How epistemic injustice maintains norms of the disembodied ideal worker in UK Universities

This paper extends debates usually reserved for philosophy, health and justice systems to a new domain by applying Fricker’s concept of epistemic injustice to the workplace to understand the experiences of academics living with disability and chronic health conditions. It focuses on the experiences of disabled UK higher education institution (HEI) employees, including women with long-term gynaecological health conditions. The paper brings together four studies conducted between 2017 and 2020 specifically: oof interviews with disabled academics (n=75), interviews with key stakeholders in universities (n=35) ((including university executives, line managers and human resources staff) alongside an analysis of the human resource management (HRM) policies (n=84) used by university managers to manage disabled employees and those with long-term health conditions.), a survey of experiences of managing gynaecological health conditions while working in universities (n=627) and : university staff with gynaecological health conditions (n=23) and We utilise the concept of epistemic injustice to explain the complicated spoken and unspoken, written and unwritten ways in which HRM policy and practice in UK HEIs reinforces sexist and ableist barriers, limiting meaningful inclusion of disabled employees and women employees with gynaecological health conditions. The paper reveals the invisibility of embodied experiences in HE HRM policy and subsequent practice, the implicit operationalisation of stigma to maintain silence and the burden of ‘proof’ required from individuals experiencing health conditions or disability that originates from an assumption of disingenuity. The stigmatised nature of many health conditions, particularly those relating to women’s reproductive systems, restricts open discussions of health and the materiality of bodies in the workplace, so limiting the provision of workplace accommodations. HRM policy and practice in UK HEIs requires disclosure and evidence from employees seeking support – obliging them to speak up in a context of institutional silence with no guarantees that they will be believed.