I found the Keenser story to be a bit childishly insulting to 'disability' in the workplace (Keenser standing on a box to reach consoles)
Insulting to whom? Maybe it was insulting to the Starfleet designers, demonstrating their failure to design with accessibility in mind, but I think Keenser came off in a positive light and was able to adapt to his circumstances.
Sorry, I meant insulting to disabled workers generally. I just found its approach to be blinkered and simplistic. In modern times employers are under an obligation to make reasonable alterations to the workplace to accommodate disabled employees. Many disabled workers are denied unlawfully jobs because employers don't want to make those accommodations.
It's a bit frustrating that Keenser's height was deemed to be worthy as a focus as to why he struggled to do his job when actually, after 6 months, his employer was under a duty to ensure that his workplace was adapted. Or give him a portable anti-grav step.
It just speaks to a level of ignorance in the writing; it's the kind of thing that frustrates disabled people that I know.
It was also silly that the engineers don't have robotic drones to go into crawl spaces that are too small for crewmen.
I'm sure there are many plausible reasons that able-bodied people might like to come up with to justify Scotty's lax approach to his colleague's needs but the story should have been, 'Keenser is a great engineer' with a focus on his personality instead of 'little people are a bit crap but they can be really useful sometimes'.