The representation of people with disabilities in the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS) is approximately 44% less than that seen in the civil services of the United States (US) and Great Britain (GB; i.e., the United Kingdom sans Northern Ireland). Various proactive approaches to employing people with disabilities are cited for the success of the US and GB’s efforts to increase the representation of disabled people in their civil services. This is important because governments as employers can be the catalyst for large-scale social change. The US and GB governments have demonstrated an intention to be this catalyst. They have done this by (a) establishing goals for the hiring of disabled people; (b) naming executives responsible for reaching these hiring goals; (c) utilising special hiring authorities; (d) executing guaranteed interview schemes; and (e) applying regulations and laws designed to employ and protect people with disabilities. These activities could be adopted in Northern Ireland (NI) to address the current inequalities in the NICS. However, the question remains whether a government that believes it has achieved disability equality in its civil service, despite comparators that say otherwise, can or will make such a concerted effort. An analysis of over 60 US, GB, and NI government and assembly documents, reports, and laws are examined and compared through the lens of critical disability theory (CDT) to identify the disconnect between the representations and the reality of figures presented about the inclusion of those with disabilities in the NICS.