Chicago Startup Exclusively Hires People With Asperger's

Post Reply New Topic

"Aspiritech, a Chicago-based tech startup, is a software testing firm that exclusively hires people with Asperger’s syndrome":
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2011/02/tech- ... l-prowess/
"Aspiritech is a Chicago-based non-profit startup whose mission is to "align the unique abilities of individuals with Asperger's syndrome and high functioning autism with the needs of the business community."":
http://www.businessinsider.com/software ... lus-2011-2
"Aspiritech, a Chicago-area start-up, is embracing Asperger’s Syndrome to take advantage of the perceived technical advantages many say the condition provides":
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/does-aspe ... oder/45259
"Brenda Weitzberg is the founder of Aspiritech, which is offering services to employers looking for test software, hardware, websites, applications, and computer bugs, using her staff of Asperger’s employees":
http://www.ere.net/2011/02/21/at-this-c ... quirement/
"Huh. Here's an interesting one. A Chicago-based non-profit startup called Aspiritech (that's A"Spirit"ech as far as the logo is concerned) has announced that it will be exclusively hiring software testers with Asperger's Syndrome":
http://www.gearlog.com/2011/02/startup_ ... to_exc.php

Too bad it's all based in Chicago.

It's a start, though.

How is that any different from a business that only hires NT's?

This has been posted before. Like I said, if there is anybody here which is a programmer I am doing a startup as well in the DC area. But I think programmers in general are in very high demand right now.

They're going to get sued for discrimination and forced to hire NTs. And then it won't have benefitted us at all.

*sigh* Honestly, part of me wants to say that this is discrimination and it's wrong. But not a very big part; we desperately need jobs and highly qualified Aspies are refused positions. There is discrimination against us by NTs. We need something like this.

And yet even so... it's not legal. They're not allowed to do this, so they're going to get sued. We'll all end up WORSE than if this hadn't been tried.

From the titles of the articles it definately looks illegal. One article is titled "exclusively hires those with Aspergers Syndrome" and another article says "Aspergers Syndrome is a job requirement". That is illegal.

However, it may also be the word choice of whoever wrote the articles. If somebody applies and fits all the job requirements but is dismissed because they can't provide a note from a doctor of diagnosis, then that's definately illegal discrimination. (And it would bar all the self diagnosed of WP from holding the job.) But if they are merely looking putting job ads in places where AS people congregate (why not here?!?!) or sending headhunters to AS support meetings, then it isn't illegal.

If they are loking for (what they consider) hallmarks of AS in a job interview (no eye contact? no small talk?) but never saying "do you have Aspergers Syndrome?" then it wouldn't be illegal. It would just be the flipside of looking for the ability to make small talk or eye contact and deciding that way.

I guess where it gets really hazy, or maybe outright illegal, is if they blatantly come right out and say "we will not consider any person who does not have Aspergers Syndrome" rather than looking for such people in likely places or looking for signs at a job interview.

So I guess it all depends on how they are actually going about it. Could somebody who self-identifies but has no doctor diagnosis get hired? Could somebody who doesn't self identify but meets all their other criteria get hired? It all hinges on that.

edited to add: I read articles linked to the articles and also some comments and how to do this legally came up. It is just plain illegal to ask people if they have Aspergers. The plan is to go with interview style. So that makes it really no different from companies that hire based on people skills. Somebody need not even be self-diagnosed, let alone have a doctor's diagnosis. They merely need to present in a way that seems "Aspie" to the interviewer. By the comments and lnks, that's legal.

I hope visagrunt sees this thread and contributes. He seems to know lots about law, including American employment law even though he is Canadian. Or maybe he has Canadian legal training and it gives him the ability to decode American legalese faster than somebody without that training. I'm just winging it on broad rather than legalese knowledge.

I don't know how I feal about this. This feals like revearse discrimination, but in a market place where we're actively discriminated against..well I'm not sure.

And actually I don't think it's illegal. As far I know you can't discriminate based on
Sex,
Age,
Religion(situational),
Political Views(Also Situational),
Disability(Situational)
Sexual Orientation
Race/Nationality
Pregnancy
Genetics
...thats all I could find

While you could argue that we're discrinating based on disability, the law only protects the disabled..not vice versa. Which means you have to prove that NTs are the disabled ones. Now if they ever discover an autism gene, they could (theoretically) argue that, but we all know such a gene doesn't exist.

There are plenty of work programs for the disabled, I'm not sure this is any different. Actually, I think companies get tax benefits for hiring the disabled. (and the minimum age is lower to boot)

Raises hand. Lawyer (though non-practicing). This is completely legal. You can actually target disability groups if you want to do preferential hiring with regards to that disability group. The law in question would be the Americans with Disabilities Act. This would not be a violation of it. I can't go into all the reasons why, but American law only runs afoul when you deny said a person with disabilities. I know that sounds a little off, but the ADA only applies if you have a disability, not if you don't have one. Even then it is very specific, for example they have to meet minimum qualifications. I can go on, but the ADA is tricky and very narrow.

The ADA you can discriminate based on a lack of a disability. It does allow for "disability focused recruiting". The point of it was to even the scales and it may be one of the ways to help employment along.

Reverse discrimination is what people of privelege claim. Sorry, I never liked the term and never will.