.S.

I just noticed you already used your 3rd post of the day-- na, na, na..

You'll have to wait until midnight to get-me-back publicly..

P.S.S. I rolled on the floor laughing at your email with the samples

codes.

I added most of them to the master list.

P.S.S.S -- Now I'm really going outside to farm a bit.

February 9, 2003

On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Matt Roloff wrote:

> When people-- whether media folks, airport staff (I was asked by PDX to

> give their staff 'sensitivity training specifically on the issues faced

> by LP's) public school administrators, church clergy or whomever cares

> to make themselves more aware of the specific issues and political

> correctness (I hate that term) of LP's.

I agree with the need for a media guide. If there are things that can be

identified that are legitimate " political correctness " issues, and there

is very little disagreement on those points, then they could be included

in such a guide.

But no-one likes to be stereotyped, especially members of a minority like

ours. My primary concern is with the danger of creating very broad and

inaccurate generalizations about little people that a) not all little

people agree with, and cause problems for little people in certain

situations like obtaining employment.

ly, and as someone who is working hard to obtain new employment as we

speak, I would rather get hired first, and deal with the accommodation

issue after the fact. I work in an industry where my mind and my

experience is what an potential employer should be focussing on, not my

disability, and whether they are going to have to buy 3 stools for me if

they hire me. I don't want anything getting in the way of me getting the

job. I mean, sure, legally they cannot use the added expense of 3 stools

as a reason to disqualify me, but if the decision is being made solely by

one person, how can you ever prove why he/she REALLY didn't hire you.

Before I am hired, if the person should get ahold copy of Midgets For

Dummies and learns that we use a lot of step stools, it might cause

him/her to wonder " what else am I going to have to do if I hire this guy " ,

and cause them to pick someone else who doesn't present any accommodation

worries.

To me, accommodation in the workplace is a VERY MINOR issue, and one that

I am very used to solving on my own. And I want to KEEP it a minor issue.

It SHOULD be a minor issue. And if I get the job before they start

thinking about how to accommodate me, it will REMAIN a minor issue,

because then they cannot legally fire me over the need to buy step stools.

But if they are put off by unexpected accommodation requirements BEFORE

they hire me, I am screwed before I even have a chance to prove myself.

This whole thing got started by someone suggesting a guide to tell

employers how to accommodate an LP in the workplace. That particular

arena, the arena of obtaining employment, is my primary concern. I am not

at all opposed to a media guide, or a guide for schools and churches. So I

just want us to be clear on what type of guide we are talking about, and

whether its purpose should include workplace accommodation, and how it

might affect someone getting a job. Like I say, it is a double-edged

sword. It might help, but it could hurt too, unless it is written and

purposed properly. And I maintain that I don't think the employment piece

of it is really even necessary, what with existing ADA regulations and

such. Let's not set out with good intentions and accidentally create

ammunition for potential employers to shoot us down with.

--

Bradford

Information Services Director, LPA, Inc.

Home: (503) 203-1043

Cell: (503) 341-9519

February 10, 2003

-ly, and as someone who is working hard to obtain new employment

as we

speak, I would rather get hired first, and deal with the accommodation

issue after the fact. I work in an industry where my mind and my

experience is what an potential employer should be focussing on, not

my

disability, and whether they are going to have to buy 3 stools for me

if

they hire me. I don't want anything getting in the way of me getting

the

job. I mean, sure, legally they cannot use the added expense of 3

stools

as a reason to disqualify me, but if the decision is being made

solely by

one person, how can you ever prove why he/she REALLY didn't hire you.

Before I am hired, if the person should get ahold copy of Midgets For

Dummies and learns that we use a lot of step stools, it might cause

him/her to wonder " what else am I going to have to do if I hire this

guy " ,

and cause them to pick someone else who doesn't present any

accommodation

worries.

- I actually agree with on this issue. Whenever I go into an

interview, I want the focus to be on my experience, my attributes, my

knowledge, and my personality. I would rather discuss accomodations,

if there is any need, after I am offered the position. Also, I enjoy

the first expressions the person exhibits when I meet them for the

first time.. If its a shocked expression, then it allows me to work

harder to impress this person and show them why I am right for the

job. .

-I mean, sure, legally they cannot use the added expense of 3 stools

as a reason to disqualify me, but if the decision is being made

solely by

one person, how can you ever prove why he/she REALLY didn't hire you

You can't prove it and why would you want to? To work for an

insensitive employer? No thank you!

February 10, 2003

Oh boy! Here I go again-- Can't keep my mouth shut. It must be that

second glass of Oregon Merlot I'm half way through.

I've been trying hard to stay quite on saying any more on this crazy

topic, but I'm struggling to understand the rationale behind the

thinking I keep reading. I seek to better understand.

Are all the folks (that are arguing against a " guide " ), saying you're

looking for jobs and don't want a potential employers knowing anything

about dwarfism because it might scare them off?? Nobody is saying that

LPA inc. will 'discover' you're applying somewhere and, using CIA

intelligence, quickly put one of these 'guides' in the mail to ruin your

employment prospects. I can't even imagine LPA ever even considering

sending these out proactively to all employers in the world. That would

be prohibitively expensive. I don't even see the primary purpose of the

" guide " for employment matters in the first place. I see it much more

generically.

However, in regard to the employment aspects of this potential 'guide'

-- I really want to better understand the opposition's resistance to

that purpose. I see this 'guide' as a relief via education, for

employers, not a laundry list of unreasonable demands.

My own personal experience....

I've NEVER been awarded a job offer without giving my potential employer

a full briefing/education on dwarfism and why Little People make such

unique and valuable employees!! That may sound unfortunate to many of

you. But the types of jobs I seek, I fully believe I'll score a better

deal ($$, options and benefits wise) if I offer that information up

front, and not chance any misunderstandings or mis-conceptions about my

abilities/limitations. I fully realize that everybody has their own

ways on finding employment and sharing whatever details you want in an

interview is personal preference. I'm not arguing that in the least! I

don't see this " guide " forced on anyone to utilize. You can tell your

interviewer whatever you want. You can use whatever tools you have in

your own arsenal to win the job. Some of us might find this 'guide' a

less in-you-face method to effectively remove fears and uncertainties

about dwarfism. Others may not need it or use it at all.

Aren't employers more afraid of the unknown then the known??

The ones that have hired me seem to be--- Until I voluntarily offer

details about being a dwarf they don't always seem very comfortable.

Suddenly, once they know it's 'only a stool in the restroom', or

whatever I may share with them. Once they see I'm comfortable talking

openly about what I might require, I can see their body relax. Prior to

that-- their imaginations seem to run wild on what I 'might' demand

after being hired, and the fear of themselves using in-proper

terminology etc.

The big picture...

What if employers (in general) WERE educated that lp's are actually the

least 'needy' of many disabilities? They might see hiring an LP as the

most economical way to avoid any ADA based discrimination charges.??

What would our members think if the National Headquarters was suddenly

flooded with dozen of legitimate requests from companies seeking to

employ an LP', simply because the fear of the unknown was suddenly

relieved by a few simple facts! What if LPA's current unemployment

rate was to drop by 20%?? ***another sip of Merlot***

Is it possible that LPA could become more that just a 'party club' and

actually provide a constructive job reference program for professional

careers specifically fostered by a LPA employment advocacy team?

I know some of you don't need any help-- But others might?

Just more flame for the seemingly dying fire..

Matt

P.S. Keep those great suggestions coming, they're all going into a giant

cooker in the blue sky.

February 11, 2003

*Maybe because we should spend more time concentrating on the ADA

which carries some weight behind it.

*Maybe because we are such a diverse population, with a variety of

needs that this document will turn into a mini-bible. (perhaps we can

carry it around of the harddrive of the laptop mini-me markets -sorry,

I couldn't help it)

*Maybe because some folks don't need to be handed another crutch.

What's that " feed them.....teach them to fish........ " . It is very

hard to judge why you weren't hired. The of 20something years

would have a different perspective of the of 40mumble years.

Education and " skills " make a difference and can smooth out that rocky

road towards employment.

*Maybe because a workshop on " How to get your act together for an

interview " might be more productive than " How to get the interviewer

up to speed on LPs and their ways " .

Mind you I've had only 3 jobs in my lifetime but I've encountered a

variety of people in these positions and when out on interviews.

(Working at a University allows you a multitude of encounters every

single day.) I keep thinking of the woman who patted me on the head

after my interview was over, the faculty member who stated after years

of not running into me " I see you're still short " , and the young male

student in a class who could not see why " midget jokes " were harmful.

Would a pamphlet helped any of them?

I wish I had been older and better able to handle the situation

" myself " at that interview, and/but I realize I don't need to work for

someone that thoughtless. I doubt I would have handed her anything

after that. The faculty member was untrainable (believe me people

tried), he basically was 'encouraged' to retire, one situation where

education wasn't enough. I have a theory on what Ph.D. stand for. And

I spent a lot of time dealing with that young man, the entire

classroom was troubled by our discussion. I realized that no matter

how I personalized it, he didn't get it. A " midgets for morons "

wouldn't have helped either. But, one day, when he experiences a

personal incident which drives my points home, he will remember our

conversation. Doubt he would have remembered a pamphlet, he would have

dropped it off in the same recepticle I file religious material.

Matt, what about sharing the wine!!

(who's beginning to believe she lives a good life if she doesn't need

all of this assistance)

>

> Oh boy! Here I go again-- Can't keep my mouth shut. It must be

that

> second glass of Oregon Merlot I'm half way through.

>

> I've been trying hard to stay quite on saying any more on this crazy

> topic, but I'm struggling to understand the rationale behind the

> thinking I keep reading. I seek to better understand.

>

> Are all the folks (that are arguing against a " guide " ), saying

you're

> looking for jobs and don't want a potential employers knowing

anything

> about dwarfism because it might scare them off?? Nobody is saying

that

> LPA inc. will 'discover' you're applying somewhere and, using CIA

> intelligence, quickly put one of these 'guides' in the mail to ruin

your

> employment prospects. I can't even imagine LPA ever even

considering

> sending these out proactively to all employers in the world. That

would

> be prohibitively expensive. I don't even see the primary purpose of

the

> " guide " for employment matters in the first place. I see it much

more

> generically.

>

> However, in regard to the employment aspects of this potential

'guide'

> -- I really want to better understand the opposition's resistance to

> that purpose. I see this 'guide' as a relief via education, for

> employers, not a laundry list of unreasonable demands.

>

> My own personal experience....

>

> I've NEVER been awarded a job offer without giving my potential

employer

> a full briefing/education on dwarfism and why Little People make

such

> unique and valuable employees!! That may sound unfortunate to many

of

> you. But the types of jobs I seek, I fully believe I'll score a

better

> deal ($$, options and benefits wise) if I offer that information up

> front, and not chance any misunderstandings or mis-conceptions about

my

> abilities/limitations. I fully realize that everybody has their own

> ways on finding employment and sharing whatever details you want in

an

> interview is personal preference. I'm not arguing that in the least!

I

> don't see this " guide " forced on anyone to utilize. You can tell

your

> interviewer whatever you want. You can use whatever tools you have

in

> your own arsenal to win the job. Some of us might find this 'guide'

a

> less in-you-face method to effectively remove fears and

uncertainties

> about dwarfism. Others may not need it or use it at all.

>

> Aren't employers more afraid of the unknown then the known??

>

> The ones that have hired me seem to be--- Until I voluntarily offer

> details about being a dwarf they don't always seem very comfortable.

> Suddenly, once they know it's 'only a stool in the restroom', or

> whatever I may share with them. Once they see I'm comfortable

talking

> openly about what I might require, I can see their body relax.

Prior to

> that-- their imaginations seem to run wild on what I 'might' demand

> after being hired, and the fear of themselves using in-proper

> terminology etc.

>

> The big picture...

>

> What if employers (in general) WERE educated that lp's are actually

the

> least 'needy' of many disabilities? They might see hiring an LP as

the

> most economical way to avoid any ADA based discrimination charges.??

>

> What would our members think if the National Headquarters was

suddenly

> flooded with dozen of legitimate requests from companies seeking to

> employ an LP', simply because the fear of the unknown was suddenly

> relieved by a few simple facts! What if LPA's current unemployment

> rate was to drop by 20%?? ***another sip of Merlot***

>

> Is it possible that LPA could become more that just a 'party club'

and

> actually provide a constructive job reference program for

professional

> careers specifically fostered by a LPA employment advocacy team?

> I know some of you don't need any help-- But others might?

>

> Just more flame for the seemingly dying fire..

>

> Matt

>

> P.S. Keep those great suggestions coming, they're all going into a

giant

> cooker in the blue sky.

February 11, 2003

On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Matt Roloff wrote:

> However, in regard to the employment aspects of this potential 'guide'

> -- I really want to better understand the opposition's resistance to

> that purpose. I see this 'guide' as a relief via education, for

> employers, not a laundry list of unreasonable demands.

I was hired in my first job just a couple of years before the ADA was

enacted. A couple years later, when my company's HR department was

notified of their duty to comply with the ADA, they scheduled a meeting

with me to discuss whether there was anything they could do to further

accommodate me (fortunately, there wasn't, as I had a good working

relationship with my department and they'd already solved all my

accommodation issues). But the overture was welcomed, and it showed that

the ADA was working.

My point is that the ADA already satisfactorily facilitates accommodation

via direct communication. The ADA encourages employers and employees to

communicate directly with each other to solve problems. This is by far the

best way. A " guide book " is not only NOT going to completely address an

employee's specific unique needs, (i.e. we all have different needs), it

may reduce, or interfere with, direct communication and the opportunity to

establish a better working relationship with the non-disabled.

But don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying such a booklet is worthless.

I'm saying that specifically with regards to employment, direct

communication is a) much, much better, has always worked perfectly for

me, and c) is already encouraged via the ADA.

In other situations -- school, church, media relations -- a guide book

makes a lot more sense. Let's target such a book at those areas. Then if

someone wants to give such a book to their employer instead, sure, why

not. It's their choice. I'm just saying let's not " purpose " the book as an

employment guide.

> I've NEVER been awarded a job offer without giving my potential employer

> a full briefing/education on dwarfism and why Little People make such

> unique and valuable employees!!

Hey, if you are able to " sell " your dwarfism as a bonus to your employer,

more power to you. Personally, my dwarfism is totally unrelated to my

employment qualifications, and that's the way I want to keep it. Just as I

don't want to be denied a job just because I'm a dwarf, neither do I want

to get one just for that reason.

--

Bradford

Information Services Director, LPA, Inc.

Home: (503) 203-1043

Cell: (503) 341-9519

February 11, 2003

Dave,

I completely agree with everything you just said!!

....we can put this conversation to bed!

This guide-- IF we ever did it?? Should NOT specifically address