Meet our Mentees

Post Image

Placerat In Egestas Erat

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque urna dolor, ullamcorper varius mi ut, dignissim volutpat tortor. Sed sed nibh ex.

Curabitur tincidunt augue non turpis pellentesque sollicitudin. Fusce non ligula quis neque.

Nulla vulputate, mi at efficitur cursus, turpis elit suscipit mauris, ac varius dui enim in sapien. Cras ut tincidunt sem. Nunc porttitor in nulla et sodales. Suspendisse bibendum ac dolor vitae tincidunt. Sed leo leo, pharetra id feugiat nec.

Mattis quis ante. Sed luctus, quam eu condimentum venenatis, nunc metus tincidunt lacus, sit amet pellentesque eros diam vel elit. Nunc eu libero non leo posuere vulputate. Ut porta mauris a massa posuere

Placerat In Egestas Erat Imperdiet Sed Euismod Nisi Porta.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque urna dolor, ullamcorper varius mi ut, dignissim volutpat tortor. Sed sed nibh ex.

Nunc sed velit dignissim sodales. Mi eget mauris pharetra et. Vulputate sapien nec sagittis aliquam malesuada bibendum. Cras pulvinar mattis nunc sed blandit. Tortor at auctor urna nunc id cursus metus aliquam eleifend.

Placerat In Egestas Erat Imperdiet Sed Euismod Nisi Porta.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque urna dolor, ullamcorper varius mi ut, dignissim volutpat tortor. Sed sed nibh ex.

Nunc sed velit dignissim sodales. Mi eget mauris pharetra et. Vulputate sapien nec sagittis aliquam malesuada bibendum. Cras pulvinar mattis nunc sed blandit. Tortor at auctor urna nunc id cursus metus aliquam eleifend.

Placerat In Egestas Erat Imperdiet Sed Euismod Nisi Porta.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque urna dolor, ullamcorper varius mi ut, dignissim volutpat tortor. Sed sed nibh ex.

Nunc sed velit dignissim sodales. Mi eget mauris pharetra et. Vulputate sapien nec sagittis aliquam malesuada bibendum. Cras pulvinar mattis nunc sed blandit. Tortor at auctor urna nunc id cursus metus aliquam eleifend.

30% Club Malaysia launched its first newsletter

The 30% Club Malaysia is very excited to launch its first newsletter.


Each month we will share news and events that have taken place as well as future engagements of 30% Club Malaysia.


We look forward to seeing all of you at these events as we build that collective voice for Diversity, Equity & Inclusion.

Crafting Board Profiles for Success: CnetG Asia’s Board Profile Writing Masterclass for Mentees

A well-crafted board resume that clearly shows the value the board aspiring candidate brings to the organisation, increases the chances of an appointment as board director.


With this in mind, twenty participants of the mentees from the Board Mentoring Scheme of the 30% Club Malaysia recently participated in the Board Profile Writing Masterclass, which was organised by CnetG Asia, a key strategic partner of the 30% Club Malaysia.


Raj Kumar Paramanathan, the Managing Partner of CnetG Asia who ran the session single-handedly, brings to the table more than two decades of experience in executive search. 


He shared that a board resume differs from a typical executive resume in that it highlights more of the successes or accomplishments from the angle of corporate governance, strategy, and P&L management.


“The Top 1/3 of the resume is termed as the “prime real estate”, wherein candidates should use this section to describe the expertise and value they bring to the organisation. It is key to provide context and specifics instead of broad statements to highlight their expertise and competencies,” he said.


During the two-hour event, participants learned an interesting angle about gender bias in resumes; Raj Kumar cited that studies have shown that female candidates tend to use collaborative words in their resumes compared to male candidates who use more action verbs.


The session included interactive Q&A discussions as well as specific extracts of participants’ own resumes including demonstrations by Raj Kumar of eye-opening and catching “Before” and “After” effects by applying the techniques as shared during the session.


In the next posting, we will share some of the feedback from the participants about the session and future improvements to the Board Mentoring Scheme.


30% Club Malaysia and Heriot-Watt University announces scholarship

The 30% Club Malaysia and Edinburgh Business School, Heriot-Watt University are pleased to announce that they are awarding one full scholarship for the part-time MBA programme at the Heriot-Watt University Malaysia campus to ONE entrepreneurial woman.

In addition, TWO partial fee scholarships of 30% will be offered under the same scholarship programme. The conditions are: 

The candidate must have received and accepted an unconditional offer of a place on the full or part-time MBA programme and paid the deposit before a scholarship application can be submitted.

Amount of award
One placement for a full tuition fee waiver of RM58,050.
Two placements for a 30% fee waiver of the full tuition fee.

Successful applicants would commence the two-year programme in September 2021 or January 2022. In the video, you can hear from Laura Sanchez, an oil and gas executive who completed her MBA on campus in Malaysia.

Important dates to note:
Opening date: 15 June 2021
Closing date: 15 December 2021 (Midnight, Malaysian time)

For more information, please read here

 

Mentee Circle holds its first Fireside Chat with Velesto Energy

  •  

Early this week the MenteeCircle from the 30% Club Malaysia Board Mentoring Scheme held a Fireside Chat on “Board Diversity, Sustainability, and Governance”. 


About 100 participants including the mentees from the six cohorts attended the virtual event, to learn from the guest speaker, Rohaizad Darus of Velesto Energy Berhad, speaking passionately about the topic. 


The event started off with an opening address by Tan Sri Zarinah Anwar, Founding Chair of 30% Club Malaysia. She said that Velesto is indeed leading by example, as women directors currently represent 44% of Velesto’s board.


The company, Velesto Energy Berhad which has been included and has scored highly in the FTSE4 Good Bursa Malaysia Index (which rates a company’s ability to manage its ESG issues) is also in the top quartile of Tier 1 for Sustainability Disclosures to Bursa Malaysia. 


On this note, one of the questions that Savita Saigal, the moderator of the Fireside Chat posed:


“It has been and, in some instances, still a challenge for corporations to convince their stakeholders to invest in Sustainability agenda as this requires a financial commitment, planning, and manhours. Stakeholders being profit-driven would rather plow back into the business. 


Therefore, do share with us how Sustainability was introduced into Velesto and what were the challenges you faced with your stakeholders?”


In reply, Rohaizad had elaborated, into three parts


Lead and Manage
– Velesto is fortunate to have Government-related funds (who are our major shareholders), so Sustainability and Governance are part of the business emphasis.

– Convincing the management (top to bottom).

– Building a robust infrastructure to implement the company’s value system and deploying standard practices such as iLEAP, QHSE focus, including implementing cost savings programmes and CSR initiatives.


These approaches have made it easier for the company and people to accept. Having said that, we still face some challenges.


Challenges
– Staff were unfamiliar with the new Sustainability concept and were confused with existing practices, 

– Costs and operations issues compounded 

– Over expectations and concerns on reporting requirements 


Overcoming the Challenges
– Optimised on communication with our staffs at various stages – meetings, townhalls, formal and informal;  

– Continued to allocate budget, albeit at a smaller scale to maintain momentum; 

– Convinced the Operations team on the benefits of Sustainability and its impact on everyone 

-Prioritised on what can be achieved first and managed expectations where necessary   

– Gradually embraced reporting requirements

– Shared experiences with the rest of the world


The Fireside Chat is the second event by the Mentee Circle, a networking group that helps foster better collaboration among mentees and enhances the visibility of board-ready candidates. 

Mentee Circle holds its first virtual panel discussion – Owning Your Board Journey

The Mentee Circle from the 30% Club Malaysia Board Mentoring Scheme recently held a virtual panel discussion entitled Owning Your Board Journey.


Fifty participants were glued to the screen to listen to the panelists speak on their experiences and challenges on being board members.


Some of the memorable quotes from the session were –


“Never underestimate the power of connection/network. Being a board member can be challenging. Always keep learning and equip yourself with knowledge in corporate governance. Do network with industry experts to build a robust eco-system,” –

Ilham Sunhaji (MBA).


“You are allowed to make mistakes. Learn from them. Move On,” – Maheswari G Kanniah.


“One must be confident that the Board is the right one for you. Do some research on the company and assess the types of risks that one is willing to take,” another pointer -Maheswari G Kanniah.


“To get on board, it is important to get your CV right. State what are you bringing to the board, especially strategy and oversight experience”- Frances P.

The sharing session was moderated by Sujatha Sekhar Naik.


This is the first event that was initiated by the Mentee Circle, a networking group that helps foster better collaboration among mentees.


30% Club Malaysia Unveils Mentee Circle

The 30% Club Malaysia through its Board Mentoring Scheme unveiled a mentee networking group, the Mentee Circle.

 

Interestingly, the idea behind the MenteeCircle came from the graduating mentees themselves, with the goal of building an ecosystem of board ready women.

 

At the virtual launch earlier today its founding chair Tan Sri Zarinah said the Mentee Circle is a useful forum to enable one to connect and network, to share experiences & learn from each other & to initiate programmes that will enhance one’s visibility as aspiring directors.

 

The Mentee Circle aims:

      1. To foster connection & collaboration among mentees within the cohort during & post the 9-month mentoring period;

     

    1.  2. To promote knowledge sharing through relevant events within the mentee community, as well as with selected mentors & corporate leaders;

     

    1. 3. To provide a platform to raise the visibility and enhance the visibility of board-ready candidates. 

     

    1. The Mentee Circle has lined-up a series of planned activities for this year & all 30% Club Malaysia mentees are invited to participate.

     

    The two health crises facing Black people in Canada: COVID and Racism

    A conversation with Sané Dube on the two health crises facing Black people in Canada: COVID and Racism

    By Stephania Varalli

     

    By early April, just a few weeks after COVID-19 was officially declared a pandemic, the headlines started appearing: Black people were experiencing an increased risk of infection, hospitalization, and death from the virus. 

     

    The stats were coming from the US and the UK, because we weren’t collecting race-based COVID data in Canada — despite awareness of the risks for Black communities, community members sounding the alarm, and supporting evidence by way of overlapping COVID and census data. 

     

    As Black Lives Matter protests erupted globally at the end of May in response to the killing of George Floyd, accelerating calls from Black community health leaders in Canada to have anti-Black racism declared a health crisis — mainstream discussions were still asking, “Is Canada racist?” 

     

    Sané Dube has been advocating for greater visibility and action with respect to the connection between race and health. Currently the Policy and Government Relations Lead, with a focus on Black health, at the Alliance for Healthier Communities, she has worked in community development, health promotion, research, and strategic policy development. 

     

    I spoke with Sané about the link between anti-Blackness and the severity of COVID among Black people in Canada, the distinctly Canadian blind spot that serves to halt progress on the issue, and what we could be doing differently to dismantle systemic racism in healthcare. 

     

    This interview has been edited for length. 

     

     


    Statistics are showing that Black people are more likely to die from COVID — but while the numbers are making the headlines, not everyone is gaining an understanding of why this is happening. Can we start there? 

     

    Health is about a lot more than being able to walk into a doctor’s office or being able to walk into a healthcare facility. Health is really influenced by a range of factors and the environments we live in. Social determinants of health can be understood as the conditions that you live, work, and play in — it’s really a combination of the social and economic factors that impact your health.

     

    Housing, for example, impacts health in very significant ways in terms of stability. We know that people who are unhoused or are experiencing homelessness tend to have worse health outcomes than people who have stability and don’t have to worry about housing. These social determinants of health are really looking at health with a much broader view than just through the ability to see a doctor, nurse or healthcare provider. They’re looking at the everyday things in someone’s life that can either help their health or lead to deterioration of their health.

     

     

    Early on in the pandemic, when first called upon to collect race-based data with respect to COVID, Dr. David Williams, Chief Medical Officer of Health for Ontario, responded that statistics based on race aren’t collected in Canada unless certain groups are found to have risk factors — which seems to completely ignore the existence of social determinants of health. 

     

    That moment was really shocking. At the same time that Ontario was saying we won’t collect the data, we were seeing really striking statistics coming out of the United States and also the United Kingdom. We now know that in the US, Black people are five times more likely to be hospitalized and more than twice as likely to face fatal outcomes from COVID, compared to white Americans. 

     

    We know that in Ontario it’s the same story. At the time when Dr.Williams made this comment, we were already seeing the impact of COVID on some communities. It was really disappointing to hear.

     

    There was a lot of rallying, there was a lot of mobilization — I think people were pushing back against this thing that often happens in Canada, where we try and make invisible the way that systemic racism and structural inequality impact the most marginalized and vulnerable in our communities. We often get, ‘We’re not the same as the US,’ which invisibilizes the harm that Black, racialized and Indigenous people experience in this country. 

     

     


    The efforts made by advocacy groups eventually led to 
    the Ontario government changing course on the collection of race-based data for COVID, which is certainly a win. But to put that in perspective — this can’t be the first time this conversation was happening, right? 

     

    You’re right. This is not new. People have been calling for this for literally decades. I was looking at something today — someone showed me a committee that had been put together in 1998, asking for the collection of this data. I think that this happened to be a window of opportunity because of the devastation that we have seen with COVID.

     

    Data is collected in Ontario for other sectors. Education collects data by race. Justice also does. And there was a discussion, around 2017, to collect the data for health, but at the time the ministry said that there are lots of privacy concerns. I don’t think in calling for more data collection now, people are saying we should not be mindful of privacy. It’s also important to say that the collection of the data is not the end goal — but having the data means we have better tools to dismantle what causes harm.

     

    “This call was partly pushback saying, no, things are really awful, and this is not an issue just in the US. Even in Canada, Black people are dying, Indigenous people are dying, because of what happens with policing, because there isn’t a recognition of the ways that racism leads to death, or racism leads to us getting less services than other people, or getting care that just isn’t good enough. “

     

    You were a signatory on thejoint statement calling for anti-Black racism to be declared a public health crisis. Can you share what led to its release on June 1, and what were the main goals of this joint effort?

     

    You’ll remember that in the same week in the US, we had just seen the killing of George Floyd and Tony McDade, and we were talking about the killing of Breonna Taylor. Then in Canada, that same week, we had seen Regis Korchinski-Paquet, an Afro-Indigenous woman, fall to her death in police presence. There have been two other deaths in Ontario under similar circumstances. In New Brunswick, we had just seen Rodney Levi, an Indigenous man, killed by an RCMP officer, and Chantel Moore, who was also Indigenous, killed by police who were called in to respond to a mental health and wellness check.

     

    All these things were happening in Canada, and our Premier was asked about systemic racism, and his response at that time was that ‘we’re not as bad as the US’ — the premier did later reverse this, but in that moment it had the effect of minimizing the violence Black and Indigenous communities were facing.  

     

    This call was partly pushback saying, no, things are really awful, and this is not an issue just in the US. Even in Canada, Black people are dying, Indigenous people are dying, because of what happens with policing, because there isn’t a recognition of the ways that racism leads to death, or racism leads to us getting less services than other people, or getting care that just isn’t good enough. Racism leads to our communities being underfunded, so that in the social sector, the health sector, our communities receive less. That ends up influencing our health.

     

    With the declaration of anti-Black racism as a public health crisis, we were calling for it to be seen that racism was impacting people’s lives. It was a push to make things visible, and to then have the system be accountable for the ways that people are harmed. Declaring something a public health crisis shows urgency, that this is a critical issue that demands a response. It ensures health resources are designated, and there’s planning for the appropriate resources to be put in place, as well as accountability, infrastructure, and mechanisms for the system. 

     

     


    A lot of the mainstream media stories have focused on the mortality rate of COVID being higher for Black people. What’s not making the headlines that should be, with respect to Black communities and health? What about mental health? 

     

    When that question comes up, my first thought is always, how do you talk about this in a way that doesn’t pathologize Black people? Anti-Black racism, anti-Indigeneity has done so much harm and continues to do so much harm. White supremacy does so much harm to our people, and yet we often talk about mental health in a way that somehow again places the harms of these huge, unrelenting systems at the feet of Black people, without holding the system accountable for the distress that it causes to our people. What I would really like us to ask is, ‘What does this system do to Black people and in what way is it not accountable?’ 

     

    I’ll give the example of healthcare workers who are dying in Ontario. Most have been personal support workers, many of them Black and racialized. It’s caused tremendous distress to their families, especially the circumstances under which they have died. I think that even the system has not held itself accountable for the way that it’s contributed to those deaths.

     

    Earlier on in the pandemic, Chief Medical Officer of Health, David Williams, was asked about personal protective equipment for personal support workers. He initially did not name them as essential workers, or prioritize access to equipment for them. Then personal support workers started dying, and there’s no apology for the way that they have been treated, there is no acknowledgement of the way that the system has failed them. Instead, when you read about their death, it’s almost framed like they are responsible for what systemic and structural issues have done to them.

     

     

    Is there a way we can tell these stories differently, so that they are contributing to positive change?

     

    We need to be able to tell these stories in a way that also holds the system and these structures accountable for the harm that they do to people.

     

    With Regis Korchinski-Paquet, for example, I think we have to ask, as a 29-year-old young woman, what other support had she received to that point? Had she been able to find care that was culturally appropriate and that understood her very specific cultural issues that she was bringing? If she hadn’t, then why isn’t there more of an effort, even as we discuss her case, to talk about funding for mental health programs that are designed by and for marginalized communities, so that people can get the care that they need?

    Even with Chantel Moore, I think that there just hasn’t been as much useful conversation talking about the way that policing continues to be part of the colonial project in Canada. It again goes back to that accountability. So much of the media coverage in Canada has been focused on the question, is there systemic racism? — which is just a distraction, and it takes away from what people are going through. 

     

    And while we’re wasting time asking if there’s systemic racism, people’s lives are still being negatively impacted. People are still not getting the care that they need in Toronto’s  North West to deal with a deadly pandemic. While we’re asking, ‘Is there systemic racism in prisons?’, people who are Black and Indigenous — who are also overrepresented in prison populations — are not getting all the supplies that they need to deal with COVID, even though they are at some of the highest risk because of the condition that people in prisons live under.

     

     


    Has the conversation around racism and health evolved at all, as a result of the pandemic?

     

    I think that we are having conversations right now in 2020 under COVID that we weren’t having in 2018, which is great. But it would be naive not to look at the ways that already white supremacy is mutating and working to keep the status quo in place. I think there’s a lot of words that are being put out, but I don’t know that most of them are turning into actual work.

     

     

    You have written about how anti-Blackness is a health crisis that deserves more than lip-service. Is there anything that gives you hope for change in what’s happening now? 

     

    This is a question that we also see a lot in Canadian media. I think that hope is a critical part of resistance; hope is a critical part of being able to remake a world where we can live better. I think that often what happens when people are asked to be hopeful, is minimization of the very real pain that people are in and the difficulty of this moment. So I don’t usually answer that question, ‘what gives you hope?’ But what I do say is that I recognize hope is a critical part of resistance.

     

     

    Throughout the pandemic we’ve heard the phrase “We’re all in this together” — but are we? Looking closer, the impact of COVID-19 is not equal for all. The 30% Club Canada and Women of Influence are partnering on Unmasked — a series that amplifies the voices of community leaders, sharing unique challenges and thoughts on how we can build a better, more inclusive future.

    COVID’s greater impact on women and how we can rebuild equitably

    A conversation with Sarah Kaplan on COVID’s greater impact on women and how we can rebuild equitably

     

     

    At this point in the pandemic, we should no longer be asking if COVID is affecting women to a greater degree than men.  

     

    The evidence shows it is, and in many ways; a primer on the gendered impacts of COVID-19 released in April by the Institute for Gender and the Economy (GATE) pointed to higher participation in risky front-line work, greater susceptibility to economic uncertainty, increased domestic and caregiving responsibilities, increased vulnerability to domestic violence, and barriers to sexual and reproductive healthcare — with Indigenousracialized, low-income, LGBTQ+ and other vulnerable groups worse affected.

     

    Even as social distancing rules are relaxing, the situation has not improved. The latest statistics show women suffered a greater loss of jobs and are experiencing a slower recovery, have higher reported mental health issues, and a higher COVID mortality rate in Canada — and relatively speaking, this is still just the immediate impact. We don’t have a clear view of the long-term effects of the pandemic for women. 

     

    I spoke with Sarah Kaplan, Founder and Director of GATE, to get her take on why it’s important to look at COVID with an intersectional gendered lens, where we are headed with respect to gender equality, and what we can be doing to build a more inclusive future. 

     

    The interview has been edited for length. 

     

     

    From the very beginning, you’ve been looking at the pandemic with an intersectional gender lens. Why is this so important? 

     

    When we first put out our primer on the gendered impacts of COVID, I had a colleague reach out to me irate that at a time when people were getting sick and dying, and the economy is in the tank, that I would dare be talking about gender issues — as if gender were something on the side, a nice-to-have, but it has nothing to do with the core economic or health impacts. 

     

    And of course, when you actually do look with a gender lens, you see how much it does have to do with gender, and you see the very unequal economic and health impacts. Gender, or women’s issues, or issues of masculinity, are not just something you focus on when times are stable — this moment of crisis is when we should be spending the most time looking at these kinds of issues. 

     

     

    Some people might argue we should take a ‘neutral’ approach to these issues, rather than a gendered approach. Is that even possible? What do you think could be the impact of that kind of thinking? 

     

    There is evidence from previous economic downturns and previous corporate layoffs that often diversity suffers, because if you approach it with rules like ‘we’ll furlough all the part-time workers’ or ‘we’ll furlough the people with the lowest evaluations’ or ‘we’ll furlough the people who are most recently hired’ — all of those are gendered. Women are more likely to be part-time, we know that performance evaluations are often gender-biased, and because companies have historically been bad at diversity, women are less likely to have seniority. 

     

    These supposedly gender-neutral rules have really gendered outcomes. We need to have an explicit diversity lens on these decisions, or you’re going to kill off whatever diversity we’ve been fighting to get in the last decade or so, including in corporate Canada. 

     

     

    That’s a very bleak thought — but not unsurprising, considering how many ways women are being affected from an economic standpoint. Are there any repercussions that you are particularly concerned about? What’s the worst case scenario here? 

     

    I think we could end up quite far back. Take a situation like yours, with young kids at home — if there has historically been a gender division of labor in the household, then it’s much more likely that the woman is going to drop out of the labour force, because it’s too hard for her to manage small children and perform in her job. 

     

    Among heterosexual couples, we know that we don’t have equal sharing of responsibilities in Canadian households — there is an incredibly gendered division of labour. The likelihood that we are going to see a whole generation of women with pre-teen children dropping out of the workforce is extremely high. It’s just not manageable. And until we get a vaccine, I think we’re going to see a whole slew of people leaving the workforce, and that will undo a lot of the progress. 

     

     

     

     

    “We’ve known for 30 years that childcare is the secret to women’s advancement in their jobs, and now we’re talking about how the secret to economic recovery is going to be childcare — it gives me some hope that we might actually get a universal child care solution.”

     

     

    What about the argument that men are now seeing how much work is involved in care responsibilities?

     

    Yes, on the positive side, and again talking about heterosexual couples, there are situations where the male partner is seeing exactly how much care work is required at home, and actually participating more and becoming more committed to getting corporate policies adjusted to adapt. 

     

    This may be a wake up call for many male leaders about what exactly has been happening behind the curtains. Some people predict that maybe we’ll get a wave of more equal households going forward, but I’m not sure about that. I think it remains to be seen exactly what social changes are going to be wrought from this. 

     

    I think one thing is true: we are never going to go back to everyone always working in their offices, now that people are set up to work from home. The future of work is going to change because of this, or accelerate at least, and I don’t think we have a good way to predict which way it’s going to pull — whether it’s going towards more gender equality because men have gotten more involved in care work, or it’s going to uphold inequality because women will have to give up their work in order to deal with the additional care work. 

     

     

     

    In the face of losing ground in the push for gender equality, what gives you the most hope? 

     

    A few things give me hope, including this broader conversation about care work. We’ve known for 30 years that childcare is the secret to women’s advancement in their jobs, and now we’re talking about how the secret to economic recovery is going to be childcare — it gives me some hope that we might actually get a universal child care solution. That would be great. 

     

    The second thing that gives me hope is that we all got thrown into a period of experimentation. We had been talking for years and years at the Rotman School about doing some online education, and there was resistance to that change — and then from March 13 to March 16, the entire in-person experience got transferred to online. We’re seeing similar things in all sorts of companies; between experiments with collaborative work, and different tools, we may come up with a better way of working. 

     

    We’re also able to include so many more people at work than we were ever able to include before. For example, people in smaller communities can now get a remote job at a big corporate in Toronto, get the advantage of that salary, and the advantage of staying in their communities. And many of the things that we have ended up doing because of the pandemic have been things that people with disabilities have been asking for for years. We can still do a better job of including people with disabilities — virtual meetings can be harder for people who have a vision impairment, or people who have a hearing impairment if they can’t read people’s lips — so it’s not perfect, but I see all kinds of experimentation leading us to think about ways of work that could actually be much more inclusive, and that gives me hope.  

     

     

    These are all examples of positive side effects of the pandemic, which are great, but what do you think we could be doing to intentionally rebuild in an equitable way

     

    GATE has actually partnered with the YWCA to develop a feminist recovery plan — because we definitely need to be intentional about what is included. From a more narrow focus, corporate recovery plan, to a broader focus, like where governments should invest in infrastructure. These kinds of big projects have major feminist dimensions to them. 

     

    As an example, investing in caregiving pays huge dividends — it basically pays for itself in a very short period of time — but it seems really expensive and so people don’t want to do it because it’s just caregiving, it’s not a highway. Investing in social infrastructure as opposed to physical infrastructure is a way of reconceptualizing the major government spending that will happen to help recover the economy.  

     

    It would be very different from how countries typically spend to recover the economy, and without some more very serious conversations, it’s unclear we’re going to get the feminist solution that we need.

     

     

    Throughout the pandemic we’ve heard the phrase “We’re all in this together” — but are we? Looking closer, the impact of COVID-19 is not equal for all. The 30% Club Canada and Women of Influence are partnering on Unmasked — a series that amplifies the voices of community leaders, sharing unique challenges and thoughts on how we can build a better, more inclusive future.

    COVID and People Living with Disabilities

    A conversation with Maayan Ziv on COVID and people living with disabilities

    By Stephania Varalli

     

    Maayan Ziv is an award-winning tech entrepreneur and disability advocate. Frustrated by the barriers she was experiencing living with muscular dystrophy, nearly five years ago she founded AccessNow — an app that uses crowdsourcing to pin-point the accessibility status of locations on an interactive map. 

     

    A few days before our conversation, the federal government announced new funding: $15 million to enable community organizations to help Canadians with disabilities adapt to the realities of COVID-19, and up to $600 for individuals who qualify for the Disability Tax Credit (DTC). 

     

    While that measure would have reached about 1.2 million eligible Canadians, one study estimates it would only cover roughly 40% of working-aged adults with a severe disability. What’s worse, on June 11 the bill that included these benefits failed to pass, as opposition parties withheld support. Party leaders blamed one another for the impasse, and so far, no new initiatives have been announced.

     

    Maayan Ziv spoke candidly on the challenges COVID presents for people with disabilities — and the opportunities.

     

     

    I’d like to start by asking, how are you doing?

     

    I’ve been okay. At first there was a lot of fear that I was experiencing — especially being someone who fits into the category of being immunocompromised. Whenever I listen to stories about how this is really, really dire for people who fit my criteria, there’s a lot of fear around that. And that is a shared experience. Pretty much everyone that is in a similar situation as me, we have had to take a lot of precautions. 

     

    It was difficult at first. Before there was even a lockdown, I was starting to self-isolate. I used to live in Toronto and I just moved out to the country to be in a less dense population. I’m not going to the grocery store or anywhere really, and basically everyone who’s living in the same house is in the same boat. It’s pretty extreme. 

     

    It can be frustrating or difficult, especially now when things are starting to open — it’s really not the case for me. I’ve gone through cycles, from fear, to a sense of grieving for what life was like pre-COVID. Now, I’m in a state of acceptance and really working on leveraging the silver lining that comes along with this new reality. I think that there’s a lot of change and it’s not all bad.

     

     

    One of those silver linings, from what I’ve been reading, is that some of the ways we’ve adapted because of COVID are actually beneficial to people living with disabilities. Would you agree with that?

     

    A lot of the things that we were seeing in the very beginning — like people writing about what it means to work from home, to access services online or remotely, and people having this panic of, how do I do life if I haven’t done this before? — that was general across the board, every person we talked to said the same thing. 

     

    And for our community of people with disabilities, it was a very interesting experience, because the things that people started realizing that they needed are things that people with disabilities have been advocating for years. The flexibility, working from home or having different work hours, the ability to use online tools as opposed to meeting in person.

     

    Specifically, if you just look at employment, it’s been a huge conversation that has been happening within the disability community for a very long time. Part of it has actually resulted in barriers where people don’t get the job, or they’re not given a fair chance to pursue an opportunity because people will say, ‘Well, if you can’t come into the office every day or if you can’t work in this way, you can’t work for us at all.’

     

    Now, there’s a bigger sense of advocacy for the disability community, that’s been demanding these types of accommodations, you might call it, for years — from home delivery to telehealth. There are so many different aspects of how we’re revolutionizing the world to be post-COVID that have been part of the DNA of how people with disabilities have been wanting to live their lives, and not always been granted access to.

     

    There’s a sense of, welcome to my world, and a real opportunity to develop a sense of empathy and work towards a greater understanding of inclusion because things that were considered accommodations, or things that are accessible specifically for people with disabilities, are now things that every person needs. That is a really unique opportunity to capitalize on and keep working towards inclusive progress.

     

    We’re in a really important moment in time where we hope that things will continue in this direction. We hope that restaurants will continue to offer options, and that offices will continue to embrace a remote work style, and that we won’t just go back to a one-size-fits-all model without the flexibility to be there for every person. That’s something we’re advocating for within the disability community.

     

    “There’s a sense of, welcome to my world, and a real opportunity to develop a sense of empathy and work towards a greater understanding of inclusion because things that were considered accommodations, or things that are accessible specifically for people with disabilities, are now things that every person needs.”

     

    Is there a degree of frustration that you’ve been advocating for this for years and people have been saying, ‘We can’t do it’ — and now all of a sudden, en masse, the world has started doing it?

     

    It’s a good question. For sure, I think that there is some frustration there, but the frustration has always been there. The fact that people with disabilities haven’t been given the same rights and opportunities, that’s a systemic issue, and it’s global. 

     

    That’s why the largest minority group in the world has been advocating for that for so long. But rather than just leaning on that anger and that frustration, having the opportunity to then use that frustration as fuel to capitalize on this chance for change, I think is really the approach that I’m taking personally and I see a lot of people in the community doing as well. 

     

    So knowledge-sharing, improving access with our Access From Home product, and we’ve launched a campaign that’s focused on storytelling, so that people with disabilities can share their own lived experiences about what access from home looks like, so that it becomes more personal and it becomes real for people, rather than this blob of immunocompromised people. 

     

     

    You mention your Access From Home product — which seems to be the opposite of what you were offering with AccessNow. How did that come about?

     

    At AccessNow we were originally focused on connecting people to the physical world, the built environment, and encouraging and empowering people to get out and do things and be independent. With COVID, we had to quickly start thinking about what our role is now, in a world where people can’t really go out. 

     

    That’s really where Access From Home became part of the solution. We’ve been hearing a lot of people in our community saying, ‘I’m having a difficult time finding access to groceries,’ or ‘What opportunities do I have for online employment? What tools can I use?’ or ‘What sources of education or entertainment do I have access to from home?’

     

    We started building this directory of different companies and services, where people can look for the things that they need in their life, and so have that sense of accessibility and empowerment at home. So we’re contributing in the same way that we’ve always done, connecting people to an accessible world — even if our world is now digital, and accessed through devices at home.

     

    And we continue to invest in our main platform, the AccessNow app. We know that accessibility in the built environment is still, and will always be, critical to achieving independence and equity

     

     

    What about other supports — like group programs and at-home care? I’ve read they’ve had to change how they’re delivered, or they’ve just gone away. How is this being managed?

     

    Many people are really struggling. I’ve heard nightmare stories from people who are without enough support, because their caregivers have had to pick only one place of employment or don’t feel safe coming to work. I’ve heard from people who have had to isolate from loved ones in order to limit the risk of exposure, or those unable to get basic needs met due to new financial constraints or gaps in care. It’s just hard, it’s hard on everyone, with or without the disability. 

     

    But for those with disabilities, it can be really trying right now and that story is not widely known. We still have a lot of people hanging out in big groups or not practicing proper social distancing or not wearing masks. Many people I feel are not thinking about how those actions, although they might not actually hurt them personally, are hurting other people. 

     

     

    Do you feel like, as we’re all figuring out this new normal, that your voice is being heard?

     

    Early on Minister Qualtrough put together an advisory committee of people that were focused on disability and COVID-19, and that now there is also a new effort from Stats Canada to collect survey data on the impact of COVID on Canadians with disabilities.

     

    But is it too little too late? I think the $15 million for programs, that’s a significant number but when we talk about funding on the personal level, there’s a lot of people who fall through the cracks. The important thing to realize, and I don’t think people do, is that people with disabilities have a lot of expenses, especially now, and many are without the support they need.

     

    Here’s one tiny example: a caregiver that’s coming and going daily — you need PPE not just for you, but for all the people who come in and out of your life every day to support you. There are all these microtransactions that people don’t really think about, and there’s a whole body of work that talks about the cost of disability — and during this time, it’s even more significant. I’m glad that some funding is there, but I’m not sure it will be enough.

     

     

    Is there a lesson you hope that we learn out of this? If there was one thing you wish we could hold on to that will lead us towards a better future, what would that be?

     

    I honestly think that it boils down to empathy. I think when there is a sense of empathy we react differently, and we’re kinder to each other, and we are more thoughtful about our actions. I think we’ve been given the opportunity to empathize with another person’s fear, another person’s reality. People start meetings with a meaningful ‘how are you?’ — it is not necessarily something we would have seen in the past, but is a chance to connect with another person, authentically.

     

    Having that kind of human element, we have a unique opportunity to now grow from this experience, and I hope that we do. Human tendency is to get these new paths and then eventually forget about them and go back to the old ways. I hope that that’s not going to be the case. I think we have an opportunity to learn from this, and to invest in a future that is welcoming and inclusive.

    Throughout the pandemic we’ve heard the phrase “We’re all in this together” — but are we? Looking closer, the impact of COVID-19 is not equal for all. The 30% Club Canada and Women of Influence are partnering on Unmasked — a series that amplifies the voices of community leaders, sharing unique challenges and thoughts on how we can build a better, more inclusive future.