Collective care: recent collective actions in paid and unpaid care work in New Zealand Dr Katherine Ravenswood

Overview New Zealand in 1 slide Paid work and unpaid care work in NZ (undervalued) Recent legal action to address wages and care work Equal Pay Act 1972 – case in residential aged care Averted action for ‘inbetween client travel time’ in home/community care New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Act (No 2) 2013). How effective has the action been? Conclusions - Why/Why not effective?

A brief history of New Zealand...

Unpaid care work.... Women make up 62% of all unpaid carers in NZ (Grimmond, 2014). The approx carers’ contribution is estimated to be worth in the range of $7.3 bn (3.4% of GDP) to $17.6 bn (8.1% of GDP) (Grimmond, 2013). Career income penalty of approx 10% (Grimmond, 2013) BUT family care work is undervalued in policy eg: Paid Parental leave less than the minimum wage (Ravenswood, 2008); Sole parent support work requirements and penalties for non-compliance; Prior to 2014, no government payments for family carers of disabled adult children – payments for non-family carer.

Paid care work... A typical aged care worker... (Ravenswood, Douglas & Teo, 2015) 45 years + Main earner in her family Earns $15 per hour or less Feels that she has the skills she needs for her job Loves the job itself Feeling less valued

Equal Pay Act 1972 We therefore reject the argument that the sole mischief the Act was intended to address was different rates paid by the same employer to males and females for the same work. We similarly reject the argument that in a predominantly female workforce what was intended was a solely internal comparison limited to the wage rates and policies of the employer concerned (clause 103, Terranova Homes & Care Limited vs Service and Food Workers Union and Kristine Bartlett, 2014).

In-between client travel time – Minimum Wage Act 1983 Time travelling between clients should be paid. Legal action averted. Resulted in tri-partite discussions and agreement. Also resulted in ongoing discussions on the regularizing of work.

Family Carers Action – Human Rights Act 1993 Group of families – discrimination on the basis of family status. Ministry of Health argued that parental care of children was natural and part of social contract. Judge ruled non-payment was discriminatory, and that care for adult disabled children went ‘social contract. Resulted in the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Act (No 2)

How effective are these actions?

Conclusions Most effective (so far) in changing funding and payments is under the Minimum Wage Act. What is the difference? It is not claiming discrimination and is less ‘gendered’ – technicality about wages rather than drawing attention to care work. Different industry and stakeholders/actors. Least effective, perhaps the Family carers case: punitive – prevents further action on the basis of discrimination.. Has transgressed norms of care and families. Contrary also to current government policy on care work in the home and paid work. Stigma of disability. Equal Pay Act 1972 – Still to be seen. Very successful in terms of union solidarity and capacity. Can that be sustained over long case?