Jenny Sealey, Creative Director of the Paralympic Games opening ceremony and Artistic Director of Theatre Company Graeae, is backing the ‘Stop Changes to Access to Work Campaign‘ by becoming its spokesperson.
In a video posted on the campaign’s website, Sealey explains why proposed changes to the scheme are wrong and how, if introduced prior to the Paralympics, would have scuppered her ability to work on the opening ceremony. Both video and transcript are below. The campaign’s website said people could expect to ‘hear a lot from Jenny soon’.
The campaign was launched after the government proposed changes to Access to Work, a system that funds communication support for employed deaf people. The changes, according to the campaign, limit the choice of working deaf people to choose the best interpreter or communication method for different scenarios by forcing organisations to employ a single interpreter if more than 30 hours a week are required.
Jenny Sealey on Access to Work
A petition launched in November has gained 4,900 signatures and meetings have taken place between leading charitable organisations and politicians but the ‘thirty-hour rule’ remains.
Transcript of the video:
I just want to talk about Access to Work without that provision, I couldn’t do my job, it’s fundamental to being Chief Executive and Artistic Director of Graeae Theatre.
Access to Work is amazing, it’s so brilliant to have that, when we were doing the Paralympics, I had a team of 14 or 15 fully highly qualified interpreters working amongst, I think there were 10 deaf people, plus me, and I had my own core team of three. Without that skill, that knowledge and everything, we would never, ever have been able to do such a glorious Paralympics and for all those deaf people to have full and equal access.
What I need in my job is so varied, I go from rehearsals, to budget meetings, to board meetings, to networking, working in schools, it’s so varied so I’m very, very aware, I carefully pick which interpreters I need for which jobs and to be forced to have one interpreter, just in the office.
That’s giving me just one voice, one interpretation, all the way through my working life… That’s not going to work for someone like me, and there’s many, many other deaf people that I know, that same style will not work for them either.
My interpreters need to be cast, I suppose, in the same way that I cast my plays. So I have the right person for my budget meetings, you know, an interpreter that knows and understands finance.
I have the right interpreter when I’m working in schools that understands the school environment. I want, I need, and have to be allowed choice, and that is the same for other deaf people. Also, we need to have fully qualified high spec interpreters, not, you know, a baby CSW because that’s wrong, and that means we’re not getting full and equal access. So please, please, we have to have choice, skill, and qualified interpreters. We need that.
Linda Richards
March 14, 2014
This is a massive issue for Deaf people. Response has been mixed. Questions have been raised about the possible conflict of interest by interpreters. There are several separate groups working on this issue. There seems to be little coherence. Now that this campaign has Jenny has their spokesperson, maybe we could also know who else is in the campaign group? Trust is important here.
Robert Duncan
March 14, 2014
Great to see Jenny leading on this. She puts her finger on a key issue – the right of the Deaf person to express her/himself in a diversity of ways, and not to be limited by the limitations or limited experience of one interpreter or, especially, somebody less well qualified.
The Risk Taker
March 16, 2014
Yes, Bob. I wonder also, what can deafblind workers do about the remaining 7.5 hours in terms of safety? Take risk crossing the road at work? Or underperform five days a week and lose the career?
An important question: what help is there for employability? Especially of deafblind workers?