When Ableism and Sexism interact: Why women with disabilities face the harshest barriers at work

By Priscila Pereira, Director of Research & Innovation, Shape Talent

Key Summary

Disability inclusion is often treated as an afterthought in workplace equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) efforts, especially for women and marginalised genders. Although organisations frequently report progress on gender equity or racial diversity, disability data is often missing from annual reports, surveys, and internal dashboards.

As Women at Work highlights, disability is under-reported because numbers appear too small to disclose confidentially, employees fear retaliation, and many do not realise that invisible conditions such as ADHD, autism, depression, or chronic anxiety qualify as disabilities (Harvard Business Review, 2023). The result is a distorted picture of workplace disability, limiting an organisation’s capacity to design effective inclusion strategies.

But disability is not experienced in isolation.

For women and marginalised genders, disability interacts with sexism, ableism, and structural exclusion. It shapes every stage of employment, from hiring and pay, to representation and safety.

The problem of invisibility

Women and marginalised genders with disabilities often remain overlooked in disability-rights and gender-equity initiatives (UN Women, 2020). This dual invisibility emerges from persistent stigma, narrow stereotypes, and systems built around ableist norms.

The medical model places responsibility for disability on the individual, while the social model recognises that structural barriers create exclusion. The social model underpins global disability frameworks and is core to the UN Disability and Development Report (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2024).

Building on this, Crip theory further challenges fixed binaries between “non-disabled” and “disabled,” encouraging more fluid understandings of identity and capability. Recognising both visible and invisible disabilities helps disrupt assumptions and drives more equitable workplace design (Hanebutt, R., & Mueller, C., 2021)

Hiring, working and earning: Inequity across the employment lifecycle

The employment gap

Globally, only 27% of people with disabilities are employed, compared with 56% of people without disabilities (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2024). In the UK, unemployment among workers with disabilities is nearly double that of non-disabled individuals (Office for National Statistics, 2020).

For women with disabilities, the gap is even wider. Only 20% of women with disabilities in the EU work full-time, compared with 29% of men with disabilities, 48% of non-disabled women, and 64% of non-disabled men (European Disability Forum, 2023).

Autistic people face some of the harshest outcomes, with unemployment reaching 78% in the UK and 85% in the US (Austin & Pisano, 2021).

Precarious work

Intersectional inequalities magnify precarity. Black women with disabilities in the UK, for example, are nearly three times more likely to be on zero-hour contracts compared to non-disabled white men (Trades Union Congress, 2021a).

Bias in hiring

Many hiring systems remain inaccessible, with criteria rooted in ableist and neurotypical norms. Interviews often reward charisma, eye contact, or social fluency, all of which can disadvantage autistic or otherwise neurodivergent candidates (Austin & Pisano, 2021).

A UK study found that half of leaders and managers would not employ a neurodivergent person, with the highest bias directed at people with Tourette’s, ADHD, and autism (Leadership Global, 2023).

Women with disabilities also face compounded discrimination, reporting stereotypes and biased assumptions at significantly higher rates than their non-disabled peers (Hughes, 2023).

The accommodation gap

Even when women with disabilities obtain employment, poor workplace design often undermines their long-term success. Barriers include inaccessible meeting spaces, overstimulating open-plan offices, lack of assistive technologies, and insufficient leave or flexibility.

When environments are not designed to support neurodivergent workers, many feel pressured to “mask” or behave in neurotypical ways. Masking is strongly linked to burnout, anxiety, and reduced retention (Austin & Pisano, 2021).

The gendered disability pay gap

The disability pay gap intersects with the gender pay gap, creating one of the deepest wage penalties in the labour market. In the UK, women with disabilities experience a pay gap 30% worse than men with disabilities (Trades Union Congress, 2021a).

This persistent pay gap contributes to low representation of women with disabilities in leadership and ongoing economic inequality (European Disability Forum, 2023).

Microaggressions, harassment, and violence

Women with disabilities experience disproportionately high rates of microaggressions and workplace harassment. Research finds that:

• 61% of women with disabilities experience microaggressions (UN Women, 2020)
• 68% have faced sexual harassment at work (Trades Union Congress, 2021b)
• Among younger women with disabilities, this rises to 78% (Trades Union Congress, 2021b)

UN Women (2020) documents widespread patterns of non-consensual touching, infantilisation, and violations of bodily autonomy experienced by women with disabilities, globally. These behaviours often carry into workplace dynamics.

Despite these realities, many women with disabilities choose not to report incidents due to fears of retaliation and job insecurity (Trades Union Congress, 2021b).

Disclosure: A high-stakes decision

On top of the structural and cultural barriers they already face, disclosure is often a risky decision for disabled workers. Women with disabilities  are more likely to avoid disclosing their disability due to fears of job loss, stereotyping, lack of support, or retaliation (Hughes, 2023). These concerns are not unfounded, research consistently shows that disabled employees who disclose can face stalled progression, increased scrutiny, or exclusion from opportunities.

This creates a vicious circle of non-disclosure. When women with disabilities do not disclose, employers may assume there is no need for accommodations or systemic change. As a result, workplaces remain inaccessible or unresponsive to disability-related needs. In turn, the lack of accommodations then reinforces performance pressures, burnout, and feelings of isolation, which in turn make employees even less likely to disclose. Non-disclosure becomes a rational self-protective strategy in environments where disclosure is not met with safety, support, or trust.

A further consequence of this vicious circle is the lack of aggregated disability data across organisations, sectors, and regions. Because disclosure rates are low, disability often appears statistically insignificant within workforce data. This leads to a distorted picture of disability prevalence, causing employers, policymakers, and regulators to underestimate both the scale and nature of the barriers women with disabilities face. As a result, policy responses remain underdeveloped, resourcing is insufficient, and organisations fail to design informed, evidence-based interventions.

Because women with disabilities experience heightened intersectional discrimination, shaped by gender, disability, race, sexuality, and class, the stakes of disclosure are far higher than for their male peers. This results in a reinforcing cycle: inaccessible workplaces limit disclosure, low disclosure limits data, limited data undermines systemic action, and the absence of action maintains inaccessible workplaces.

What organisations can do

Organisations seeking genuine inclusion must adopt intersectional, structural approaches that go beyond compliance. These include:

• accessible, bias-aware hiring practices
• proactive accommodations rather than reactive ones
• sensory-inclusive workspace design
• psychological safety for disability disclosure
• qualitative data from listening circles by an independent provider to investigate further the lived experience of working women with disabilities
• intersectional pay and progression audits
• strong anti-harassment systems informed by disability and gender data
• adopting universal design approach as much as possible

Universal design means creating workplaces, systems, and environments that are accessible and usable for all people from the outset, rather than making adjustments only after someone encounters a barrier. It focuses on building flexibility, choice, and ease of use into processes, technologies, communications, and physical spaces so that accessibility becomes the default rather than the exception. Alongside universal design, adopting the social model of disability and embedding intersectionality are essential steps toward eliminating systemic barriers.

FAQs for organisations

Q. What is Crip theory?
A. Crip theory is a framework from disability studies that challenges traditional ideas of what is considered “normal” in relation to bodies, minds, and abilities. It draws on both disability theory to question how society labels, marginalises, and regulates disabled people. Crip theory argues that disability is not an individual deficit, but a political and cultural identity shaped by ableism, power, and social norms. It critiques pressures placed on disabled people to “mask” or appear non-disabled, and instead emphasises the value of diverse bodies, communication styles, and ways of being in the world.

Rather than seeing disability as a rigid category, Crip theory views:

• bodies
• minds
• abilities
• communication styles

as diverse, shifting, and legitimate.

Q. Why is disability often underreported in workplace EDI data?
A. Disability is chronically underreported due to fears of retaliation, stigma, and the misconception that only visible or mobility-related conditions qualify as disabilities. Many employees also avoid disclosure because they worry about being perceived as less capable or fear negative career consequences. As a result, disability data is frequently incomplete, leading to inaccurate representation in organisational reporting.

Q. What barriers do women with disabilities face during the hiring process?
A. Women with disabilities experience intersecting forms of discrimination:

• ableist hiring criteria
• inaccessible application platforms
• interviews requiring neurotypical communication norms
• stereotypes held by hiring managers
• compounded discrimination based on gender, disability, race, and class

Research shows that 50% of leaders and managers admit they would not employ a neurodivergent candidate (Leadership Global, 2023). Women with disabilities report significantly higher rates of bias in recruitment processes (Hughes, 2023).

Q. How does the disability pay gap affect women specifically?
A. Women with disabilities experience one of the largest wage penalties in the labour market. In the UK, the disability pay gap is 30% worse for women with disabilities compared to  men with disabilities (Trades Union Congress, 2021a). This pay gap persists across careers, shapes access to leadership roles, and deepens long-term economic inequality.

Q. How can organisations improve inclusion for disabled employees?
A. Effective strategies include:

• embedding the social model of disability in all policies
• training hiring managers on accessibility and bias
• offering structured, accessible recruitment processes
• providing accommodations proactively, not only on request
• ensuring psychological safety for disclosure
• conducting intersectional pay and progression audits
• strengthening anti-harassment systems informed by disability and gender data

These changes must be systemic, not individualised.

This article builds on our earlier blog published earlier this year, updating the insights and examples to reflect the latest developments and perspectives.

References

Austin, R., & Pisano, G. (2021). Autism doesn’t hold people back at work – discrimination does. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/12/autism-doesnt-hold-people-back-at-work-discrimination-does

European Disability Forum. (2023). EU gender equality index: Women with disabilities still left behind. https://www.edf-feph.org/2023-eu-gender-equality-index-women-with-disabilities-still-left-behind/

Hanebutt, R., & Mueller, C. (2021). Disability Studies, Crip Theory, and Education. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Disability Studies, Crip Theory, and Education | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education

Harvard Business Review. (2023). Women at work: Navigating your career when you have a disability [Podcast]. https://hbr.org/podcast/2023/10/navigating-your-career-when-you-have-a-disability

Hughes, K. (2023). Gender, disability, and labour market inequalities. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 25(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740.2023.2179108

Leadership Global. (2023). Half of all leaders and managers would not employ a neurodivergent person. https://leadership.global/resourceLibrary/half-of-all-leaders-and-managers-would-not-employ-a-neurodivergent-person.html

Office for National Statistics. (2020). Outcomes for disabled people in the UK. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/disability/articles/outcomesfordisabledpeopleintheuk/2020

Trades Union Congress. (2021a). Zero progress on the disability pay gap in the last decade. https://www.tuc.org.uk/news/tuc-slams-zero-progress-disability-pay-gap-last-decade

Trades Union Congress. (2021b). Disabled women and sexual harassment at work. https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/2021-07/DisabledWomenSexual%20harassmentReport.pdf

UN Women. (2020). Sexual harassment against women with disabilities: A multisectoral response. https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/Library/Publications/2020/Discussion-paper-Sexual-harassment-against-women-with-disabilities-en.pdf

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2024). Disability and development report: Executive summary. https://social.desa.un.org/sites/default/files/publications/2024-06/Final-UN-DDR-2024-Executive%20Summary.pdf