Nowhere in this law does it say that people with disabilities who want to build their careers in jobs that are predominantly publicly funded would not have the same rights as they would have if their desire was to pursue a career in the economy.
http://pisrs.si/Pis.web/pregledPredpisa?id=ZAKO3841 makes it clear, however, that direct and indirect budget users, as employers, are not entitled to the contributions and bonuses ceded under this law. These are funds that should be earmarked to support employees with disabilities, and they also have no other sources of funding for the supportive environment that such employees need.
Having said that, the way in which direct and indirect budget users are financed is often such that part-time employees with disabilities are a burden on the rest of the team, who do not have someone to be present full-time, and this weakens workplace relations and is already a bad atmosphere for the inclusion of someone who needs additional support on a permanent or occasional basis.
This also carries over into the area of cooperation with the economy - in reserved procurement, where the contracting authorities are not aware that if someone who is disabled and has certain limitations is working, that the work has to be adapted to them and not the other way round.
So I think that these are two areas where there is a systemic failure to build an inclusive society.

In our country, in certain institutions where it would be much easier to adapt jobs to employ people with disabilities.
An analysis of this could show how much is being paid into the fund from these organisations and how, perhaps through quota replacement projects, jobs could be developed contractually and thus this inequality of employers and thus a greater opportunity for the inclusion of vulnerable groups in these organisations.
We believe that this is also a very welcome approach to raise the culture of mutual relations and, in the long run, to contribute to a more efficient and socially responsible society.