It would have
seemed hard for Atos to further worsen its appalling reputation on the
Work Capability Assessment, but in a blatant PR puff-piece in the
Financial Times it seeks to create an impression it wants to withdraw
from the WCA because of repeated death threats to its staff by disabled
campaigners.
According to the
FT “Atos Healthcare said the political environment had become untenable
and that it was no longer fair to employees to leave them vulnerable to
attack. ‘It is becoming incredibly difficult for our staff; it’s pretty unpleasant,’”
‘it’s pretty unpleasant’
seems rather ironic given the hundreds of thousands of disabled people
repeatedly subjected to the incredibly distressing WCA by Atos.
Now death-threats
are clearly unacceptable, but what is particularly interesting here is
Atos have never before alleged their staff were at risk, and they had
the perfect opportunity in front of the Work and Pensions Select
Committee barely a month or so ago. When it comes to unacceptable
behaviour, the focus has rather been on Atos staff indulging in such
unprofessional behaviour as homophobic rants to patients, or attacking
claimants as ‘scroungers’ on social media. Indeed the BMA found it
necessary to remind doctors working for Atos that basic honesty was a professional requirement.
The true
explanation for Atos’ behaviour may be revealed further into the
article, where it admits ‘The French IT company has been in discussions
with the Department for Work and Pensions with a view to exiting the
deal since October last year, because it views the tests as “outdated”. “In its current form it is not working for claimants, for DWP or for Atos Healthcare,” Atos said. “For several months now we have been endeavouring to agree an early exit from the contract, which is due to expire in August 2015.”’
In other words the
campaign by disabled people to reveal the truth about Atos and the WCA
has been so successful that it has destroyed the company’s reputation in
the UK and it is desperate to find a way out.
Atos could simply
have said ‘We are being asked to implement a policy that doesn’t reflect
the needs of those subjected to it,’ and guaranteed themselves a PR win
for being mature enough to admit when they are wrong; but, in an
absolutely classic example of bullying behaviour, Atos seeks to turn its
disabled victims into the aggressors for forcing the truth of their
behaviour into the public conscience, and there we find the true measure
of Atos.
