“A high tide lifts all ships… if you design for the outside, you get the centre for free.”
This line from Chris Hind at Recite Me summed up the whole session. When you design your hiring journey for people who face the most barriers, you do not just help a small group. You make the process clearer, fairer and easier for everyone who wants to work for you.
In this webinar, Reach ATS’ own Hector Bustillos was joined by Chris Hind from Recite Me, a digital accessibility specialist, for a practical look at why accessibility in recruitment matters now, what barriers candidates face online, and what HR and talent teams can do in real life, with real budgets.
The focus was clear: move accessibility out of the “nice to have” or pure compliance box, and show how it shapes candidate experience, the size and quality of your talent pool, and your brand as an inclusive employer.
Why this conversation mattered
Hector opened by placing accessibility in the wider context of hiring. As an applicant tracking system, Reach ATS sees thousands of candidates go through career sites, job ads and application forms every week. From that vantage point, three things are obvious:
Candidates drop out when processes are confusing, heavy or inaccessible.
Many organisations care about inclusion but still have hidden digital barriers.
Accessibility is often treated as a bolt-on, not as part of the core candidate journey.
Hector’s aims for the session were to:
Shift the mindset from “tick-box” accessibility to a people-centred approach.
Share what the data and lived experience say about digital exclusion.
Explore practical steps to remove barriers across the recruitment journey.
He also introduced Recite Me as Reach ATS’ digital accessibility partner, explaining how the two organisations work together to help candidates with disabilities or different abilities interact with online content more easily.
The scale of the problem: accessibility and online exclusion
Chris began by setting out the scope of digital exclusion. Unless you work in disability inclusion or ED&I every day, it is easy to underestimate it.
“It may surprise some that it’s actually 24%… disability that makes it difficult to access information online.”
That figure covers a wide range of people:
People with visual impairments or colour blindness.
People who are Deaf or hard of hearing.
People who are neurodivergent, for example with dyslexia or ADHD.
People who need content translated or simplified.
And that is only what is reported. Many people never disclose.
Chris also highlighted the behaviour of disabled users online. A large proportion – often quoted as around two-thirds – will leave a website that is not accessible and seek an alternative. In recruitment terms, that means:
High drop-off from your careers site and application forms.
Good candidates quietly self-selecting out.
A smaller, less diverse shortlist than you could have.
Digital accessibility is not a niche issue. It affects a significant share of your potential talent pool.
Why accessibility matters for candidates and organisations
When Hector asked whether accessibility is still seen mainly as a compliance tick box, Chris was clear: that mindset sells everyone short.
“If you design for the outside, you get the centre for free.”
Designing for those at the “edges” of your user base – people with disabilities, different language needs or different ways of processing information – creates better experiences for every candidate, including:
People on mobiles or slow connections.
People applying on a lunch break or caring for children.
People for whom English is a second or third language.
From an organisational view, accessibility links to:
Legal risk – for example, under the Equality Act 2010, which prohibits discrimination and places duties on employers to avoid putting disabled people at a substantial disadvantage.
Reputational risk – visibly inaccessible journeys undermine any public ED&I commitments.
Competitive risk – inaccessible processes mean you simply miss strong candidates who go elsewhere.
Business performance – diverse teams and diverse thinking are linked with stronger performance.
Accessibility is not a favour to candidates. It is a route to better hiring decisions and a more resilient organisation.
Common barriers in the recruitment journey
Hector asked Chris to walk through the recruitment journey and highlight where candidates typically struggle. Chris grouped barriers into a few key stages.
Careers sites and job adverts
Your careers site and job adverts are often the first point of contact, so digital barriers here are costly. Chris called out several common issues:
Poor link text – “click here” or “read more” links are inaccessible for people using screen readers, because they do not explain where the link goes.
Excessive, unexplained acronyms – strings of acronyms (PPC, SEO, CRM, CMS, ATS, etc.) with no explanation can be hard to process for many people, including those with cognitive or neurodivergent conditions.
Exclusionary language – phrases like “young and energetic”, “digital ninja” or “must handle banter” can signal that some people are not welcome.
Unclear salary and benefits – vague details make it harder for candidates to judge if the role is right, which can put those with additional responsibilities at a disadvantage.
Chris shared a worked example of a job ad that, on the surface, looked normal, but contained multiple barriers: non-descriptive links, age-coded language, long hours in a “high pressure” environment and multiple acronyms. By tweaking these elements, the ad could become far more inclusive with very little cost.
Application forms and online journeys
Next, Chris turned to application forms and website journeys more broadly. Barriers here include:
Complex, crowded layouts that are hard to navigate with keyboard or screen readers.
Poor colour contrast between text and background, which is difficult for people with low vision or colour blindness.
Long, rigid forms that cannot be saved and returned to later.
No clear way to request adjustments during the process.
Small changes like improving colour contrast, increasing font size, simplifying layouts and allowing candidates to save progress can make a big difference.
Assessments and interviews
Barriers do not stop once someone has clicked “submit”. Chris and Hector discussed:
Assessments that assume a single way of showing competence, such as rapid-fire timed tasks, which may disadvantage some neurodivergent candidates.
Interviews that do not explain the format in advance, so candidates cannot prepare or request adjustments.
Physical or virtual set-up that does not consider sensory needs, for example harsh lighting, noisy environments or chaotic video calls.
Chris stressed that providing clear information ahead of interviews and offering adjustments as a standard part of the process can help people perform at their best, without lowering the bar.
Requesting adjustments
One theme Chris returned to several times was how hard it can be for candidates to ask for what they need.
“One of the common barriers is making sure that people can request adjustments.”
If there is no obvious, low-friction way to request adjustments, candidates may worry they will be judged, “othered” or viewed as high effort. That can lead to silence, not because people do not have needs, but because they do not feel safe stating them.
Simple steps like adding a clear adjustments line on your careers site and job ads, and repeating it in interview invites (“If you need us to make adjustments, here is how to let us know…”), can send a powerful signal.