Presentation to Department for Employment and Learning Northern Ireland 22 nd May 2013

DELNI Economic Inactivity Strategy Literature Review:

those with family commitments & the long-term sick and disabled

Presentation to Department for Employment and Learning Northern Ireland 22nd May 2013

Professor Ronald McQuaid

(Report by Professor Ronald McQuaid, Dr Helen Graham, Dr Marina Shapira, Professor Robert Raeside)

Employment Research Institute, Edinburgh Napier University

[email protected]

1. BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH

2. KEY FINDINGS - Contextual analysis- Family Commitments- Disabilities- Conclusions

Aims

• Overarching aim to: provide a detailed understanding of how multiple cross-cutting issues prevent the economically inactive from seeking work, in order to better inform the Departmental Strategy on reducing economic inactivity.

• Specifically, the review considers two groups: those with family commitments; and the long-term sick and disabled.

• However, while there are similarities, there are significant differences between and within these groups.

Methods

• Analysis is primarily based on academic findings around the multiple and cross-cutting barriers to employment for the groups

• The main methods used was a desk based review of the literature taken from a number of sources, especially the academic literature

• This was informed by analysis of related statistical information within the context of the Northern Ireland labour market

Main statistics sources

• Labour Force Survey• 2011 Census (limited published data so far) • NI Claimant Count • NI Quarterly Employment Survey • Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings and • Department for Social Development (DSD), NI Benefits Statistics

Summary

• Generally data for Working Age population (16-64 years old for men and 16-59, for women)

1. BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH

2. KEY FINDINGS - Contextual analysis- Family Commitments- Disabilities- Conclusions

Figure 2.2: Economic inactivity in the working age population by age and gender

Source: LFS

Figure 2.3: Age, Gender and Economic activity, NI/GB ratios

Source: LFS

NI has high levels of inactivity (except for women aged 25-49 years)

Family responsibility:• Child bearing when young, so have never fully enter the labour

market (e.g. young lone parent)• Work history then children so re-entry may or may not occur and

may be (e.g.) part-time, low paid etc. (likelihood of remaining economically ‘inactive’ rises with number of children, disability of child etc.)

• Caring for older relatives, such as parents or spouse (more likely for older people)

Disability:• Disability from childhood (e.g. pathway may be via low

educational achievement etc.)• Disability during working life (e.g. physical trauma when young,

mental problems due to unemployment etc., health issues when older, stroke etc.)

Some pathways into inactivity

Table 2.2: Disability, Dependency and Economic activity in 2012 (LFS) Married/co-habiting dependent children Lone parent dependent children No dependents

Disability Total Disability Total Disability Total

Disabled Not disabled Disabled Not disabled Disabled Not disabled

Great Britain In employment 60.6% 77.0% 74.7% 37.5% 53.7% 50.1% 49.8% 81.1% 73.8%

ILO unemployed 5.6% 5.3% 5.4% 12.0% 13.5% 13.2% 7.1% 6.5% 6.6%

Inactive 33.8% 17.6% 19.9% 50.5% 32.8% 36.7% 43.1% 12.4% 19.6%

Northern Ireland In employment 53.8% 77.1% 74.3% 23.2% 46.2% 42.0% 34.6% 81.9% 70.9%

ILO unemployed 6.4% 2.6% 3.0% 7.3% 7.2% 7.2% 4.5% 7.2% 6.5%

Inactive 39.8% 20.4% 22.7% 69.4% 46.6% 50.8% 60.9% 11.0% 22.6%

Disability and caring

Employment rates of Not Disabled similar in NI and GB, but otherwise generally different with higher inactivity in NI (except No Dependents, Not Disabled)

1. BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH

2. KEY FINDINGS - Contextual analysis- Family Commitments- Disabilities- Conclusions

Examples: Mothers returning to work

Millennium Cohort Study suggests that the probability of a mother returning to work by the time her child is three is:• positively associated with being employed during pregnancy, especially in a

managerial or professional position (Fagan et al. 2012). • less likely in women who are Pakistani, Bangladeshi or mixed race, Lone

mothers, and mothers with a partner who works long hours

Maternity and Paternity Rights and Women Returners Survey, return more likely if: • working in the public sector; working for a larger employer; (longer)

duration of job pre-birth; generous maternity pay, particularly occupational provision in addition to the statutory entitlement; being partnered rather than single; and being highly qualified (Chanfreau et al. 2011).

Factors affecting the employability of those with caring responsibilities (Box 3.1)• INDIVIDUAL LEVEL• Employability; qualifications, labour market history, health• Attitudes to work; orientation towards work, beliefs about appropriate care,

confidence

• PERSONAL AND HOUSEHOLD CIRCUMSTANCES• Household• Who is being cared for; how many, how old (e.g. young children), how

intensive are their needs• Partner present or not, and if so whether working, or hours worked and

income • Personal network• Support from family, friends, neighbours and community

Factors affecting the employability of those with caring responsibilities (Box 3.1) cont.• WIDER ECONOMY AND SOCIETY• Employer• Employer’s attitude to flexibility for those with care responsibilities• Size and sector of employer• Local area• Local labour market demand and jobs offered (e.g. pay, flexibility)• Childcare or social care service provision (new Childcare strategy)• Transport and isolation (both rural and deprived communities within urban

areas)• National level• State support for childcare• Maternity leave arrangements• Support for those with caring responsibilities (e.g. allowances)• Prevailing economic conditions

Family responsibilities – policy lessons

• Holistic and tailored support. Silo mentality does not work.• Partnership working. This is needed between local training providers,

employers and childcare providers. • The importance of a good adviser. Engagement is most productive when

advisers are both well-trained and supportive. A key worker model with one contact worker who can provide support directly or through referrals appears to be effective.

• Training and qualifications. This is something to be targeted. • Making work pay. This is also linked to the issue of qualifications, job types

and Universal Credit • The limits of policy. Prevailing economic conditions play an important role in

the inactivity rate.

EXAMPLE: The Working for Families Fund for disadvantaged parents/ carers (Box 3.2)• The Working for Families programme was effective in tackling both childcare

and employability issues in an integrated and effective way. £50m over 4 years. A total of 25,508 clients (with 42,214 children aged below 18) received support from WFF. 13,594 clients (53%) achieved ‘hard’ outcomes, such as employment, and a further 3,283 (13%) achieved other significant outcomes (training, distance travelled, e.g. improved confidence).

• Success factors in the implementation of WFF include: the integration of employability and childcare support; and the Key Worker approach - individualised, holistic approach; and the importance of effective partnership working (between agencies and also with employers).

• Careful consideration should be given to providing stable, longer term funding for such programmes as the evidence suggests that this is much more efficient and cost effective.

• A prime focus of WFF type policies should be on ‘hard’ outcomes and flexibility in terms of funding and implementation was important

What appears to be effective for supporting those with care responsibilities

• integrating childcare (or other care) with employability support;• effective partnership working between agencies and with employers;• the need for more childcare that is affordable even to those on the lowest

incomes;• affordable transport that facilitates the journeys between home, work and

childcare providers;• holistic support that recognises and responds to the needs of the individual,

and is delivered by a well-trained and sympathetic advisor;• policy stability that ensure longer term funding, as start-up costs are often

large and effectiveness in achieving outcomes can be low in the early stages.

1. BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH

2. KEY FINDINGS - Contextual analysis- Family Commitments- Disabilities- Conclusions

Disabilities

• DDA defines as disabled a person with a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

• LFS, in the second quarter of 2012, 18.9% (19% and 18.5% for male and female respectively) of the working age population in NI reported some kind of disability.

• Distributed unevenly by age. In 2012 the smallest share of disabled is found among 16-24 year olds (8.3%); this share reaches 16% among 25-49 years old, and is the highest among working age men and women aged 50 or older (35%)

Figure 2.10a: Employment Rates by Disability in NI 2006-2012

Figure 2.10b: Employment Rates by Disability in NI by gender 2006-2012

Disability and employment • For some sheltered workplace (Remploy or social enterprise or

within a employer) or even being outside of labour market (inactive) may be appropriate

• For those entering ‘main stream employment’: – Employability (skills, qualifications etc.); – Accessible work (physical, work organization etc.); – Attitudes of employers (and co-workers).

• Type of jobs is important (part-time, low pay, low skilled)• Crucial are types and severity of disabilities (e.g. diabetes v

mental); plus disability from youth or in older age

Figure 2.14c: Disability Living Allowances by main disabling condition

Type of Disability and No Qualifications (LFS)

Disability and Occupational Group (LFS) Q1 2006 Q1 2012

Disabled Not Disabled Disabled Not Disabled

Occupation (SOC10) Row %1

Column %2

Row %1

Column %2

Row %1

Column %2

Row %1

Column %2

Managers and Senior Officials 11.6% 12.1% 88.4% 9.5% 8.2% 7.1% 91.8% 8.8%

Professional occupations 5.7% 7.5% 94.3% 12.7% 6.1% 11.3% 93.9% 19.5%

Associate Professional and Technical 8.0% 10.4% 92.0% 12.2% 13.1% 13.8% 86.9% 10.2%

Administrative and Secretarial 6.1% 8.7% 93.9% 13.8% 9.2% 11.9% 90.8% 13.0%

Skilled Trades Occupations 10.2% 20.0% 89.8% 18.1% 14.9% 20.7% 85.1% 13.1%

Personal Service Occupations 6.3% 5.0% 93.7% 7.6% 10.2% 9.5% 89.8% 9.3%

Sales and Customer Service Occupations 13.9% 12.3% 86.1% 7.8% 10.8% 8.7% 89.2% 8.0%

Process, Plant and Machine Operatives 11.6% 11.3% 88.4% 8.8% 10.9% 7.1% 89.1% 6.4%

Elementary Occupations 12.1% 12.7% 87.9% 9.5% 8.7% 10.0% 91.3% 11.7%

Factors that affect the employability of those with long term illnesses and disabilities Box 4.3 INDIVIDUAL LEVEL • Individual characteristics: • A health condition, illness or impairment • Employability factors such as age, qualifications, skills, labour market

experience • Benefits barriers: fear of losing benefits without a guarantee of making a

sustainable transition to paid employment • Lack of confidence, anxiety • Attitudes: Beliefs about the availability of appropriate work, attitudes to

work, perceptions of the level of discrimination towards those disabled, perceptions about societal attitudes toward those disabled; awareness of disabled people about anti-discriminatory legislation

Factors that affect the employability of those with long term illnesses and disabilities Box 4.3b HOUSEHOLD & PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES• Caring responsibilities• Availability of help and support • Availability of other income WIDER ECONOMY AND SOCIETY• Employer• Employer’s attitude to employment of people with disabilities and to

flexibility and work place adjustment (including e.g. long hours culture etc.) for those with disabilities

• Size and sectors of employers• Local area• Local labour market demand and jobs offered (e.g. pay, flexibility)• Transport and isolation (both rural and deprived communities) Access

barriers (lack of suitable personal transport, etc.)

Factors that affect the employability of those with long term illnesses and disabilities Box 4.3 • National level policies towards disabled: • State legislation on disability and disability benefits• Services that manage health conditions, occupational rehabilitation services • Welfare to work programmes (e.g. financial help for people to allow them to

make the transition from benefits to paid work)• Programmes that target the employability of disabled people (skills

development, work experience) and create work places for disabled people • Programmes that help disabled people with access to work and work place

adjustments • Programmes that target employers (create incentives for employers to

employ people with disabilities through wage subsidies, funding of work place adjustment, etc.) and the provision of work place adjustment for disabled people

• Cooperation among health care, employment services and employers • Prevailing economic conditions

Lessons• Increase and make less selective the up-take of programmes which are

directed to support people with disabilities to find employment. Uptake of programmes directed at supporting people with long-term illnesses/disabilities to get into employment is usually selective and low

• Supporting the whole range of jobs rather than low-skilled/low paid jobs. Many subsidised jobs for employment of disabled people tend to be low skilled and low paid (e.g. Clayton et al. 2011a, 2012; Hohnen 2001)

• Change programmes’ effectiveness assessment criteria. Job entry may be misleading indicator if unable to sustain employment without addition help

• Increase the up-take of workplace adjustment programmes. Physical accessibility issues and work organisation

• Improve communication, coordination and cooperation between employment services for disabled people and employers and health services.

What appears to effective for supporting disabled people:

• a focus on workplaces; making them more aware of legislation but also more knowledgeable about what adjustments disabled people actually need, and what support might be available to them to make adjustments;

• improving awareness about the programmes, and coverage and uptake of programmes aimed at supporting disabled people into employment, including expanding beyond those most work-ready and tackling the harder to reach;

• increasing the employability of disabled people through equipping them with better qualifications and skills

• an integrated approach to each of the policy elements, including skills development, job placement and support after employment.

1. BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH

2. KEY FINDINGS - Contextual analysis- Family Commitments- Disabilities- Conclusions

Conclusions

• Reducing inactivity is important for Northern Ireland and the people involved

• However, for some there may be more appropriate alternatives to paid employment

• Policies may appear to be gender-, disability-,family-blind etc. but in reality they often are not

• Cannot treat those with family commitments or disabilities as an ‘add on’ to existing policies – need properly considered and resourced policies

Thank you for listen

Report is available at:

McQuaid, R., Shapira, M., Graham, H. and Raeside, R. (2013) Economic Inactivity Research Project (those with family commitments and the long-term sick and

disabled) - Literature Review (Project-11040), Department for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland

http://www.delni.gov.uk/economic-inactivity-literature-review-project