Caring for society’s elders: Understudied implications of population ageing for HRM and ER

Abstract

Employment practices that allow employees to better care for society’s elders have never been more important. However, few resources are available to guide practitioners on how to manage employees with a paid or unpaid eldercare role. Accordingly, this chapter aims to enhance understanding of the employee and organisational implications of eldercare. In doing so, we draw upon caring, health care management, human resource management (HRM), and employment relations (ER) research to identify high quality ways for thinking about employment and eldercare. We specifically focus on two questions of direct interest to managers in the context of an ageing Australian and New Zealand workforce: What are the implications of eldercare for individuals and organisations? and How can organisations respond to the challenges of eldercare?

Full text

This is an unedited chapter accepted for publication in the book: The Big Issues in Employment: HRM
and Employment Relations in Australasia. The final version might undergo minor additional editing in
style and content.
Please cite as:
Bainbridge, H. T. J., & Radford, K. (2018). Caring for society’s elders: Understudied implications of
population ageing for HRM and ER. In J. Parker (Ed.), The Big Issues in Employment: HRM and
Employment Relations in Australasia. Sydney: CCH.
CARING FOR SOCIETY’S ELDERS: UNDERSTUDIED IMPLICATIONS OF POPULATION
AGEING FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
Hugh T. J. Bainbridge
University of New South Wales
Katrina Radford
Griffith University
Corresponding author:
Hugh T. J. Bainbridge, University of New South Wales,Room 510, School of Management, Business
School, University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052 Australia,
Email: h.bainbridge@unsw.edu.au


Chapter12
CaringforSociety’sElders:UnderstudiedImplicationsof
PopulationAgeingforHumanResourceManagementand
EmploymentRelations
HughBainbridgeandKatrinaRadford
12.0Introduction
For some months, Dad, almost crippled with osteoarthritis, had been getting daily visits
at home from carers organised by an excellent service called Anglican Retirement
Villages. The carers helped him shower and dress, did a bit of shopping, drove my
parents to medical appointments when necessary, and helped Mum prepare meals. I had
suggested to my parents that they put their names down for hostel accommodation, and
I’d offered to go searching for a comfortable place where they could be close to a dining
room and medical attention. His condition then deteriorated so much that the doctors and
social workers suggested he go into respite care. Amazingly, they found him a bed
within 48 hours. When I saw his “temporary” nursing home, it was enough to start me
immediately checking every place on a list of recommendations from the Anglican
Retirement Villages people and the hospital social worker. At this point, most of the
nursing home directors were polite enough not to laugh, but they did make it clear that I
had a long wait ahead. When I asked if I could come and inspect, they’d suggest
appointment times a week away. When inspections showed places to be acceptable, I
would fill in 8-page application forms that asked extraordinarily detailed questions about
my parents’ financial situation. I’d phone the matrons every few days to see if there were
any prospects. (D. Dale, 20 September 2000, “The home run-around”. The Sydney
Morning Herald)
The opening excerpt illustrates a typical manifestation of “population ageing”. It charts a son’s provision
of unpaid care, and the interactions with the formal care sector that supported his father via visits to the
family home and nursing home care. In doing so, the material introduces three themes that we will
develop in this chapter. First, it illustrates a central aspect of population ageing in terms of its implications
for eldercare. Second, it outlines the importance of the formal health sector in which employees provide
paid care for the elderly. Third, it gives prominence to the experience of employees who also provide
informal, unpaid care to an elderly parent.
Employment practices that allow employees to better care for society’s elders have never been
more important. However, few resources are available to guide practitioners on how to manage
employees with a paid or unpaid eldercare role. Accordingly, this chapter aims to enhance understanding
of the employee and organisational implications of eldercare. In doing so, we draw on caring, healthcare
management, human resource management (HRM), and employment relations (ER) research to identify
high-quality ways for thinking about employment and eldercare. We specifically focus on two questions

of direct interest to managers in the context of an ageing Australian and New Zealand workforce: What
are the implications of eldercare for individuals and organisations? and How can organisations respond
to the challenges of eldercare?
12.1Populationageingandthegrowthinmature‐agedworkers,retirees
andtheelderly
A growing percentage of the Australian and New Zealand populations are aged over 65 years. In
Australia, over-65s are projected to increase from 18% to 24% of the population between 2021 and 2061
(Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2013c). This trend is prompting an intense interest in how ageing
creates challenges for employees, organisations and society (Boxall, Bainbridge and Frenkel, 2018; Kulik,
Ryan, Harper and George, 2014; Radford, Chapman, Bainbridge and Halvorsen, 2018). For example,
researchers have argued that population ageing requires organisations to reassess traditional beliefs about
the needs and capabilities of mature-aged employees (Kulik and Bainbridge, 2006b; Perry and Parlamis,
2006). A series of recent major reports in Australia and New Zealand also outline the impact of ageing on
government services and on how people will be cared for as they age (Australian Institute of Health and
Welfare [AIHW], 2015; Australian Productivity Commission [APC], 2013; Statistics New Zealand,
2006).
Population ageing brings with it an increased likelihood of physiological and psychological
impairment. This, in turn, creates a need for assistance from family members and the formal healthcare
sector. For this reason, researchers on ageing have had a longstanding interest in access to, and provision
of, eldercare. Eldercare refers to the provision of assistance with the daily living activities for an elderly
person (65 years or older) who is chronically ill, frail or has age-related disabilities.
The implications of ageing for family and society have been the focus of sustained inquiry in the
social sciences and medical research. In contrast, eldercare has not been a prominent concern in the
organisational literature. This is unfortunate, because eldercare is increasingly relevant to the decisions of
employees, employers and policy-makers. For individuals in the aged care sector, population ageing will
open up new job and career opportunities as demand for formal care increases. For employees in other
fields, population ageing increases the chance of being faced with a decision about whether and how to
combine employment with care for their elderly parent. For employers, ageing reduces the number of
individuals participating in the labour force. This creates challenges in the context of both paid and
unpaid eldercare. For example, a smaller ratio of employees to the elderly intensifies competition for
talent in the healthcare sector. It also means that the responsibility of unpaid eldercare is borne by a
smaller section of the population. For policy-makers, an ageing population is problematic because it
means that fewer individuals are available to provide unpaid care. This places greater reliance on the aged
care sector and on government social services. In the following material, we expand on two approaches to
supporting the needs of the elderly: informal, unpaid eldercare and formal, paid eldercare.
Informal, unpaid eldercare is provided by family members or friends of the recipient. In most
cases, the person providing this care is a son or daughter of an elderly parent. Eldercare can take the form
of assistance with personal needs (e.g. washing, cooking) and with administration, finance and record-
keeping. Informal carers constitute a large fraction of the Australian and New Zealand populations. In

Australia, 12% of the population have caring responsibilities (ABS, 2015). A similar percentage provide
unpaid care in New Zealand (NZ Ministry of Social Development, 2014). These carers are often
employed in other careers (e.g., teaching, engineering, accounting), and combine their paid employment
with the provision of unpaid eldercare. To illustrate, 66% of Australian carers aged 15–64 years are
employed in addition to their unpaid caring role (ABS, 2015). The prevalence of employees with
eldercare responsibilities is growing as population ageing increases the incidence of disability in the
population, and the rise in dual-career couples increases the involvement of women (who
disproportionately care for elderly parents) in the paid workforce (ABS, 2015). Consequently, most
employees can expect to provide eldercare at some point during their career
Eldercare is also provided by employees in formal healthcare settings. These include nursing
homes, retirement villages and hospitals, but also outreach services, such as “meals on wheels” and other
services that visit an elderly person in his or her domestic residence. The aged care sector is large, and is
expanding rapidly to meet growing demand. In Australia, the sector provided services to 368,000 people
during 2014–2015 (AIHW, 2017), whereas in New Zealand, there were over 37,500 residential care
places (New Zealand Aged Care Association, 2016). This high and growing demand for formal aged care
is detailed in a series of recent major reports (Carers Australia, 2015; Deloitte, 2015).
12.2ManagingeldercareinAustraliaandNewZealand:currentresearch
andkeychallengesforpractice
We now turn to discussing recent developments in Australian and New Zealand research on employees
who provide eldercare in the context of either (1) an informal, unpaid non-work role, or (2) formal, paid
employment. For both, we identify the context shaping eldercare provision, the key challenges for
individuals and organisations, and potential responses to those challenges.
12.2.1Employeeswithinformal,unpaideldercareresponsibilities
A first step in engaging with the issue of eldercare requires that managers appreciate the rapidly
developing legislative context for eldercare. This is important because, while informed managerial
decisions can ensure good individual and organisational outcomes, gaps in knowledge about the
protections extended to employees with non-work eldercare roles can impose significant costs.
Australian and New Zealand legislation provides some protection for employees with eldercare
responsibilities. In Australia, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 prohibits discrimination against a
worker because they are an “associate” of a person with disabilities. An associate may be a carer. More
recently, the Fair Work Act 2009 makes it unlawful for an employer to take adverse action against a
person who is a current, former or prospective employee because of the person’s family or care
responsibilities. Adverse action is defined as activities that include: dismissal, altering a position to a
carer’s detriment, discriminating between a carer and other employees, refusing to employ an individual,
or discriminating in the terms and conditions of an employment offer. The Fair Work Act also formalises
the minimum entitlements of employees covered by federal awards in the form of National Employment
Standards (NES). The NES outlines 10 minimum conditions. Three of these have direct relevance to
carers: requests for flexible working arrangements; parental leave and related entitlements; and personal

carers leave and compassionate leave. Under the NES, an employee with a year of continuous service
who is a parent or carer of a child of school age or younger, or a child under 18 with disability, has the
right to request a change in working arrangements to assist with a child’s care. Further, all employees
except casuals are entitled to up to 10 days each year of sick and carer’s leave. Under the NES, casual
employees are entitled to less generous entitlements (e.g., unpaid rather than paid carer’s leave). They
also need to be continuously employed for a year in a role to have the right to request flexible working
arrangements. However, an important limitation of these initiatives is that employees possess a right to
request, but not a right to obtain the requested flexible working arrangements. This issue has been taken
up in the recent Time to Care campaign, in which unions have sought a strengthening of the Fair Work
Act via the inclusion of an appeal right when an employer refuses a request for flexible working
arrangements (Australian Council of Trade Unioons, 2013).
This protection is complemented by carer-specific state and federal legislation. Federally, the
Carer Recognition Act 2010 creates a requirement for Australian public service agencies and government-
funded service providers to ensure that they take carers’ needs into account when developing and
implementing services. However, the coverage of the Act is limited. It is specifically stated that the “Act
does not create legally enforceable obligations”. Carer legislation also exists in most Australian states and
territories. This includes: the Carers (Recognition) Act 2010 (NSW); the Carers (Recognition) Act 2008
(QLD); the Carers Recognition Act 2005 (SA), the Carers Recognition Act 2012 (VIC);the Carers
Recognition Act 2004 (WA); and the Carers Recognition Act 2009 (NT). As an illustration, the Carers
(Recognition) Act 2010 (NSW) defines who is a carer, and aims to improve understanding of carers by
creating the NSW Carers Charter and a Carers Advisory Council. It also sets out obligations for public
sector and human service agencies. However, the Act does not provide employees with legal rights or
entitlements.
In New Zealand, section 6AA of the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2014 provided
employees with caring responsibilities the right to request flexible working arrangements. A subsequent
amendment to the Employment Relations Act in 2015 has provided all New Zealand employees the right
to request a change to their working arrangements. Requests for flexible working arrangements need to be
in writing, and an employee is not required to discuss or justify the reason for the request. Employers are
required to respond to their employee’s request within one month. An employer can decline the request
only on the grounds of its impact on workplace needs. For example, a request can be refused if it conflicts
with a collective agreement, or because of reasons such as an inability to reorganise work among existing
staff, an inability to recruit additional employees, and the potential detrimental impact on quality or
performance. The past decade has also seen the launch of the first New Zealand Carers’ Strategy and Five
Year Action Plan. Its most recent update sets out major objectives to “Increase awareness and
understanding of the carer’s role” and “Improve pathways to paid employment for carers and support for
whānau, aiga,1 family and carers to balance their work, life and caring roles” (NZ Ministry of Social
Development, 2014).

1 “Whānau” refers to the extended family or community of related families in Māori, and “aiga” means family in
Samoan culture.

Thebusinesscaseforhelpingemployeesmanagenon‐workeldercare
Eldercare is important to employees and organisations because the combination of work and eldercare
creates both challenges and opportunities. Eldercare is potentially challenging because juggling work and
eldercare can be difficult. Carers manage work alongside the significant physical and mental demands of
providing care. These eldercare demands create strain, and can interrupt an employee’s work-related
activities. Thus, incompatibilities between work and care roles create inter-role conflict that can degrade
day-to-day effectiveness in one or both roles. Over the longer term, care responsibilities may contribute to
career disruption and under-employment (Bainbridge and Broady, 2017). A care role causes career
interruptions when it prompts employees to take a leave of absence, decline promotions and take on less
challenging job roles. In turn, career disruption and under-employment reduce carer well-being
(Bainbridge and Broady, 2017). This detrimental effect on well-being is particularly likely when a care
recipient is in poor health (Kulik, Cregan and Bainbridge, 2013). Difficulties combining work and
eldercare also contribute to turnover (Bainbridge, Broady and Fong, 2016) and a partial (e.g. reducing
work hours) or full withdrawal from the workforce (Berecki-Gisolf, Lucke, Hockey and Dobson, 2008;
Bittman, Hill and Thomson, 2007; Nguyen and Connelly, 2014). Turnover is particularly costly for
organisations, because employees with eldercare responsibilities are often highly experienced,
knowledgeable, and possess specialised skills. Furthermore, these employees, who typically are the most
economically mobile, are especially likely to leave when faced with incompatibilities between work and
care roles (Austen, Jefferson, Lewin, Ong and Sharp, 2015).
Work and eldercare can also be combined for mutual benefit (Bainbridge, Cregan and Kulik,
2006). Organisations that are supportive of eldercare are better placed to access a largely untapped pool of
labour. This will be increasingly important as population ageing reduces the effectiveness of traditional
recruitment approaches. People may also develop skills via eldercare that are transferable to employment.
For example, carers develop planning, organising and problem-solving skills through their experience of
juggling the demands of care. These skills are highly valued by employers (Australian Chamber of
Commerce and Industry, 2002). Carers also benefit from employment because it provides a source of
respite, social contact and financial support (Bainbridge et al., 2006). Finally, there may be reputational
benefits in positioning an organisation as “carer friendly” (Bainbridge and Broady, 2017). These benefits
are illustrated in the accompanying vignette (Box 12.1).

Box 12.1: Workplace flexibility case study: Clayton Utz’s flexible working arrangements
Company: Clayton Utz (www.claytonutz.com/)
Company profile: Clayton Utz is an Australian law firm with offices in Sydney, Brisbane,
Melbourne, Perth, Canberra and Darwin. Established in 1833, it is a member of what was known as
the Big Six of Australian law firms. With 165 partners and over 1,300 employees, it is one of the
largest law firms in Australia.
Programme profile: Clayton Utz recognises that there are many ways people can work flexibly.
They offer flexible work arrangements that are formal or informal, regular or ad hoc, to
accommodate a variety of life and career stages including study, eldercare, community
participation, childcare, health, well-being and lifestyle pursuits. Flexible work arrangements vary
the standard hours and/or location of an employee’s work, and include:
 working variable start and finish times
 job-sharing
 working part-time
 working from home or another remote location
 phased retirement, and
 additional leave arrangements.
In addition, Clayton Utz has a dedicated National Flexibility Manager who helps broker and
implement flexible work arrangements that are mutually desirable, beneficial and sustainable. The
Flexibility Manager is a central source of information about flexible work options, providing a
nationally consistent approach to flexibility across the firm. The Flexibility Manager also provides
resources and training to support individuals and teams to deliver effective and successful flexible
work arrangements.
The challenge: For many organisations, offering flexible working arrangements is only the first
and easiest step. The greater challenge is to get employees and managers to effectively access the
flexible working arrangements. Clayton Utz has addressed this by offering arrangements that: (1)
are broad in scope, and (2) are championed by a dedicated National Flexibility Manager.
Benefits to employees and employer: Clayton Utz says that their policies on working from home
and flexible work provide mutual benefits to their employees and the firm. These include:
 the ability to retain skilled employees
 a competitive edge in recruiting, and an enhanced firm brand
 improved morale, engagement and commitment
 reduced absenteeism and employee turnover
 better service for its clients, and
 the ability for individuals to work and accommodate their personal commitments and
interests, community projects and family at home.
Lessons learned: Clayton Utz management believes that “flexibility is an absolute priority for
diversity and inclusion”, and that it is a “key enabler for creating a positive workplace culture”.
Offering flexible working arrangements and encouraging their use via a dedicated National
Flexibility Manager and the visible take-up of these arrangements by Clayton Utz partners has
contributed to the success of this initiative. The success is reflected in a recent survey in which 54%
of Clayton Utz respondents said that they use flexible work arrangements, both formally and
informally.

12.2.3Workplacepracticesthathelpemployeesjuggleworkandeldercare
Organisations can respond in three interrelated but straightforward ways to enhance the likelihood that
employees will manage work and eldercare for personal and organisational benefit. The first approach is
to reduce incompatibilities between work and eldercare roles. Organisations can provide flexibility in how
or where a job is completed. For example, enhancing access to flexible hours, unpaid family leave, and
paid sick or vacation days reduces turnover (Pavalko and Henderson, 2006). These initiatives are
particularly important for women in low-status jobs or with fewer job-relevant skills who find it
challenging to combine work and care (Austen and Ong, 2013). The importance of these initiatives is also
underlined by recommendations that government policies support workforce participation. This may be
achieved by promoting the use of flexible work arrangements and by funding programmes that support
the re-employment of people who wish to re-enter the workforce after a period providing unpaid care
(Berecki-Gisolf et al., 2008).
A second approach is to focus on aspects of each role that are stressful or strain-inducing.
Organisational policies that reduce strain-based conflict include the collation of eldercare information on
the availability of medical services, carers advocacy bodies, and government employment policies. To
illustrate, because government policy initiatives can provide greater flexibility in combining work and
care, employers should ensure that they share information about strain-reducing policy developments
(Bainbridge et al., 2016). Stress management initiatives can also be helpful. Organisations can sponsor
employee support groups (Conklin, 2000) that bring together carers to share experiences and resources.
This might be complemented by offering support outside the workplace (e.g. confidential Employee
Assistance Programme services). These services may be more likely to be accessed by carers who do not
wish to publicise their eldercare responsibilities at work.
A third approach is to focus on how eldercare is perceived at work. Perceptions are important,
because they shape how employees, co-workers and managers engage with the issue of eldercare. Positive
beliefs about eldercare and people’s ability to combine multiple roles translate into more productive
exchanges at the nexus of work and eldercare. In contrast, adverse eldercare stereotypes create a barrier to
disclosure of the role, to employee engagement, and to workforce participation. Disclosing an eldercare
role is typically necessary in order to access flexible working arrangements. Due to the ongoing
devolution of people management responsibilities, this disclosure is typically made to line managers who
are taking on increasingly responsibility for authorising flexible work (Kulik and Bainbridge, 2006a).
Employees with eldercare responsibilities are thus subject to a high level of managerial discretion in
seeking these arrangements. Supervisor training about the importance of work–life balance and of
following fair processes for evaluating requests is thus important. These interventions shape employee
beliefs about the cost and benefits of disclosure by providing an overt signal of positive organisational
values. For example, eldercare awareness training can encourage the development of supportive attitudes
(Carers NSW, 2015). These supportive co-worker relationships also enhance the likelihood that the
eldercare role will be disclosed. In addition, a supportive workplace climate for caring improves work
performance, family performance and employee well-being (Kossek, Colquitt and Noe, 2001).
12.2.4Employeeswithformal,paideldercareresponsibilities
Ageing Australian and New Zealand populations are also increasing the need for formal aged care

services (Mavromaras et al., 2017). The Australian aged care sector currently employs over 366,027
workers. Of these, 235,764 are in residential care, and 130,263 in community aged care (Mavromaras et
al., 2017). This sector is expected to grow another 20% by 2020 (Australian Department of Employment,
2016). In New Zealand, over 33,000 are employed in residential aged care. However, the most recent
statistics are over seven years old, and the number of employees in community care are unknown (New
Zealand Labour Party and Green Party of New Zealand, 2010). What is clear, though, is that significant
workforce shortages exist in this sector (New Zealand Labour and Greens, 2010). In the following
section, we describe the characteristics of these paid eldercare roles, before discussing the implications of
population ageing on the Australian and New Zealand workforces.
12.2.5Whatarethecharacteristicsofformal,paideldercarerolesinAustraliaandNew
Zealand?
Employees involved in formal, paid eldercare roles are employed in either a residential aged care facility
setting or a community aged care setting. Residential aged care facilities provide permanent and
temporary accommodation to older people living in Australia and New Zealand (AIHW, 2010, 2012).
Within these settings, both low-level and high-level care services are provided. Low-level care services
include everyday living services (e.g. assistance with meals, laundry and cleaning), some personal care
services (e.g. bathing and toileting assistance), and nursing care as required (Department of Health, 2018).
High-level care services provide these services plus more complex care services, such as palliative care
(end-of-life care), medication management, falls management, nursing care, and allied health services,
such as podiatry, physiotherapy, and recreational and occupational therapy (APC, 2011; King et al.,
2012). In recent times, aged care funding has resulted in more high-care places being offered to older
people than low-care places (AIHW, 2017). This shift means that more complex services are being
offered in a residential care environment than ever before.
In contrast, community aged care services are provided for older people to enable them to live
independently in their own homes for longer (Department of Health, 2018). These services include both
low-care and high-care services. Low-care services include domestic assistance and some personal care
services. High-care services include more complex care options, such as registered nursing care, allied
health care, personal care, social support, home help, and highly technical services, such as assistance
with oxygen and/or enteral feeding (feeding a client through a tube) (APC, 2011; Department of Health,
2018). These services are provided by the Australian government through community aged care packages
and programmes, which are delivered to the wider community through approved providers (Department
of Health, 2018).
Employees who work in a community aged care setting are autonomous, semi-virtual employees
who enter an office environment only to collect supplies on an “as-needed” basis. This is an important
distinction, as employees working in a residential aged care setting attend one venue and work from the
same location, typically for 8–10 hours a day. Employees working in a community care setting have more
casual shifts and travel from home to home, typically in their own car, with uncertain hours on a daily
basis. Consequently, managing both workforces can be challenging, and research has increasingly found
that the workforces are motivated by different factors (Howe et al., 2012; Radford and Chapman, 2015;
Radford, Shacklock and Meissner, 2015b).

Within both sectors, however, there is a mixture of direct care and non-direct care workers. The
direct care workforce consists of occupations that exist only within the healthcare sector, including
personal carers and assistants in nursing, enrolled nurses, enrolled endorsed nurses, registered nurses,
allied health workers, directors of nursing, and other workers (including those who provide support
services, such as cooking, cleaning, administration and maintenance services) (APC, 2011). The non-
direct care workforce consists of occupations that are not health-specific, including engineering, project
management, research, architecture, marketing, human resource management, information systems,
accountancy and finance. This chapter is focused on the direct care workforce.
12.2.6Whataretheworkforceimplicationsofthepaidcareworkforce?
To date, the eldercare sector has used a one-size-fits-all approach to manage each workforce. However,
recent research (Howe et al., 2012; Radford and Chapman, 2015; Radford et al., 2015b) has found that
approaches that are customised to the needs of each workforce may be beneficial. One reasons for this
could be that the motivations behind staying at their organisations in residential and community care
settings are different. For example, researchers have found that the sense of autonomy, supervisor
support, organisational support and intention to stay are higher in a community care environment than in
residential care (Radford, Shacklock and Bradley, 2015a). Community care employees are also more
satisfied on the whole than residential care employees (Howe et al., 2012). This suggests that more
emphasis needs to be placed on the recruitment of quality middle managers to ensure appropriate
supervision is provided in each employment environment. For example, in community care, it may be
more important to hire a clinician to lead the team so that when the site is having a shortage of workers,
they can step in. Whereas in a residential care environment the need for a financial manager may be more
important over a clinical role, as this environment hires registered nurses and usually has a clinical
manager for each shift. Therefore, the need for clinical skills in a management job is redundant, and as
such they can focus their efforts on motivating and managing the workforce. This is highlighted by
Meissner and Radford (2014), who found that non-clinical people management skills were more
important to focus on in positions of management in the aged care sector. In addition, research has
highlighted the need for flexible work, clear succession planning, training and development opportunities
and career development within this sector (Howe et al., 2012; Radford et al., 2015a).
12.2.7Whataretheimplicationsofpopulationageingontheformaleldercare
workforce?
Population ageing has had a substantial impact on the provision of formal eldercare in both Australia and
New Zealand. In Australia, the average age of a direct care worker within the residential aged care facility
setting in 2016 was 46 years. In New Zealand, over 48% of the aged care workforce are aged over 50
years (Ravenswood, Douglas and Teo, 2014). In contrast, within the Australian community aged care
setting, the median age was 52 years for a direct care worker (Mavromaras et al., 2017). No data on this
point are available for New Zealand community care employees (Ravenswood et al., 2014). In total, the
available data suggest that, while these workforces have a high level of age diversity, they have an
especially large proportion of older workers (aged 55+ years). This underlines the importance of using
HRM and ER approaches that are based on a strong understanding of the specific needs of employees
within this sector (Mavromaras et al., 2017)

12.2.8Agediversityatwork:whatdoIneedtoknow?
In the following material, we address age diversity at work before applying this to the specific case of the
eldercare workforce. Age diversity has been linked to improved creativity (Crampton and Hodge, 2007)
and increased productivity (Ilmakunnas and Ilmakunnas, 2011). However, it also presents challenges via
the need to manage the expectations of employees of different ages. Past research on age diversity has
addressed two major themes: (1) exploring generational differences at work, and (2) examining the
differences between older and younger workers’ motivations.
12.2.9Whataregenerationaldifferences?
A generation is defined as an identifiable group that shares the same birth years, age locations and
significant life events at critical development stages (Kupperschmidt, 2000). Within the workforce,
generational similarities and differences in motivations, attitudes and behaviours are suggested to arise
from the shared significant life events that characterise that generation (Chen and Choi, 2008). However,
as the definition of a generation is anchored in the experience of significant life events, the specific date
range given for each generation varies widely in practice. For simplicity, though, we use the dates that
appear most frequently in Australian and New Zealand research: Veterans (born 1925–1944), Baby
Boomers (1945–1964), Generation X (1965–1980), and Generation Y (1981–2000).
Researchers have identified similarities and differences between generations in employment
attitudes. For example, a study of American nurses found that, relative to other generations, Generation X
and Y employees had less permanent relationships with their employers and expected success more
quickly (Weston, 2006). Apostolidis and Polifroni (2006) found that Generation X nurses were more
satisfied with their professional status and less satisfied with their pay than Baby Boomers. In contrast,
Wilson, Squires, Widger, Cranley and Tourangeau (2006) found no differences in overall satisfaction
across generations, but found that Baby Boomers were more satisfied than Generation X or Y nurses with
professional opportunities, the amount of praise, control, recognition and respect they received, and
extrinsic rewards.
In Australia, the main drivers of intentions to remain in a job for Generation X employees was the
relationship with one’s supervisor and attachment to the work itself (Shacklock and Brunetto, 2011). This
finding is consistent with studies identifying generational differences in factors influencing retention
(Carver, Candela and Gutierrez, 2011; LeVasseur, Wang, Mathews and Boland, 2009; Smola and Sutton,
2002; Wong, Gardiner, Lang and Coulon, 2008). Table 12.1 presents an overview of findings on
generational cohorts and work values. It outlines the relevance of core values, and job-related assets and
liabilities across the four generations.

Table 12.1: Values of generational cohorts
Values Veteran generation Baby Boomer
generation Generation X Generation Y
Core
values
 Respectful of
authority
 Supportive of
hierarchy
 Disciplined in
approach to work
and life
 Values hard work,
dedication, sacrifice,
conformity, law and
order, adherence to
rules, honour, loyalty
and commitment to
organisation and
managers
 Delayed rewards
 Values personal
fulfilment, optimism,
teamwork, personal
gratifications,
efficient work
practices,
organisational
commitment and
loyalty, long-term
employment and
financial prosperity
 Values individualism
and self-expression
 Accepts overtime
and long hours as
part of working
 Health and wellness
is a central concern
 Likes to belong
 Values
independence,
achievement,
diversity, balance,
fun, informality, self-
reliance and
pragmatism
 Expects success after
a short period of time
 Maintains less-
permanent
relationships on the
job
 Resourceful
 Results-driven
 Autonomous
 Demands work–life
balance
 Confident
 Savvy
 Self-reliant
 Values professional
development and job
satisfaction
 Possess tighter peer
bonds than other
generations
 Optimistic
 Interdependent
 Cooperative
 Achievement-driven
 Morals-driven
 Values diversity
Assets on
the job
 Stable
 Detail-oriented
 Thorough
 Loyal
 Hardworking
 Service-oriented
 Driven
 Wiling to go the
extra mile
 Builds strong
relationships
 Eager to please
 Focused on the job
 Adaptable
 Techno-literate
 Independent
 Not intimidated by
authority
 Focused on their
careers
 Desires variety
 Collective action
 Optimism
 Tenacity
 Able to multitask
 Technologically
savvy
 Ambitious
Liabilities
on the job
 Dislike of change
and ambiguity
 Reluctant to buck the
system
 Uncomfortable with
conflict
 Reticent when they
disagree
 Not naturally budget-
minded
 Uncomfortable with
conflict
 Reluctant to go
against peers
 Judgmental of
others’ opinions
 Sacrifices for the job
 Has little faith in
authority
 Impatient
 Poor people skills
 Inexperienced
 Cynical, sceptical
 Will not sacrifice for
the job
 Lack of respect for
authority
 Need for supervision
and structure
 Inexperience,
especially handling
difficult people
 Has difficulty
accepting leadership
if supervisor is older
Sources: (Goldman and Schmaltz, 2006; Kupperschmidt, 2000; Shaw and Fairhurst, 2008; Smola and Sutton, 2002;
Weston, 2006).

12.2.9Whatdoesthismeanfortheeldercaresector?
These findings suggest that younger generations (Generations X and Y) may have different work attitudes
and behaviours. Employers thus need to consider the people management practices they use to attract and
retain these employees. Within the eldercare sector, this may include offering career development
opportunities, tangible rewards that are aligned with the expectations of the behaviour, positive work
cultures and recognition of service, as well as professional recognition for their experience. To illustrate,
organisations might offer pay grades based on experience, and encourage employees “to work up the
ladder”. Other strategies include offering training and development opportunities beyond those prescribed
in employment agreements. The eldercare workforce is adapting to the new skills required in their work,
as more than half (58%) of these employees had undertaken professional development in the preceding
year. This is even more important as population ageing creates new requirements for quality care and
innovative services. The need to innovate and offer more flexible and suitable services is critical for the
ongoing success and sustainability of this sector (Vecchio, 2015).
A failure to implement appropriate people management approaches in the eldercare sector is
likely to exacerbate the current talent shortage, by prompting employees to move to part-time work and
by increasing turnover. To illustrate, while the actual numbers of employees who reduce their hours is
unknown, the size of the part-time workforce in aged care appears to be increasing (Mavromaras et al.,
2017; Ravenswood et al., 2014). The aged care workforce is also characterised by high levels of turnover.
In New Zealand, turnover is reported to run at 40–50% (Ravenswood et al., 2014), and in Australia
anecdotal reports place it in the vicinity of 30% per year. The resulting shortage of workers is particularly
acute outside major cities (Mavromaras et al., 2017).
12.3Conclusion
Australia and New Zealand have ageing populations. However, HRM and ER research has given limited
attention to the implications of ageing for: (1) employee eldercare responsibilities, and (2) employees in
the aged care sector. Practitioners thus have little guidance about how to respond to the challenges of
managing each group.
In this chapter, we give prominence to these challenges. We outlined the impact of population
ageing by identifying the link between ageing and requirements for care. We then define and characterise
two different ways in which these assistance requirements are fulfilled: informal unpaid care, and formal
paid care. In doing so, we outline the legislative context for eldercare, and recent Australian and New
Zealand research concerning these groups.
This chapter also identifies the individual and organisational costs of mismanaging employees
who provide informal and formal care. Finally, we make recommendations for workforce practices that
are relevant to managing these two groups. In relation to informal care, we highlight the three mutually
supporting approaches for improving how employees can combine their paid work with informal care
responsibilities. We recommend that organisations: (1) reduce incompatibilities between work and
eldercare roles by providing greater flexibility in how a job is performed; (2) eliminate stressful aspects of
work and care roles via the provision of resources (e.g. information on carers support organisations,

government initiatives, stress management programmes, support groups, employee assistance
programmes); and (3) improve how eldercare is perceived in the workplace. In relation to formal care, we
recommend that organisations enhance efforts to provide career development opportunities, offer tangible
rewards that are aligned with the expectations of behaviour, and build a supportive work culture.
12.4KeyQuestions
1. Discuss the main similarities and differences between childcare and eldercare. How should an
organisation assist an employee with each type of non-work care responsibility?
2. An increasing amount of legislation protects the rights of employees with diverse demographic
characteristics (gender, age, sexual orientation, disability) or non-work roles
(childcare/eldercare). Discuss the HRM and ER challenges of this changing legislative
environment.
3. Identify three major contemporary trends relating to managing employees in the aged care sector.
How should Australian and New Zealand managers deal with the challenges of demographic
ageing in relation to this industry sector?

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Apostolidis, B. and Polifroni, E.C. 2006. Nurse work satisfaction and generational differences. Journal of
Nursing Administration, 36, 506–509.
Austen, S., Jefferson, T., Lewin, G., Ong, R. and Sharp, R. (2015). Care roles and employment decision-
making: The effect of economic circumstance. Journal of Industrial Relations, 57, 665–685. DOI:
10.1177/0022185615590906.
Austen, S. and Ong, R. (2013). The effects of ill health and informal care roles on the employment
retention of mid-life women: Does the workplace matter? Journal of Industrial Relations, 55:
663–680. DOI: 10.1177/0022185613494648.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2013). 3222.0 — Population Projections, Australia, 2012 (base) to 2101.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2015). 4430.0 — Disability, Ageing and Carers: Summary of Findings.
Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. (2002). Employability skills - an employer perspective:
getting what employers want out of the too hard basket, Issues paper (Australian Chamber of
Commerce and Industry), ACCI, Canberra. Available at:
http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv%3A12484.
Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU). (2013). Australians Want Time To Care: A Summary
Report of Views Regarding Support Required to Balnce Work and Care. Melbourne, Australia:
ACTU. Available at: https://www.actu.org.au/our-work/publications/other-
publications/australians-want-time-to-care-a-summary-report-of-views-regarding-support-
required-to-balance-work-and-care.
Australian Department of Employment. (2016). Industry Employment Projections 2016 Report. Canberra:
Department of Employment. Available at:
https://www.google.com/search?ei=fX_WWsbuKIaR8wWi76uwDw&q=Australian+Department
+of+Employment.+2016.+Industry+employment+projections+2016+report.+Australia%3A+Can
berra&oq=Australian+Department+of+Employment.+2016.+Industry+employment+projections+
2016+report.+Australia%3A+Canberra&gs_l=psy-
ab.3...3972.4584.0.4912.1.1.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.0.0....0.eMetvtqmdgs.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2010). Australia’s Health 2010. Australia’s Health
series 12. Cat No. AUS 122. Canberra: AIHW. Available at:
https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health/australias-health-2010/contents/table-of-
contents.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2012). Residential Aged Care in Australia 2010–
2011: A Statistical Overview. Cat no. AGE 68. Canberra: AIHW. Available at:
https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/aged-care/residential-aged-care-in-australia-2010-
11/contents/table-of-contents
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2015). Australia’s Welfare 2015. Australia’s
Welfare series no. 12. Cat. no. AUS 189. Canberra: AIHW. Available at:
https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/00d10915-1257-4c6a-b7a0-b5640b6b8e54/AW15-1-1-
welfare-in-australia.pdf.aspx.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (2015). Residential Aged Care and Home Care 2014–
2015: Supporting data. Canberra: AIHW. Available at: https://www.gen-
agedcaredata.gov.au/Resources/Access-data/2015/December/Residential-aged-care-and-Home-
Care-2014%E2%80%9315-suppo
Australian Productivity Commission (APC). (2011). Caring for Older Australians. Melbourne: APC.
Available at: https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/aged-care.
Australian Productivity Commission (APC). (2013). An Ageing Australia: Preparing for the Future.
Melbourne: APC. Available at: https://www.pc.gov.au/research/completed/ageing-australia.
Bainbridge, H.T.J. and Broady, T.R. (2017). Caregiving responsibilities for a child, spouse or parent: The
impact of care recipient independence on employee well-being. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
101, 57–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvb.2017.04.006

Bainbridge, H.T.J., Broady, T.R. and Fong, M. (2016). Individualized funding: How disability service
policy can assist in maintaining caregiver employment. Journal of Business and Management, 22,
23–38.
Bainbridge, H.T.J., Cregan, C. and Kulik, C.T. (2006). The effect of multiple roles on caregiver stress
outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 490–497. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.490.
Berecki-Gisolf, J., Lucke, J., Hockey, R. and Dobson, A. 2008. Transitions into informal caregiving and
out of paid employment of women in their 50s. Social Science and Medicine, 67(1), 122–127.
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.03.031.
Bittman, M., Hill, T. and Thomson, C. (2007). The impact of caring on informal carers’ employment,
income and earnings: A longitudinal approach. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 42, 255–272.
DOI: 10.1002/j.1839-4655.2007.tb00053x.
Boxall, P., Bainbridge, H.T.J. and Frenkel, S. (2018). Styles of human resource management in Australia
and New Zealand. In C. Brewster, E. Farndale and W. Mayrhofer (eds), Handbook of Research in
Comparative Human Resource Management, 2nd ed (pp. 614-630). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Carers Australia. (2015). Annual Report 2014–15. Deakin, ACT: Carers Australia. Available at:
http://www.carersaustralia.com.au/media-centre/article/?id=carers-australia-annual-report-2014-
15.
Carers NSW. (2015). Carers NSW Annual Report 2014–2015. Sydney: Carers NSW. Available at:
https://www.carersnsw.org.au/Assets/Files/CarersNSW_AnnualReport_2014-2015.pdf.
Chen, P.-J. and Choi, Y. (2008). Generational differences in work values: A study of hospitality
management. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(6), 595–615.
DOI: 10.1108/09596110810892182.
Conklin, W. (2000). Employee resource groups: A foundation for support and change. Diversity Factor,
9, 15–24. Available at: http://www.tgender.net/taw/Fall_00_Emp.pdf.
Crampton, S.M. and Hodge, J.W. (2007). Generations in the workplace: Understanding age diversity. The
Business Review, 9(1), 16–22.
Deloitte. (2015). The Economic Value of Informal Care in Australia 2015. Sydney: Deloitte.
Department of Health (2018). Home Care package program data report 1 October-31 December 2017.
https://www.gen-agedcaredata.gov.au/www_aihwgen/media/Home_care_report/HCP-Data-
Report-2017%E2%80%9318-2nd-Qtr.pdf
Goldman, K.D. and Schmalz, K.J. (2006). Builders, boomers, busters, bridgers: Vive la (generational)
difference. Health Promotion Practice, 7(2), 159–161. DOI: 10.1177/1524839906286595.
Howe, A.L., King, D.S., Ellis, J.M., Wells, Y.D., Wei, Z. and Teshuva, K.A. (2012). Stabilizing the aged
care workforce: An analysis of worker retention and intention. Australian Health Review, 36(1),
83–91. DOI: 10.1071/AH11009.
Ilmakunnas, P. and Ilmakunnas, S. (2011). Diversity at the workplace: Whom does it benefit? De
Economist, 159(2), 223–255. DOI: 10.1007/s10645-011-9161-x.
King, D., Mavromaras, K., Wei, Z., He, B., Healy, J., Macaitis, K., Moskos, M. and Smith, L. (2012). The
aged care workforce, 2012. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing. Available at:
http://www.agedcarecrisis.com/images/pdf/The_Aged_Care_Workforce_Report.pdf.
Kossek, E.E., Colquitt, J.A. and Noe, R.A. 2001. Caregiving decisions, well-being, and performance: The
effects of place and provider as a function of dependent type and work-family climates. Academy
of Management Journal, 44(1), 29–44. DOI: 10.2307/3069335.
Kulik, C.T. and Bainbridge, H.T.J. (2006). HR and the line: The distribution of HR activities in
Australian organisations. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 44(2), 240–256. DOI:
10.1177/1038411106066399.
Kulik, C.T. and Bainbridge, H.T.J. (2006). Psychological perspectives on workplace diversity. In A.M.
Konrad, P. Prasad and J. K. Pringle (eds), Handbook of Workplace Diversity, pp. 25–52.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kulik, C.T., Cregan, C. and Bainbridge, H.T.J. (2013). I feel your pain: The moderating effect of care
recipient health on the relationship between work hours and care recipient and caregiver

psychological outcomes. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 114–136. DOI:
10.1111/j.1530-2415.2012.01304.x.
Kulik, C.T., Ryan, S., Harper, S. and George, G. (2014). Aging populations and management: From the
editors. Academy of Management Journal, 57, 929–935. DOI: 10.5465/amj.2014.4004.
Kupperschmidt, B. (2000). Multi-generation employees: Strategies for effective management. Health
Care Manager, 19(1), 65–76. DOI: 10.1097/00126450-200019010.00011.
Mavromaras, K., Knight, G., Isherwood, L., Crettenden, A., Flavel, J., Karmel, T., Moskos, M., Smith, L.,
Walton, H. and Wei, Z. (2017). The Aged Care Workforce. Adelaide: National Institute of Labour
Studies.
Meissner, E. and Radford, K. (2014). Importance and performance of managerial skills in the Australian
aged care sector — a middle managers’ perspective. Journal of Nursing Management, 23(6),
784–793. DOI: 10.1111/jonm.12208.
New Zealand Aged Care Association (NZACA). (2016). The Voice of the Aged Residential Care Sector:
Annual Report. Auckland: NZACA.
New Zealand Labour and Greens 2010. A Report into Aged Care: What Does the Future Hold for Older New
Zealanders? Available at: https://home.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/Aged_Care_Report_for_email.pdf.
New Zealand Ministry of Social Development. (2014). The New Zealand Carers’ Strategy Action Plan
for 2014 to 2018. Wellington: Ministry of Social Development.
Pavalko, E.K. and Henderson, K.A. 2006. Combining care work and paid work: Do workplace policies
make a difference? Research on Aging, 28(3), 359–374. DOI: 10.1177/0164027505285848.
Perry, E.L. and Parlamis, J.D. (2006). Age and ageism in organizations: A review and consideration of
national culture. In A.M. Konrad, P. Prasad and J.K. Pringle (eds.), Handbook of workplace
diversity, pp. 345–370. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Radford, K. and Chapman, G. (2015). Are all workers influenced to stay by similar factors or should
different retention strategies be implemented? Comparing younger and older aged-care workers
in Australia. Australian Bulletin of Labour, 41(1), 58–81.
Radford, K., Chapman, G., Bainbridge, H.T.J. and Halvorsen, B. (2018). The ageing population in
Australia: Implications for the workforce. In S. Werth, & C. Brownlow (eds.), Work and Identity:
Contemporary Perspectives on Workplace Diversity, pp. 39-54. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Radford, K., Shacklock, K. and Bradley, G. (2015). Personal care workers in Australian aged care:
retention and turnover intentions. Journal of Nursing Management, 23, 57–66.
Radford, K., Shacklock, K.H. and Meissner, E. (2015). What makes me stay? An investigation into
factors influencing older workers’ intentions to stay. Industry and Labour, 25(4), 306–320.
Shacklock, K.H. and Brunetto, Y. (2011). A model of older workers’ intentions to continue working.
Personnel Review, 40(2), 252–274. DOI: 10.1108/00483481111106110.
Shaw, S. and Fairhurst, D. (2008). Engaging a new generation of graduates. Education and Training,
50(5), 366–378. DOI: 10.1108/00400910810889057.
Smola, K.W. and Sutton, C.D. (2002). Generational differences: Revisiting generational work values for
the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 363–382. DOI: 10.1002/job.147.
Statistics New Zealand. (2006). Demographic Aspects of New Zealand’s Ageing Population. Wellington:
Statistics New Zealand. Available at:
http://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/people_and_communities/older_people/demographic
-aspects-nz-ageing-population.aspx.
Vecchio, N. (2015). Labour force participation of families coping with a disabling condition. Economic
Analysis and Policy, 45, 1–10.
Weston, M. (2006). Integrating generational perspectives in nursing. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing,
11(2), manuscript 1. DOI: 10.3912/OJIN.Vol11No02Man01.
Wilson, B., Squires, M., Widger, K., Cranley, L. and Tourangeau, A.E. (2006). Job satisfaction among a
multigenerational nursing workforce. Journal of Nursing Management, 16(6), 716–723. DOI:
10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00874.x.