To expect the UK's 1 million unemployed to get a job as a Care Worker?

[SquireOfGreenway]

The number of people unemployed in the UK is just over 1 million - the lowest it's been since the early 1970s. However, we should still surely expect that figure to be even lower.

From next year, it may be much harder for care-providing organisations to recruit European migrants to fill their Care Worker vacancies.

Surely, it is reasonable to expect any UK resident who is unemployed, claiming job-seekers allowance and so far unable to get a job to be required to get a job as a Care Worker? If they don't then they should be sanctioned and lose their state benefits.

I am not just talking about Care Work. I am talking about all minimum-wage and minimum-wage plus jobs that we have been relying on European migrants to fill.

Why not? There will always be maybe a few 100,000s unemployed, as people move from one job to another, etc. But why should there be a million unemployed people if there is a shortage of workers in any industry that does not require any great level of pre-entry qualifications?

I think that jobs like stacking shelves and picking crops aren’t far from being automated. Robot care assistants will probably be around in the next 50 years.

What happens when all these unskilled jobs are automated?

I’m surprised the workhouse hasn’t been resurrected. Run by G4S and called a PC name.

I employ carers as I'm a care home manager. Funnily enough I don't think dragging anyone in off the street is good enough for the residents in my care.

Unmployment rate is still declining and 3.8% is a good statistic. For the population of 66 million, 1 million unemployed is probably realistic, always going to be people coming in and out of employment due to childcare, care for elderly parents and disabilities. A lot of people quit work due to undiagnosed conditions and are simply not fit for work (e.g. depression) which of course people like OP would probably be first to point the finger and say "back to work with you"

No. There should be more investment in social care and training for it, but I do NOT want the people who care for me or my loved ones to be people who take the job grudgingly because they can't find anything else.

And let's actually think about what Patel herself said about these 'economically inactive' people because if you're not a total fuckwit you will notice she said not just the long-term unemployed (of which there are not many) but also the retired, students and those with 'caring responsibilities'.

Let's break that down and give it a Tory angle. First of all, they raised the age at which one can draw a state pension. So you're not talking about people who are young themselves. Let's see how this can play out: living on state pension, you'll need to volunteer be encouraged to do these jobs, none of which is physically undemanding. Students: need the max loan amount, loan, keep in mind, loan, you'll also be compelled to do conscripted labour. Those with 'caring responsibilities', often doing 24/7 care with no respite and £65/week if you qualify for Carers Allowance. How do you suppose they will fit in this work?

Those are some good points hoik. I have the following thoughts about solutions to this large problem.

1. Consider the possibility that they might require actual structural change to solve them. If we insist on continuing with a system where care and food production are left to a toxic mixture of private employers and state subsidy for low wages, look at the following.

1. Accept that merely being unemployed doesn't necessarily qualify you for any of the low paid vacancies soon to be available.

1. It is better all round if vacancies are filled by people who have at least some interest in the work. Sure, most people in any job are primarily or totally motivated by the money, but even within low skilled work there are going to be people who are more obviously suited to some roles than others. If you have two otherwise identical people looking for work, one likes working outside while the other doesn't, ideally you want the first person to be the fruit picker. But there might be obstacles, maybe Person A has a secure social housing tenancy and can't risk moving area for the agricultural season. Look at what we can do to remove those obstacles. If someone would be interested in care work but needs set hours, could there be some kind of incentive for employers to offer this?

1. Do not implement a top up benefits system for low earners that massively disincentivises taking on temporary work because it's so utterly inefficient. Tax credits was by no means perfect, but UC is something else.

Just off the top of my head...

Some comments are calling on care assistants to be paid £25k - that’s more than a newly qualified nurse earns! Where is the money coming from to give care assistants a £10k pay rise?

Care assistants should be paid more than minimum wage. It’s a physically challenging and emotionally draining job. It’s a hard job. I understand this but it’s also classed as low skilled work. Unlike healthcare professionals, care workers don’t need a degree. Or any qualifications. They need communication skills and a caring nature and common sense. I know that they can get NVQs and similar qualifications at level 2

No, YABU. There’s already to many carers out there who can’t do the job, who neglect their clients and can be violent. You can’t just pull any old random person into a caring role.

Making unemployed people get jobs stacking shelves or agricultural work - yes. But care workers? Recipe for disaster.

You are therefore ordering community service, for private business, for unemployment. We tried that once. It was abandoned for a very good reason .

Posted too soon...

But this doesn’t mean that care work is a “professional” job like being a registered nurse and with professional registration with the NMC. It’s not a job that anybody can do but it’s also not a job with rare skills. That’s why it pays minimum wage or near to it. Retail workers are also paid minimum wage. It’s a job we need people to do and can be quite physical and deals with challenging customers. But it’s also not a job that requires professional qualifications or even GCSEs.

I employ carers as I'm a care home manager. Funnily enough I don't think dragging anyone in off the street is good enough for the residents in my care.

And you works be absolutely right.

But do you think it’s a good idea to import carers and pay them a pittance?

The OP shows such a lack of intelligent thought in her post that she's probably too embarrassed to to return. Such an ill thought out opinion cannot even be argued for I guess.

Kind of offensive. I’m a care worker, I don’t want to have to work with people who have no affinity for the job. I take great pride in doing my job well. I have an English degree and I’m highly qualified but I love care work and specialise in dementia and palliative care so I chose to do this.

It makes me shiver to imagine just anyone walking in and doing this. Not everyone can cope with the pain, the bodily waste, the emotions. It doesn’t make them bad, just not suited to this particular job.

I work in care & sorry not everyone is suited to the role.

Some comments are calling on care assistants to be paid £25k - that’s more than a newly qualified nurse earns! Where is the money coming from to give care assistants a £10k pay rise?

Nurse vs carer isn’t a direct comparison though is it? They’re completely different roles.

A carer who is excellent with people dementia may not be any good with a brain injured teenager. Much like a diabetes specialist nurse wouldn’t be able to walk into a palliative nurses role without further training.

A good carer may only require lower qualifications but the qualities that make a good carer are much harder to quantify and remunerate. But like most publicly funded jobs no one is actually paid what they’re worth because it just isn’t possible with the numbers required for society to function.

It’s an interesting question, I can’t see how carers are not going to become more and more important in our ageing population. The quality of that care and regulations around it are going to more relevant as more people come into contact with the system.

Surely, it is reasonable to expect any UK resident who is unemployed, claiming job-seekers allowance and so far unable to get a job to be required to get a job as a Care Worker?

Gosh yes! and any that don't want to do it should have all their benefits stopped, and if they can't pay rent and feed their kids (which, frankly being unemployed they shouldn't have anyway) then they can go on the streets and the kids can go into care. Where they can train to be carers themselves later.

Or something else.

@SquireOfGreenway

YABU. Not only to suggest this ludicrous idea, but also to peddle the myth that there are only a million people out of work. When you take into account the people on training schemes, the people who have been sanctioned, and most importantly, the people who are on zero hours contracts, (ergo the amount of people without an actual proper job who could/should be in one,) the figure is probably triple the amount that is being peddled.

I don’t think we should ever force people to be carers. We can send them to the farms to harvest fruit and veg instead .

Conscripted labour is used as punishment for a crime, people, you are suggesting it is a crime to be unemployed or, most worryingly, 'economically inactive' as Patel herself states (remember, that means they're not on benefits). Are you really in that big a hurry to don the brown shirts?

For those people, I would like mandatory armed forces enrolment (with childcare onsite), where they have to do a 40 hour week learning a trade/ skill for a minimum of 3 years and are only permitted to leave when they have found a full time job and accommodation/ childcare etc that they can afford.

But maybe that's just me

I certainly bloody well hope it is just you. What is this, workhouse regimes for the 21st century?

Yabvu absolutely not god the mere though gives me the shivers. I work in community care for over 25yrs working with learning difficulties and the elderly. It is not a easy job you need common sense , patience and above all empathy it takes a certain person to be a carer it is not just a 'job ' you do for money .I have amazing boses who will come out and work as part of the team and the team I work with are an amazing bunch of carers .I treat the individuals i care for with respect and compassion because i care but you stick a person in the job because it's a job .I have not read all the posts so it may have been mentioned but think Panorama and Winterbourne and there is one answer why it should not happen .

and are only permitted to leave when they have found a full time job and accommodation/ childcare etc that they can afford.

And those jobs, houses and childcare are going to magically appear in the economy?

Plombear. I think perhaps a better contract overall for careworkers, not necessarily a big hike in pay is what people are asking for. I'm not a care worker, but my understanding from this thread is that alongside the poor pay, it is also a zero hours job, with irregular hours and they are not paid for travel between clients.
The irregular hours and zero hours contracts are quite are ok for some - young adults still at home etc. but crap if you need a guaranteed wage coming in to budget and pay your bills.
Other 'professional' caring positions - social workers, community nurses etc. would be paid for their travel time and would otherwise have decent contracts of employment. Offering care workers set hours and the other perks of a regular contract of employment would be a start.

Look x number of years into the future. You're elderly and vulnerable and carers are going to come into your home twice a day to help you wash and care for you. They may have key access. So any two randoms from the dole queue will do for you?

"It’s not a job that anybody can do but it’s also not a job with rare skills."

We have no respite for my child because there is no one with the skills required to do it.