Implementation of the Employment Standard: Part 1

WEBVTT

1
00:00:04.059 --> 00:00:10.160
Dan Samosh: Hello, everyone. Welcome to our idea. Social innovation lab, Webinar series.

2
00:00:10.360 --> 00:00:21.980
Dan Samosh: Today we have the second of 3 sessions on the accessible standards, Canada standard on employment and the implementation guidance that goes along with that standard.

3
00:00:21.980 --> 00:00:42.309
Dan Samosh: So our 1st session was on introducing the standard, and this one is about the implementation of the standard and practical guidance for parties within the workplace for our session we do have captions available, and we also have French interpretation. So please use those, if you need.

4
00:00:42.310 --> 00:00:52.030
Dan Samosh: The session will also be recorded and posted online at our idea website. And we'll also be sharing slides there as well.

5
00:00:52.190 --> 00:01:21.109
Dan Samosh: For today our speakers, we have a few of them will share a short presentation on the standard and practical guidance, and then from there we'll get into a discussion about that guidance. If you do have any questions, please, as always use the Q&A. Function, and hopefully, we'll be able to get to your questions. If we don't have enough time, please send us an email with those questions, too, because we'll try to get to the speakers so that you can have your questions answered at some point, if not during our 1 h session today.

6
00:01:21.280 --> 00:01:45.610
Dan Samosh: But without further ado. We have 3 speakers today. Our 1st speaker is Rebecca Gowertz Rebecca Gortz. Dr. Gortz is an associate professor of rehab sciences at Mcmaster, and one of the co-leads of idea. We also have Matt Freeman, Assistant clinical professor at Mcmaster University, and we have Dr. Mahari Osukai, who chaired the technical committee for the Employment standard. So I will turn it to you. Rebecca.

7
00:01:47.670 --> 00:01:59.439
Rebecca Gewurtz: Thank you so much. So hopefully, everybody can hear me. And my volume's okay. So today, we're going to be talking about

8
00:02:00.080 --> 00:02:15.890
Rebecca Gewurtz: employment accessibility, a practical guide for workplace parties, which is an implementation guide for the the new Asc standards in employment. And

9
00:02:16.120 --> 00:02:35.660
Rebecca Gewurtz: and this is an implementation guide that's being developed through inclusive design for employment access idea, the idea initiative. So I'll introduce everybody involved in this process. Perhaps, as the starting point in the next slide.

10
00:02:37.250 --> 00:02:50.879
Rebecca Gewurtz: so our implementation guide team, we have a fantastic and diverse team that's made up of people with lived experience of disability researchers.

11
00:02:50.910 --> 00:03:13.340
Rebecca Gewurtz: consultants, but also important to indicate that we have people who were part of the technical committee for the Employment Standard Development, including the chair. Mahadio Sukai and I believe, Vice Chair, Andy Livingston, as well as members of the

12
00:03:13.810 --> 00:03:41.179
Rebecca Gewurtz: the Committee, Emil Tompa. So also on our Implementation Guide Development Team includes Andrew Dixon, who's a research associate with idea. Dilsham Fernando, also a research associate with idea, Peter Field, an accessibility and inclusion. Consultant Matt Freeman, who's an assistant clinical professor

13
00:03:41.260 --> 00:03:56.240
Rebecca Gewurtz: at Mcmaster University myself, who I'm the director of idea, but also associate professor at Mcmaster, and, as mentioned, Andy Livingston, Mahario Sukai, and Emil, Tompa

14
00:03:56.240 --> 00:04:21.219
Rebecca Gewurtz: Andy Livingston is a chief executive officer of dexterity, consulting Mahadio is an educator, executive and researcher and scientist, and Emil Tampa, who is the executive director of idea and a senior scientist at the Institute for Work and Health. So we have a very diverse team that I think

15
00:04:21.220 --> 00:04:30.640
Rebecca Gewurtz: we each bring important perspectives to this idea of, how do we take these standards and support the implementation of the standard?

16
00:04:33.130 --> 00:04:56.250
Rebecca Gewurtz: yeah. And so I've already mentioned this. Our project team includes accessibility experts from different disciplines. Some who are persons with lived experience of disability, I would say, we all have. We all come to this work from very important perspectives. We include policy advisors, system thinkers, academics, and consultants.

17
00:04:56.812 --> 00:05:09.209
Rebecca Gewurtz: And several of the team members were on the employment Standard Technical Committee, and I believe I already highlighted some of the people who were on that committee.

18
00:05:11.470 --> 00:05:34.390
Rebecca Gewurtz: So this is really meant to be review. I think many people on the line can already relate to this and the labor market realities of persons with disabilities. But just to reiterate that in Canada only 47.1% of persons with disabilities were employed in 2023, and this compares with

19
00:05:34.430 --> 00:05:54.850
Rebecca Gewurtz: 66.9 for people without disabilities. So that's a stark difference that you know, we believe we can really reduce that the difference between the opportunities for people with disabilities and those without disabilities, by

20
00:05:54.850 --> 00:06:18.260
Rebecca Gewurtz: creating more inclusive workplaces. And so the unemployment rates for people with disabilities are 7.6% compared to 4.6% among the rest of the population. And importantly, because it's not just the rate of employment or rate of unemployment. But the medium wages are also 5.5% lower.

21
00:06:19.180 --> 00:06:43.710
Rebecca Gewurtz: and barriers to employment for people with disabilities continue to exist despite much effort and resources that we've invested in skilling up workers and supporting their employment search efforts and their employability journeys. So traditionally, we've really focused on the disabled job seeker.

22
00:06:43.730 --> 00:07:00.880
Rebecca Gewurtz: And despite those, I would say, decades of effort, you know, we continue to see barriers to employment, and certainly within idea, our focus is really on.

23
00:07:00.880 --> 00:07:22.880
Rebecca Gewurtz: How can we create more inclusive workplaces? And I think these standards really speak to that. Those efforts. So what is really needed is to help employers build their capacity to be inclusive of the diversity of talent in the labor market. And so this is sometimes described as disability confidence.

24
00:07:23.530 --> 00:07:48.510
Rebecca Gewurtz: So that's really why we're doing this. And now a little bit about the employment standards themselves. I believe they were. The the initial version was released in late 2024, I believe in December 2024, and a Revised Version has been released this week by accessibility standards Canada, and is available

25
00:07:48.510 --> 00:07:53.539
Rebecca Gewurtz: for access through the link on this, on the slide here.

26
00:07:54.130 --> 00:08:07.919
Rebecca Gewurtz: And the standard is really about envisioning a work environment that is accessible, inclusive, barrier, free and discrimination free for all workers, including persons with disabilities.

27
00:08:08.040 --> 00:08:30.860
Rebecca Gewurtz: and as I've already alluded to, it draws on a social model of disability, so it promotes removing barriers in the environment and providing accommodations without the need for disclosure. So it really focuses on how you can create a more inclusive workplace

28
00:08:30.920 --> 00:08:58.409
Rebecca Gewurtz: and environments that are what we refer to as inclusive by design, and we can get a bit more into that as as we move into the panel discussion. But that's really our focus is trying to create inclusive work environments that that do not require that formal accommodation process that's inclusive to the diversity of the workplace.

29
00:09:00.518 --> 00:09:06.501
Rebecca Gewurtz: So just a a brief overview of of the

30
00:09:07.230 --> 00:09:29.640
Rebecca Gewurtz: The Standard and and Mahadia walked us through this, I believe in more detail. At the last webinar and our webinars are available through the idea website. But there are 5 core modules or clauses in the standard itself, and this includes Clause 10, which is about structural support policy and leadership.

31
00:09:29.780 --> 00:09:40.460
Rebecca Gewurtz: Clause 11, which is about culture, engagement and education. Clause 12, which is about recruitment, hiring and onboarding

32
00:09:40.570 --> 00:09:45.300
Rebecca Gewurtz: clause 13, which is about retention and career, development

33
00:09:45.460 --> 00:09:53.759
Rebecca Gewurtz: and clause 14, which is about development and maintenance of and of access and accessibility support.

34
00:09:55.040 --> 00:10:19.809
Rebecca Gewurtz: So going to the next slide, just tackling, and what I'll say about that is that when we're developing the implementation guide, we're really trying to map to the standards and the clauses with it. The modules within the standards. So why do we think we need an implementation guide in general standards described

35
00:10:19.810 --> 00:10:38.580
Rebecca Gewurtz: what's required and what an organization needs to have in place to meet expectations, and in this case we just the the standard. The employment standard that's been released describes what an employer needs to do to be an inclusive employer.

36
00:10:39.000 --> 00:11:08.710
Rebecca Gewurtz: and it provides advice on the process to sorry our implementation. Guidance provides advice on the process to achieve the requirements of a standard, so you might have a standard, but you know, an employer who's really focused on running their business may not just may not know how to how to adapt to meet the standard and how to change the way

37
00:11:08.790 --> 00:11:30.939
Rebecca Gewurtz: to make changes in their organization consistent with the standard. So a distinction is sometimes described as the what the standard is the what versus how, which is the implementation? Guidance? And employers who really want to meet the standard might need some support in how to do so.

38
00:11:31.500 --> 00:11:52.030
Rebecca Gewurtz: So an implementation implementing a standard without implementation guidance could be possible, but can be challenging, given, especially given the complexity of of accessibility in the in the workplace and the need to contextualize it.

39
00:11:52.420 --> 00:12:18.870
Rebecca Gewurtz: So the guide we are developing is being designed really to support the implementation of the accessibility standards. Canada employment standard in different contexts, in diverse workplaces. And you know, our goal is really to support the efforts that employers are making to become more inclusive and accessible.

40
00:12:19.364 --> 00:12:32.719
Rebecca Gewurtz: So the process of implementation will vary on the unique circumstances of each organization. And we're writing the implementation guide to meet the needs of diverse workplaces.

41
00:12:35.000 --> 00:12:42.770
Rebecca Gewurtz: So if you recall 2 slides ago, I talked about what the the modules are within

42
00:12:42.770 --> 00:13:06.200
Rebecca Gewurtz: within the standards, and we are covering similar areas within the guide, including developing an employment, accessibility, strategy, creating a new normal through leadership and culture, inclusive recruitment, hiring and onboarding inclusive retention, promotion

43
00:13:06.200 --> 00:13:12.890
Rebecca Gewurtz: and career development, and then creating and maintaining an accessibility, support system.

44
00:13:13.210 --> 00:13:34.970
Rebecca Gewurtz: and the emphasis within the guide is given to measurement, evaluation, and reporting, as well as keeping up with accessibility compliance, because that's what employers really, you know, are often concerned about. So we're really trying to address that as we develop the guide

45
00:13:35.931 --> 00:13:42.549
Rebecca Gewurtz: and so it's grounded in this concept of continual improvement.

46
00:13:42.580 --> 00:14:04.610
Rebecca Gewurtz: And that's a centerpiece of the approach within the guidance document. It's focused on systems change through continual improvement. And for those who, some of you might be very familiar with the continual improvement system, focus and process.

47
00:14:04.610 --> 00:14:13.650
Rebecca Gewurtz: But it is an ongoing effort to refine a particular area of organizational activities through

48
00:14:13.650 --> 00:14:23.149
Rebecca Gewurtz: periodic cycles of reviewing and revising. So typically, there are 4 stages to this cycle.

49
00:14:23.602 --> 00:14:27.670
Rebecca Gewurtz: And it's often known as plan do check act.

50
00:14:27.870 --> 00:14:34.539
Rebecca Gewurtz: So the 1st stage is a plan which is about developing plans and targets.

51
00:14:35.390 --> 00:14:40.450
Rebecca Gewurtz: The second stage is the due stage. It's implementing the plans.

52
00:14:40.890 --> 00:14:58.709
Rebecca Gewurtz: The 3rd stage is measuring and evaluating progress and outcomes. That's the check phase. And then the last phase is acting on findings of about the evaluation to ensure targets are met. So that's the act phase

53
00:15:02.420 --> 00:15:24.080
Rebecca Gewurtz: So I want to acknowledge that the development of this guidance document is happening through inclusive design for employment, access or idea which is supported by generous funding from the government of Canada's new frontiers in Research fund.

54
00:15:24.525 --> 00:15:34.299
Rebecca Gewurtz: So I just want to acknowledge that that's where the funding for this has has come specifically for the guidance, the implementation, guidance.

55
00:15:37.040 --> 00:15:47.649
Rebecca Gewurtz: and I think those are the introductory slides. That sort of set, the the set the stage for our panel discussion.

56
00:15:48.680 --> 00:15:54.669
Dan Samosh: Great. So thank you very much, Rebecca. And just in case, if anyone joined late.

57
00:15:54.990 --> 00:16:23.310
Dan Samosh: Dr. Gowertz gave us an introduction to the implementation, guidance being developed. We have 3 panelists with us today. Those include Dr. Goertz, Dr. Sukai, and Dr. Freeman. So we're going to get into some questions about the implementation guidance. We already have some questions in the Q. And a. If you do have questions for the panelists, please type those into the Q&A function, and we'll hopefully be able to get to them to start. I have a question

58
00:16:23.360 --> 00:16:33.840
Dan Samosh: for Mahadeo, although anyone can can respond to it, and the question is, how long do you think it would take for an organization to implement the standard.

59
00:16:34.910 --> 00:16:58.790
Mahadeo Sukhai: That's a fun question, Dan. Thank you for asking it, and and good morning. Good afternoon, everybody depending on which time zone you're in. So the standard is set up in such a way so that someone can say, You know what I'm going to start by doing everything. For example, in clause 12, which is the the recruitment hiring and onboarding clause, and then circle back to doing other stuff. So

60
00:16:58.920 --> 00:17:08.750
Mahadeo Sukhai: to some degree the standard can be modularized and organizations can can tackle the modules that

61
00:17:08.839 --> 00:17:18.190
Mahadeo Sukhai: that each individual organization feels might be simpler for them, based on what they already have. I think that

62
00:17:18.280 --> 00:17:26.009
Mahadeo Sukhai: I think that the implementation to be clear from my perspective, is.

63
00:17:26.040 --> 00:17:49.400
Mahadeo Sukhai: And this is Mahadio's personal perspective. And that comes from actually serving as an organization's Chief Accessibility officer for 7 years. There's never going to be a finish line, right? So we're never going to completely have a fully accessible by design work environment, because the environment is constantly evolving.

64
00:17:49.650 --> 00:18:18.289
Mahadeo Sukhai: and it needs to constantly evolve through that lens of accessibility by design. So we're always paying attention to it. And so it never finishes. That said, I think, to go through everything in the standard with commitment and intention. It will depend a lot on the size of the company. It will depend a lot on the resources that are put behind it. Right.

65
00:18:18.540 --> 00:18:44.529
Mahadeo Sukhai: you know, if if there's 1 person doing this off the side of their desk. It it's gonna take years. If if somebody actually says I'm gonna make a commitment to reviewing everything that we we currently do and everything that we currently practice and and look at that against the standard it could. It could actually take a lot less time, right? Depending on the size of the operation. So so it it's it's a. It.

66
00:18:44.720 --> 00:18:48.859
Mahadeo Sukhai: Some folks might write in the Q. And A. That's a carefully worded non-answer

67
00:18:49.300 --> 00:19:16.920
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? But I actually think that what I'm saying to you is it very much depends on your context, and very much depends on how much intentionality and effort you wish to put into it upfront. The purpose of the standard is all about accessibility by design in the workplace. So it's all about intentionality and effort upfront. The more of that you put in, the easier it is going to be to do in the long term, and the faster it's going to take you, no matter how big you are.

68
00:19:19.630 --> 00:19:35.730
Dan Samosh: Thank you, and the next question I'll start off by posing it to you, Matt. But anyone in the panel please feel free to answer is, what do you see? Are the benefits of implementing the standard on a voluntary basis?

69
00:19:37.540 --> 00:19:40.180
Matt Freeman: The benefit of implementing the standard

70
00:19:40.842 --> 00:19:43.439
Matt Freeman: on a non-voluntary basis. Is that

71
00:19:43.540 --> 00:20:12.989
Matt Freeman: your your, if your goal is to be an inclusive organization. Then you're really moving forward toward that target. And you're you're doing so and working towards an inclusive environment that that really doesn't. This could be at the forefront of hiring people with disabilities, and we'll have standards and practices that will allow you to to be a leader in the field, and these are

72
00:20:13.590 --> 00:20:16.820
Matt Freeman: often what a leader is is someone who can

73
00:20:16.960 --> 00:20:26.079
Matt Freeman: take voluntary standards and adopt them within their organization without having to be compelled to do so. So I believe that that's 1 of the major

74
00:20:26.450 --> 00:20:46.439
Matt Freeman: major benefits to implementing a voluntary standard. It also, there's also the sense that this is a societal responsibility to be to have an inclusive workplace. So I think, although it's voluntary in terms of implementing within the workplace, there is a need to integrate

75
00:20:46.910 --> 00:20:49.669
Matt Freeman: people with disabilities further into the workplace.

76
00:20:49.820 --> 00:20:56.939
Matt Freeman: So I think that that's a benefit as well. And I I don't know Mohadi or Rebecca, whether you have anything you want to add.

77
00:21:03.900 --> 00:21:08.976
Rebecca Gewurtz: Yeah, maybe I will add that I think.

78
00:21:09.840 --> 00:21:37.209
Rebecca Gewurtz: you know this is a bit of a journey, I would say, is is important to highlight. And so, you know, different organizations are going to go through different processes, and as they pick up the implementation guidance, some may see some some components that can be implemented really readily and easily, without too much effort. These kind of quick wins that will

79
00:21:37.560 --> 00:21:41.865
Rebecca Gewurtz: achieve several things. And that perhaps

80
00:21:43.000 --> 00:21:48.400
Rebecca Gewurtz: They are structures or processes that they were hoping to do

81
00:21:48.710 --> 00:22:09.499
Rebecca Gewurtz: anyways. But they couldn't get buy-in. And maybe you know the fact that it's in the implementation, guidance and part of the standard. They, they might be able to push that forward really easily. And then there's going to be components that take much longer. Things like culture change that can be a slow process that is, is not going to happen right away overnight.

82
00:22:10.051 --> 00:22:19.420
Rebecca Gewurtz: So I think making it voluntary allows organizations to go through that that natural evolution and process

83
00:22:19.420 --> 00:22:37.419
Rebecca Gewurtz: and and sort of figure things out at their own pace, seeing the benefit of it and and and and it it just gives organizations that flexibility to to grow more naturally than you know. Otherwise.

84
00:22:40.090 --> 00:22:42.429
Dan Samosh: Audio. Is there anything you would like to add.

85
00:22:44.440 --> 00:22:51.989
Mahadeo Sukhai: I think I think that the the thing that I would I would probably say

86
00:22:52.110 --> 00:23:09.220
Mahadeo Sukhai: is that is that you know what what different organizations is gonna think, are going to think is is the easiest thing to do. Right? Will definitely vary from entity to entity. But also some things are probably a lot easier

87
00:23:09.220 --> 00:23:23.510
Mahadeo Sukhai: to do then we might give them credit for. And I'm gonna take the employment accessibility strategy as an example of this right. Someone might might take what's written in the standard and say, Wow, you're actually asking me to

88
00:23:23.560 --> 00:23:36.499
Mahadeo Sukhai: completely overhaul every policy I have in my organization. I'm a large organization of a thousand employees, or I'm a, you know, an organization of 10 people, and I'm the one in charge of all the policies you're asking me to review everything

89
00:23:36.650 --> 00:23:40.549
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? And that's a lot of work.

90
00:23:40.980 --> 00:23:46.640
Mahadeo Sukhai: and I don't really understand the point of it. And I don't really understand how it's going to make a difference.

91
00:23:46.860 --> 00:23:51.260
Mahadeo Sukhai: except that you know you think about.

92
00:23:51.700 --> 00:24:11.729
Mahadeo Sukhai: You think about policies, and we write a policy, and every so often the policy gets reviewed and and the policy is reviewed on on a cyclical basis for the most part, and that that's usually an intentional process. Somebody somewhere, especially in large organizations, has a list of policies that has to be reviewed in a given month. Right? And and so so when that review goes on.

93
00:24:11.880 --> 00:24:25.410
Mahadeo Sukhai: then embedding accessibility into the review to make sure that that accessibility and inclusion of all workers, not just workers with disabilities, are embedded within the policy

94
00:24:25.700 --> 00:24:37.390
Mahadeo Sukhai: becomes part of the thought process. Right? So so it's not just. I'm going to read this for grammar and punctuation. And and I'm going to read this to make sure it still applies. It's I'm going to read this and actually think to myself.

95
00:24:37.660 --> 00:24:54.179
Mahadeo Sukhai: how might this impact a worker with a disability? And what do I need to do to change the language in here. Right? And I think I come back to something that that I said 2 weeks ago, which is which is that we we in writing the standard

96
00:24:55.086 --> 00:24:57.470
Mahadeo Sukhai: we asked people to

97
00:24:57.890 --> 00:25:16.719
Mahadeo Sukhai: engage in a mindset change and get away from a reactive accessibility by accommodation process to a proactive accessibility by design process. There's a couple of questions in the chat about who's been consulted in the writing of things, and

98
00:25:16.830 --> 00:25:42.189
Mahadeo Sukhai: the and I've also been asked on a bunch of panels. Are there good examples of people who do accessibility? Well, and I always say to folks who ask me that question that I'm interpreting it in terms of, are there good examples of folks who do accessibility by design? Well, right? And the answer to the 1st question is lots of companies, if you think about it through duty to accommodate. And the answer to the second question is, many fewer folks, because that mindset switch hasn't actually happened as yet.

99
00:25:43.480 --> 00:25:53.840
Mahadeo Sukhai: and so so what I would. What I would really say is is that the implementation guide gets at? What does it take to have that mindset switch happen

100
00:25:53.990 --> 00:26:04.750
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? Which is which is less of an Hr question than you might think it is, and and more of a

101
00:26:05.140 --> 00:26:15.530
Mahadeo Sukhai: an understanding of the intent behind how the standard was constructed, and what are the practicalities of doing it? And you know I come back to that notion that that

102
00:26:15.680 --> 00:26:25.419
Mahadeo Sukhai: the the standard does look overwhelming right? But with with that perspective it it's a lot easier than folks might give it credit for.

103
00:26:26.760 --> 00:26:48.910
Dan Samosh: I think it's especially meaningful. A comment you made earlier in relation to the standard, potentially looking, overwhelming, that organizations can choose to start in one, maybe clause or one component, the areas that make the most sense for them to begin in and then kind of grow from there. And this actually relates to our next question, which start off by posing to you, Matt.

104
00:26:49.060 --> 00:26:54.999
Dan Samosh: is, what kinds of expertise does one need to be able to implement the standard.

105
00:26:56.130 --> 00:26:58.960
Matt Freeman: One of the things that we've tried to do

106
00:26:59.070 --> 00:27:22.909
Matt Freeman: around thinking around the implementation is to recognize that not all enterprises and businesses are are at the same are at the same place, so not every organization has the same level of expertise. So there is when when thinking about the standard, if you read through the standard, you'll see that there's a lot of definitions that are explained. And when we're thinking about implementation.

107
00:27:22.910 --> 00:27:33.310
Matt Freeman: we think about well, what are the terms that need to think about. And then, we we need to think about what's a useful step-by-step process to help people get started

108
00:27:33.450 --> 00:27:42.380
Matt Freeman: with with with the implementation. So one of the components that I'm involved in is the the notion of a disability support

109
00:27:42.440 --> 00:28:09.190
Matt Freeman: system, and who would be a part of those teams. So if we think about smaller organizations where one person might be responsible for a lot of different things, then there, there's not that same level of expertise and really checking in a specific knowledge base. So we we've really tried to make sure that the standard and the implementation of the standard can be accessible to everyone.

110
00:28:12.050 --> 00:28:19.140
Dan Samosh: Thank you and our other panelists, Rebecca and Audio. Let us know if you have anything you want to share there, too.

111
00:28:26.260 --> 00:28:30.430
Dan Samosh: Okay, so our next question is

112
00:28:30.620 --> 00:28:36.489
Dan Samosh: a big one. Actually, it's I'll pose it to Rebecca first.st

113
00:28:36.720 --> 00:28:40.920
Dan Samosh: How does one know if they are compliant with the standard.

114
00:28:43.650 --> 00:29:07.290
Rebecca Gewurtz: Yeah, that is a big question. And I think the idea with continual improvement is that organizations can engage in a series of periodic cycles to check on their work. And you know I don't think that.

115
00:29:07.763 --> 00:29:30.336
Rebecca Gewurtz: You know an organization is going to be able to. To. You know the 1st question. I do think this relates to that 1st question of how long it will take, and I think the goal here is that organizations take steps towards becoming more inclusive and more disability. Confidence. That's that's the goal here. And

116
00:29:30.980 --> 00:29:32.080
Rebecca Gewurtz: you know.

117
00:29:33.230 --> 00:30:03.179
Rebecca Gewurtz: they might want to set some priorities about what is most impactful, and that might start with some of the statements in the standard that focus on Shall or Mahario. Maybe you can talk a little bit about the various statements, because some are shall, some are must. There's different wording, so that might give you a clue on what the developers of the standard thought were the priorities.

118
00:30:03.180 --> 00:30:30.639
Rebecca Gewurtz: But as an organization, you might be able to set some priorities, and those priorities might be a combination of what is consistent with their existing strategic directions. What is going to be easier to implement faster, to implement what you might call low hanging fruit, to be able to quickly implement some areas that can quickly become accessible.

119
00:30:30.790 --> 00:30:57.889
Rebecca Gewurtz: And then you would engage in a series of Pdcas to evaluate whether you're achieving it. So that's 1 way that's built into the process of continual improvement, that organizations might see steps towards becoming more and more accessible over time, more and more inclusive over time. That's probably what I would highlight.

120
00:31:00.200 --> 00:31:19.650
Mahadeo Sukhai: It's Mahadio. I can go next if you like. So 1st of all shall should May. So there's a hierarchy to requirements, clauses that we were taught on Day one. It was sort of standards, development 101, as part of our orientation. In March of 2021,

121
00:31:19.680 --> 00:31:44.659
Mahadeo Sukhai: and the project manager for the employment standard is actually in the audience. Quinn, Redikop and Quinn really did a very good job of providing this level of education to a technical committee that not everyone on that committee had actually worked with standards like a national standard of Canada, which is what this thing is. And so shall basically means you must do this should means

122
00:31:44.750 --> 00:31:51.999
Mahadeo Sukhai: it's strongly recommended that you do this. But we, we understand that there are circumstances in which this may actually not be practical, for you

123
00:31:52.170 --> 00:31:55.760
Mahadeo Sukhai: may means we want you to consider this.

124
00:31:55.890 --> 00:32:12.010
Mahadeo Sukhai: and in ideal circumstances do it. And in circumstances that aren't ideal, it's Ok for you to not do it. And then the lowest level is a can which basically means, think about it. You don't have to do anything right.

125
00:32:12.010 --> 00:32:32.509
Mahadeo Sukhai: We never used can or may in this standard, and Andy's here as well, and I didn't fully vet the list to see if anyone other than Andy or Emil or myself are here from the Technical committee, and so I would invite any technical committee members, or even Quinn. To say this.

126
00:32:33.440 --> 00:32:36.909
Mahadeo Sukhai: We, I think, made a conscious choice to use should

127
00:32:37.340 --> 00:33:04.379
Mahadeo Sukhai: only in a setting where we recognized there were barriers to actually doing the thing, so should was not our default. Shall, was our default. We said everybody must do these things, and we recognize that sometimes. That's not practical or possible for very just and valid reasons. And that's the only time we actually said should, and that was how we sort of treated it. A lot of public comments were, well, this should be, should not shall, and

128
00:33:04.760 --> 00:33:15.069
Mahadeo Sukhai: committee rejected those and and so so you know, that's that's something about the hierarchy of language. How do we know that the standard is is.

129
00:33:15.380 --> 00:33:27.279
Mahadeo Sukhai: how do we know that an organization is compliant with the standard? So let's let's actually take Clause 12 as an example. This is the recruitment hiring onboarding clause. A number of elements in there

130
00:33:27.280 --> 00:33:46.750
Mahadeo Sukhai: basically say the organization shall have a publicly posted commitment to accessibility and inclusion in employment practices. Right? So that is a I have it, or I don't have it right? So it exists. It's publicly posted. I can point to it. There's a URL. So, in other words, I can document doing this thing

131
00:33:47.320 --> 00:34:15.910
Mahadeo Sukhai: right, and at the end of the day, in any kind of compliance framework, the question becomes, Can I document. Having done this thing, not having thought about the thing, but rather having attempted to do the thing in one way, shape or form, and in many, many clauses we recognize there is no right way to do it. There's also no single way to do it, and a lot of it will depend on how big the organization is, what sector the organization's in the geographic

132
00:34:16.250 --> 00:34:22.839
Mahadeo Sukhai: location of the organization, all sorts of variables that we thought about in the writing of the standard.

133
00:34:23.070 --> 00:34:51.040
Mahadeo Sukhai: But we're not under our control. And so, from a process of understanding whether I'm compliant, can I document something as new, as specific as I need to have a commitment statements to accessibility and inclusion in my employment practices. Right talking about the employment, accessibility, strategy, which is the exact opposite end of that spectrum of specificity. The question is, again, can I document

134
00:34:51.520 --> 00:35:04.779
Mahadeo Sukhai: having done something to review a standard, to review a policy, to determine how to embed accessibility and inclusion into that policy. Right? And so, if I can document

135
00:35:05.020 --> 00:35:22.520
Mahadeo Sukhai: that level of detail, and that documentation makes sense, and that documentation will make sense to not just somebody in my organization, but somebody outside. And I know that this is working because of what Rebecca just said. Then I know that I'm being compliant right. If if I can't do those things, I'm not compliant.

136
00:35:24.920 --> 00:35:40.510
Dan Samosh: Yeah, it's very helpful to have that understanding of shall and should. And also I know, Rebecca, during your presentation you mentioned that the implementation, guidance will have these elements of measurement and evaluation. So to have that documentation present so that we can go back to the document.

137
00:35:41.340 --> 00:35:55.549
Dan Samosh: And our next question. It relates to some of what we've been talking about, especially in terms of you know we've mentioned the breadth of the standard as well as the depth of the standard, too. It's a very large, substantial document.

138
00:35:55.630 --> 00:36:22.640
Dan Samosh: So for an organization, let's say, that's deciding. You know, we're going to start implementing this. We have a grasp of our shalls and shoulds. But within our own context, maybe they're not sure how they would implement it. Where would you suggest an organization new to this area starts in terms of implementation. And I'll pose this question 1st to you, Matt, but everyone, please go ahead as well, anyone really wants to jump in.

139
00:36:23.830 --> 00:36:30.209
Matt Freeman: I think, as we are developing the implementation guide, one of the things we're thinking about

140
00:36:30.360 --> 00:36:38.090
Matt Freeman: is actually how to get started and who should get started. So one of the things we're trying to do is break up

141
00:36:38.350 --> 00:36:45.970
Matt Freeman: the process and work and put the standard in some kind of context. For

142
00:36:46.060 --> 00:37:12.550
Matt Freeman: how? How do I go about doing this? And who do I involve? And one of the 1st key steps for implementing and working with the standard, regardless of what area of the standard we're talking about, is really doing a survey of the capacity of your organization or your business to determine where are the gaps, or what? What are? And rebecca's talked about? Low hanging fruit?

143
00:37:12.550 --> 00:37:26.630
Matt Freeman: Do? Have you done an assessment of your organization to see where the capacity is to to address some of these clauses right away. And I I think that is our our overall goal

144
00:37:26.640 --> 00:37:34.049
Matt Freeman: in terms of Houston, because we recognize that again, not everyone is in this in the same place, and

145
00:37:34.150 --> 00:37:39.250
Matt Freeman: there needs to be some flexibility for the type of organization that you have.

146
00:37:42.640 --> 00:37:50.040
Dan Samosh: Great. And yeah, our our other 2 panelists. Would you like to share anything on that kind of starting point for organizations that are new? This area.

147
00:37:51.200 --> 00:37:52.519
Mahadeo Sukhai: Rebecca, did you want to go first? st

148
00:37:52.520 --> 00:38:17.499
Rebecca Gewurtz: Yeah, maybe I'll say something here. I really think that this is something that organizations. I agree with what you've said, Matt, that organizations need to look at their capacity and what they're already doing. And I think there's going to be a lot of win-wins where they kind of see that there are some steps that they can take that's consistent with other priorities or strategic directions.

149
00:38:17.500 --> 00:38:33.099
Rebecca Gewurtz: And that's where I would start, you know, like, where, where makes the most sense. And and I'm not sure that where to start is exactly, you know, if we can actually make some generalizable

150
00:38:33.680 --> 00:38:57.990
Rebecca Gewurtz: too many. Anyways, I think there's some things that are, you know, critical that that can also be done right away, that are easy for organizations to do. But I think there's a lot that that organizations will will need to have some control. So so I do think there is. You know, they have to go through that process, and that journey, or that

151
00:38:57.990 --> 00:39:08.949
Rebecca Gewurtz: is going to perhaps take some some time and and effort, but then produce really really good results.

152
00:39:09.340 --> 00:39:29.019
Rebecca Gewurtz: And I and I do think it's interesting. The comment. There is a question in the Q&A about like how to effectively demonstrate the impact, the financial impact of meeting or the economic. I guess that return on investment that organizations want to know about

153
00:39:29.441 --> 00:39:55.979
Rebecca Gewurtz: of of taking these steps. So I'm not sure I can answer that. But I think I agree with the person who's asked the question that that is the motivator. And and and that's where the system level evaluation ongoing is going to be really important to demonstrate that. You know, when you take these steps, there's there's positive impacts on the organization.

154
00:39:56.110 --> 00:40:23.829
Rebecca Gewurtz: And you know, I agree that that specifically around that financial gain, the return on the investment will be really important and how to measure. That is really kind of a qualitative process that, like showing that people stay, that that employees stay with the organization. There's less turnover. Those kinds of measures that allow

155
00:40:23.830 --> 00:40:46.440
Rebecca Gewurtz: of organizations do collect would be really powerful indicators of positive change in the culture, and that people want to stay in the organization. So those are some of my thoughts. And I think there's other people on the panel and in our team who can comment a little bit more on that economic evaluation.

156
00:40:47.360 --> 00:40:57.400
Mahadeo Sukhai: So so, and it's Mahattio. So so before, Stuart, I come to your question, and it is a good question. I'm not an economist. That that would be Emil and and

157
00:40:57.990 --> 00:41:00.527
Mahadeo Sukhai: Emil would have thoughts as well.

158
00:41:01.320 --> 00:41:05.400
Mahadeo Sukhai: where to start. So so here's here's actually what I think.

159
00:41:05.780 --> 00:41:16.069
Mahadeo Sukhai: If if I were in a position to actually recommend to an entity how to how to tackle the employment standard.

160
00:41:16.240 --> 00:41:31.939
Mahadeo Sukhai: I would actually suggest that the 1st thing that you do is is somebody sit down with all of the department heads across the organization and say, What are you already doing from an accessibility and inclusion? Perspective?

161
00:41:32.620 --> 00:41:42.220
Mahadeo Sukhai: And then and then review that list and and ask the question of how much of this is accessible by design versus how much of this is accessible by reactive

162
00:41:42.260 --> 00:42:07.250
Mahadeo Sukhai: right or accessible by reaction. And then I would actually look at that information against the body of the standard itself. And so the standard, the Technical Committee expended a fair degree of effort in providing in clauses 615-16-1718, and 19, of the standard.

163
00:42:07.500 --> 00:42:23.699
Mahadeo Sukhai: and also interspersed throughout the requirements, clauses as well. And it's in the definitions. We spent a lot of effort to provide a context to the accessible by design philosophy that you're going to miss. If all you do is read the requirements clauses

164
00:42:23.700 --> 00:42:46.399
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? And so there's a lot of extra words in the standard that don't include requirements. But those extra words actually make a difference, because they explain the philosophy that we had in developing that standard in the 1st place. And that's an important read. Because if you go through stuff and you say, Well, I have an accommodation policy. Therefore I have an employment accessibility policy

165
00:42:46.530 --> 00:43:05.269
Mahadeo Sukhai: that's actually an incorrect interpretation of how the standard is intended to go, or you say I have a policy that says, if you require accommodation during the interview, and those of you who've heard me talk before. Know I loathe the word accommodation, but I'm using it because it's the legal term here.

166
00:43:05.420 --> 00:43:16.240
Mahadeo Sukhai: And and so so if if you have something that says, if you require an accommodation during the interview contact. Hr. That actually does not meet the intent or the letter of most of what's in clause. 12.

167
00:43:16.260 --> 00:43:38.190
Mahadeo Sukhai: Right? So so yes, there are accessibility things that you might do, but they might not meet the intent or the letter of what's written in the standards. So gather everything that you know you're doing, and review that against the standard and the philosophy behind the standard, and then say to yourself, You know what I'm actually doing, a bunch of things that are relevant to clause 11, for example.

168
00:43:38.250 --> 00:44:06.990
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? Because my learning and development programming is advanced beyond the let's throw a wall of text at somebody in the 1st week of their employment, or what have you? And so, maybe because I'm doing a lot of stuff that is in alignment with Clause 11. I don't look at Clause 11 first, st but you know what I'm not doing. A lot of stuff that actually aligns with Clause 12. And a lot of these things seem relatively easy. So maybe that's my 1st go to, or I'm not doing a lot of things

169
00:44:06.990 --> 00:44:15.940
Mahadeo Sukhai: that align with Clause 13. But these things seem relatively easy. So that's my 1st go to. So I think, in order to answer the question, because there isn't 1 answer to the question.

170
00:44:15.940 --> 00:44:29.500
Mahadeo Sukhai: I think, in order to answer the question, think about what you do, and think about how much of what you do already aligns with the standard, because you might actually be surprised pleasantly at how much that actually is right.

171
00:44:29.660 --> 00:44:50.639
Mahadeo Sukhai: And I am aware of entities that have actually done that, and have come away pleasantly surprised with how much of what they already do actually is in alignment with the standard, and so go through that exercise, and then use that information along with the low hanging fruits that Rebecca talked about to determine what to do, first, st because there isn't a 1. Size fits all answer.

172
00:44:50.900 --> 00:44:59.943
Mahadeo Sukhai: Now, Stuart, again you ask a really good question. Right? And and I'm happy to expand on this offline if if you're interested.

173
00:45:00.440 --> 00:45:04.119
Mahadeo Sukhai: But I would also suggest, in addition to Rebecca's point.

174
00:45:04.350 --> 00:45:21.969
Mahadeo Sukhai: that to some degree, what needs to be done is a little bit of of an advanced sort of cost, effectiveness, analysis, approach, but also an understanding that money that you spend in year one is money that you're likely not going to have to spend, or will outright, save in year

175
00:45:22.210 --> 00:45:26.479
Mahadeo Sukhai: 3 to 5, for example. And and so so here's here's kind of a

176
00:45:26.790 --> 00:45:35.779
Mahadeo Sukhai: here's, here's 1 way of thinking about this. So let's say your organization's it. Procurement practice is we're giving everyone a 12 inch laptop.

177
00:45:36.100 --> 00:45:39.379
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? And nothing else. Everyone gets a 12 inch laptop

178
00:45:40.405 --> 00:45:44.080
Mahadeo Sukhai: and and that leads to

179
00:45:44.590 --> 00:45:55.310
Mahadeo Sukhai: X number of accessibility requests of folks asking for larger screens and larger computers and different performance management, like different performance of their laptop blah blah blah!

180
00:45:55.840 --> 00:46:19.499
Mahadeo Sukhai: All of those x numbers of requests involve time away by the worker to go get the documentation to give them the large screen and whatever and involve Hr. Processing time and involve. It's processing time and involve dealing with paperwork that the organization has. And I'm thinking about a large company when I'm talking about this right? And so you factor all of that in.

181
00:46:19.680 --> 00:46:23.770
Mahadeo Sukhai: And you realize that that for every request to have.

182
00:46:24.000 --> 00:46:32.380
Mahadeo Sukhai: you know a differently set up computer. The the cost happens to be. And I'm just gonna make up a number here, you know.

183
00:46:33.060 --> 00:46:34.700
Mahadeo Sukhai: $2,000 a person.

184
00:46:35.510 --> 00:46:43.490
Mahadeo Sukhai: But if you simply got everybody a 15 inch laptop.

185
00:46:44.290 --> 00:46:46.950
Mahadeo Sukhai: The cost differential might be 250 bucks

186
00:46:47.280 --> 00:47:08.789
Mahadeo Sukhai: per person per laptop. And and so, if you do the math. You recognize that by changing your procurement policy to not give everyone a 12 inch form factor, but rather a 15 inch laptop. You've all of a sudden. Yes, spent an extra $250 per machine out of your capital expenditures, but in reality

187
00:47:09.120 --> 00:47:17.889
Mahadeo Sukhai: are actually saving $2,000 per request, and 20% of your organization is making those requests. Then guess what you're actually saving yourself a pile of money.

188
00:47:19.290 --> 00:47:31.499
Mahadeo Sukhai: Right? And so so for for all of the all of the aspects of accessibility within your organization. If if you're intent on doing the calculus, that's the kind of calculus you have to do.

189
00:47:34.160 --> 00:47:56.590
Dan Samosh: Thank you. And I want to comment because it came across in everyone's responses. I think when you're a new organization starting in this space. There's this idea of what gets measured gets done. So it can be a nice point, especially because organizations already have employee surveys and a lot of information embedded within them. It's really nice to hear all of your kind of varying perspectives on that.

190
00:47:56.790 --> 00:48:01.170
Dan Samosh: Our next question I will pose 1st to Rebecca.

191
00:48:01.430 --> 00:48:06.329
Dan Samosh: and it is, why is an implementation guide needed for the standard.

192
00:48:09.420 --> 00:48:15.750
Rebecca Gewurtz: Okay, so thank you for the question. The short answer is, because

193
00:48:15.820 --> 00:48:44.339
Rebecca Gewurtz: employers are focused on running their businesses, and many, you know, want to be inclusive, want to have inclusive workplaces. But if we just left it with the what with the standard, they would think, okay, we know what we need to achieve no idea how to get from here to there, we don't know how. And so it's to really support the how.

194
00:48:44.370 --> 00:48:59.559
Rebecca Gewurtz: And I think that's really the the short to simplify it. That's the answer. Now, somebody rightfully posted a question in the chat about really highlighting that a document guidelines

195
00:48:59.560 --> 00:49:22.410
Rebecca Gewurtz: or guidance document in and of itself may not be enough, for likely isn't enough for many employers, and that there's more work that needs to be done, whether it's training or consultation, or and so forth. And certainly that's true. But the guidance document at least gives us some attempt at the how, in a broad.

196
00:49:22.410 --> 00:49:31.560
Rebecca Gewurtz: in a broad way, and then more work, certainly, to support these guidance, the the guidance document will be needed for sure.

197
00:49:34.030 --> 00:49:39.839
Dan Samosh: And our other panelists. Would you like to comment on why an implementation guide is needed.

198
00:49:43.770 --> 00:49:46.595
Matt Freeman: What Vibanka has said. Sorry.

199
00:49:47.280 --> 00:49:57.680
Matt Freeman: I just wanted to point out that one of the comments in the chat is that policies are often at a high level, and it's not. There are concepts that aren't necessarily

200
00:49:57.930 --> 00:50:01.229
Matt Freeman: applicable to or understood.

201
00:50:01.500 --> 00:50:08.579
Matt Freeman: And I think that's what we're trying to address with the implementation guide is to to help people get from

202
00:50:08.650 --> 00:50:17.370
Matt Freeman: from the the goals of the standard and the glossary of terms that are in the references and try and build out

203
00:50:17.400 --> 00:50:31.849
Matt Freeman: some of and make it practical for all kinds of businesses. So I mean, we recognize that that's that's necessary to do. I would also say that. It's important to remember that

204
00:50:31.880 --> 00:50:58.299
Matt Freeman: the policy itself, in order to achieve these. And we've we've talked about it across the panel that this takes time and is part of a process of understanding what your organization is, and what your capacity is to address some of these issues and your base of knowledge and understanding. That process, I think, is really important. Moving forward. So it helps to address

205
00:50:58.480 --> 00:51:21.360
Matt Freeman: how to implement and also it also helps organizations understand what some of their gaps are. So it isn't necessarily about implementing the policies within the standard. Only it's about giving organizations, the tools to analyze themselves and address what needs to be done in order to fulfill

206
00:51:21.500 --> 00:51:28.019
Matt Freeman: the the standards within or with, in order to fill the closets within the standard.

207
00:51:29.610 --> 00:51:31.750
Dan Samosh: Thank you, Mahadia. Would you like to add anything.

208
00:51:31.940 --> 00:51:40.840
Mahadeo Sukhai: I I would. So I think I think there's actually a much more basic answer than than what

209
00:51:41.070 --> 00:52:03.810
Mahadeo Sukhai: both Rebecca and Matt have offered, and and both of your answers are actually really good and absolutely in my perspective, correct as someone who had a hand in pinning this thing. But I think there's there's a much more basic answer. There is a desire and an appetite for an implementation guide. That's why one is necessary.

210
00:52:04.030 --> 00:52:06.919
Mahadeo Sukhai: Right? So so the 1st question

211
00:52:07.130 --> 00:52:16.000
Mahadeo Sukhai: that anybody who's read the standard with an open mind is going to say is, this is great. How do we do it?

212
00:52:16.900 --> 00:52:24.550
Mahadeo Sukhai: Somebody's gonna answer that question right? And this this group chose to do that? So so that's

213
00:52:24.790 --> 00:52:27.999
Mahadeo Sukhai: I think I think that's that's a basic sort of

214
00:52:28.610 --> 00:52:33.109
Mahadeo Sukhai: fundamental philosophy behind. Why is an implementation standard required is because people want one

215
00:52:33.340 --> 00:52:43.520
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? I think I think, even even beyond that, the other extreme of folks who who will read the standard are those who who come at

216
00:52:43.810 --> 00:53:03.250
Mahadeo Sukhai: accessibility in the workplace very much from that embedded medical model of. We need documentation. People need to tell us what they need, and if they don't tell us what they need, we don't know what to do, and so it's easier to do nothing until we're asked the question, and then we've got to evaluate it before we can figure out what we're going to do. And so those folks who read the standard feel very uncomfortable

217
00:53:03.420 --> 00:53:11.629
Mahadeo Sukhai: because we're inviting them to think differently. And and that's that's actually quite hard. Right? And and for those folks

218
00:53:11.750 --> 00:53:16.570
Mahadeo Sukhai: an implementation guide is, is one way of sort of of

219
00:53:17.530 --> 00:53:19.989
Mahadeo Sukhai: I'm going to use the term S. Wage.

220
00:53:20.110 --> 00:53:36.919
Mahadeo Sukhai: The the fundamental fear that that this is this is such a large sea change from the way things are, and and I'm capitalizing, as I say, that the W. The T. And the a. So the way capital W. The T. Capital, the the things capital T. And the R. Capital a.

221
00:53:39.420 --> 00:54:05.179
Dan Samosh: Thank you. And so I'm just thinking about time as well. We likely only have enough time for one more question, possibly 2 in the Q. And a. We won't get to everyone's questions. But several of the questions mentioned. You know the experience, perhaps, of Hr. Professionals or people in the Federal government. And so our next question kind of combines a lot of that. And I'll start with you

222
00:54:05.390 --> 00:54:10.840
Dan Samosh: is, who is the actual target audience for the implementation guidance.

223
00:54:12.269 --> 00:54:19.660
Mahadeo Sukhai: The answer to that question is anybody who actually works on accessibility in the workplace? Because at some level.

224
00:54:19.680 --> 00:54:46.699
Mahadeo Sukhai: you know what it's again. Having served as a Chief accessibility officer, my job as a chief accessibility officer was to ensure that the role of the Chief accessibility officer became rather more ceremonial than functional right, because at the end of the day every department head plays a role. Every worker plays a role in making sure that the workplace is accessible by design. And so anybody who has an active role to play

225
00:54:46.700 --> 00:54:53.030
Mahadeo Sukhai: in doing something, whether it's procurement specialist or it specialist or Hr. Specialist. Or

226
00:54:53.160 --> 00:55:12.249
Mahadeo Sukhai: you know the the external recruiter, the internal recruiter, the person who's observing paperwork, the finance, the marketing communications, people who do all the organizational comms, everyone who plays a role in contributing to an accessible by design workplace gets to

227
00:55:13.060 --> 00:55:20.750
Mahadeo Sukhai: gets to be the target audience for the implementation guide because everyone who who plays a role in the accessible by design workplace is the target audience, the standard

228
00:55:20.890 --> 00:55:23.260
Mahadeo Sukhai: right? Practically.

229
00:55:23.460 --> 00:55:37.120
Mahadeo Sukhai: you know, a lot of folks because of how accessibility and and disability are sort of navigated in especially large organizations. Practically the answer is going to be somebody's head of Hr.

230
00:55:37.580 --> 00:55:42.809
Mahadeo Sukhai: but I actually think that that's that is a that's a logical trap

231
00:55:43.060 --> 00:55:49.130
Mahadeo Sukhai: because it perpetuates it perpetuates a system. It doesn't start to create a culture.

232
00:55:51.710 --> 00:56:01.840
Dan Samosh: Thank you. And to our other 2 panelists. Do you have any comments on target audience as well? If there's just any last kind of comments on the standard and the implementation guidance. You'd like to share.

233
00:56:05.652 --> 00:56:11.990
Rebecca Gewurtz: I don't have anything to add about the target audience. I think Mahadio covered that.

234
00:56:16.130 --> 00:56:19.089
Matt Freeman: I also agree that Mario has covered it well.

235
00:56:19.400 --> 00:56:19.970
Dan Samosh: Great.

236
00:56:20.280 --> 00:56:47.519
Dan Samosh: We did have one other question I want to make sure we turn to, which is so. At the beginning of our session today, Rebecca, you mentioned that this past week 4 components of the Standard were just published, and people are asking about the publication of the implementation guidance. So is there like a timeline? Or is there an idea of when that information that more specific implementation, focused information, might be shared.

237
00:56:48.490 --> 00:56:51.867
Rebecca Gewurtz: I have actually forgotten our goal date.

238
00:56:52.620 --> 00:57:21.999
Rebecca Gewurtz: but it isn't published yet, and when it is published I think it's going to be in June. I just can't remember the exact plan date. When it is published it will be available on the idea website. What I can't remember. I think the June date was actually for a draft, because, as people have pointed out, it does need to be reviewed and and vetted and workshopped, and so forth. So we are going to go through that process. How do you want to add to that? Do you remember the date.

239
00:57:22.579 --> 00:57:28.159
Mahadeo Sukhai: So so so the the specific date is is is, I think.

240
00:57:28.580 --> 00:57:32.600
Mahadeo Sukhai: still up in the air a little bit. The the window is, we want it

241
00:57:32.940 --> 00:57:36.600
Mahadeo Sukhai: out in draft form as a living document.

242
00:57:37.290 --> 00:57:47.610
Mahadeo Sukhai: including Hr. Specialists and and folks within the Federal public service, and so on and so forth to comment on. Now now keep in mind that the way that this thing is being

243
00:57:47.750 --> 00:57:53.389
Mahadeo Sukhai: conceived of and thought about is is is an implementation guide for for

244
00:57:54.060 --> 00:57:57.809
Mahadeo Sukhai: companies of all sizes. So so you've got the, you know.

245
00:57:57.840 --> 00:58:24.859
Mahadeo Sukhai: 15,000 person Federal department. And then you have the, you know, the the 25 person entity that works within the federally regulated spaces, and both of them have to pay attention to this. And so this is not a 1 size fits all approach. It can't be. And and so the intent is to put that draft out there in English and in French for community

246
00:58:25.480 --> 00:58:44.820
Mahadeo Sukhai: engagement with it. Right? So so as a living document. And so that's actually why the Implementation Guide writing committee isn't a committee of 25 people, including representatives from Scotia and representatives from Esdc. And representatives from whoever right? It's a small group of

247
00:58:45.140 --> 00:59:12.520
Mahadeo Sukhai: of folks who have lived living in professional experience in developing this thing. And so we're going to develop it. We're going to put it out there. Everyone comment on it right? Tell us what you think is going to work or not, and try stuff and figure out if it works or not. Right. Don't. Don't just tell us if you think it works, but actually try it and tell us if it actually works, that's that's the important part, right? Because we might not think something's going to work. But when we actually give it a shot we might be like, Oh.

248
00:59:13.130 --> 00:59:30.459
Mahadeo Sukhai: huh! That's easier than I thought it was going to be right. And and so, yeah, I think June, July in that timeframe. Because we're in. We're in the space now of editing and finalizing chapters of the implementation Guide. And then translation will take what translation takes.

249
00:59:32.150 --> 00:59:49.010
Rebecca Gewurtz: And if I could just add, there was a question about the purpose potentially to eliminate the process of requiring accommodations, and that is not our goal. I did answer that question in the Q. And a people might want to see that. But I know we're out of time, so I will stop.

250
00:59:50.180 --> 01:00:02.819
Dan Samosh: Thank you. No, thank you. Dr. Gortz, Dr. Sukai, and Dr. Freeman. It was a really helpful presentation, and I think from our Q. And a we can tell that people are anticipating this implementation guidance, and how much it will help

251
01:00:02.880 --> 01:00:05.460
Dan Samosh: with kind of interpreting the

252
01:00:05.480 --> 01:00:32.290
Dan Samosh: standard itself and working with the standard before we go. I do just as always want to say thank you to the team that makes these webinars possible. Rebecca Gowertz, as well as with us today, Emil Tompa 2 and our French language interpreter. So we have our 3rd session, 3rd and last session on the standard and implementation that's happening in a couple of weeks in June.

253
01:00:32.290 --> 01:00:38.940
Dan Samosh: so please also join us for that. But until then, hope you have a nice weekend and thank you for joining us today.

254
01:00:39.190 --> 01:00:41.080
Mahadeo Sukhai: And happy national accessibility. Week.

255
01:00:41.420 --> 01:00:43.620
Dan Samosh: Yes, happy national accessibility week.

256
01:01:00.810 --> 01:01:03.980
Dan Samosh: Everyone I need to run. So I'm gonna go.

257
01:01:05.250 --> 01:01:10.060
Dan Samosh: It was a nice hour, and I'll see you tomorrow. Mario and everyone else see you soon, I hope. Bye, bye.

258
01:01:10.060 --> 01:01:12.150
Matt Freeman: 10. Thanks, Rebecca. Thanks, Mike.