Skip to main content

OECD calls for improved pay and status for long term care workers

The influential Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has released a new report (Help Wanted? Providing and paying for long-term care ) that concludes that   aging populations in developed countries will cause spending on long term care to double or triple by 2050.  Spending on long-term care currently accounts for 1.5% of the economy in developed countries.


The growth in demand for long term care leads the OECD to conclude that pay and working conditions in long term care (including home care) must improve:

"Major reforms to attract more care workers and retain them in the sector should be put in place quickly. Most long-term care careers are dead-end jobs with a high turnover and low pay and benefits....Upgrading the status of the long-term care workforce by improving pay and working conditions is key."

These conclusions are particularly striking as the OECD is tightly tied to ruling elites, and is generally known for being boss-friendly rather than worker-friendly. 

Less surprisingly, the OECD raises the idea of privatization: "Countries have to spread the burden of such high costs, either by targeting universal benefits to those most in need of care or via public-private partnerships.  Private insurance could play a role in some countries... but is likely to remain a niche market unless made compulsory."

As well, the OECD is concerned about the impact of rising LTC costs on government, and is particularly keen to limit "institutional" long term care (i.e. nursing homes or homes for the aged):

Governments will need to find a balance between offering access to good-quality care and making their systems financially sustainable.... Around 70% of long-term care users receive services at home, but spending in institutional care accounts for 62% of total spending. Respite care, encouraging part-time work and paying benefits to family carers can all be cost-effective policies, reducing demand for expensive institutional care.

This line of thinking has already come to Ontario:  LHIN and government officials claim that up to 30% of people now in LTC facilities should be at home, and have slowed the growth of long term care facilities (even as wait lists for LTC beds explode).  

The OECD report also includes some information regarding Canada: 

  • In 2010, about 13%  of Canada’s population is aged over 65 (OECD average 15%), and about 3.5%  over 80 (OECD average 4%).
  •  In 2006, Canada’s expenditure on long term nursing care was equivalent to about  1.5% of its gross domestic product (about the OECD average).  More than 80% of these expenditures were  targeted to institutional care -- and that is significantly higher than the OECD average of 62%. 
  •  In 2008-09, about 0.7 % (250,000 individuals) of the Canadian population resided in an institution, of which about 75 % were 65 years and older. The 238,000 individuals are equivalent to about 4% of the population over 65.
  •  In 2008-09, there were approximately 4,850 residential care facilities across Canada with 270 000 approved beds.  Of these beds, about 217 000 were approved for homes for the aged.  
  • In 2006, more than 2.5 % (875,000 individuals) of the population reported receiving home health care and home support; about 60% of this group received home health care only.
  • In 2006, about 160,000 nurses and personal carers worked in the long-term care (LTC) sector on a full-time basis and close to 70,000 on a part-time basis.
  • Canada has a young and small LTC private insurance market.  In 2007, about 276 000 individuals (roughly 1% of the total population) subscribed to a long-term care insurance (75% as part of a group insurance plan).  A total of about $65 million (Canadian) was paid in premiums while about $9 million  in benefits were paid.








Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

More spending on new hospitals and new beds? Nope

Hospital funding:  There is something off about the provincial government's Budget claims on hospital capital funding (funding to build and renovate hospital beds and facilities).    For what it is worth (which is not that much, given the long time frame the government cites), the province claims it will increase hospital capital spending over the next 10 years from $11 billion to $20 billion – or on average to about $2 billion per year.   But, this is just a notional increase from the previous announcement of future hospital capital spending.  Moreover, even if we did take this as a serious promise and not just a wisp of smoke, the government's own reports shows they have actually funded hospital infrastructure about $3 billion a year over the 2011/12-2015/16 period. So this “increase” is really a decrease from past actual spending. Even last year's (2016-17) hospital capital funding increase was reported in this Budget at $2.3 billion - i.e. about 15% more th
Post a Comment
Read more

Ford government fails to respond to 72% increase in COVID inpatient days, deepening the capacity crisis

COVID infections continue to drive up hospital costs and inpatient hospitalizations in Ontario. For the most recent fiscal year (April 1, 2022- March 31, 2023) hospital stays related to COVID cost $1.221 billion, according to new CIHI data.   This is about 4% of total hospital spending, creating a very significant new cost pressure beyond the usual pressures of population growth, aging, inflation, and rising utilization.   Costs for COVID related hospitalizations increased 22.2% in Ontario in 2022/23 from the previous fiscal year, rising from $999 million to $1.221 billion.  That rise is particularly notable as the OMICRON spike of late 2021 and early 2022 had passed by the the 2022/23 fiscal year.   The $222 million increase in COVID hospitalization costs came in the same year as the Ford government cut special COVID funding and, in fact, cut total hospital funding by $156 million.     In total, there were 60,653 COVID hospitalizations in Ontario in 2022/3, up from 47,543 in 2021/2. 
Post a Comment
Read more

Paramedic Services in Canada: Structure, Privatization, Unionization and other issues

Governance and Funding :  While police and fire services are usually municipal services, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) are typically controlled by provincial governments.  In Ontario, regional municipal governments have responsibility for delivering and funding EMS.  But even in Ontario the province plays a key role, strictly regulating EMS, providing funding for 50% of the approved land ambulance costs, and paying 100% of the approved costs for air ambulance, dispatch, base hospitals, First Nation EMS, and for territories without municipal government. Delivery :  Like police and fire services, EMS is predominantly a publicly provided service in Canada.   But businesses have now made some significant in-roads into EMS, primarily  Medavie,  a private corporation based in the Maritimes that describes itself as not-for-profit.  Medavie goes back over 70 years, with its roots in health insurance.  It still operates Medavie Blue Cross with 1,900 employees.  It now a
Post a Comment
Read more