October 26, 2023 • 52 mins
We are delighted to welcome three esteemed guests to Care Matters; Professor Nancy Folbre, Dr Naomi Lightman and Professor Shereen Hussein. In this episode, hosted by Dr Duncan Fisher, our guests discuss the devaluation and underpayment of care work.
Drawing on experiences from the USA, Canada and the UK, they consider the challenges of assigning value to care, emphasising social, cultural and intergenerational dimensions.
Useful links mentioned in this episode
Nancy Folbre's 'Care Talk' blog on the Revaluing Care website: https://www.revaluingcare.org/category/care-talk/
“Working More and Making Less: Post-Retirement Aged Immigrant Women Care Workers in Canada” Journal of Aging and Social Policy. Naomi Lightman and Hamid Akbary. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08959420.2022.2139984
Lightman, Naomi., Evehe B., M. and Baay, C. “More than ‘Just a Health-Care Aide’: Immigrant Women Speak About the COVID-19 Crisis in Long-Term Care.” Edmonton: Parkland Institute. https://www.parklandinstitute.ca/more_than_just_a_health_care_aide
--------
Learn more about our research on the Centre for Care website here: https://centreforcare.ac.uk/
The CARE MATTERS Podcast is produced by Dan Williamson at the Centre for Care.
---Intro/outro music: Music: https://www.purple-planet.com is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:05):
The Care Matters podcast
is brought to youby the ESRC Centre for Care and CIRCLE,
the Centre for International Researchon Care, Labour
and Equalities.
In this series, our researcherswelcome experts in the field
and to those giving or receiving careto discuss crucial issues in social care
(00:27):
as we collectively attemptto make a positive difference to how care
is experienced and provided.
Hello and welcome to Care Matters.
The podcast from the Economicand Social Research Council, Centre
(00:47):
for Care and the University of Sheffield's,CIRCLE Research Centre.
My name is Duncan Fisher and I am aresearch associate at the Centre for Care.
We are delighted to welcome three esteemedguests to Care Matters
Nancy Folbre, NaomiLightman and Shereen Hussein.
In this episode we will discuss thedevaluation and underpayment of care work.
(01:12):
Drawing on experiencesfrom the USA, Canada and the UK.
We consider the challengesof assigning value to care,
emphasising social,cultural and intergenerational dimensions.
I will now introduce our guests.
Nancy Folbre is Professor emerita
of Economics and directorof the Program on Gender and Care Work
(01:35):
and the Political EconomyResearch Institute
at the Universityof Massachusetts, Amherst, and a senior
Fellow of the Levy Economics Institute
at Bard College in the United States.
Her research exploresthe interface between political economy
and feminist theory, with a particularemphasis on the value of unpaid care work.
(01:58):
You can learn more about herat her website and blog.
Care Talk.
Naomi Lightman
is an associate professor of sociologyat Toronto Metropolitan University.
Her areas of research expertise
include care, work, migration, gender
and critical research methodology.
(02:20):
Shereen Hussein
is professor of healthand Social Care Policy
at the London School of Hygieneand Tropical Medicine and leads
the Care workforce Change Research Groupand the Centre for Care.
She is an established,multidisciplinary research leader
with extensive social care and healthresearch experience,
working primarily with policymakersin the UK and internationally.
(02:45):
Welcome to CareMatters, Nancy, Naomi and Shereen
So when we talk about care,
we can often see thisas devalued or underpaid.
So what does it mean when we saythat care is devalued or underpaid?
Maybe, Nancy, who could come to you firstto think about this question?
(03:05):
Well, one big thing that comes to mind is
that care is devaluedbecause it's hard to make a profit on it
because care, by definition,is an effort to meet people's needs,
not necessarily to just take advantageof their purchasing power.
But another factor isthat care has big multiplier effects.
That is, if you care for someone,they're more likely to care
(03:26):
for someone else,to care for someone else, etc., etc..
So what that meansis it's really important
to the economyand to the larger social climate,
but it's very hard to capture the valuethat's created.
The value that's created isvery is very diffuse.
It's very you know, it's
(03:46):
it sort of escapes the money metric.
And so it's not goingto be valued in money terms
as much as it should be.
And Naomiand I think what's striking about care
is, you know, we all rely on careat some point in our lives.
But it is work that was traditionally donefor free by women in private homes.
(04:08):
And I think that ispart of that relationship.
We are we just don't value at the sameas other types of jobs.
And sharing.
Really what's interesting for methat the care economy itself,
so the care is one of thosebig growing sector where you can invest
and the care is sold in a in a veryexpensive way through a consumer lens.
(04:31):
But the care work itself is not valued.
So it's very easy to find situations
where care is quite expensive to to buy.
However, people who are providing care,particularly those, of course,
who are providing unpaid care,even though providing paid care
are less valued.
(04:52):
And this is because an assumption.
So of course, it's difficult to putan economic value on on the product,
but also an assumptionthat this comes naturally to people
and people can do it easily.
So there is a question as wellabout structures and employment
and qualifications and career path
and the divergence between
(05:14):
care as as as a product
and a consumer kind of targeted
product is different from care
being valued as as a type of work.
Yeah, another wayto put that in kind of the language
that economists use is that careworkers have very little bargaining power.
(05:36):
And that problem is really compoundedbecause often their clients
don't have much bargaining powereither or not much political voice. So
both workers and
consumers or care services are don't
or in kind of a weak positionin the overall economy.
Yeah, and I mean, I think what
(05:57):
what also what Nancy's saying, of course,is that it's overwhelmingly women
and immigrants and people of colourthat are doing these care work jobs.
So they are people that have weakerbargaining power
and are just generally more vulnerablein society.
And it's pretty striking how this isreally consistent across countries,
across continents, across welfare regimesin the global north and the global south.
(06:19):
So it's really a universal phenomenonthat we see.
Yeah.
And I think that that interest and likeand it comes back to your initial point,
Nancy, about about profit, because
you know what Naomi says about the peoplewho do the vast majority of the caring.
We know that.
We know who doesn't.
But we also know that there are peoplewho do profit from care
(06:44):
and, you know, who makewho make money off of care as well.
And that tends to be
not the people who are
obviously herewho are doing the work on the ground.
You know, so actually in the UK, we knowthat, you know, there are corporations
who do make quite a lot of money over the.
Yes, that's very true.
(07:05):
But often and this is especially the casein the US, their ability to turn a profit
is very much based on public subsidies,taking advantage of public infrastructure.
So it's a kind of collaboration or or,you know,
concentration of economic powerbetween the market and the state
that allows a lot of profit to be made.
(07:27):
I mean, in in both
the US and the UK, the health care systemis heavily subsidised
by the public sector,but a lot of the add on services
are have been taken over by private firmsand private equity
and often really exploiting the structureof of public support.
(07:47):
So I don't know, one reallyshocking example recently in the US was
private equity firmsmoving into hospice care, which is care
for people who will be dyingwithin a very short period of time.
And the wayin which the public subsidy was set up
made it very,very easy to defraud the system and just
(08:09):
garner huge profits
without providing any services at alland in hospice care.
And also just given the the
the human input is a very importantinput in the provision of the care.
So once you move out of care homes,which the
the structure and the infrastructure is,is one of the big investment,
(08:30):
the profitsmargin can only come from the human input
because the human input and interfaceis, is the care is a provision of care.
So there is there is kind of a fundamental
kind of tension between making profitsand valuing the care work
because the margins comes from the wagesof the care workers and back to norms
(08:52):
point where the majority of thosewho provide care are women
with multiple responsibilities.
So we know that a lot of women
working formerly in carehave informal care responsibility.
We know that women migrants,we know that people from ethnic minorities
and from kind of communitieswhere there is a lot of inequalities.
(09:13):
So then these are people who do not havethe bargaining power, like Naomi said.
And what another issue is interestingis what motivate people to work here.
And this is a kind ofparadoxical situation.
So people come into carebecause they love doing care.
They want to feel the rewards
from the people that they feelthat they are helping others.
(09:36):
And I think this this point is exploitedall in through the system.
So the system itself,kind of the structure, exploits this fact.
So kind of, you know, we reward you indifferent ways, which is not wage related.
We will acknowledgeyou worked like what we've seen
during COVID, which is kind of,you know, clap to carers, but it didn't
(09:57):
translate in the UK, It didn't translateto any wages or career progression.
So there is this tensionbetween having a business
care as a commodity
and care is reliant on the human inputand then kind of knowing
that the specific groups are attractedto work and care and therefore our ability
(10:19):
and system, particularly exploiting,
exploiting their characteristics
and exploiting their motivationsto work in that sector.
Yeah, and I mean,I think we certainly see this
marketisation of care that you're bothtalking about really globally.
So increasing kind of profit motivein various sectors of the economy.
(10:42):
But we also have this huge care deficitwhere we don't have enough workers
to do these jobs and we have an entireyou know, we call it the global care
chain, but it's an, you know,transnational global system where
we import women from poorer countriesor poorer parts of countries
to come do jobsthat typically native born workers
(11:04):
are not interested in doing, largelybecause of pay and working conditions,
and not to take away from what Shereen
was speaking about in terms of kindof the non pecuniary benefits.
So the the real relationshipbetween wanting to do better
or help other peoplethat motivates people to do these jobs.
I also think we have entire immigrationstreams set up
(11:26):
that kind of create incentivesfor migrants to come and do these jobs.
So certainly in Canadawhere I live and work,
we have an entire immigration streamfor living care workers.
And what we see is that
even within that, even as you know,there's a policy understanding
we need women to do these jobs
(11:46):
once they come, they're typically unableto do the jobs that they're trained for.
And again,this is not just the case in Canada.
They'rethey're overwhelmingly overqualified.
We have many barriers for themto become permanent residents
so they can actually stay in the country.
There are overwhelmingly kindof transnational parenting.
So they have families abroadthat they would like to bring over.
(12:09):
But there's many barriers to do so.
So I think there's a lot of ethical issuesin terms of the conditions
that we create when we have peoplecome over specifically to do these jobs.
And that's even separate from the factthat this is very low wage,
very physically demanding,mentally straining,
complicated work that,
(12:30):
you know, as I'm sure we're going to talkmore about, we really don't value.
Yeah, well, thanks, Naomi,for bringing the immigration
and the kind of mobility,the global mobility that we're seeing.
And many countriesare seeing this as a solution to
many issues, particularly carewhere you can talk to my kids a lot of it.
So rely on people who have othermotivation and other drivers
(12:53):
to come and work.
And we've seen over and over in the UK,especially with Brexit
and other kind of immigration policies,that is tightening
entry into the care work that some ofthese policies have kind of exploited.
Further workerswho are driven to come to help,
(13:14):
usually help their families back homewho have different responsibilities.
So they have different priorities.
And we kind of they are accepting
certain conditionsand certain forms of pay and work
that they might not have acceptedotherwise.
They have their own pressures back home.
They made a commitment toto send, to remit
(13:37):
and to care, to to save for some time.
And a study that we just finishedlooking at the experience of live
in care worker in in Londonthat showed that there is quite
a high level of exploitationand particularly with live in care
where you don'thave your own space to live in.
(13:57):
So you're completely reliant on the clientor the older person
that you are supporting own accommodationin food
and quite a lot of difficultdecisions has to be made.
So we need to think more about
the group of workers who are attracted toto these kind of jobs.
And in our research also, even,you know, British white women
(14:21):
who come to this work usually havemultiple caring responsibilities.
They like the flexibility of work,but it means for them
that they have to workso many shifts to just get the
you kind of the decentincome that they need to live.
And so there was quitea lot of complexities.
And with population ageingwhere we have shrinking working age
(14:42):
and you kind of difficulty in optimisingcare, you're reliant on these migration
chains,you're relying on the vulnerability
of certain groups in the communityto make this input.
And I think the system is kind of set upto overlook this contribution.
So making it more complexto translate this into an economic value.
(15:05):
I mean, I think migration itself is
not the problem is the low payand really poor working conditions
and in the paid care sector that are
are basically kind
of treating the desire to help othersas though it's an inexhaustible resource
when in fact people cannot providegood care unless they have some amount
(15:26):
of job security and some amount of abilityto get to know and
and engage with the peoplethat they're caring for. And,
you know, what's
happened is that we've designedthese really low wage, low road jobs
where there's really high levelsof burnout and turnover.
So it's not really goodfor consumers, for clients either,
(15:50):
so that our whole system of care
provision really needs to be reformed.
Yeah, And just one thing I was thinkingabout with regard to this recently
is, you know, what happens to care workerswhen they themselves age.
And I recently wrote a paperlooking at this in the Canadian contacts,
just kind of tracing over timethe income and kind of social supports
(16:14):
available to women who had migratedthrough the caregiver program in Canada.
And not not surprisingly,I think to to me are to people
listening to this podcast arethey have very low incomes when they age.
You know, in Canada, they are relyingon our old age income support.
So even as they're working multiple jobs,as as we've noted, they're doing such,
(16:37):
you know, essential labour over time,they're not set up to, you know,
kind of provide for their families or agewith dignity, dignity.
And I think that is,you know, a real social
then that that's just unconscionable,really, that they're coming
and doing this, this essential labourand then they themselves are not able
(16:58):
to have adequate incomewhen they age or out of adequate savings.
So I think it's a very short it's oftenvery short term policies.
We're just trying to fill gaps
in our labour marketand there isn't like a long term or system
level thinking in termsof how we're sending these people up
to function fairly and equally in society.
(17:20):
You know, so and in the US, undocumentedworkers are particularly vulnerable
because they have absolutely no accessto any kind of social benefits
or or pension benefitsor access to health care.
So it's it's a really extreme example ofthat kind of the disposable worker model.
And I say, yeah, I think we can seethese kind of trends are
(17:42):
are similar in different contexts,
but also the particularitiesof context important.
And at the centre recentlywe had a really interesting seminar
because the current issueof the International Journal of Care
and Caring is all about carein Southern Africa.
And one of the papers is about
(18:02):
workers from
Lesotho who migrated to Southern Africato work in the mines.
And there was lots of discussion
about, Yeah,well what happens to these people when
they finish workingand what can a provision there is?
And also the question of thatyou can absorb, they're not only about
the case, the care cycleand thinking about life course, you know,
(18:24):
this is a context where life expectancy is
is waylower than in North America or Europe. So
which which brings us onto thinking a bit more about care.
So if we think about we're talkingobviously a lot about valuing care,
so are the respective approachesthat you've all taken and research
(18:45):
and can we put a value on care?
Or if so, how can we do that?
Maybe, maybe you can all think aboutsome of the the theoretical ideas,
possibilities that you've used to tomaybe tackle these questions.
Well.
Well, one,you know, one strategy is to look at
(19:05):
kind of the output of care, that is,to look at indicators
of health, mental healthand physical health.
There's a lot of research on childoutcomes,
on, you know, vulnerability to illness.
I mean, we certainly saw during the COVIDpandemic
a lot of a lot of indicators of lives lost
as a result of very inadequate care.
(19:28):
And but I think we're generallyit's important
to look at the social climateand to see how care is related
to really serious social costs like crime,
like drug addiction, like alcoholism.
What has come to be called in the USdeaths of despair
are taking a more ecological approachthat is not just
(19:50):
individual health outcomes,but what happens to communities
when they're deprived ofof the level of care
that they really need to to,you know, to reproduce themselves?
And there's I think there'sa lot of interesting new research on that.
A lot of itshows that inequality of access to care
is a very,very toxic factor on the community level.
(20:13):
Absolutely.
And I think from my point of view, it'sreally important to think about the policy
and the structures and the long term ofthe sustainability of the kind of outcomes
that we want to have on the idea of,you know,
you know, as Nancy said, you kind of,you know, the Met an unmet need.
So we have in the UK, we just finisheda study on unmet needs among older people
(20:37):
and there are huge inequalitiesrelated to different groups
and related even to different geography.
And if we think as if careas a very important campaign component
to sustain people's lifeand high quality life as much as possible
with their needsthroughout their life, course
(20:57):
that would be of great valueto the whole society.
So I know that there is a huge body
of literaturetrying to make the economic costs between
social care and NHS or the health care,which usually health care
is much more expensive.
But it's it's bigger than that.
It's broader than that.
It's how we function as a society,how we continue
(21:18):
living and participating and engaging.
And there is hugeintergenerational transactions
that happens through thisas care is not one way.
It's, you know, bidirectional, multidirectional.
So people who receive carethemselves are usually
provider of carein other spheres and other contexts.
(21:38):
So it's not like there is a deficitof the group who receive care.
But a lot of, for example, peopleliving with disabilities would need care
and then they would be very productivesocially and economically.
And if we talk about older people,the huge impact in terms of
grandparenting,in terms of financial transaction
(21:59):
and housing transaction, so a need to see
care in a much broader sense
and have a multiplicity of outcomesthat sits within the macro level.
So the societal level,I think that goes back to Nancy's
eco kind of ecosystem
more ecologically kind ofsustained holistic approach.
(22:21):
As long as we just so
fixated about the individualoutcome itself when it comes, say,
towards the end of life, thenthe future returns might not be as high.
So you can make some argumentswhen you talk about child care, where
their future investmentand returns to investment can be fruitful.
But that kind of type of very limitedargument
(22:45):
will hinder the whole societybecause it will constrain people
from thinking about careas a very important element,
just like having parksand having a means of living our lives
in in a in a better way and enhancingthe quality of life for everybody.
So care is a very important componentin that structure.
Yeah, I mean, I completely agree
(23:07):
that taking a more, more holistic approach
and thinking about our entire systemof care provisioning, paid and unpaid
marketisation,non-market types does really essential.
But I think when we think about inputsand outputs, it's also about process.
And that's where the workers come inbecause, you know,
(23:28):
we absolutely won't have a systemof high quality care provision
if we don't value the the people thatare providing those services.
So I think that is
where issueslike wages, working conditions,
you know, access to paid sick days,all the things that were really,
I think, highlighted during the pandemicwhen we saw such
(23:50):
a crisis of care really across the globe.
Those are the issues that are going toset us up for sustainable care provision.
So once these become jobs, that's
people not just are motivated to dobecause they want to help others,
but are motivated to stay.
And over time, that'swhen we're going to see these long term
(24:11):
improvements in outcomesfor clients or recipients of care.
So it's all very much interconnected
and I think we need to look at itin that sort of way, just like
we need to take more
of an intersectional approachwhen we look at the devaluation of
of the people receiving care,but also the the racialized
and migrant women that are providing theseservices overwhelmingly.
(24:36):
So just to add
something that also the care workitself is changing.
So for example, the work that we're doingin centre at the Centre for Care,
we're looking at how policy, macro level
and the kind of direction of,you know, local authorities
and the government changingthe interface of care work itself.
So we're seeing a lot of changesin the roles in the tasks of care workers,
(25:01):
the level of skills that they are requiredto do, the pandemic has actually shifted
a lot of of work from health to care,where there was lockdowns and restrictions
and nurses and health care provisionwere not able to be in in care homes.
Actually, care workers started to do that,to learn online and to take these tasks.
And now the government's through theirkind of social care workforce policies,
(25:25):
are enforcing this through the kindof delegation processes and guidance.
And we're seeing this growthin the responsibilities
of care workersand the expectations from care workers.
But we're not seeing any evaluationof that and read words.
So it's it's it's again, we're relyingon the model that they are doing this.
The semi quasivocational work that they are doing
(25:47):
because they love doing care and hencewe don't have to put a reward structure
but keep kind of adding to their tasksand adding to the responsibilities.
And many of them are willingly taking thisbecause they want to to,
to provide better quality of service.
So it's kind of the whole structure
is, is set up on that assumptionthat people will always come to care.
(26:10):
There will be always groupscoming for whatever reason
that they want to do that workand they will take on more.
So it's really important to step upand think about the policies and to go
how how sustainable is that policy
in the in the future?
What is the cost?
What is the human cost to that?
(26:30):
What is the societal cost to that?
When you create inequalities,further inequalities among this group,
who's providing that that valuable workbut they don't feel valued.
So there is a societal costand the societal problems
that Nancy hinted towardsearlier in the discussion.
So we need to think about thatmore holistically.
(26:51):
But again, try to translate itto economic costs, because without that,
you know, many policy makerswill not listen to that argument.
Well.
One of the problems that we've run into inthe US is the lack of adequate data
on care provision, both unpaid and paid.
It makes it really hard to dothe kind of policy
(27:11):
analysis we'd really like,like to do to make the case.
And we just finished
a couple of
co-authors and myselfjust finished a report on measuring care
and looking at care data, infrastructure.
And just to give example of one importantfinding,
(27:31):
there's really no information
on care deficits in the US.
There's some assessment of fooddeficits of people that are going hungry,
but there's no systematic
sauce for how many people need child carebut can't get it.
How many older peopleor people with disabilities need need?
How many community based servicesbut can't get it? So
(27:55):
it's really,really important to develop our
our data infrastructurein order to be able to
look at the policy
issues in a more,
you know, a more effective way.
Yeah, I'd certainly echo downin the Canadian context too.
I think that's true internationally,and it goes back to the fact
(28:15):
that this hasn't been a policy priority,but we don't have data
or we don't have enough data.
We have,
you know, important qualitative studiesthat, for example, look at language
barriers experienced by ethnic minorities,seniors who need to access home care.
You know,
I can think of
a good studies on that in Canada,and I'm sure that's the case in Canada
and the UK.
But we don't have national level data.
(28:37):
We certainly don't have
international comparative datato get at that care deficit.
And I'd certainly agreethat that really hinders our ability
to advocate for what is necessaryand to kind of create policy changes.
Are I don't, you know, work to createpolicy changes at the more macro level.
(28:57):
Yeah.
And I guess that that isI mean, this kind of lack of data
certainly wouldthat would fit in with what you're saying.
Naomi But and that kind of itbeing a lack of a policy priority,
but I guess also which also reflectsand then
they can have a lack of unity in the careworkforce and is fragmentation,
which is also linked to a marketisation,outsourcing
(29:20):
a lot of a lot of these processes,imminence obsolete.
I suppose that is a factor in therethat, you know,
lack of bargaining power as well,that the care workers hold
and the UK, we have awe have a devolved system.
So in Scotland
at the moment there's there are movestowards a national care service.
We're going to have an electionat the UK level next year.
(29:41):
The Labour Partycurrently are quite far ahead in the polls
and they're certainlylooking quite closely
at having a national care servicein Scotland.
Similar to what we have in health carewith our National Health Service.
So I wonder in North Americafor any kind of that, any discussion
about moving towardsa more kind of unified care workforce
(30:03):
or are we talking aboutprofessionalisation here?
Are there any moves in the North Americato think about these things?
Yeah, well, I think about inCanada are really a current examples
that our federal government very recentlyinstituted a national child care policy.
And, you know,I don't want to take away from this.
This is a huge victoryfor women, for society as a whole.
(30:26):
I recently became a mother.
This is somethingthat's like immediately relevant to me.
But it goes back to or some of thethe challenges we're seeing
is that there aren't enough workersto fill the new places
that have been providedand child care centres. And this is
especially true in kind of more ruralor remote or less central areas.
(30:46):
So I knowI sound like I'm beating a dead horse,
but I think it goes back to this ideathat they have to be well paid jobs
that people are motivated to deal.
And if we don't have enough childcareproviders, it really doesn't matter
or enough people that want to do that jobthat stay in that job.
High levels of turnover,high levels of burnout that are related to
(31:06):
poor working conditions, then, you know,it's really at the level of rhetoric.
So that's one thing I'd say.
Just the other point I wanted to makeis that, yeah, bargaining power
very important.
And I think we've all hinted at this,but it's very hard for
especially home care workers to organise.
A lot of people working in the careeconomy are,
(31:29):
you know, working at isolated work places,you know, not large places where where,
you know, organising is easier,like a hospital or even a long term
care home where there are higher,certainly higher rates of unionisation.
And also just that these are peoplethat are often working, shift work,
working multiple jobs,and it just makes it that much more
(31:50):
challenging to kind of havea large organised strategy.
But I think it's somethingthat cell unions and kind of
advocates need to be working towards.
So in the U.S., the Democratic Partyhas really moved towards
a very strong care agendaand they outlined legislation last fall
as part of what was calledthe Build Back Better Act that was really,
(32:14):
really pretty, very promising.
With attention to raising wages of lowpaid co-workers,
increasing the supply of childcareand home and community based services.
You know, it lost by one votebasically in the Senate.
So it's very contested.
And I think it really helps us understandthat care provision
(32:36):
is really a site of very complicateddistributional conflict.
We live in a worldwhere there are a lot of different forms
of collective conflictgoing on between workers and employers,
between citizens of affluent countriesand citizens of poor countries.
There's also a distributional struggleover people who are providing care
and people who are getting it
(32:57):
basically for free.
So I think it's it kind of
just thinking about these issueskind of can maybe help us understand
why we live in sucha complicated political environment.
And I think this lack of voiceand fragmentation of care workers
pose also challengeswhen we do research on the value of care.
(33:19):
So although that there are stepsare being taken in the UK, for example,
we have a care register in Walesand in Northern Ireland and in Scotland
we don't have one in England, which hasthe largest number of care workers
and just not having a register of peopleworking in care in itself.
It makes it very difficult to understandwho is doing what, where
(33:39):
and increasingly and it goes ways.
So there are a lot of good reasonswhy we having diversity in the care
provision, because we want to allow peopleto have choice and control
and decide the type and nature of workand policies like personalisation
and personal budget, which is cashfor care, allows people to choose
(34:01):
from a market, but it also increasesthe fragmentation of that market.
So it's very difficult to understand
fully the landscape can make assumptions,but there is a lot of missing
missing gaps and dataunfortunately is not great.
So we have some data in Englandprimarily collected from employers.
(34:22):
So we lose a lot of the voicesof the most kind
peoplewho are the most peculiar or conditions,
who are kind of self-employedor casually employed
or doing differentthings like personal assistant.
So again, we need coursewe need better data,
but we need, we need bettersources of data and we need to take maybe
(34:45):
even when we do research,we incorporate qualitative
and quantitative approach more formallythrough different techniques.
So recently I was just speakingin one of the seminars for The Science
of Care of using Bayesian methodologyto include some quantitative
is to use quantitative big data set,but also to use qualitative,
(35:06):
you know, research to add in indicatorsso we can have a more holistic picture.
So as researchers,we we want to make better use
of all the informationand resources that we have.
And data sources are not kind of sayor we only need
some quantitative databecause sometimes you don't have that.
You have a good quality.
Qualitative studiesuse these as indicators
(35:28):
to help you kind of draw a picture,a broader picture of of all care workers,
what they do, how we can value the workthat happens within different happened
in different structures and are paiddifferently in different ways.
So so exactly the complexnature of the provision of care
will translate itself when we when we cometo do research on the value of care.
(35:56):
Yes. Well, I
guess that a lot of whatwhat what we've been pointing to
and thinking aboutand through as as as the value of care.
But we're I guess we're thinkingalso about the fact that
that the value of care is
more than is more than an economic thing.
It's more than a fiscal thing in nature.
(36:17):
So I wonder if anyone wants to
maybe come in there and speak to thatand that point.
And in a broader sense,moving beyond thinking
about quantifying careand and thinking about justice
as a as a form of research,I wonder if anyone wants to.
COHEN On that point.
(36:37):
Well, I'll come in because II think economics really has to change.
I think what has come to be calledan economic approach
is basically kind of the moneymetric and gross domestic product.
And really what economics should be about
is the production and the developmentand the maintenance of human capabilities
that have intrinsic value,not reducible to dollars
(37:02):
and thinking about, you know, what,what's the relationship between
how we're
organising,how we're spending our time and our money
and what's happening to our collectivecapabilities
is just a better wayof thinking about the economy.
And in fact,there's a lot of interest now in
(37:23):
on the macroeconomic leveland on the national policy level
about thinking about the quote unquote
wellbeing economyand just changing the scoreboard
instead of measuring successin terms of gross domestic product,
to think of a dashboard of indicatorsthat we would want to use
in which mental and physical
(37:43):
and communityhealth would be first and foremost.
Yeah,I think there is a growing recognition
of the importance of focusingon inequality at ease, inequalities
among care provision, inequalitiesamong care recipients.
And, you know,if we go back to this holistic idea,
then that's thinking about the waysthat gender and migration and race
(38:07):
play outspecifically within our care economy.
And you know how we think about thisgoing forward.
Maybe it's through legislation,maybe it's through increased social
supports, maybe it's through,you know, greater universalise ation
and the provision of health and educationand social services.
But I think we need to recognise that,you know, as long as these care
(38:32):
chains are so fundamentalto our care economy, we have
a responsibility as as countries
that are receiving care providersto think about
not just them as filling gapsin our labour market,
but to think about them as human beingsand think about the ways
we can help them to have, you know,permanent resettlement in countries,
(38:54):
bring their family members over to dothe job that they were trained to do,
you know, so that if they were nursesin their home countries,
they're able to be nurses at leastrelatively quickly when they come here,
and so that they can
become with their families,you know, not be separated for decades
so that they have maternity leave and,
(39:15):
you know, sick leave and fair wages.
And, you know,I did research on personal support workers
who are working in long termcare homes right when the pandemic hit.
And I think the pandemic was kind oflike a magnifying glass.
It just made everything,all these existing inequalities worse.
And this wasI mostly do quantitative research,
(39:38):
but to speak to what she means thatI think that we did qualitative work
because there was no quantitative dataat the point at that point,
and it was so important to hearfrom these women's voices themselves
and they were saying their wages were 50to 70% reduced during the pandemic.
I mean, these are already low wageworkers.
So we need to kind of prioritise,
(39:59):
I think creating or reducing inequalities
in our labour marketand in our kind of social policy systems.
If we want to improveour economy going forward.
Sorry, now wecan just come in there and just ask why?
Why were the way it is so reducedso heavily at that point?
(40:19):
Absolutely.
So we're this was within longterm care homes.
And what happened was that there weresingle site work policies across Canada.
I think also in the UK, in the US, meaningthey could only work in one long
term care home.
And that makes perfect sensefrom a public health perspective.
And the women I spoketo absolutely understood that.
But the truth is they had been workingat multiple job sites.
(40:40):
And why was that?
Because employers were reluctantto give them permanent full time jobs
because then they have to pay thembenefits.
So, you know, when the pandemic hitall of a sudden they could only work
three quarters of a job when beforethey'd been working one and a half jobs.
And so, yeah, that meant that in additionto kind of doing this work
where they were very scared
(41:01):
about their own well-being, their health,their family's health,
the fact they also werethen unable to pay their mortgage
or their car payments,
let alone send moneyback to their families, which is something
that, you know, most of themhad been doing on a very sustained basis.
So that was just really striking to mein terms of how when things get really
(41:21):
tough, it's the most vulnerable workersthat are hit the hardest.
And very similar resultswe found from ING in England.
So we did two studies, onelooking at the single side policies
and the different policiesthat were introduced during the pandemic.
It was a comparative studyand we have kind of done this data now.
But in England there were similar issuesto do with lockdowns within particularly
(41:46):
care homes where people who used toand we talked about that earlier,
to maintain a decent living,they have to work in multiple sites.
They have to work in multiple jobs.
But when the pandemic hitand with some of these restrictions,
they were not ableto work in multiple sites.
So they have to only reduce their hours.
(42:06):
But more than that.
So we had another study,a big large survey, around 1800 responded
with high sick leave.
And while high infection ratespeople had to do more hours unpaid.
So if you have if you're already
running at a low capacityand there is a high vacancy rate,
people who will remain on sitewhen others fell sick,
(42:30):
they are doing more hoursand unpaid hours.
So there was a huge inequalities,a huge level of exploitation.
And our study showed something
very hard that there was high levelof abuse as well.
So that image of of care workers in the UKwas terrible because they were thinking
people who go to homes to do a home care
(42:52):
basically are infection spreader.
And there was there was huge public abuse.
So coming from the public, people workingin care, workers working in residential
care and have to apply restrictionaround family visitation were seen
as the bad guys who are preventing familycoming to see their loved ones.
(43:14):
And hencethey have been facing a lot of abuse
because people are frustrated and getting,you know, that frustration on them.
So on top of working more hoursand having less pay,
they were actually facing hugelevel of abuse.
That 25% of our samplesaid that they received abuse
and that figure increased to nearly 50%among people from ethnic minorities.
(43:37):
So that shows you again,that there is vulnerabilities
and hierarchies within vulnerabilities.
So this is a really that iswe really need to look at that.
But at the same time, we're seeing policypushing forward for care workers
to do more tasks, to do more workwithout acknowledging them.
So coming back to the question aroundkind of,
(43:59):
you know, moving forwardsand thinking about what needs to be done,
and it really, you know,building on the issues of migration,
the issues of realising the value of care
more than just dollarsand more than just the immediate return
there is, there are differentreturns is thinking to have
a global perspective as well,because this is a mobile world.
(44:22):
We know that a lot of countries in Europeand North America
will continueto have shrinking working age
and they will continue to needand require people who do that work.
A lot of them are migrants.
But think about thatas a global perspective
because other countriesas well are ageing.
So we need to think about the whole carein a very, you know, kind of a holistic,
(44:46):
but more than national, it's very globaland there is a lot of, you know,
transactions,
international transactions
that are happening and care transactionsthat people care about, road
care at a distance, provide care virtuallyor provide care in two places.
So we need to havea holistic national view,
but also a more global view are havinga bit of foresight to the future
(45:10):
that we are all going through, needingmore care because we're all living longer.
But unfortunatelywe're not living healthier all the time.
There will be need for for careduring our late lives.
So thinking about that more globally,more holistically
across national borders, So so
(45:33):
believing care will help us all to agetogether.
Better to move to a better future,
to have, you know, better futuresfor all children, but for ourselves.
So we can work longer.
We can we rely on to re-enterto economies, different economies
and have this social productivityin our societies.
(45:56):
I would just add one thing,
which is that we've really focussed onand with good reason,
focussed on low wage workersand most of what we've been saying.
But it's also true that the care workforceincludes
a lot of relatively well-educatedand well-paid workers
that we think of as being pretty middleclass nurses and teachers.
(46:19):
And our research in the US shows that
these workers are paying a big penaltyrelative to what
workers with similar educationand experience are earning.
And in fact, wewe also found somewhat to our surprise
that even managers and professionals inhealth and education and social services
were being paid far less than managersand professionals in business services.
(46:43):
And this comes back to the pointabout the difficulty of kind of monetising
or capturing the value of of carethat's provided.
And I think it also creates the potentialto create some kind of cross-class across
race alliances, around
the importanceof of really value and care.
(47:04):
Yeah, we haven't
really touched upon the question of genderor class or so much,
but I think Naomi's point aboutand thinking
intersectional about this would,you know, and would incorporate that.
I wonder
if maybe you could just say a little bitmore about that intersectional approach?
Possibly.
Some of our listenersmay not be so familiar with that.
(47:26):
Sure. Yeah. Well, I mean, first, I think
in terms of what Nancy just saidabout that devaluation within the industry
of care, even at different levelsof occupational professionalisation,
the main lens we see withthat is gender, right?
This is these are overwhelminglyfeminised and
(47:47):
feminised industries. So
again, jobs that women do pay less.
We know this and jobs that women
do are disproportionately jobswithin the caring industry.
So I think that this gender lensis very much relevant.
Yeah,all the way from doctors to, you know,
(48:08):
earlychildhood, you know, care assistants.
And also relevant to all womenwho are mothers
because we know on top of penaltiesand paid care work that women
pay a huge penalty and lifetime earnings
from from
creating the next generation.
You know the work onwhich are kind of future as a society
(48:31):
on the costs and benefits of that workare very unequally distributed
and really contributeto the feminisation of poverty.
And caring for parentsand people with disabilities.
Yeah, So I mean,I think gender is really glaring any,
any way we look at thisthis care deficit or this devaluation.
(48:51):
And I think in termsof a more intersectional lens, it's
you know, it is the kind of transferenceof care responsibilities
from kind of upper class women to who,you know, are overwhelmingly
entering the workforce or have enteredthe workforce for decades now.
But their ability to do so is,you know, oftentimes on the backs of lower
(49:13):
class women who are overwhelminglyracialized or migrant women. And
this is kind of how we've set up
this kind of gender equality in the labour
market is such that
there isreally intersectional disadvantage
and such that it's only possiblefor upper class women
(49:36):
to get these great jobsand kind of do it all in quotations
because, you know, more vulnerablewomen are doing the kind of backroom
dirty jobs or raising childrenor caring for elderly people
or people with disabilities.
So I think it's really incumbent on usto think intersectionality
when we're trying to look forwardin terms of making improvements
(49:59):
to how we value care, how we provide care,how we think about care.
And I think, Nancy,
can I mention touched upon the future,the future of the planet.
And I think you remember hintingat the importance of thinking about
take intersectional approach,thinking about care in holistic terms,
in terms of our futureand the claimant's future.
(50:21):
So maybe, maybe we can finish by Nancy.
Maybe you could make make a point in thereabout about connecting discussions
with the climate.
We haven't talked about that,but maybe you could roll things off.
Well, first of all,I mean, I think there is kind of a wave
of interest of concern of of urgency
about the social climateas well as the physical climate.
(50:44):
And we can learnso much from a comparison.
You know, just thinkhow long it took us to figure out that our
our climate is changingand to persuade people, not everyone,
but many people, that the causes of thatare really rooted
in the waywe've organised our economic system.
And, you know,we're in a similar situation.
It's it's very hard to understand climate,what's happening to climate.
(51:07):
It's hardto understand the social climate.
We're just in the middle of figuringthat out, really,
how inequality and how unmet need and how
collective conflictimpose social costs. So
I don't think there's
I don't think we have a magic solution,but we do have I think a lot of motivation
(51:28):
to think more creativelyabout a more sustainable and equitable
economic system and really realisingthat those two things have to go together.
Thank you very much.
And I think that's a good way to end
and for us to think moving forward,to embrace those challenges.
So all that remains for me to donow is to thank our guests.
(51:48):
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
And to thank you for listening. Thank you.
The Care Matters podcast
is brought to youby the ESRC Centre for Care and CIRCLE,
the Centre for International Researchon Care, Labour
and Equalities.
In this series, our researcherswelcome experts in the field
and to those giving or receiving careto discuss crucial issues in social care
(00:27):
as we collectively attemptto make a positive difference to how care
is experienced and provided.
Hello and welcome to Care Matters.
The podcast from the Economicand Social Research Council, Centre
(00:47):
for Care and the University of Sheffield's,CIRCLE Research Centre.
My name is Duncan Fisher and I am aresearch associate at the Centre for Care.
We are delighted to welcome three esteemedguests to Care Matters
Nancy Folbre, NaomiLightman and Shereen Hussein.
In this episode we will discuss thedevaluation and underpayment of care work.
(01:12):
Drawing on experiencesfrom the USA, Canada and the UK.
We consider the challengesof assigning value to care,
emphasising social,cultural and intergenerational dimensions.
I will now introduce our guests.
Nancy Folbre is Professor emerita
of Economics and directorof the Program on Gender and Care Work
(01:35):
and the Political EconomyResearch Institute
at the Universityof Massachusetts, Amherst, and a senior
Fellow of the Levy Economics Institute
at Bard College in the United States.
Her research exploresthe interface between political economy
and feminist theory, with a particularemphasis on the value of unpaid care work.
(01:58):
You can learn more about herat her website and blog.
Care Talk.
Naomi Lightman
is an associate professor of sociologyat Toronto Metropolitan University.
Her areas of research expertise
include care, work, migration, gender
and critical research methodology.
(02:20):
Shereen Hussein
is professor of healthand Social Care Policy
at the London School of Hygieneand Tropical Medicine and leads
the Care workforce Change Research Groupand the Centre for Care.
She is an established,multidisciplinary research leader
with extensive social care and healthresearch experience,
working primarily with policymakersin the UK and internationally.
(02:45):
Welcome to CareMatters, Nancy, Naomi and Shereen
So when we talk about care,
we can often see thisas devalued or underpaid.
So what does it mean when we saythat care is devalued or underpaid?
Maybe, Nancy, who could come to you firstto think about this question?
(03:05):
Well, one big thing that comes to mind is
that care is devaluedbecause it's hard to make a profit on it
because care, by definition,is an effort to meet people's needs,
not necessarily to just take advantageof their purchasing power.
But another factor isthat care has big multiplier effects.
That is, if you care for someone,they're more likely to care
(03:26):
for someone else,to care for someone else, etc., etc..
So what that meansis it's really important
to the economyand to the larger social climate,
but it's very hard to capture the valuethat's created.
The value that's created isvery is very diffuse.
It's very you know, it's
(03:46):
it sort of escapes the money metric.
And so it's not goingto be valued in money terms
as much as it should be.
And Naomiand I think what's striking about care
is, you know, we all rely on careat some point in our lives.
But it is work that was traditionally donefor free by women in private homes.
(04:08):
And I think that ispart of that relationship.
We are we just don't value at the sameas other types of jobs.
And sharing.
Really what's interesting for methat the care economy itself,
so the care is one of thosebig growing sector where you can invest
and the care is sold in a in a veryexpensive way through a consumer lens.
(04:31):
But the care work itself is not valued.
So it's very easy to find situations
where care is quite expensive to to buy.
However, people who are providing care,particularly those, of course,
who are providing unpaid care,even though providing paid care
are less valued.
(04:52):
And this is because an assumption.
So of course, it's difficult to putan economic value on on the product,
but also an assumptionthat this comes naturally to people
and people can do it easily.
So there is a question as wellabout structures and employment
and qualifications and career path
and the divergence between
(05:14):
care as as as a product
and a consumer kind of targeted
product is different from care
being valued as as a type of work.
Yeah, another wayto put that in kind of the language
that economists use is that careworkers have very little bargaining power.
(05:36):
And that problem is really compoundedbecause often their clients
don't have much bargaining powereither or not much political voice. So
both workers and
consumers or care services are don't
or in kind of a weak positionin the overall economy.
Yeah, and I mean, I think what
(05:57):
what also what Nancy's saying, of course,is that it's overwhelmingly women
and immigrants and people of colourthat are doing these care work jobs.
So they are people that have weakerbargaining power
and are just generally more vulnerablein society.
And it's pretty striking how this isreally consistent across countries,
across continents, across welfare regimesin the global north and the global south.
(06:19):
So it's really a universal phenomenonthat we see.
Yeah.
And I think that that interest and likeand it comes back to your initial point,
Nancy, about about profit, because
you know what Naomi says about the peoplewho do the vast majority of the caring.
We know that.
We know who doesn't.
But we also know that there are peoplewho do profit from care
(06:44):
and, you know, who makewho make money off of care as well.
And that tends to be
not the people who are
obviously herewho are doing the work on the ground.
You know, so actually in the UK, we knowthat, you know, there are corporations
who do make quite a lot of money over the.
Yes, that's very true.
(07:05):
But often and this is especially the casein the US, their ability to turn a profit
is very much based on public subsidies,taking advantage of public infrastructure.
So it's a kind of collaboration or or,you know,
concentration of economic powerbetween the market and the state
that allows a lot of profit to be made.
(07:27):
I mean, in in both
the US and the UK, the health care systemis heavily subsidised
by the public sector,but a lot of the add on services
are have been taken over by private firmsand private equity
and often really exploiting the structureof of public support.
(07:47):
So I don't know, one reallyshocking example recently in the US was
private equity firmsmoving into hospice care, which is care
for people who will be dyingwithin a very short period of time.
And the wayin which the public subsidy was set up
made it very,very easy to defraud the system and just
(08:09):
garner huge profits
without providing any services at alland in hospice care.
And also just given the the
the human input is a very importantinput in the provision of the care.
So once you move out of care homes,which the
the structure and the infrastructure is,is one of the big investment,
(08:30):
the profitsmargin can only come from the human input
because the human input and interfaceis, is the care is a provision of care.
So there is there is kind of a fundamental
kind of tension between making profitsand valuing the care work
because the margins comes from the wagesof the care workers and back to norms
(08:52):
point where the majority of thosewho provide care are women
with multiple responsibilities.
So we know that a lot of women
working formerly in carehave informal care responsibility.
We know that women migrants,we know that people from ethnic minorities
and from kind of communitieswhere there is a lot of inequalities.
(09:13):
So then these are people who do not havethe bargaining power, like Naomi said.
And what another issue is interestingis what motivate people to work here.
And this is a kind ofparadoxical situation.
So people come into carebecause they love doing care.
They want to feel the rewards
from the people that they feelthat they are helping others.
(09:36):
And I think this this point is exploitedall in through the system.
So the system itself,kind of the structure, exploits this fact.
So kind of, you know, we reward you indifferent ways, which is not wage related.
We will acknowledgeyou worked like what we've seen
during COVID, which is kind of,you know, clap to carers, but it didn't
(09:57):
translate in the UK, It didn't translateto any wages or career progression.
So there is this tensionbetween having a business
care as a commodity
and care is reliant on the human inputand then kind of knowing
that the specific groups are attractedto work and care and therefore our ability
(10:19):
and system, particularly exploiting,
exploiting their characteristics
and exploiting their motivationsto work in that sector.
Yeah, and I mean,I think we certainly see this
marketisation of care that you're bothtalking about really globally.
So increasing kind of profit motivein various sectors of the economy.
(10:42):
But we also have this huge care deficitwhere we don't have enough workers
to do these jobs and we have an entireyou know, we call it the global care
chain, but it's an, you know,transnational global system where
we import women from poorer countriesor poorer parts of countries
to come do jobsthat typically native born workers
(11:04):
are not interested in doing, largelybecause of pay and working conditions,
and not to take away from what Shereen
was speaking about in terms of kindof the non pecuniary benefits.
So the the real relationshipbetween wanting to do better
or help other peoplethat motivates people to do these jobs.
I also think we have entire immigrationstreams set up
(11:26):
that kind of create incentivesfor migrants to come and do these jobs.
So certainly in Canadawhere I live and work,
we have an entire immigration streamfor living care workers.
And what we see is that
even within that, even as you know,there's a policy understanding
we need women to do these jobs
(11:46):
once they come, they're typically unableto do the jobs that they're trained for.
And again,this is not just the case in Canada.
They'rethey're overwhelmingly overqualified.
We have many barriers for themto become permanent residents
so they can actually stay in the country.
There are overwhelmingly kindof transnational parenting.
So they have families abroadthat they would like to bring over.
(12:09):
But there's many barriers to do so.
So I think there's a lot of ethical issuesin terms of the conditions
that we create when we have peoplecome over specifically to do these jobs.
And that's even separate from the factthat this is very low wage,
very physically demanding,mentally straining,
complicated work that,
(12:30):
you know, as I'm sure we're going to talkmore about, we really don't value.
Yeah, well, thanks, Naomi,for bringing the immigration
and the kind of mobility,the global mobility that we're seeing.
And many countriesare seeing this as a solution to
many issues, particularly carewhere you can talk to my kids a lot of it.
So rely on people who have othermotivation and other drivers
(12:53):
to come and work.
And we've seen over and over in the UK,especially with Brexit
and other kind of immigration policies,that is tightening
entry into the care work that some ofthese policies have kind of exploited.
Further workerswho are driven to come to help,
(13:14):
usually help their families back homewho have different responsibilities.
So they have different priorities.
And we kind of they are accepting
certain conditionsand certain forms of pay and work
that they might not have acceptedotherwise.
They have their own pressures back home.
They made a commitment toto send, to remit
(13:37):
and to care, to to save for some time.
And a study that we just finishedlooking at the experience of live
in care worker in in Londonthat showed that there is quite
a high level of exploitationand particularly with live in care
where you don'thave your own space to live in.
(13:57):
So you're completely reliant on the clientor the older person
that you are supporting own accommodationin food
and quite a lot of difficultdecisions has to be made.
So we need to think more about
the group of workers who are attracted toto these kind of jobs.
And in our research also, even,you know, British white women
(14:21):
who come to this work usually havemultiple caring responsibilities.
They like the flexibility of work,but it means for them
that they have to workso many shifts to just get the
you kind of the decentincome that they need to live.
And so there was quitea lot of complexities.
And with population ageingwhere we have shrinking working age
(14:42):
and you kind of difficulty in optimisingcare, you're reliant on these migration
chains,you're relying on the vulnerability
of certain groups in the communityto make this input.
And I think the system is kind of set upto overlook this contribution.
So making it more complexto translate this into an economic value.
(15:05):
I mean, I think migration itself is
not the problem is the low payand really poor working conditions
and in the paid care sector that are
are basically kind
of treating the desire to help othersas though it's an inexhaustible resource
when in fact people cannot providegood care unless they have some amount
(15:26):
of job security and some amount of abilityto get to know and
and engage with the peoplethat they're caring for. And,
you know, what's
happened is that we've designedthese really low wage, low road jobs
where there's really high levelsof burnout and turnover.
So it's not really goodfor consumers, for clients either,
(15:50):
so that our whole system of care
provision really needs to be reformed.
Yeah, And just one thing I was thinkingabout with regard to this recently
is, you know, what happens to care workerswhen they themselves age.
And I recently wrote a paperlooking at this in the Canadian contacts,
just kind of tracing over timethe income and kind of social supports
(16:14):
available to women who had migratedthrough the caregiver program in Canada.
And not not surprisingly,I think to to me are to people
listening to this podcast arethey have very low incomes when they age.
You know, in Canada, they are relyingon our old age income support.
So even as they're working multiple jobs,as as we've noted, they're doing such,
(16:37):
you know, essential labour over time,they're not set up to, you know,
kind of provide for their families or agewith dignity, dignity.
And I think that is,you know, a real social
then that that's just unconscionable,really, that they're coming
and doing this, this essential labourand then they themselves are not able
(16:58):
to have adequate incomewhen they age or out of adequate savings.
So I think it's a very short it's oftenvery short term policies.
We're just trying to fill gaps
in our labour marketand there isn't like a long term or system
level thinking in termsof how we're sending these people up
to function fairly and equally in society.
(17:20):
You know, so and in the US, undocumentedworkers are particularly vulnerable
because they have absolutely no accessto any kind of social benefits
or or pension benefitsor access to health care.
So it's it's a really extreme example ofthat kind of the disposable worker model.
And I say, yeah, I think we can seethese kind of trends are
(17:42):
are similar in different contexts,
but also the particularitiesof context important.
And at the centre recentlywe had a really interesting seminar
because the current issueof the International Journal of Care
and Caring is all about carein Southern Africa.
And one of the papers is about
(18:02):
workers from
Lesotho who migrated to Southern Africato work in the mines.
And there was lots of discussion
about, Yeah,well what happens to these people when
they finish workingand what can a provision there is?
And also the question of thatyou can absorb, they're not only about
the case, the care cycleand thinking about life course, you know,
(18:24):
this is a context where life expectancy is
is waylower than in North America or Europe. So
which which brings us onto thinking a bit more about care.
So if we think about we're talkingobviously a lot about valuing care,
so are the respective approachesthat you've all taken and research
(18:45):
and can we put a value on care?
Or if so, how can we do that?
Maybe, maybe you can all think aboutsome of the the theoretical ideas,
possibilities that you've used to tomaybe tackle these questions.
Well.
Well, one,you know, one strategy is to look at
(19:05):
kind of the output of care, that is,to look at indicators
of health, mental healthand physical health.
There's a lot of research on childoutcomes,
on, you know, vulnerability to illness.
I mean, we certainly saw during the COVIDpandemic
a lot of a lot of indicators of lives lost
as a result of very inadequate care.
(19:28):
And but I think we're generallyit's important
to look at the social climateand to see how care is related
to really serious social costs like crime,
like drug addiction, like alcoholism.
What has come to be called in the USdeaths of despair
are taking a more ecological approachthat is not just
(19:50):
individual health outcomes,but what happens to communities
when they're deprived ofof the level of care
that they really need to to,you know, to reproduce themselves?
And there's I think there'sa lot of interesting new research on that.
A lot of itshows that inequality of access to care
is a very,very toxic factor on the community level.
(20:13):
Absolutely.
And I think from my point of view, it'sreally important to think about the policy
and the structures and the long term ofthe sustainability of the kind of outcomes
that we want to have on the idea of,you know,
you know, as Nancy said, you kind of,you know, the Met an unmet need.
So we have in the UK, we just finisheda study on unmet needs among older people
(20:37):
and there are huge inequalitiesrelated to different groups
and related even to different geography.
And if we think as if careas a very important campaign component
to sustain people's lifeand high quality life as much as possible
with their needsthroughout their life, course
(20:57):
that would be of great valueto the whole society.
So I know that there is a huge body
of literaturetrying to make the economic costs between
social care and NHS or the health care,which usually health care
is much more expensive.
But it's it's bigger than that.
It's broader than that.
It's how we function as a society,how we continue
(21:18):
living and participating and engaging.
And there is hugeintergenerational transactions
that happens through thisas care is not one way.
It's, you know, bidirectional, multidirectional.
So people who receive carethemselves are usually
provider of carein other spheres and other contexts.
(21:38):
So it's not like there is a deficitof the group who receive care.
But a lot of, for example, peopleliving with disabilities would need care
and then they would be very productivesocially and economically.
And if we talk about older people,the huge impact in terms of
grandparenting,in terms of financial transaction
(21:59):
and housing transaction, so a need to see
care in a much broader sense
and have a multiplicity of outcomesthat sits within the macro level.
So the societal level,I think that goes back to Nancy's
eco kind of ecosystem
more ecologically kind ofsustained holistic approach.
(22:21):
As long as we just so
fixated about the individualoutcome itself when it comes, say,
towards the end of life, thenthe future returns might not be as high.
So you can make some argumentswhen you talk about child care, where
their future investmentand returns to investment can be fruitful.
But that kind of type of very limitedargument
(22:45):
will hinder the whole societybecause it will constrain people
from thinking about careas a very important element,
just like having parksand having a means of living our lives
in in a in a better way and enhancingthe quality of life for everybody.
So care is a very important componentin that structure.
Yeah, I mean, I completely agree
(23:07):
that taking a more, more holistic approach
and thinking about our entire systemof care provisioning, paid and unpaid
marketisation,non-market types does really essential.
But I think when we think about inputsand outputs, it's also about process.
And that's where the workers come inbecause, you know,
(23:28):
we absolutely won't have a systemof high quality care provision
if we don't value the the people thatare providing those services.
So I think that is
where issueslike wages, working conditions,
you know, access to paid sick days,all the things that were really,
I think, highlighted during the pandemicwhen we saw such
(23:50):
a crisis of care really across the globe.
Those are the issues that are going toset us up for sustainable care provision.
So once these become jobs, that's
people not just are motivated to dobecause they want to help others,
but are motivated to stay.
And over time, that'swhen we're going to see these long term
(24:11):
improvements in outcomesfor clients or recipients of care.
So it's all very much interconnected
and I think we need to look at itin that sort of way, just like
we need to take more
of an intersectional approachwhen we look at the devaluation of
of the people receiving care,but also the the racialized
and migrant women that are providing theseservices overwhelmingly.
(24:36):
So just to add
something that also the care workitself is changing.
So for example, the work that we're doingin centre at the Centre for Care,
we're looking at how policy, macro level
and the kind of direction of,you know, local authorities
and the government changingthe interface of care work itself.
So we're seeing a lot of changesin the roles in the tasks of care workers,
(25:01):
the level of skills that they are requiredto do, the pandemic has actually shifted
a lot of of work from health to care,where there was lockdowns and restrictions
and nurses and health care provisionwere not able to be in in care homes.
Actually, care workers started to do that,to learn online and to take these tasks.
And now the government's through theirkind of social care workforce policies,
(25:25):
are enforcing this through the kindof delegation processes and guidance.
And we're seeing this growthin the responsibilities
of care workersand the expectations from care workers.
But we're not seeing any evaluationof that and read words.
So it's it's it's again, we're relyingon the model that they are doing this.
The semi quasivocational work that they are doing
(25:47):
because they love doing care and hencewe don't have to put a reward structure
but keep kind of adding to their tasksand adding to the responsibilities.
And many of them are willingly taking thisbecause they want to to,
to provide better quality of service.
So it's kind of the whole structure
is, is set up on that assumptionthat people will always come to care.
(26:10):
There will be always groupscoming for whatever reason
that they want to do that workand they will take on more.
So it's really important to step upand think about the policies and to go
how how sustainable is that policy
in the in the future?
What is the cost?
What is the human cost to that?
(26:30):
What is the societal cost to that?
When you create inequalities,further inequalities among this group,
who's providing that that valuable workbut they don't feel valued.
So there is a societal costand the societal problems
that Nancy hinted towardsearlier in the discussion.
So we need to think about thatmore holistically.
(26:51):
But again, try to translate itto economic costs, because without that,
you know, many policy makerswill not listen to that argument.
Well.
One of the problems that we've run into inthe US is the lack of adequate data
on care provision, both unpaid and paid.
It makes it really hard to dothe kind of policy
(27:11):
analysis we'd really like,like to do to make the case.
And we just finished
a couple of
co-authors and myselfjust finished a report on measuring care
and looking at care data, infrastructure.
And just to give example of one importantfinding,
(27:31):
there's really no information
on care deficits in the US.
There's some assessment of fooddeficits of people that are going hungry,
but there's no systematic
sauce for how many people need child carebut can't get it.
How many older peopleor people with disabilities need need?
How many community based servicesbut can't get it? So
(27:55):
it's really,really important to develop our
our data infrastructurein order to be able to
look at the policy
issues in a more,
you know, a more effective way.
Yeah, I'd certainly echo downin the Canadian context too.
I think that's true internationally,and it goes back to the fact
(28:15):
that this hasn't been a policy priority,but we don't have data
or we don't have enough data.
We have,
you know, important qualitative studiesthat, for example, look at language
barriers experienced by ethnic minorities,seniors who need to access home care.
You know,
I can think of
a good studies on that in Canada,and I'm sure that's the case in Canada
and the UK.
But we don't have national level data.
(28:37):
We certainly don't have
international comparative datato get at that care deficit.
And I'd certainly agreethat that really hinders our ability
to advocate for what is necessaryand to kind of create policy changes.
Are I don't, you know, work to createpolicy changes at the more macro level.
(28:57):
Yeah.
And I guess that that isI mean, this kind of lack of data
certainly wouldthat would fit in with what you're saying.
Naomi But and that kind of itbeing a lack of a policy priority,
but I guess also which also reflectsand then
they can have a lack of unity in the careworkforce and is fragmentation,
which is also linked to a marketisation,outsourcing
(29:20):
a lot of a lot of these processes,imminence obsolete.
I suppose that is a factor in therethat, you know,
lack of bargaining power as well,that the care workers hold
and the UK, we have awe have a devolved system.
So in Scotland
at the moment there's there are movestowards a national care service.
We're going to have an electionat the UK level next year.
(29:41):
The Labour Partycurrently are quite far ahead in the polls
and they're certainlylooking quite closely
at having a national care servicein Scotland.
Similar to what we have in health carewith our National Health Service.
So I wonder in North Americafor any kind of that, any discussion
about moving towardsa more kind of unified care workforce
(30:03):
or are we talking aboutprofessionalisation here?
Are there any moves in the North Americato think about these things?
Yeah, well, I think about inCanada are really a current examples
that our federal government very recentlyinstituted a national child care policy.
And, you know,I don't want to take away from this.
This is a huge victoryfor women, for society as a whole.
(30:26):
I recently became a mother.
This is somethingthat's like immediately relevant to me.
But it goes back to or some of thethe challenges we're seeing
is that there aren't enough workersto fill the new places
that have been providedand child care centres. And this is
especially true in kind of more ruralor remote or less central areas.
(30:46):
So I knowI sound like I'm beating a dead horse,
but I think it goes back to this ideathat they have to be well paid jobs
that people are motivated to deal.
And if we don't have enough childcareproviders, it really doesn't matter
or enough people that want to do that jobthat stay in that job.
High levels of turnover,high levels of burnout that are related to
(31:06):
poor working conditions, then, you know,it's really at the level of rhetoric.
So that's one thing I'd say.
Just the other point I wanted to makeis that, yeah, bargaining power
very important.
And I think we've all hinted at this,but it's very hard for
especially home care workers to organise.
A lot of people working in the careeconomy are,
(31:29):
you know, working at isolated work places,you know, not large places where where,
you know, organising is easier,like a hospital or even a long term
care home where there are higher,certainly higher rates of unionisation.
And also just that these are peoplethat are often working, shift work,
working multiple jobs,and it just makes it that much more
(31:50):
challenging to kind of havea large organised strategy.
But I think it's somethingthat cell unions and kind of
advocates need to be working towards.
So in the U.S., the Democratic Partyhas really moved towards
a very strong care agendaand they outlined legislation last fall
as part of what was calledthe Build Back Better Act that was really,
(32:14):
really pretty, very promising.
With attention to raising wages of lowpaid co-workers,
increasing the supply of childcareand home and community based services.
You know, it lost by one votebasically in the Senate.
So it's very contested.
And I think it really helps us understandthat care provision
(32:36):
is really a site of very complicateddistributional conflict.
We live in a worldwhere there are a lot of different forms
of collective conflictgoing on between workers and employers,
between citizens of affluent countriesand citizens of poor countries.
There's also a distributional struggleover people who are providing care
and people who are getting it
(32:57):
basically for free.
So I think it's it kind of
just thinking about these issueskind of can maybe help us understand
why we live in sucha complicated political environment.
And I think this lack of voiceand fragmentation of care workers
pose also challengeswhen we do research on the value of care.
(33:19):
So although that there are stepsare being taken in the UK, for example,
we have a care register in Walesand in Northern Ireland and in Scotland
we don't have one in England, which hasthe largest number of care workers
and just not having a register of peopleworking in care in itself.
It makes it very difficult to understandwho is doing what, where
(33:39):
and increasingly and it goes ways.
So there are a lot of good reasonswhy we having diversity in the care
provision, because we want to allow peopleto have choice and control
and decide the type and nature of workand policies like personalisation
and personal budget, which is cashfor care, allows people to choose
(34:01):
from a market, but it also increasesthe fragmentation of that market.
So it's very difficult to understand
fully the landscape can make assumptions,but there is a lot of missing
missing gaps and dataunfortunately is not great.
So we have some data in Englandprimarily collected from employers.
(34:22):
So we lose a lot of the voicesof the most kind
peoplewho are the most peculiar or conditions,
who are kind of self-employedor casually employed
or doing differentthings like personal assistant.
So again, we need coursewe need better data,
but we need, we need bettersources of data and we need to take maybe
(34:45):
even when we do research,we incorporate qualitative
and quantitative approach more formallythrough different techniques.
So recently I was just speakingin one of the seminars for The Science
of Care of using Bayesian methodologyto include some quantitative
is to use quantitative big data set,but also to use qualitative,
(35:06):
you know, research to add in indicatorsso we can have a more holistic picture.
So as researchers,we we want to make better use
of all the informationand resources that we have.
And data sources are not kind of sayor we only need
some quantitative databecause sometimes you don't have that.
You have a good quality.
Qualitative studiesuse these as indicators
(35:28):
to help you kind of draw a picture,a broader picture of of all care workers,
what they do, how we can value the workthat happens within different happened
in different structures and are paiddifferently in different ways.
So so exactly the complexnature of the provision of care
will translate itself when we when we cometo do research on the value of care.
(35:56):
Yes. Well, I
guess that a lot of whatwhat what we've been pointing to
and thinking aboutand through as as as the value of care.
But we're I guess we're thinkingalso about the fact that
that the value of care is
more than is more than an economic thing.
It's more than a fiscal thing in nature.
(36:17):
So I wonder if anyone wants to
maybe come in there and speak to thatand that point.
And in a broader sense,moving beyond thinking
about quantifying careand and thinking about justice
as a as a form of research,I wonder if anyone wants to.
COHEN On that point.
(36:37):
Well, I'll come in because II think economics really has to change.
I think what has come to be calledan economic approach
is basically kind of the moneymetric and gross domestic product.
And really what economics should be about
is the production and the developmentand the maintenance of human capabilities
that have intrinsic value,not reducible to dollars
(37:02):
and thinking about, you know, what,what's the relationship between
how we're
organising,how we're spending our time and our money
and what's happening to our collectivecapabilities
is just a better wayof thinking about the economy.
And in fact,there's a lot of interest now in
(37:23):
on the macroeconomic leveland on the national policy level
about thinking about the quote unquote
wellbeing economyand just changing the scoreboard
instead of measuring successin terms of gross domestic product,
to think of a dashboard of indicatorsthat we would want to use
in which mental and physical
(37:43):
and communityhealth would be first and foremost.
Yeah,I think there is a growing recognition
of the importance of focusingon inequality at ease, inequalities
among care provision, inequalitiesamong care recipients.
And, you know,if we go back to this holistic idea,
then that's thinking about the waysthat gender and migration and race
(38:07):
play outspecifically within our care economy.
And you know how we think about thisgoing forward.
Maybe it's through legislation,maybe it's through increased social
supports, maybe it's through,you know, greater universalise ation
and the provision of health and educationand social services.
But I think we need to recognise that,you know, as long as these care
(38:32):
chains are so fundamentalto our care economy, we have
a responsibility as as countries
that are receiving care providersto think about
not just them as filling gapsin our labour market,
but to think about them as human beingsand think about the ways
we can help them to have, you know,permanent resettlement in countries,
(38:54):
bring their family members over to dothe job that they were trained to do,
you know, so that if they were nursesin their home countries,
they're able to be nurses at leastrelatively quickly when they come here,
and so that they can
become with their families,you know, not be separated for decades
so that they have maternity leave and,
(39:15):
you know, sick leave and fair wages.
And, you know,I did research on personal support workers
who are working in long termcare homes right when the pandemic hit.
And I think the pandemic was kind oflike a magnifying glass.
It just made everything,all these existing inequalities worse.
And this wasI mostly do quantitative research,
(39:38):
but to speak to what she means thatI think that we did qualitative work
because there was no quantitative dataat the point at that point,
and it was so important to hearfrom these women's voices themselves
and they were saying their wages were 50to 70% reduced during the pandemic.
I mean, these are already low wageworkers.
So we need to kind of prioritise,
(39:59):
I think creating or reducing inequalities
in our labour marketand in our kind of social policy systems.
If we want to improveour economy going forward.
Sorry, now wecan just come in there and just ask why?
Why were the way it is so reducedso heavily at that point?
(40:19):
Absolutely.
So we're this was within longterm care homes.
And what happened was that there weresingle site work policies across Canada.
I think also in the UK, in the US, meaningthey could only work in one long
term care home.
And that makes perfect sensefrom a public health perspective.
And the women I spoketo absolutely understood that.
But the truth is they had been workingat multiple job sites.
(40:40):
And why was that?
Because employers were reluctantto give them permanent full time jobs
because then they have to pay thembenefits.
So, you know, when the pandemic hitall of a sudden they could only work
three quarters of a job when beforethey'd been working one and a half jobs.
And so, yeah, that meant that in additionto kind of doing this work
where they were very scared
(41:01):
about their own well-being, their health,their family's health,
the fact they also werethen unable to pay their mortgage
or their car payments,
let alone send moneyback to their families, which is something
that, you know, most of themhad been doing on a very sustained basis.
So that was just really striking to mein terms of how when things get really
(41:21):
tough, it's the most vulnerable workersthat are hit the hardest.
And very similar resultswe found from ING in England.
So we did two studies, onelooking at the single side policies
and the different policiesthat were introduced during the pandemic.
It was a comparative studyand we have kind of done this data now.
But in England there were similar issuesto do with lockdowns within particularly
(41:46):
care homes where people who used toand we talked about that earlier,
to maintain a decent living,they have to work in multiple sites.
They have to work in multiple jobs.
But when the pandemic hitand with some of these restrictions,
they were not ableto work in multiple sites.
So they have to only reduce their hours.
(42:06):
But more than that.
So we had another study,a big large survey, around 1800 responded
with high sick leave.
And while high infection ratespeople had to do more hours unpaid.
So if you have if you're already
running at a low capacityand there is a high vacancy rate,
people who will remain on sitewhen others fell sick,
(42:30):
they are doing more hoursand unpaid hours.
So there was a huge inequalities,a huge level of exploitation.
And our study showed something
very hard that there was high levelof abuse as well.
So that image of of care workers in the UKwas terrible because they were thinking
people who go to homes to do a home care
(42:52):
basically are infection spreader.
And there was there was huge public abuse.
So coming from the public, people workingin care, workers working in residential
care and have to apply restrictionaround family visitation were seen
as the bad guys who are preventing familycoming to see their loved ones.
(43:14):
And hencethey have been facing a lot of abuse
because people are frustrated and getting,you know, that frustration on them.
So on top of working more hoursand having less pay,
they were actually facing hugelevel of abuse.
That 25% of our samplesaid that they received abuse
and that figure increased to nearly 50%among people from ethnic minorities.
(43:37):
So that shows you again,that there is vulnerabilities
and hierarchies within vulnerabilities.
So this is a really that iswe really need to look at that.
But at the same time, we're seeing policypushing forward for care workers
to do more tasks, to do more workwithout acknowledging them.
So coming back to the question aroundkind of,
(43:59):
you know, moving forwardsand thinking about what needs to be done,
and it really, you know,building on the issues of migration,
the issues of realising the value of care
more than just dollarsand more than just the immediate return
there is, there are differentreturns is thinking to have
a global perspective as well,because this is a mobile world.
(44:22):
We know that a lot of countries in Europeand North America
will continueto have shrinking working age
and they will continue to needand require people who do that work.
A lot of them are migrants.
But think about thatas a global perspective
because other countriesas well are ageing.
So we need to think about the whole carein a very, you know, kind of a holistic,
(44:46):
but more than national, it's very globaland there is a lot of, you know,
transactions,
international transactions
that are happening and care transactionsthat people care about, road
care at a distance, provide care virtuallyor provide care in two places.
So we need to havea holistic national view,
but also a more global view are havinga bit of foresight to the future
(45:10):
that we are all going through, needingmore care because we're all living longer.
But unfortunatelywe're not living healthier all the time.
There will be need for for careduring our late lives.
So thinking about that more globally,more holistically
across national borders, So so
(45:33):
believing care will help us all to agetogether.
Better to move to a better future,
to have, you know, better futuresfor all children, but for ourselves.
So we can work longer.
We can we rely on to re-enterto economies, different economies
and have this social productivityin our societies.
(45:56):
I would just add one thing,
which is that we've really focussed onand with good reason,
focussed on low wage workersand most of what we've been saying.
But it's also true that the care workforceincludes
a lot of relatively well-educatedand well-paid workers
that we think of as being pretty middleclass nurses and teachers.
(46:19):
And our research in the US shows that
these workers are paying a big penaltyrelative to what
workers with similar educationand experience are earning.
And in fact, wewe also found somewhat to our surprise
that even managers and professionals inhealth and education and social services
were being paid far less than managersand professionals in business services.
(46:43):
And this comes back to the pointabout the difficulty of kind of monetising
or capturing the value of of carethat's provided.
And I think it also creates the potentialto create some kind of cross-class across
race alliances, around
the importanceof of really value and care.
(47:04):
Yeah, we haven't
really touched upon the question of genderor class or so much,
but I think Naomi's point aboutand thinking
intersectional about this would,you know, and would incorporate that.
I wonder
if maybe you could just say a little bitmore about that intersectional approach?
Possibly.
Some of our listenersmay not be so familiar with that.
(47:26):
Sure. Yeah. Well, I mean, first, I think
in terms of what Nancy just saidabout that devaluation within the industry
of care, even at different levelsof occupational professionalisation,
the main lens we see withthat is gender, right?
This is these are overwhelminglyfeminised and
(47:47):
feminised industries. So
again, jobs that women do pay less.
We know this and jobs that women
do are disproportionately jobswithin the caring industry.
So I think that this gender lensis very much relevant.
Yeah,all the way from doctors to, you know,
(48:08):
earlychildhood, you know, care assistants.
And also relevant to all womenwho are mothers
because we know on top of penaltiesand paid care work that women
pay a huge penalty and lifetime earnings
from from
creating the next generation.
You know the work onwhich are kind of future as a society
(48:31):
on the costs and benefits of that workare very unequally distributed
and really contributeto the feminisation of poverty.
And caring for parentsand people with disabilities.
Yeah, So I mean,I think gender is really glaring any,
any way we look at thisthis care deficit or this devaluation.
(48:51):
And I think in termsof a more intersectional lens, it's
you know, it is the kind of transferenceof care responsibilities
from kind of upper class women to who,you know, are overwhelmingly
entering the workforce or have enteredthe workforce for decades now.
But their ability to do so is,you know, oftentimes on the backs of lower
(49:13):
class women who are overwhelminglyracialized or migrant women. And
this is kind of how we've set up
this kind of gender equality in the labour
market is such that
there isreally intersectional disadvantage
and such that it's only possiblefor upper class women
(49:36):
to get these great jobsand kind of do it all in quotations
because, you know, more vulnerablewomen are doing the kind of backroom
dirty jobs or raising childrenor caring for elderly people
or people with disabilities.
So I think it's really incumbent on usto think intersectionality
when we're trying to look forwardin terms of making improvements
(49:59):
to how we value care, how we provide care,how we think about care.
And I think, Nancy,
can I mention touched upon the future,the future of the planet.
And I think you remember hintingat the importance of thinking about
take intersectional approach,thinking about care in holistic terms,
in terms of our futureand the claimant's future.
(50:21):
So maybe, maybe we can finish by Nancy.
Maybe you could make make a point in thereabout about connecting discussions
with the climate.
We haven't talked about that,but maybe you could roll things off.
Well, first of all,I mean, I think there is kind of a wave
of interest of concern of of urgency
about the social climateas well as the physical climate.
(50:44):
And we can learnso much from a comparison.
You know, just thinkhow long it took us to figure out that our
our climate is changingand to persuade people, not everyone,
but many people, that the causes of thatare really rooted
in the waywe've organised our economic system.
And, you know,we're in a similar situation.
It's it's very hard to understand climate,what's happening to climate.
(51:07):
It's hardto understand the social climate.
We're just in the middle of figuringthat out, really,
how inequality and how unmet need and how
collective conflictimpose social costs. So
I don't think there's
I don't think we have a magic solution,but we do have I think a lot of motivation
(51:28):
to think more creativelyabout a more sustainable and equitable
economic system and really realisingthat those two things have to go together.
Thank you very much.
And I think that's a good way to end
and for us to think moving forward,to embrace those challenges.
So all that remains for me to donow is to thank our guests.
(51:48):
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
And to thank you for listening. Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.