Breaking Barriers: Inclusive Employment for Disabled Talent

Jane Hatton, CEO of Evenbreak, shares how her organization is transforming disability employment globally through inclusive recruitment practices and partnerships with local disability organizations.

• Evenbreak started as a UK job board for disabled job seekers but has expanded into a global enterprise
• Every team member at Evenbreak has lived experience of disability, representing diverse conditions and backgrounds
• Traditional recruitment methods like CV screening and interviews perpetuate bias against disabled candidates
• AI in recruitment presents both opportunities for accessibility and risks of amplifying existing biases
• Evenbreak's innovative hiring process focuses only on essential skills, allowing candidates to demonstrate capabilities in any format
• Job descriptions often contain unnecessary requirements that disproportionately discourage disabled candidates from applying
• Rather than asking for CVs, Evenbreak asks candidates to demonstrate how they meet 5 essential criteria for the role
• Global expansion requires working with local disability organizations who understand specific country contexts and supports
• Successful hiring processes provide meaningful feedback to all candidates, including connections to other opportunities
• Creating truly inclusive recruitment requires designing out bias from the beginning rather than retrofitting processes

Chapters

• 0:00 Introduction to Evenbreak and Jane Hatton
• 3:14 Evenbreak's Global Mission and Services
• 5:08 AI in Recruitment: Opportunities and Risks
• 10:17 Job Description Bias and Universal Design
• 16:15 Better Hiring: Skills-Based Over CV-Based
• 22:34 Creating Meaningful Candidate Experiences
• 29:13 Closing Thoughts and Connections

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:01

Hello and welcome to Access Chat. I'm delighted that we're joined today by Jane Hatton. Jane is the CEO of Evenbreak, doing good work in the UK around inclusive employment. So, jane, can you introduce yourself a little and tell us a bit about what Evenbreak is and the work that you're doing?

Speaker 2: 0:20

I'd be delighted to Thank you, neil, and thank you for having me here on Access Chat. We're actually doing a lot of good work around the world, not just in the UK. So we started off in the UK as a job board for disabled people who were looking for new or better work and for those employers who are enlightened enough to see us as a pool of talent rather than a source of problems. And we started off in the UK and we made a decision right at the beginning that we would only employ disabled people ourselves. So we're a social enterprise.

Speaker 2: 0:51

Everybody who works at Evenbreak has lived experience of disability, because I felt it was really important that if we're looking to support disabled candidates, we should have lived experience of the barriers that they face. And obviously I have lived experience of my own disability, which is a spinal condition which for a long time made me fairly immobile. Thankfully, I'm more mobile now than I was, but I still have chronic pain. But I have no idea what it's like to be schizophrenic or to be blind or to be diabetic. So it was important to me that we had a whole range of people with lived experience within Evenbreak, and also not just disabled people but also people who are diverse in other ways age, culture, religion, skin colour, gender, sexual orientation because, of course, disability doesn't discriminate, does it? You know, you can be any colour or age or whatever and still become or be born with a condition. And so we've moved and grown a lot since those very early days and now we are a global job board In fact we're the only global job board that is run by and for disabled people.

Speaker 2: 2:02

But we also offer support to employers, because one of the things we found when we started was employers were saying you know, jane, this is great, we're getting all of these amazing disabled candidates apply. But you know, we're not sure our recruitment process is quite as accessible as it should be. Our hiring managers are a bit nervous around disability. They don't know what they can say, what they can't say. They're frightened of putting their foot in it, of offending somebody, of saying the wrong thing.

Speaker 2: 2:29

And so we started to also offer training and consultancy. So recruitment process reviews, training for managers, for TA, professionals, whoever. And then we had candidates coming to us saying can you help us with our career? Can you help us with our CVs? Can you help me identify transferable skills? Now I can't do my previous job anymore, and so we started offering support to candidates disabled candidates as well which, of course, is offered free of charge and that's funded by the services that we offer to employers, to employers.

Speaker 2: 3:06

And now all of that is happening globally, because what we recognise is there aren't just disabled people in the UK who knew that actually accessibility, inclusion, diversity is an issue that's universal, it's all over the world. If you're autistic in Poland or the US or Russia or Australia or Morocco, you still have to face those barriers, and they're still there. And really what we want to do at Evenbreak is help have to face those barriers and they're still there and really what we want to do at Evenbreak is help employers to remove those barriers, but also help disabled people to navigate around them until we've got that world as we want it.

Speaker 1: 3:35

Absolutely so. Thank you, and yes, apologies, being located in the UK. I knew about your work from back in the day when you started out. So last week we were both in and this is recorded, so it's going to be two weeks ago by the time people see this. But last week we were in austria for zero conference and you know that was a big international disability community conference and there's a lot of focus on jobs and so on. But one of the other topics that kept coming up a lot and ai is a big topic anyway, but was ai and recruitment and the barriers and so on and so forth. So, um, so clearly there's a lot of play at the moment in terms of changes to how people work, but also how people get into work, and you've been dealing with removing of barriers for a long time. But a dear friend of the community, susan Scott-Parker, is rightly highlighting that some of these new technologies and the HR technologies are actually introducing new barriers as well.

Speaker 2: 4:39

Yeah, yeah, I think it's a double-edged sword, isn't it AI? I mean, I'm very excited by it from an accessibility perspective. You know, I think it's a double-edged sword, isn't it AI? I mean, I'm very excited by it from an accessibility perspective. You know, I think there's a lot that AI can offer in terms of assistive technology, in terms of disabled people accessing services, recruitment, employers and all sorts of other things.

Speaker 2: 4:59

But there is a huge danger as well, and the danger is, if we're going to be using AI to make hiring decisions whether that's shortlisting or whatever it might be the AI takes with it the bias that we all have in humanity anyway.

Speaker 2: 5:16

So, although I think there's a danger that sometimes talent acquisition professionals think, well, if it's AI, it must be neutral, it must be not biased, but, of course, ai just relies on what's gone on before, what's already in the internet, the knowledge that's already there and all that has been informed by bias.

Speaker 2: 5:33

So I think that we should be really embracing AI in terms of how can we open things up, how can we create opportunities, how can we make things more accessible through AI for disabled candidates, but people generally, but be really careful that we don't allow the bias that's inherent in everything that happens to be perpetuated by the use of AI. And so, yeah, I've got very sort of ambivalent feelings on the one hand, I'm really excited by it, but on the other hand, I'm oh, let's just be careful that we don't think it's the solution to everything, but because clearly it can create further barriers. And I think you know, we hear about AI sifting through CVs, resumes, talking about looking for particular keywords. Well, the keywords aren't always absolutely relevant to the job and there may be people who have transferable skills, who may be the perfect candidate, but maybe AI doesn't pick that up. So I just think we need to handle it with a degree of caution.

Speaker 3: 6:35

Well, ai's here, so no matter what AI's here we need to make, it work for us, don't we?

Speaker 2: 6:41

I mean, that's the thing, right.

Speaker 3: 6:43

And today. So far, ai has added a lot of value to my work. Personally, I'm hoping it ain't going to kill us all, but you know, I'm also hoping a lot of things for the world I have. I didn't realize, jane, it was this Jane from Evenbreak. So I'm just now. I am really glad that we're connecting this way too, because we've been trying to connect for a long time. So, first of all, I love that everyone on your team has lived experience with disabilities. I appreciate you understanding that value.

Speaker 3: 7:11

I know other people do say that they have global job boards, but some of them I don't know that anyone can make the claim that everyone on their team have lived experience with disability. So big kudos to you for that. That's one thing I really am focused on at Billion Strong is that we really need to include ourselves, and when we ourselves, I mean I know that my team, supposedly, is only about 90%. I actually think it's 100%, but you know, everybody gets to decide, everybody gets to walk their own identity path, but I did. I do want to talk a little bit about the global job board, one thing Neil had said we can chat behind the scenes, and he had made a comment saying, well, if it's on the web, it's global. I mean, anybody can make that claim, not saying that you're doing that, jane. But I wanted to address a little bit about the global, because one thing that I think that we have done I think we can look back at our disability movement, our accessibility movement, everything's we've done, and it's very easy. The Americans, we are putting these big old targets on ourselves. So I get it.

Speaker 3: 8:23

Somebody came at me about how dare I talk about intersectionality and I'm like, wow, really. So that's what we're going to do. We're just going to say, all right, we don't want to be near you guys. Okay, all right. Or I think instead we could be saying, all right, cool, how do we do this in a way that we're talking about things that, instead of breaking us up into little pieces, why don't we talk about human inclusion, and human inclusion in every single phase of our lives? Sometimes humans are born and they're blind. I mean, these are not new. There are no news here? Okay, we know how to make things fully accessible. No news there, we know it digitally. And the environment, okay. So I think what's really cool about what you're doing at Evenbreak and I'm curious if you agree with.

Speaker 3: 9:11

My assessment of this is it's, you know, it's, in a way, it's a shame that our community can't go to some of the really big names that have big job boards, some of them that I've worked with and I love this group but the reality is we really can't, because what we find is, when we try to do it, even though we see you trying to include us, we can also feel it's almost like an afterthought often.

Speaker 3: 9:35

And so I think working with our own community, understanding what our needs are, I mean, that's the whole start and soul of what we're trying to do with Billion Strong. But I am curious, with all of that meaning sending you a lot of love and appreciation how do you make it global? How do you really address and once again, that thing that we were talking about earlier, that AI will help how do we address the language barriers? Because we're dealing with a lot of these things at Billion and Strong right now and we're we're going to lean more on AI. But how do you make sure it's culturally correct the same time? So when you say it's global, if I'm in Bangladesh, can I do it and does it culturally make sense? I don't know how to ask the question, but I think that you know where I'm going. I get where you're coming from yes, absolutely.

Speaker 2: 10:23

And just because we do things one way in the UK doesn't mean that that's the way it's done everywhere else in the world.

Speaker 3: 10:28

Right, you do it the way the US does it, Jane oh.

Speaker 2: 10:33

I'm sorry. Oh, I'm sorry, right? So what we recognize is that we do some things well in the UK, the US do some things well or did were allowed to. Other countries do different things well and for me it's very much about partnerships. So, with the reason I was at the amazing Zero Project conference in Vienna was for many reasons, but the main reason was to make relationships with people in other countries who are supporting disabled people into work, people in other countries who are supporting disabled people into work, because we have a career hive in the UK which we run and fund and we give free career coaching and free career advice and workshops and all sorts of things which will be relevant to people in the UK who are looking for jobs, because it will talk about access to work.

Speaker 2: 11:22

But it's no good me talking about access to work in America because you don't have access to work, or it's no good me talking about access to work in America because you don't have access to work, or in India or in Argentina. So what we are doing is we are working with disabled run and led organizations in as many countries as we can get around to so that we can use their expertise or so that our candidates in those countries can use their expertise. So we work with a lot of global employers so Coca-Cola, mace, apple, you know a whole Unilever, a whole range of global organizations but they will do recruitment differently in each of the countries they're operating in, and the candidates who want to apply for their jobs in those different countries will need different kinds of support. So, yeah, language is part of it, but actually it's more than just translating services. It's also about what support does the government give in this particular country? What is the culture? Is it that some countries have quotas and you'll find, if you don't employ enough disabled people? Some organizations, like the UK, don't have quotas, but we offer although it's dwindling a bit at the moment, but we offer support through access to work. Other countries, like the US, might offer tax incentives.

Speaker 2: 12:33

So every country does it differently and it's important that the candidates in that country understand the framework that they're having to survive in. And so, rather than us thinking we've got all the answers, it's a bit like any charity, isn't it? We're not a charity, we're a social enterprise, but we aren't the people that are going in as the saviors to save the rest of the world. What we're doing is we're harnessing the expertise that already exists in the rest of the world. So a lot of what we do is around partnership, working with people who are located locally, who have lived experience of disability, who understand the language, the culture, the barriers, the support that's available, who understand the language, the culture, the barriers, the support that's available, that with the best will in the world, even with all of the AI, we're never going to have that local knowledge and those nuances of every different country. Neither should we. So that's my quick answer. Well, that was my long answer. The quick answer is partnerships.

Speaker 3: 13:25

I love you, Jane. I can't wait for us to talk on the other side. Antonio, you want to come in?

Speaker 4: 13:30

We know that those who have trained many of the language models that we know around the world, they have no idea in which data the language models have been trained at. So if you ask them, we just train them on the data that is out there. So it's basically in the wild and there was no control and there was no way or no measures to remove any bias or anything that this talks from the platforms. What they sometimes do is they fix things aftermath, you know, trying to avoid and mitigate serious risks. So you, on the other hand, by the fact that you are doing partnerships with people from different parts of the world, with people from different parts of the world, know how employers and how people with disabilities are looking at the world and the concerns they have about employment. So, looking into that, what risks from your experience do they feel that AI might impact on their current jobs? And then, to complement this question, what skills do you believe they might need to acquire to continue active and to find new opportunities in the workforce?

Speaker 2: 14:51

that will happen. We thought that would happen with robotics. I remember I'm very old. I remember back in the 70s and 80s people talking about everybody working a three-day week and we 'll have more leisure time. But actually the more technology we acquire and the more robotics we acquire, the longer we seem to work. So I'm not sure that's a grounded fear. I think one of the fears was that the or one of the hopes was that one of the kind of jobs that would be overtaken by AI would be the boring, repetitive, predictable jobs. But my understanding with the research is that that's actually not what's happening. So it's a really interesting question and, as you say, in every country there are different approaches to this.

Speaker 2: 15:27

My interest is more around how can we make sure that the recruitment process doesn't use any bias within it in the first place? So that universal design. So I would rather, rather than, let's say, a job advert be written and then put through ai, to, in theory, remove the bias. We can do that ourselves, and if we that, if we design those job adverts from scratch with no bias, then it doesn't matter what AI does. The bias has been removed.

Speaker 2: 16:00

So it's things like, you know, training recruiters, ta professionals and things like don't ask for things that the job doesn't need. So we know the old one about every job needs a driving license. Well, we know that most jobs don't. It just might mean you have to get from A to B, so don't put that in there, unless the job is as a driver, in which case, of course, you need a driving license. But there are also the other ubiquitous things that we see in every job description, like must be a team player, must have great interpersonal skills, must also be really good at details, must be good at working on your own. Very few people are good at all of those things and almost no jobs require all of those things. So for me it's very much about saying to recruiters really distill down what the must-haves are for this job and only ask for those.

Speaker 2: 16:47

Because what we've found with our candidates is if there's a list of 20 essential requirements and they can do 19 of them, they won't apply for the job, whereas a non-disabled person might think, oh well, I can do 15 of those, it's worth applying, but because disabled people have had such a history of rejection for no good reason, it's almost a kind of there's no point in me applying unless I know, I can do this job metaphorically standing on my head with my eyes closed, and so what we do is we cut out a lot of applicants, of people who would be maybe the best person for the job, because we're asking for things that weren't needed in the first place.

Speaker 2: 17:27

If AI could solve that and maybe it can then greatudos to it. You know, that's great, but for me it's about how do we design out bias right from the start, rather than retrofitting it afterwards, which is what we would say within buildings, isn't it? You don't build a building and then say wheelchair users forgot about them. Now what are we going to do? You need to have that in right at the beginning, the planning stage and I think it's the same in the recruitment process. We going to do you need to have that in right at the beginning, the planning stage and I think it's the same in the recruitment process. We need to design bias out of those processes.

Speaker 1: 17:55

I know Deborah wants to comment, but I know from my own experience in a large company we have thousands of different job descriptions and so there is a tendency to want to use AI to tweak them. And we certainly have used Textio to remove some of the gender bias in those things and we were looking to do similar ideas along the lines of what you've talked about. But actually we need to reduce the number of job descriptions we have. We don't need that many. But what tends to happen is people grab stuff, they alter, and then they, they sort of, they, they read across the organization, and so you, so you know job types, job descriptions, all of these things then, you know, get a little bit out of control. And also people, the recruiting managers, are in a hurry, they're you know, they're like, all right, well, I'll just take the thing that I had last time and sling it up, because I've got 16 other things to do today. So so I think that a lot of the time, the perpetuation of these barriers or these ill-thought-out job descriptions is not intended.

Speaker 2: 19:02

No, no, no, no, I don't think any bias isn't intentional, it's not malicious, it's just laziness, or?

Speaker 1: 19:08

Yeah, or lack of time to do a better job.

Speaker 2: 19:12

Or lack of knowledge about what barriers really are.

Speaker 3: 19:15

Absolutely I would also say that, as a manager for many, many years, that those job descriptions also being all robust and everything, you have to defend those positions sometimes too, so you make them as important as you can. It's just a big old game everybody's playing, but anyway. But I also wanted to come in on the other side, which is sad to say. But humans also have biases. So it's like I get that we want to and I totally agree with you, jane. I just don't know how we humanly do it, but I do know that we want to do it. But we take out the biases. Of course the biases have been. It's part of who we are biologically.

Speaker 3: 19:57

But at the same time I still do agree with what you're saying. But at the same time we also see humans having horrible biases, even though we've trained them at it. We've told you know education and stuff. And I think it helps, jane, whenever you have lived experiences, of course, having lived experiences with disabilities or your lived experience with disabilities. I have some very interesting lived experiences myself and with my beloved family members. But at the same time I just want to make sure we all understand that everything has got to change. We've got to rethink it all in the most positive, beautiful way to make you know and I know you're not saying that all AI is biased and all humans aren't. I know you're not, but I do want to make sure we make sure the audience understands we're not saying that. At the same time, I think you're well ahead of the game because you are part of the community, supporting the community, supporting people that want to support the community and hire us, and I think the thing is it's just about training.

Speaker 2: 20:58

I did mention training, but for me it's about the process. So I think the process that we've traditionally used for recruitment is CVs, resumes and interviews.

Speaker 3: 21:11

Neither of those work Right. They just don't work anymore. Maybe they work.

Speaker 2: 21:16

If we remove those and they're both really open to bias, aren't they? A CV, even if you remove all the personal details I mean, we know that names and addresses and things can trigger bias. But even if we take all of that away and we just look at work experience and qualifications, people will only have the work experience they've been lucky enough to have the opportunity to do. So. If you're a disabled person, let alone if you're a disabled person with multiple other areas of intersectionality, you will have been discriminated against. So the fact that your work history doesn't look that impressive doesn't mean that you're not an impressive candidate. It means you've not been given the opportunity to show your brilliance in the kind of roles that you're capable of doing. So I might look at a CV or a resume and say, well, this person, they haven't got really very high-flying jobs. There may be a really good reason why that's the case. It's not because they're not capable of high-flying jobs, it's because they've not been given the opportunity.

Speaker 2: 22:14

So what we do, for example, at Evenbreak, instead of asking when we're hiring for our own people, instead of saying send us your CV, send us your resume, we say these are the five, and it's never more than five absolute, essential must-haves for this job, whatever they might be. If you don't need to be a good team player, it won't appear. If you don't need a driving license, if you need a qualification. I can't think of any job in even break that really needs a qualification. But if you do, it would be in there. And then you say to the candidate tell us, in any format that suits you, how you meet those five criteria.

Speaker 3: 22:54

Can you give us an example, jane? Only because I in my brain just give me an example of maybe a position you hired for. If that's okay, yeah, sure.

Speaker 2: 23:04

So currently we're hiring for someone to do some work on this partnerships project. So we need to know which are these? Not just the big charities, disability charities in each country, but a tiny social enterprise in a rural village in India that may not have a website? We need to know about them so that they can support our candidates who might live near them, who are looking for jobs. So it's a case of when we're looking for that person to do that research, what do we absolutely need them to have? We need them to understand how to do research, but they don't need to have been a data scientist. They don't need to have been a research professional. They might have researched what's the best restaurant in my locality for Korean food, and they'll have used their skills to research that. So what we do is, instead of saying, send us your, we'll say we need you to have been able to do these things. Let us know how you can do those in any way.

Speaker 2: 24:02

So we've received we're in this process at the moment. We've received a variety of written submissions, which is the most popular naming each of the five things that we want and telling us how they've done it. But we've also had PowerPoint presentations. We've had videos. We've had people say can I dictate this over the phone? We've had audio files From a recruiter's perspective. I don't care how you give me that information. What I need to know is can you do this job? And I don't really care what job you've done before, because it might be irrelevant to this job. What I really need to know is can you do these things that I'm going to need you to do in this job?

Speaker 2: 24:40

And then the next stage, once we've shortlisted from that, is to then get into a little bit more of the detail around. Okay, so here's a task that you would be expected to perform in this role. How would you go about it? And again, tell us in any way that suits you to do it? And so when we shortlist, we're only shortlisting on the person's ability to do the job, because we have no other information to go on. That's all we can shortlist on. And when we're making the hiring decision, we're only making it on the person who best completes the tasks that we want them to complete in the role. So bias will still creep in, because we will find out at some stage what gender they are, how old they are, what their name is, but it's much less obvious. It's much less in your face. I don't know what you need. Our current team, I think quite a lot of us are into university, but I don't know, and it's practical.

Speaker 3: 25:36

It's practical because who cares if you went to a university or not at some point? And I think that's what we've done In building our societies. We've just layered stuff on top on top which doesn't even, like Neil was saying, we have so many job descriptions. I mean, and I think I've worked for these billion-dollar brands it's been a long time ago and I'm sure it's gotten so much more complicated since I was in that field in 2000. But I think sometimes people can't understand how complicated it is inside these gigantic corporations.

Speaker 2: 26:13

That makes it more simple, because we've had people who've yes to the point. What do you?

Speaker 3: 26:18

want.

Speaker 2: 26:25

Well, I'm going to say what do you need? Right, it makes sense, sorry. And often recruiters will say to me yeah, but you know, we get 1,500 CVs for this job. They won't get 1,500 responses to what I'm suggesting, because often candidates will just send 100 CVs out a week to wherever, whether they're suitable for the job or not, and actually that's no use. Is it to man the beast? Really Certainly no use to a recruiter getting loads and loads of CVs to sift through, which A don't relate to the criteria for the job and b probably aren't suitable anyway.

Speaker 2: 26:56

But how do you really know? So what you find is that you get far fewer applications, but those applications are really suitable for the job. Because if I'm going for a job and they're asking me tell me how you do these five things which are absolute must-haves for this job, so it's not the quite like to have, it's the must-haves and I can't answer them. I'm not going to apply for that job. So it's not the quite like to have, it's the must-haves and I can't answer them. I'm not going to apply for that job. So you're only going to get applicants who can do the job, and then you have the really envious position of having to select the best from a small group of amazing candidates. Isn't that what every recruiter wants, every hiring manager, every line manager?

Speaker 1: 27:32

Absolutely, and Itonio also has a a question that he'll want to follow up on. As a recruiting manager, you know it. It takes a lot of time, right, recruiting takes a lot of time. Sifting the candidates takes a lot of time. You can see why they want to implement ai tools, no matter how flawed, because the process of sifting takes an awful long time. And, having been on the other side, like years and years ago, when I first started out applying for jobs, I applied for hundreds. Yeah, I was applying a sort of carpet bombing technique of job applications, yeah, and and it doesn't really doesn't really work and it's really bad for you psychologically, because you know when you get one of those thank you, but unfortunately letters and I got hundreds of them, or you just never hear back it's pretty soul destroying. So I think that reducing the number of applications you make, but making sure that they're targeted and you've actually got a shot at it, makes a lot of sense for everyone.

Speaker 2: 28:37

Actually, from our perspective, we might get applications. We've only got one job to fill and we've got maybe 10 amazing candidates. I mean we had 50 for this particular role because it was very popular. But it may well be that the nine that we don't take on, who we know could do the job really well. But we only have one job. We can either look elsewhere and even break and say maybe there's a role there that they could do with these amazing skills that we've just discovered. Or, in our case, we're lucky because we have employers who work with us.

Speaker 2: 29:07

So it may be that we can go back and instead of having to do 500 Dear John letters sorry, we don't want you we have other people met the criteria more closely, which is of no benefit whatsoever or, as you say, just being ghosted. We can actually write back to say the nine unsuccessful people and say, look, there's a job here in Microsoft, why don't you go for this one? There's a job here in Amazon, why don't you go for this one? Or whatever, and we can make it a really meaningful feedback and we can make sure that we say we know you could do this job, you know you've convinced us you could do this job. We can only take one on.

Speaker 2: 29:40

We'd love to take you all on, but here are some other jobs that might be really good for you. So it means that the candidates get a really good experience, and the feedback that we've had from candidates and I think the way to improve your recruitment process is to get feedbacks from successful and unsuccessful candidates and the feedback that we've had from unsuccessful candidates is I'm gutted, I didn't get this job. This is the best recruitment process I've ever been through and if ever another job comes up at even break, I'm going for it. I'm going to tell everybody I know what a great employer you are. That's what you want. You don't want to be seen as don't bother going for them because they won't even answer your email.

Speaker 1: 30:18

Yeah yeah, word of mouth is so important. So, again, it's been great talking with you about the work you're doing and I particularly love the fact that you are passing on the recommendations and so on, and that's super encouraging. I know that we will continue this conversation online. I'm sure Debra is excited not just because of the espresso she's had today to continue it as well. So thank you so much. I need to thank our friends at Amazon and MyClearTales for keeping us online and keeping us captioned and really look forward to continuing the conversation on social media. Thank you.

Speaker 2: 30:54

Thanks very much.