Low-paid ethnic minority workers in health and social care during COVID-19

An evidence review examining the experiences of low-paid ethnic minority workers in health and social care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Key messages 

  • ethnic minority workers are overrepresented in low-paid health and social care roles 
  • recruitment and employment practices exposed workers to heightened insecurity during the pandemic 
  • evidence points to institutional discrimination, harassment and bullying 
  • gendered experiences shaped exposure to risk, workload and support 
  • burnout and limited access to rewards or progression were widely reported. 

Policy implications 

  • workforce policies should address institutional discrimination and unfair treatment 
  • pay, progression and job security are central to workforce wellbeing 
  • employers need clearer mechanisms to prevent harassment and to support staff 
  • future pandemic planning should explicitly consider the experiences of low-paid and racialised workers. 

Gaps 

  • most evidence focuses on England 
  • limited analysis of differences across the UK nations 
  • reliance on secondary sources constrains depth 
  • longer-term workforce impacts are not fully explored. 

Commentary 

This rapid review brings together evidence on how the COVID-19 pandemic affected low-paid ethnic minority workers across health and social care. It highlights how existing vulnerabilities were intensified by crisis conditions, particularly in roles with high exposure and limited protection. 

The review shows that experiences of discrimination, insecurity and burnout were not incidental but shaped by structural features of the labour market. Gender, ethnicity and employment status intersected to influence who faced the greatest risks and least support during the pandemic. 

From a care equity point of view, the findings stress how inequities within the workforce translate into unequal burdens. Low-paid ethnic minority workers were more likely to experience poor treatment, limited progression and inadequate recognition, reflecting deeper imbalances in how care work is organised and valued. These conditions have implications for retention, morale and continuity of care. 

Overall, the review reinforces the need to treat workforce equity as a core component of health and social care resilience. Addressing discrimination, improving pay and creating fairer progression pathways are essential steps toward a more equitable and sustainable workforce beyond crisis contexts. 

Low-paid health and social care workers’ experiences during COVID-19

A qualitative study exploring how low-paid health and social care workers understood their treatment by policymakers and government during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Key messages 

  • low-paid health and social care workers felt deprioritised in national pandemic responses 
  • participants perceived a strong policy focus on the NHS, with social care receiving less attention 
  • frequent changes to COVID-19 guidance created frustration and uncertainty 
  • low pay was seen as reinforcing a sense of undervaluation 
  • workers described limited influence over decisions affecting their working conditions. 

Policy implications 

  • crisis planning should explicitly include the social care workforce 
  • clearer and more consistent guidance could reduce pressure on frontline staff 
  • pay and employment conditions are central to workforce resilience 
  • mechanisms to amplify care workers’ voices could improve policy responsiveness. 

Gaps 

  • the study focuses on pandemic experiences only 
  • findings are based on qualitative accounts 
  • longer-term implications for workforce retention are not explored 
  • perspectives beyond health and social care workers are not included. 

Commentary 
This study sheds light on how low-paid health and social care workers interpreted their place within the UK’s pandemic response. Participants described feeling overshadowed by a dominant focus on the NHS, with social care framed as secondary despite its central role. 

The rapid and repeated changes to guidance intensified workplace stress. For many workers, the lack of stability compounded existing frustrations linked to low pay and insecure conditions, shaping how they understood government priorities. 

In terms of care equity, the findings point to structural imbalances within the workforce. When social care workers are consistently positioned as lower priority, this reinforces inequalities between sectors and undermines the status of roles that are disproportionately occupied by women and people from marginalised backgrounds. These dynamics have implications not only for workers’ wellbeing, but also for the quality and continuity of care. 

Overall, the paper highlights how crises can magnify longstanding workforce inequities. Addressing pay, recognition and inclusion in decision-making is essential if social care workers are to be treated as equal partners within the health and care system, rather than an afterthought during periods of national pressure. 

The cost of caring for residential care workers

Research examining poverty, deprivation and living standards among residential care workers in the UK.

Key statistics 

  • residential care workers make up around 40% of the adult social care workforce 
  • residential care workers are twice as likely to experience poverty and food insecurity compared with health workers 
  • around 1 in 10 residential care workers experience food poverty 
  • the adult social care sector is projected to need approximately 600,000 additional workers by 2031. 

Key messages 

  • low pay and insecure working conditions place many residential care workers at risk of poverty 
  • deprivation among care workers is significantly higher than among comparable health workers 
  • cost-of-living pressures exacerbate existing financial insecurity 
  • workforce shortages are expected to increase demand for residential care workers 
  • demographic factors shape exposure to poverty and deprivation within the workforce. 

Policy implications 

  • improving pay and working conditions is central to workforce sustainability 
  • targeted financial and employment support is needed for residential care workers 
  • workforce planning must consider living standards as well as recruitment targets 
  • addressing poverty among care workers may support retention and quality of care. 

Gaps 

  • the report focuses on residential care workers rather than the wider social care workforce 
  • limited exploration of regional variation 
  • longer-term impacts of cost-of-living changes require monitoring 
  • further research is needed on the effectiveness of targeted support measures. 

Commentary 
This report provides a stark account of the financial realities faced by residential care workers in the UK. By documenting high levels of poverty and food insecurity, it challenges assumptions that employment in care provides a stable route out of deprivation. 

The findings highlight how poor pay and insecure conditions are embedded within the structure of residential care. As demand for care grows, these conditions risk undermining recruitment and retention, placing further strain on an already stretched workforce. 

For care equity, the report exposes a contradiction at the heart of the care system. Workers who provide essential support to older and vulnerable people are themselves disproportionately affected by poverty and deprivation. These disparities are not incidental but reflect how care work is valued and funded, with implications for workforce wellbeing and continuity of care. 

Overall, the report argues that improving outcomes for people who draw on residential care cannot be separated from improving the living and working conditions of the workforce. Addressing poverty among care workers is a prerequisite for building a fair, resilient and sustainable adult social care system. 

Organising among paid care workers

A qualitative study exploring the priorities, experiences and progress of paid care worker organising in England, with a focus on pay, conditions and worker voice.

Key messages 

  • care workers identified pay and working conditions as central concerns 
  • systemic and structural issues shape everyday experiences of care work 
  • participants highlighted limited influence over decision-making processes 
  • organising was seen as a way to make care workers’ experiences more visible 
  • informal practices and collective action were used to address workplace issues. 

Policy implications 

  • decision-making in social care should better reflect frontline experience 
  • mechanisms to support worker voice could strengthen workforce sustainability 
  • pay and conditions remain key levers for recruitment and retention 
  • engagement with care worker organisations may improve policy relevance. 

Gaps 

  • findings are based on qualitative interviews 
  • the study does not assess the impact of organising on outcomes 
  • experiences may vary across regions and care settings 
  • longer-term analysis of organising efforts is needed. 

Commentary 
This study provides insight into how paid care workers in England understand their working conditions and the role of organising in addressing long-standing challenges. Participants described organising as both a response to low pay and poor conditions and a way of asserting professional identity within a marginalised sector. 

The findings show that care workers often feel disconnected from decision-making structures that shape their work. Organising activities were framed as efforts to make everyday realities visible to employers and policymakers, rather than solely as formal union activity. 

Considering care equity, the study highlights how unequal power within the workforce affects both workers and the people they support. When care workers’ voices are excluded from policy and practice, inequities in pay, security and conditions are sustained. These workforce inequities have downstream effects on continuity and quality of care, particularly in a sector employing large numbers of women and people from marginalised groups. 

Overall, the paper suggests that supporting care worker voices is not only a labour issue but a care issue. Strengthening avenues for collective input may contribute to fairer working conditions and a more equitable and stable care system.