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?

*Would £2000 or £3000 per week be sustainable

Dmil could last we are told another 5 years. The money will run out before she does.

Will the government be able to afford the amounts needed*

Well, they'll have to. They'll either have to pay more and fund that through taxes, or less profits for the care home owner, or raising cost of care.

Or they can carry on paying peanuts and in 10 years time, millions of elderly people simply won't have enough carers because no-one wants to do gruelling work for minimum wage.

My grandma was an SRN in the 1950s. The pay was dreadful. After board, lodging, laundry deductions and tax it was basically pocket money left. Did the government raise pay despite shortages? No. They just recruited nurses from Germany, Ireland and the Commonwealth.

@PlomBear unfortunately it's not simple supply and demand because Nhs workers pay (and indeed the who NHS budget and much of social cares too) is state controlled. The budget is set by the department of health, it's a political decision, rates for social care are set by local authorities who are also (ultimately) beholden to Whitehall. Successive governments have both introduced quasi competition in both sectors (bringing in for profit providers) yet simultaneously tightly controlled spending. If it was truly market driven those with money would pay for "better" and more expensive care with better paid, better trained and higher quality staff. At the moment culturally we haven't embraced this model so few could do this. Getting 20 year olds to think that they need to plan for the healthy bit of their retirement PLUS 5-10 years of care at 50-80k a year.....Hmmm well good luck with that one. So it falls to the state yet we haven't fully embraced a state solution either. This would have to be some nationalised compulsory insurance scheme so that risk was pooled because we can't predict who will need more or less care. For it to be quality care (with well paid staff) you could expect significant contributions....We are resistant to this as a nation (when asked in polls we say we'll pay more tax, yet always vote for low tax and spend governments). We want champagne services for peanut prices ....

They'll either have to pay more and fund that through taxes, or less profits for the care home owner, or raising cost of care

Fewer and fewer care homes are making any profit at all, I know of quite a few that have closed down due to this. As it is, it's well known that private customers are already subsidising the council residents, as the amount local councils pay per resident is well below the actual cost.

My grandma was an SRN in the 1950s. The pay was dreadful. After board, lodging, laundry deductions and tax it was basically pocket money left. Did the government raise pay despite shortages? No. They just recruited nurses from Germany, Ireland and the Commonwealth

My friend was a SRN in the late 90s. Geriatric Nurse. Been in the NHS since she was 16.
She was made redundant. She thinks purely because her salary (because she had risen up the ranks) was too much. They could get younger people over from Europe for 1/2 the wage or less

As far as I can see this is a disaster that the NHS orchestrated all on their own.

After caring for my own father (Alzheimer's and vascular dementia) for a decade, whilst also caring for my terminally ill husband (cancer) I couldn't care for anyone else again, and least of all people I don't know (and I worked in a nursing home before I cared for my relatives). It's stressful, hard, at times heartbreaking work and it can destroy your mental health if your heart isn't in it.
The people who need looking after are vulnerable and I believe it takes a certain type of person to do that job effectively.
Just my opinion and incidentally some people who already work in care really should not be there!!

I’m sure we will all be here in 5 and 10 years discussing pay for care workers and nothing will have changed!

In 10 years we'll be talking about Logan's Run.

I don’t understand why people think some jobs are good enough for foreign workers, but not good enough for British people

Because you get racists like 'One GCSE Gary' objecting thinking that foreigners will come here and 'steal' all the good jobs that he'd be able to get if only Ahmed the brain surgeon wasn't allowed in the country.

What's included in your figures? Just in receipt of unemployment benefit? Or those on a pension, on long-term sick, students, retired but below state pension age, stay at home mums with children of non school age, those looking after family members with disabilities? Which data did you use?

Where I live, shops and cafes are always looking for staff but they don’t pay more than minimum wage

Watch yesterdays Victoria Derbyshire There was a guy on there who runs a coffee shop Flamingos. Pays living wage and doesnt accept excuses as to why others cant.

It is insulting to the many wonderful care workers we have here to imagine that any old random who hasn't got a job can 'go and be a care worker'. Far better that those randoms go to pick fruit instead frankly, or work in a cafe. Imagining that any old person can properly look after vulnerable and frail people is very silly, and inviting problems down the line.

chardonnays I agree with you. All of MN it seems thinks that people coming to the UK 'love' care work and other jobs that Brits don't for whatever reason want to do.

As has been pointed out by other posters, the vast majority of care workers are British

I don't see why we should assume that other people want to do jobs that Brits think they're too good for.

What is your evidence that Brits think theyre too good for this work?

I thought the age of colonialism was long gone. Clearly not. It's quite arrogant of British people to assume that people of a different race/colour will do jobs they feel they are too good for.

What has colonialism go to do with British people?
Arrogance? Are you racially stereotyping people again

So maybe it's a good thing that people who come to Britain will have proper jobs to come to rather than being ripped off doing fruit picking, washing cars etc.

Maybe out of work ex Labour MP's could fill aome of the jobs?

As has been pointed out by other posters, the vast majority of care workers are British

If the vast majority of carers are British then the intended changes won't affect the care homes, so surely no need to worry then?

How on earth does that follow chardonnay?

The vast majority of carers are British, but we still have a shortage even with free movement for EU nationals and that's going to stop soon. None of these things are mutually exclusive.

If the vast majority are British then it follows that the shortage will not be significant.

No it doesn't in the slightest. Literally not at all.

The vast majority are British, around 80 to 85%, and there are still thousands of unfilled vacancies plus a projected increase in need as our population ages. You remove what has until now been the easiest entry opportunity for the 15-20% of the sector who haven't been British and dont replace it with anything, how is that not going to present an issue when filling the vacancies EU workers would've filled?

You seem to think if something only affects 15% of a workforce in an already shortage field, it can't be a big issue. This is nonsense.

If the vast majority are British then it follows that the shortage will not be significant

Lol!
Showing your complete ignorance now but this is the breit you voted for so you got what you wanted.
Care homes and in the community are already v short staffed, demand is rising and staff are retiring or leaving for better paid work, just one worker short means a patient doesn't get turned or that 45min becomes 20min (or not at all) the worker has to do unpaid o/t...all of which my DD has seen happen whilst on duty, the shortages at present have to be seen to be believed, she is f/t uni but still gets asked to work evenings, weekends, even when abroad!!!

Sorry, I didn’t vote for Brexit.

You are more than welcome to search my posts on Brexit.

But I dint have to justify my vote, one way or the other to you.

My remark above was addressed to the poster who claims the vast majority of carers are British.

Which they are. And it's still going to be a significant problem when you remove the mechanism by which thousands of care workers were able to live in the UK.

Hi Priti!

So - add 250,000 to the current vacancy number of 122,000, gives you 372,000 (October 2019 figures), leaves the care industry short around 22% rather than the current "mere" 7.8%.

That will be more than 1 in 5 positions unfilled, and with the requirement for carers on the increase that is likely only to get worse. It's been discussed at length above why the majority of unemployed or socially inactive people would NOT be suitable to fill these positions (criminal records, health both physical and mental, education etc)

Perhaps a shortage of workers in some areas is long overdue and will help redress the balance between employer and employee. Perhaps employers in some industries will have to pay a little more. Perhaps terms and conditions will neef to be improved. Maybe delivery drivers will need to be allowed regular comfort breaks (instead of feeling they need to pee in a bottle to meet targets) and agricultural workers access to toilets and hot running water (with the happy side effect we will be less likely to catch e-coli from our salads). And then in turn perhaps we will have to pay a little more for our Amazon deliveries and vegetables. If we have to pay a little more to ensure workers have the basic dignity expected in modern life we should do so. It shouldn't be any more acceptable to not have toilet breaks or facilities for poorly paid workers than it is for well paid ones.

This would all be great, but the Tories have essentially told us how they intend to fill the vacancies and it doesn't involve any of the things you mention. It was never going to.

Perhaps we will have to pay a little more for Amazon deliveries
or perhaps Amazon could take a hit and stop making a massive profit out of us all
But that wouldn't be fair on poor Jeff bezos would it, imagine how bruised his ego would be if his wealth and power was diminished.
Whatever happens the people at the top will hold on to their wealth and power because they make the rules and they make them in their favour
the fox has total control over the hen house
🦊🐣