I hate CV's

I have been looking for recent guidance on getting jobs but it is all rather dated. which is unfortunate, given we have a Government eager to get people off benefits and "back into work", but not prepared to be realistically helpful, or do any serious investigation of the issues.

I mentioned above Edmonds & Beardon "Asperger Syndrome and Employment....." published in 2008. I quite favour this series which came out of Sheffield Hallam University's centre, but sometimes the 'collected essays' style isn't strong enough. I don't think it was nearly informative enough to meet the challenges five years ago.

Part of the problem of the Adults Speak out about Autism series, when it comes to employment, is if only 20% of people on the spectrum find gainful employment, and many of those get a mix of short term or unsuitable jobs with long gaps, the scope for such essays is going to be small. I felt the book tried hard but was too little too late.

It begins with an introduction which is too heavily Triad of Impairments, diagnostic rather than real everyday perspectives: paragraphs on communication, social understanding, theory of mind, executive functioning and sensory processing (which tries to use an analogy of people in a wheelchair), then a little bit about reasonable adjustments in the workplace - mainly how to give a person on the spectrum instructions and how to lay out a task for them.

Sorry, but can't we progress to ACTUALLY understanding people on the spectrum?

Secondly the essays are mostly by people with a small amount of work experience, doing voluntary or short term, whose insights are shallow, with the result the content is witty but not very helpful. Is it so hard to find people with longer term employment experience? Or are we back to the old cookie, well if they hold down a job for years they haven't got real aspergers, so we don't count them.

One writer tables jobs deemed "High Risk of Failure", "May Suit some people not others" and "Low Risk of Failure", which seems like a good idea, but most jobs end up in the middle column, and I don't think the compiler tried hard enough to identify the low risk/ideal jobs. Out of 23 low risk suggestions compare piano tuner, cleaner, magician, milkman, funeral director/pall bearer and farm labourer with the few highlights - town planner, tourist guide, appliance engineer, navigator/route planner.

I'm trying not to be unfair. They are interesting essays by people who've tried the world of work, and some contributions from employers, but there's nothing there to reassure about how to change things. There are chapters on job hunting and CVs but it is superficial.

What we desperately need is real understanding of the issues and a means of persuading officialdom to be more realistically accommodating about workplace reform for the disabled.

I have been looking for recent guidance on getting jobs but it is all rather dated. which is unfortunate, given we have a Government eager to get people off benefits and "back into work", but not prepared to be realistically helpful, or do any serious investigation of the issues.

I mentioned above Edmonds & Beardon "Asperger Syndrome and Employment....." published in 2008. I quite favour this series which came out of Sheffield Hallam University's centre, but sometimes the 'collected essays' style isn't strong enough. I don't think it was nearly informative enough to meet the challenges five years ago.

Part of the problem of the Adults Speak out about Autism series, when it comes to employment, is if only 20% of people on the spectrum find gainful employment, and many of those get a mix of short term or unsuitable jobs with long gaps, the scope for such essays is going to be small. I felt the book tried hard but was too little too late.

It begins with an introduction which is too heavily Triad of Impairments, diagnostic rather than real everyday perspectives: paragraphs on communication, social understanding, theory of mind, executive functioning and sensory processing (which tries to use an analogy of people in a wheelchair), then a little bit about reasonable adjustments in the workplace - mainly how to give a person on the spectrum instructions and how to lay out a task for them.

Sorry, but can't we progress to ACTUALLY understanding people on the spectrum?

Secondly the essays are mostly by people with a small amount of work experience, doing voluntary or short term, whose insights are shallow, with the result the content is witty but not very helpful. Is it so hard to find people with longer term employment experience? Or are we back to the old cookie, well if they hold down a job for years they haven't got real aspergers, so we don't count them.

One writer tables jobs deemed "High Risk of Failure", "May Suit some people not others" and "Low Risk of Failure", which seems like a good idea, but most jobs end up in the middle column, and I don't think the compiler tried hard enough to identify the low risk/ideal jobs. Out of 23 low risk suggestions compare piano tuner, cleaner, magician, milkman, funeral director/pall bearer and farm labourer with the few highlights - town planner, tourist guide, appliance engineer, navigator/route planner.

I'm trying not to be unfair. They are interesting essays by people who've tried the world of work, and some contributions from employers, but there's nothing there to reassure about how to change things. There are chapters on job hunting and CVs but it is superficial.

What we desperately need is real understanding of the issues and a means of persuading officialdom to be more realistically accommodating about workplace reform for the disabled.