Forum: Goodwill cannot be the backbone of an inclusive employment system

I read with interest Eunice Tan’s commentary, “Autism in the workplace is about more than job placement” (Aug 12). As she rightly points out, opportunities remain limited, not just in number but also in scope, with young autistic adults still too often channelled into sectors such as food and beverage, housekeeping and retail.

Much also depends on individual employers motivated by personal conviction or social responsibility. While such goodwill deserves recognition, it cannot be the backbone of an inclusive employment system.

Equally critical is what happens after a person with autism enters the workplace. More often than not, support is left to a colleague appointed as a mentor or “buddy”. Without adequate training, support and recognition, this can become another responsibility added to an already full workload, making a well-intentioned arrangement difficult to sustain.

This is something my own family has experienced. My daughter, who is on the autism spectrum, has long wanted to teach. To fulfil her passion, she volunteers weekly as a teacher aide at a special education school on her day off. She is also currently an intern at a music school for children with special needs, assisting the main teacher in preparing and conducting lessons.

Modest as the role is, it has given her real confidence and purpose. Yet, as parents, we remain uncertain about how sustainable such arrangements are in the long run.

The wider system may need rethinking. Rather than relying mainly on the goodwill of private employers, the public sector could become a larger proving ground for supported employment by identifying suitable roles across ministries and statutory boards where abilities and jobs genuinely match. This could be further backed by structured internships and proper on-the-job support.

This, in turn, could demonstrate to private employers that autistic employees can succeed beyond the narrow range of roles commonly associated with them.

Existing schemes such as the Enabling Employment Credit and Open Door Programme provide an important foundation. The next step could be a collaborative push to place even greater emphasis on long-term retention, workplace support and career development.

Inclusive employment should ultimately be measured not by how many doors we open, but by how many people are able to remain, grow and build meaningful working lives after walking through them.

Thamilselvan Narayanasamy