The subdivision of industry opens places that can be filled by practically any one. There are more places in subdivision industry that can be filled by blind men than there are blind men. There are more places that can be filled by cripples than there are cripples. And in each of these places the man who short-sightedly might be considered as an object of charity can earn just as adequate a living as the keenest and most able-bodied.
I really like this approach (similar to the zoho article) to helping underpriviledged groups in society. Instead of 'discrimination is bad, let's do affirmative action', this attitude is 'discrimination is bad, for those that practice it. these people are an untapped resource'. Seems much more organic and sustainable to me.
You only have to open a newspaper to the job page (formerly known as the job pages!) to see where some of the issues lie.
I don't know what it's like in the US, but here it's very common to see job advertisements padded out with unnecessary and heavily loaded language like "we need a bubbly, bright and outgoing administrative assistant". I looked at a person spec the other day for a local council admin job which had "good sense of humour" in the desirable column. For that sort of job, personality type shouldn't come anywhere near the decision-making process - and whoever wrote that person spec should be called to account.
It's not outright discrimination, but it does come close - and the experience of the bloke in the article is something I can identify with. You send in a good CV, stellar references and an eloquent, articulate covering letter, get called in to interview... and come second because you're ever so slightly awkward and tend to prefer to concentrate on working rather than making small talk about Britain's Got Talent. Perhaps it's partly why so many hacker types end up gravitating towards the startup world rather than a job in some big company...
For an "administrative assistant" job (which I translate to "secretary"), being sociable and outgoing is almost a job requirement. A large part of their job is interacting with other people - running interference for the person they work for.
All technical positions require some social interaction. If the job is pure development, then I wouldn't worry if someone is a little socially awkward. I would worry, however, if they seem very awkward. People aren't hired on pure ability alone, and I don't see anything wrong with that. One of the most important questions an interviewer can ask themselves about an applicant is "Do I want to work with this person every day?"
Even some technical positions require significant interaction with non-technical people, and in those cases, it's reasonable to expect some who is sociable.
Personally I think you could do a lot worse than employing people with autism. Communications may be a little harder and you'll have a hard time dictating planning but it is going to be tough to find people more dedicated to whatever has their interest.
I think I have plenty of the 'autism' traits, I'm probably not the easiest person to get along with on a daily basis but once you get me motivated and going there is no stopping. (though it may take more than a little bit to get that to happen). If the job was interesting enough to me you could probably get me to work for you for free...
Companies usually prefer consistency rather than the all-or-nothing that comes with the territory of autism but from what I've seen around me to have a network of 'minders' around people with the above traits can produce spectacular results.
Autism encompasses a whole spectrum of possible symptoms. Only a small subset of people with autism are ones that might be suited to computer related work.
- Henry Ford, "My Life and Work"