Home and Community Care Digest

Home and Community Care Digest December 2003 : 0-0

Family caregivers experience lower labour force participation and lower wage rates

Abstract

This study examines the foregone employment opportunities experienced by unpaid caregivers in the United Kingdom, including the impact of caregiving on labour force participation, hours of work, and wage rates. The authors found that both male and female caregivers providing more than 10 hours of care per week experienced significantly lower rates of labour force participation and lower wages than noncaregivers. However, the labour supply (time spent working) and wage rates of those providing less than 10 hours of care per week did not differ significantly from non-caregivers. Although women are more likely to act as caregivers and tend to provide more hours of care than men, the economic losses experienced by men who provide more than 10 hours of care weekly are equally serious.
Background: As medical care increasingly shifts from the hospital to the home, responsibility for care has also shifted from the state and publicly paid care, to the family and unpaid care. Unpaid caregivers are family members and friends who provide in-home care to recipients without financial compensation, and they play a critical role in sustaining the homecare industry in such countries as Canada and the United Kingdom. This study examines the foregone employment opportunities experienced by caregivers in the United Kingdom, including the impact of caregiving on labour force participation, hours of work, and wage rates. Given that increasing numbers of men are now taking on caregiving roles, this study specifically addresses the impact of gender on labour market activity.

Methods: The authors used the United Kingdom's 1990 General Household Survey to analyze the labour market behaviour of women aged 18-59, and men aged 18-64, for both caregivers and non-caregivers. Based on earlier research by the same authors, they hypothesized that caregivers who devoted more time to caregiving duties were more likely to leave the labour force than those providing fewer hours of care. As such, they developed empirical models to predict the impact of caregiving time commitment (less than or greater than 10hrs per week) on the probability of labour force participation and hourly wages. They used statistical regression techniques to isolate the unique influence of caregiving versus other sociodemographic factors, such as age, education, household income, and the presence of children.

Findings: Both male and female caregivers providing more than 10 hours of care per week are significantly less likely to participate in the labour market than non-caregivers (males are 13% less likely and females are 27% less likely than non-caregivers of the same sex). However, the labour supply (time spent working) of male and female caregivers providing less than 10 hours of care is not significantly different from noncaregivers. Similarly, male and female caregivers providing more than 10 hours of care per week receive significantly lower wages than non-caregivers (18% lower for men and 9% lower for women compared to non-caregivers of the same sex).

Conclusions: The authors' results indicate that caregivers who are heavily involved in caregiving duties are less likely to participate in the labour market than non-caregivers, and to incur significant economic losses in the form of lost/lower wages. Although women are more likely to act as caregivers and tend to provide more hours of care than men, the economic losses experienced by men who provide more than 10 hours of care weekly are equally serious. In the United Kingdom, these results suggest that national strategies for carer-friendly employment policies, and financial compensation for caregivers may be appropriate. In Canada, this study may help inform labour policy and debates around extending employment insurance benefits to family members providing end-of-life care.

Reference: Carmichael, Fiona and Susan Charles. The opportunity costs of informal care: does gender matter? Journal of Health Economics, 2003; 22; 781-803

Comments

Be the first to comment on this!

Note: Please enter a display name. Your email address will not be publically displayed