Would you accept a hearing person as the Chief Executive Officer of the National Association of the Deaf IF that person had all the qualifications except for a hearing loss?
What if someone applied for the job who had a strong culturally deaf background, was an adult child of deaf parents (a CODA), and who had a strong work history of working in the deaf and hard of hearing community? Someone who had the financial and management skills and social networking skills to guide the NAD through challenging times?
Should that person be hired if the other candidates are deaf, but less qualified than the hearing, culturally deaf person? The job description (deadline March 1) does not state that the candidate has to be deaf. We got our deaf presidents of Gallaudet University, and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf. Are we ready for the opposite - a hearing CEO of the National Association of the Deaf?
Only if his/her business plan sound good then SOLD!
If the candidate were not a CODA, I’d be against it. I feel the CEO of NAD should be “one of us”. A CODA has lived in both cultures even though he or she hasn’t had the hearing loss firsthand.
We must not discriminate on the basis of disability! We cannot deny an otherwise fully qualified candidate the oppertunity simply because he or she lacks a particular disability.
I would hesitate at the idea of a hearing CEO of NAD.
Point one: we have come so far that we have a good supply of qualified Deaf leaders and there is simply no excuse for not finding them.
A good CEO also has the ability to draw upon talents of other people, including hearing people, and incorporate them into the NAD goals.
Point two: The payscale should be equivalent to that of other similar organizations, so that qualified Deaf CEOs are attracted to NAD. It would defeat the organization to value its employees so little that they are driven elsewhere for a fair wage.
Point three: A hearing CEO sends a very strong message to the public: Deaf people cannot do it. Deaf people are not qualified enough.
If in a competition for contributions, which organization do you think would win? A Deaf CEO of an organization of and by the Deaf, or a hearing CEO of an organization for the deaf?
Since NAD is an advocacy and membership type of organization, and not a charitable institution, this would not work at all.
I don’t think a person who didn’t have the experience of being deaf, at least, should be responsible for making decisions about people’s lives who share that experience. If we lived in a world that perfect, we wouldn’t need the agency in the first place. So no.
I don’t have a problem with it because it’s the CEO position. The President, who is the main “face” of NAD, should be Deaf.
I would be against it even if it were a CODA.
Nothing against the CODA’s…I love em’ they are ONE of us…my concern is with the PERCEPTION from the public if a CODA were speaking out for us.
However, if a CODA would swear to never use their voice…I might go for it…
Hell NO! Why should we want a hearing, even CODA be CEO? That would defeat the purpose of NAD that should be a deaf CEO to represent all DEAF.
Just imagine a hearing CEO of NAD meets with a hearing CEO of other company, a hearing CEO would think Deaf people couldn’t hack anything. It’s not right and fair to all Deaf if NAD decides to go with a hearing CEO. And also the membership may dive once that happens.
InsaneMisha
What about an oral deaf who also signs? What about a deaf/blind person who can speak but also sign? What about a person with an extensive track record of serving the deaf, perhaps as a director of a state commission for the deaf? You can not impose a blanket “never will accept” based on someone promising to “never use their voice” or something this silly.
While I understand the perception issue that concerns many, lets face facts. The NAD is struggling. They have had deaf CEO’s in the past, but two main issues are popping up: 1) the economic climate is drying up some previously reliable sources of funds, and 2) membership, while passionate, is stagnant in their advocacy (based on what I’ve seen). It’s not a question so much of whether or not the CEO is deaf, CODA, oral deaf, or HOH, it is a question of, does the person want the job for the right reasons, can they DO the job (qualified?), can they LEAD, and can they communicate the message? I’m not talking about can they sign, are they ASL fluent or deaf-culture innundated from birth, I’m talking about whether or not they can effectively communicate to ALL levels hearing, deaf, hoh, etc. what their vision is, how they plan to get there, and then how the membership can help to get there.
It is too multi-faceted of a job to entrust to a blanket litmus test, or a constantly shifting litmus test. Quite simply put, the NAD must select a QUALIFIED LEADER THAT GET PEOPLE TO BUY IN TO THE MESSAGE. To seek or even hire any less is to sound the death knell of the NAD as we know it.
Sure, as long as the person gets the job done. It should not matter whether the person is deaf or not. We absolutely cannot discriminate against hearing people. We would not want someone to not hire us based on our hearing loss, now would we?
(e
There are TWO major charities in the UK, the RNID and the BDA NEITHER has deaf people as CEO’s both are hearing, this has been the case for many years. We found the employment equality laws meant the positions could NOT be advertised as ’suitable for deaf people’, or ‘Deaf people welcomed to apply’ as this was ‘discrimination’ against hearing. We have been circumvented our rights by equality, go figure !
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has NEVER had a white person as their CEO! NAD shall NEVER have a hearing person as their CEO! The day NAACP or NAD has a white or hearing person as their CEO – they will immediately lose all their membership – guaranteed!
The National Association for the Deaf should be obligated to combat the high level of unemployment among Deaf people. What better way to do this than to purposely hire a qualified Deaf professional. They should not only promote this type of framework but, operate within this framework.
i read a true story of a girl who was hearing, and her parents were deaf. I think it would be good for a hearing person to be elected if their parents were deaf:}
I want CEO of NAD chief exeutive officer to be deaf as who born deaf period because deaf know deaf world…hearing do not know deaf world very well…I do not want you to hire hearing to work on this job postion…I want you to hire deaf to work this job period.
Because hearing think deaf is like dumb child…that’s why…to tell you truth I think hearing are too dumbiest I ever seen because hearing do not know deaf world that deaf world is more better techology so powerful than hearing you know that..you see deaf world have much better techology now more improvement for deaf future…hearing people go war and kill hearing people on earth.Deaf people got real peace with all countries of deaf people wow..hearing people are so blind to see what is going on in hearing world.
NO. I think most everyone responding has stated the reasons why. NO NO NO. The message is clear. Just like in every specialty it takes one to know one. We can represent ourselves and send a stronger message if we keep our CEO’s among our own.
I like what Kelly commented… see (12) … it makes sense…. in other words… we are obligated to ourselves to make our lives better for ourselves! It works better from within. We are our own advocates. Nothing can ever replace nor substitute our own leadership from within!
Generally I would not like a hearing CEO. Not even one with mild loss either.
The first and foremost qualification requirement would be a long history of knowing about, working with, and even advocating for Deaf issues.
But after all that how can a non-Deaf / non-Hard of Hearing understand all our issues?!
There is even a remote possibility of “hearing prejudice” (unconsciously) underlying the CEOs management decisions. It’s difficult to explain but generally an opinion of “they should learn to communicate and behave like normal hearing persons”.
That attitude, conscious or not is despicable.
Need to ask Keith Wann what he thinks of that cuz he is “that” CODA.
I believe the CEO of an organization for the deaf should be deaf. I will even go as far to say, they should’ve been born deaf. Why? No matter how qualified they may be. No matter how long they have been around deaf culture. If they were not born deaf, they will not have a true understanding of what it means to be Deaf. Because of this, there would always be a gap between them and the deaf communities they represent.
The deaf world needs the assurance that their representatives ” fully” understand the needs and concerns faced everyday by deaf people. No matter how qualified the person is. No matter how involved they are in deaf culture. If a hearing CEO is hired, there will always be a gap between them and the deaf world they were hired to represent.
I WOULD SAY NO CUZ I HAVE BEEN SEEN & THROUGH THIS BEFORE DEAF NEED STAND STRONG, U NEVER KNOW HEARING PERSON BE NICE FOE WHILE THEN LATER PUT IT HIS WAY CUZ ALL DEAF BACK OFF & WILL LOSE MEMBERSHIP,I DO NOT AGAINST HEARING PEOPLE , LOOK AT DEAF WORLD TODAY MOSTLY ARE SUFFER . IT A RISK TO TAKE THERE ARE PLENTY GOOD DEAF PERSON OUT THERE CAN DO IT & HANDLE IT
wow… I am HOH and I thought there was alot of discrimination in the hearing community. I agree with Eddie and Elizabeth. I think if the canidate has a strong….and I do mean strong background in the Deaf community, perhaps a CODA, who has LIVED and experienced Deaf culture they should NOT be ruled out due to the abscence of a hearing disability. As someone who struggles to fit into both the hearing and Deaf communities(due to the fact that I read lips but am just learning sign), I feel that perhaps someone who fits well into both cultures, such as a CODA would be a wonderful addition.
You asked if we are ready….I say nope, we are not ready and should never assume this possibility exists. If a hearing person or CODA is a “true friend/ally” of the Deaf human rights struggle, s/he will never apply for the position. NAD represents Deaf people, their language and culture, and NOT their “disability” as perceived by the medical mindset or the ignorant society. Otherwise, NAD will fail in its mission. I think this question does not become this context (About.com) and is pretty irresponsible.
no way! never know that hearing can overhead on deafies must be deaf president can find deaf who can work as president..
National Association OF the Deaf. Notice the emphasis on OF. Having a hearing CEO contradicts that name. We have many qualified Deaf leaders capable of occupying the CEO position. Why hire a hearing CEO? As a Deaf organization, we need to send a statement that we are capable of operating our own organization of the Deaf.
Since NAD also promotes the usage of sign language the Deaf CEO must possess sign language. This way we practice what we promote.
Sometime i was wondering if his/her business plan is better than others. We want NAD to be strong again…
I was hope that deaf candidate would bring the best business plan!
I feel that only a deaf person should have this position. I am not deaf nor do I have any deaf family members but I just think its only fair that a deaf person, because he or she is much more able to identify with the deaf, should have the position.
I want to echo what Ella said — I do not think we are ready to have a hearing CEO of NAD. If they are “true” ally, they WILL not apply for the position.
Period.
End of discussion.
What a waste of everyone’s time.
Period.
R-