The job is hard enough on its own. Ask anyone who has spent time in a research lab, on an engineering team, or in a software shop, and they will tell you that. Now add a workplace built without you in mind, and the difficulty doubles. Here is the part that should change the conversation: the accommodations that make STEM work usable are mostly known, mostly cheap, and mostly boring. The barrier is rarely the cost. It is the habit of treating access as a favour instead of what it is, a legal obligation and a practical investment.
This is a guide to what actually works on the bench, on the team, and in the codebase. It is written for people with disabilities weighing a STEM career, and for anyone already in one who is tired of improvising a fix every single week.
Start from the right frame: accommodation is a right, not a perk
In Canada, the duty to accommodate is law. Employers must accommodate employees with disabilities up to the point of undue hardship, and the courts have set that threshold high. Most requests do not come anywhere near it. The U.S. Job Accommodation Network, a service funded by the American Department of Labor, has tracked employer data for years, and its numbers are blunt. In its most recent survey, of the employers who reported cost information, 61 per cent said the accommodation cost nothing, 33 per cent reported a one-time expense with a median of US$300, and 6 per cent reported an ongoing cost with a median of US$2,400 a year. Moving a workstation, adjusting a schedule, installing free software. Two things worth holding onto: the figures are American and in US dollars, and the employers surveyed had all contacted JAN for accommodation help, so they are not a random cross-section. Even allowing for both, the pattern is clear enough. This is not a burden. It is the ordinary cost of running a workplace.
No spam. No inspiration porn.
Our best writing for adults with disabilities, weekly and free.
Get the newsletterKnowing this changes how you ask. You are not requesting a kindness. You are naming a barrier and proposing a fix.
Research labs: the bench is the problem, not the person
Wet labs and field sites carry their assumptions in the furniture. Fixed-height benches. Fume hoods built for a standing worker. Equipment with tiny unlabelled dials. Protocols that assume two fast hands. None of these are laws of nature. They are design choices, and design choices can be remade.
What works in practice:
- Height-adjustable benches and sit-stand stations, so a wheelchair user or anyone who cannot stand for long can reach the work surface.
- Lab equipment with large-print or tactile labelling, and software a screen reader can actually read. Independence Science, founded by chemist Cary Supalo, who has been blind since age seven, builds talking lab tools precisely because mainstream instruments lock blind scientists out of their own data.
- A lab partner or technician for steps that genuinely need two hands at once, arranged as a standing accommodation rather than a one-off scramble.
- Clear floor paths and reachable storage, so a mobility aid is not running an obstacle course. AccessEngineering, a long-running initiative at the University of Washington, points to the same basics: wide pathways, reachable shelving, legible signage.
What does not work is the unspoken expectation that you will quietly route around every barrier yourself. That is not accommodation. That is the absence of it.
Engineering teams: flexibility beats heroics
Engineering work spans field sites, fabrication shops, and long hours at a screen. The accommodations that hold up best build flexibility into the role rather than carving out a fragile exception that has to be defended every quarter.
Flexible and remote work is the single most useful one. For people with chronic illness or conditions that fluctuate, a schedule that bends with energy levels and removes a punishing commute is often worth more than any single device. The pandemic settled the question of whether the work could be done remotely. It could. Rolling that flexibility back now is a choice, not a necessity.
For the physical and digital pieces: ergonomic, adjustable workstations; captioning for the constant stream of meetings; and design and modelling software checked for keyboard and screen-reader access before it goes out to the whole team. Procurement is where accessibility is won or lost. A tool that cannot be operated without a mouse shuts people out before they ever apply.
Coding workplaces: the tools are good, the culture lags
Software is, in some ways, the most accommodating STEM field. The work is digital, often remote, and the assistive technology is mature. Screen readers, voice-coding platforms, adjustable everything. The raw tools to do the job exist and they work.
The accommodations that matter most in a coding workplace:
- Remote and flexible work, again, as the default rather than the grudging exception.
- Accessible internal tooling. The ticketing system, the chat app, the deployment dashboard all need to work with a keyboard and a screen reader. Companies often ship an accessible public product and forget the tools their own staff live in.
- Captioned meetings and recorded sessions, so Deaf and hard-of-hearing developers, and anyone who processes information better on a second pass, are not left behind.
- Quiet space or noise control for people who need a low-stimulation environment to concentrate. An open-plan office is a barrier dressed up as collaboration.
Where coding workplaces still fall down is culture. Whiteboard interviews that test performance under pressure. “Culture fit” filters. The assumption that everyone communicates the same way. These screen out talented people for reasons that have nothing to do with the work.
What does not work, across all three
A few patterns fail everywhere. Dropping the entire burden of problem-solving on the employee. Treating each request as a one-time exception that has to be re-justified every quarter. Promising accommodation in the offer letter and stalling once you have started. And the quiet penalty, where someone who needs flexibility gets passed over for the interesting projects because they are seen as less available. None of this is accommodation. It is the barrier wearing a polite face.
The takeaway
The accommodations that work in STEM are not exotic. Adjustable benches. Accessible software. Flexible schedules. Captions. A lab partner for the two-handed steps. The technology is here and the law is clear. What is often missing is the willingness to treat access as part of how the work gets done, rather than a special case bolted on afterward. If you are entering STEM, learn to name the barrier and propose the fix. The fix is almost always smaller than the people saying no want you to believe.
Sources
- Costs and Benefits of Accommodations, Job Accommodation Network
- A Way with Words and Images, Employment and Social Development Canada
- Independence Science (accessible laboratory tools, founder Cary Supalo)
- AccessEngineering, University of Washington DO-IT Center
- Critical Examination of Barriers to Full STEM Workforce Participation, National Academies
