1. “Actually they (deaf people) don’t need to speak to wash the dishes, all they need to do is to focus on the dishes and wash it. Yes, they (deaf friends) are also very good (thumbs-up). "
- DZ
2. “If you employ those who can speak, those tend to be lazier. These (non-hearing people) are more hard-working”
- DZ
***DZ said these when the owner was not sitting beside her, since he was accompanying her Deaf friends leaving the restaurant - which was more naturally-elicited
The above discourses show that DZ thinks “hearing” and “non-hearing” people are different in terms of working attitudes and behaviors, in which she used the demonstrative pronouns "those & these" as implicit discourse markers to draw social boundary and differentiated workers into “hearing” and “non-hearing” groups, as if the two categories were in contrast. This resonates with what Bucholtz and Hall (2005) states in the positonality principle, in which identities were made based on local, ethnographically specific cultural position and temporary/interactionally specific stances and participant roles. In this case, DZ was giving her verbal account on the working attitudes between "Deaf" and "Non-Deaf" employees working in a restaurant, and she positioned two groups in an explicit ways - with the strategic use of third-person plural subject pronoun (they) and demonstrative pronouns (those, these) to distinguish "hearing" from "non-hearing" employees, aided with sign language to convey her thoughts e.g. pointing to her deaf friends when she said "these". Furthermore, DZ attributed different working attitudes with the use of adjectives "lazy" and "hardworking" respectively to non-deaf and Deaf employees, in which the adjectives are antonyms of each other. This implies a potential dichotomy between two groups.
For the second discourse in particular, she may think that the working attitude of hearing people are more "laid-back", as they have the “privilege” of speaking properly, and are not disadvantaged with the hearing impairment in workplace. Hence, the hearing people can have a wider range of working opportunities and social mobility when compared to the non-hearing people, in which the hearing people can choose not to take the job seriously or treasure it as much as they do. As a result - to DZ - hearing people are tend to be “lazier” in workplace.
While on the other hand, the “non-hearing” people – including herself – are very aware of her own physical and social limitation. For instance, she had personally encountered unfriendly questioning from hearing employees - "You are deaf!?", and because of that, she might think that her hearing employee did not understand her well. This shows that she was lacking social recognition and empathy from her fellow hearing colleagues. DZ thinks that even for a "low-ranking" job like dish-washing, deaf people will do their very best and tend to be more "hard-working", so as to ensure their ability and effort can be recognized and respected by others - especially for employers.
The first discourse shows that DZ thinks speaking is not absolute necessary for deaf people - particularly in relation to a specific job like dish-washing. This actually reveals slightly about DZ’s preference on non-verbal (e.g. sign language) or verbal communication (e.g. lip reading) when it comes to workplace situation. As she was speaking for her deaf friends - who shared a high degree of similarity with her in terms of cultural and social background. Therefore, there is a possibility that she was actually projecting her own language preference when she spoke for her friends. This echoes with what Bucholtz and Hall refers in the indexicality principle (2005), where there is a subtle pointer that carries certain association. In this case, the subtle pointer is "they", which refers to her deaf friends, and from the phrase "actually they don't need to speak to wash the dishes...focus on the dishes and wash it". We can see that DZ thinks washing dishes is not a must for deaf people to speak up in order to get the job done, and by regarding "talking" is not necessary for them, it also implies that they are not good at lip reading/oral speaking. However, DZ thinks that does not affect their working performance as long as the job nature (dish-washing) does not require them to speak/talk to others.
This dichotomy was later being confirmed by the employer Mr. T as well:
"Because at the beginning, the deaf and hearing people could not actually blend in well. They usually just focus on their own benefits, seldom do they care about others."
- Mr. T
This is quite an explicit statement from Mr. T, her employer, on the relationship between the "deaf" and "non-deaf", where they seemed to described as "not actually blend in well" - hinting there is a certain degree of conflict and miscommunication. As an employer himself, he must have observed the way how the employees worked together. Unfortunately, to his own observation, they were quite "self-centered" and "selfish", as he used the phrase "focus on their own benefits" to further elaborate the reason why they were not working well with each other. Although we did not know the specific event that has stirred the conflict between them, they seemed to be caring their own business instead, rather than caring or help each other out.
Mr. T then switched the focus back to the solution he gave to the conflict and emphasized more on the possible interventions that he could give:
"So I have to transmit values such as empathy and patience to them. And building confidence is another thing to consider as well. Very often when they first come into the workplace situation, they are not particularly adapted to it. Because they feel themselves as independent, more self-reliant. Or they would feel themselves as part of disadvantaged community. And you have to train them how to develop self-confidence..."
- Mr. T
From here, Mr. T has not only given his solution on how he tried to improve on the situation (e.g. transmitting values like empathy and patience), but also explained the reason why deaf employees did not blend in well with the hearing employees, because the deaf employees "feel themselves as part of disadvantaged community". In another words, the deaf employees felt fragile, insecure and lacked the faith and confidence to embrace the challenges of a new working environment. They may think it is quite intimidating and overwhelming for them to get used to some procedures and routines of the restaurant - ranging from how to handle customers' request, to cooperating with new unfamiliar colleagues who can be so different to them in so many ways - both in terms of physical ability (e.g. hearing-able) and mental capacities (e.g. less determined or hardworking). While they may feel restricted by their own physical hindrance such as - not able to hear and speak, this also further attributes to their own insecurities, causing a wider gap for both "hearing" and "non-hearing" employees to work together in a harmonious way.
"Communicate more and respect each other more. Everyone has their own stance and thoughts. Everyone is fair. Therefore, all of us should raise the problem out and discuss about it, rather than relying on scolding and rejection. You have to try it slowly, so as to understand each other more."
- Mr. T
According to the discourse above, Mr. T has given a short but precise mindset for his employees to follow in order to solve the conflict - which is communication and respect. He thinks that mere argument is not going to solve the problem - if everyone insist they are on the right side, they would not see the things where they both (hearing and non-hearing) have in common. Therefore, he suggests that, rather than relying on rejection and drawing meaningless social boundaries, they should learn how to raise the problem in the limelight and discuss it peacefully with one another.
He has also given a suggestion on how the third party can involve and help solve the problem:
"Usually we would cooperate with the social worker. For example, this cup should be put at here... we need to talk to the social worker, she would suggest us to post something with both visuals and words to tell them how to put [the cup]"
- Mr. T
From here, he thinks that social helper can help involve as a meaningful mediator and provide relevant suggestions and advice to guide people through difficulties or challenges at workplace. For instance, instruction with both visuals and words, so that the workers could understand how to carry out the required duties in a vivid, illustrative way, instead of relying on complicated wordings and abstract concepts. This actually serves as a good reference for embracing a higher degree of inclusiveness in the society.
1. “In the [Facebook complaint] paragraph, he/she posted that ‘the girl with the pink hair pretended not to hear [me] and ignored me’. (getting louder) That moment I really wanted to tell him/her I genuinely can’t hear. But...”
- Youth A
2. “(sheepishly) [The delayed salary amount is] Very little... Trying to get it back [now].”
- Youth B (through an interpreter)
Unlike the previous interview with DZ, it is gathered that the Deaf community may be disadvantaged in their workplace due to misunderstandings and their unheard voices. From the interview with Youth A, it was noted that a customer had mistaken Youth A’s lack of attention as being intentionally rude after verbally calling for her. He/she then brought the complaint to Facebook, which caused Youth A to feel frustrated about the situation as she was not given a chance to explain her case before she was publicly called out. In the first discourse, it was observed that Youth A became more and more agitated with a gradual increase in loudness as she shared about being accused of shunning the customer which was not on purpose at all. She had wanted the customer to know it was a genuine mistake and did not even mind sharing her hearing condition to make things clear. However, without her company’s support nor their response to the social media post in the matter, Youth A had to take the blame as her side of the story was not voiced.
Apart from the misunderstanding Youth A encountered, Youth B had a similar disadvantaged encounter regarding his payment. He shared about having his payment delayed and was attempting to go after it. It was observed in the interview that Youth B was shy about his delayed salary and was not too comfortable sharing this information. The interview was held with the help of a voluntary interpreter, which suggests an inconvenience Youth B faces when it comes to communication in his daily life and that it would be hard for him to express his frustrations and dissatisfaction in speech. Therefore, he would have to rely on his friends to communicate with their boss regarding his payment and there was not much he could do as he was not able to voice out his opinions and there is an unspoken oppression of Youth B’s voice in the matter. The fact that he used the word in the discourse “try” also shows his uncertainty and lack of confidence in getting his salary. From the interviews, it is observed that one of the problems brought by the language obstacles to the Deaf youths is the oppression of their voices.
“[I]f I apply for jobs outside, I might need to go through interviews and they might ask about previous working experiences. For people who are hard of hearing -- forget about English -- even Chinese may not be pronounced properly.”
- Youth A
Employment in the Hearing world is a difficulty for the Deaf community. As Youth A mentioned, many jobs require interviews and language continues to be an obstacle for the Deaf individuals. Both Youth A and B are able to have jobs because of connections being family and friends respectively, while all the Deaf members of the NGO responded that they found it a struggle to find jobs. Like Youth B, the Deaf members of the NGO were unable to hold a verbal conversation. Since their Hearing colleagues do not know sign language, communication is done mostly through writing, and oralism for some. It might not be the most convenient mode of communication but it is observed that the Deaf individuals try their best to actively be part of conversations. Most respondents, however, have also admitted to being discriminated in their work place, and as ‘identity is the ‘social positioning of self and others’ (Bucholtz & Hall, 2005), their identity as part of the Deaf community would become stronger. It is likely that due to such distinct classification and possible communication inconveniences, companies are less willing to employ individuals who are hard of hearing, and unfair treatment still exists in the workplace.
In response to what the government can do, Youth B gave the following suggestion:
“(with certainty) Lower positions. Provide more lower-positioned jobs for us [Deaf members]... We can’t find jobs with high pay because we can only find jobs with low positions.”
- Youth B
Deducing from Youth B’s response, it is with more lower-positioned jobs that the Deaf community will face less competition and be able to have more stable jobs. With more secured jobs, individuals like Youth B do not have to worry about asking for their payment from the bosses for they work freelance. Although this may not directly relief the language obstacles, it does creates more opportunity for interaction between the Deaf community and the Hearing world. Youth B also admitted feeling like he was exploited because he could not meet the requirements for high-paying jobs and so he had to take up freelance jobs himself. There was no hesitation as Youth B gave the suggestion with certainty, which shows it was something he believed firmly that could help the Deaf community in terms of employment.
From the above discussion, it is observed there is a discrepancy among the opinions on workplace experiences of the Deaf individuals. DZ has a rather positive working environment while Youths A and B and the Deaf members of the NGO had faced discrimination and difficulty communicating with other members of Hearing world in their workplace because of language obstacles.