8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Migrant workers, essential work, and COVID‐19

      1 , 2 , 3
      American Journal of Industrial Medicine
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d5215885e83">Globally, migrant and immigrant workers have borne the brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic as essential workers. They might be a Bulgarian worker at a meat processing plant in Germany, a Central American farmworker in the fields of California, or a Filipino worker at an aged-care facility in Australia. What they have in common is they are all essential workers who have worked throughout the coronavirus pandemic and have been infected with coronavirus at work. COVID-19 has highlighted the inequitable working conditions of these workers. In many instances, they are employed precariously, and so are ineligible for sick leave or social security, or COVID-19 special payments. If these are essential workers, they should get at least the same health and safety benefits of all nonessential workers. Improving the working and living conditions of migrant workers can and should be a positive outcome of the coronavirus pandemic. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The plight of essential workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

          The Lancet (2020)
          The COVID-19 pandemic has vividly highlighted how much society depends upon essential workers. Praise for the heroic work being done by health-care workers to save lives worldwide in dangerous, exhausting conditions is everywhere. But those same workers are often left unprotected by governments and systems that have failed to supply them with enough personal protective equipment (PPE), supplies, and resources to do their jobs. In April alone, there were an estimated 27 COVID-19-related health worker deaths in the USA, 106 in the UK, and 180 in Russia, with tens of thousands of infections. The actual numbers are probably much higher. But essential work extends beyond health care. Although some people have been able to shift their jobs to their homes, millions of workers have jobs that cannot be done at home—not only custodial staff and orderlies in hospitals, but also teachers and child-care workers, grocery clerks and supermarket workers, delivery people, factory and farm workers, and restaurant staff, often without adequate PPE. These people leave their homes to help maintain a semblance of normality for others, at great risk to themselves and their families. What constitutes an essential worker in the USA varies by state, but black and Latino Americans make up a large part of the essential workforce and have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19. In New York City, over 60% of COVID-19 deaths have been in black and Latino populations. Meat processing plants have become hotspots for transmission, with 700 new cases at a Texas plant on May 16. 81 employees at a Walmart in Massachusetts tested positive for COVID-19 on May 2. Those who would rather quit their jobs than be exposed to a dangerous work situation face a daunting prospect in the USA. 36 million people have filed for unemployment in the past 2 months and quitting a job (even one that is unsafe) would disqualify workers from unemployment insurance benefits. In the UK, 33% (10·6 million people) of the total workforce are deemed key workers according to the Office for National Statistics. Despite a government plan to pay furloughed workers 80% of their salary, many low-wage workers such as cleaners, migrant and seasonal workers, and student labourers might not be eligible. Transport staff have been particularly hard hit. In New York City, 120 employees of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) have died due to COVID-19, and nearly 4000 have tested positive. The MTA changed guidance to advise wearing face masks before the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and WHO shifted their guidance, but being exposed to the public, even with adequate PPE, presents dangers. At least 28 London bus drivers have died due to COVID-19, and a UK railway worker, Belly Mujinga, died after being spat on by a passenger who claimed to have COVID-19, leaving behind an 11-year-old daughter. The International Labour Organization has reported that 2·7 billion people—81% of the world's workforce—had been affected by lockdown measures. 61% of workers are from the informal sector, 90% of whom are in low-income and middle-income countries, and social protection measures are often inadequate, with a lack of access to health-care support and economic protections. Informal and migrant workers are likely to fall through the cracks and ensuring their safety must be a priority. Some US states are considering reopening restaurants, bars, gyms, and swimming pools, without a viable system in place to test, trace, and isolate people, and a CDC draft plan to lift the lockdown has been watered down by the Trump administration. In Germany, infection rates rose as lockdown restrictions began to ease and in the UK Boris Johnson's vague, amorphous plan to end lockdown has caused confusion and angered many. Gifted with a 2-month lockdown and a chance to lay the groundwork for a staged, successful reopening, many western leaders have instead prevaricated, shifted blame, and appear not to grasp the dangers of lifting lockdown without robust testing and mitigation strategies in place. The rush towards a premature, ill-advised end to the lockdown risks a second wave of infections that could surpass the first, and essential workers who never got a chance to isolate and consider their health during the first wave will face the greatest risk to their lives. When this pandemic has ended, we cannot allow a return to the status quo ante. We must ensure that essential workers can do their jobs safely, and that they have adequate health care and paid sick leave to safeguard their health beyond extraordinary pandemics. Essential workers are just that—essential—and by protecting their health, we protect the health and wellbeing of us all. For more on the COVID-19 crisis and informal and migrant workers see https://oecd-development-matters.org/2020/04/22/the-covid-19-crisis-income-support-to-informal-workers-is-necessary-and-possible/ © 2020 Niccolo Guasti/Getty Images 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Migrant workers and COVID-19

            David Koh (2020)
            Objectives Daily numbers of COVID-19 in Singapore from March to May 2020, the cause of a surge in cases in April and the national response were examined, and regulations on migrant worker accommodation studied. Methods Information was gathered from daily reports provided by the Ministry of Health, Singapore Statues online and a Ministerial statement given at a Parliament sitting on 4 May 2020. Results A marked escalation in the daily number of new COVID-19 cases was seen in early April 2020. The majority of cases occurred among an estimated 295 000 low-skilled migrant workers living in foreign worker dormitories. As of 6 May 2020, there were 17 758 confirmed COVID-19 cases among dormitory workers (88% of 20 198 nationally confirmed cases). One dormitory housing approximately 13 000 workers had 19.4% of residents infected. The national response included mobilising several government agencies and public volunteers. There was extensive testing of workers in dormitories, segregation of healthy and infected workers, and daily observation for fever and symptoms. Twenty-four dormitories were declared as ‘isolation areas’, with residents quarantined for 14 days. New housing, for example, vacant public housing flats, military camps, exhibition centres, floating hotels have been provided that will allow for appropriate social distancing. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted migrant workers as a vulnerable occupational group. Ideally, matters related to inadequate housing of vulnerable migrant workers need to be addressed before a pandemic.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Experts criticise Australia's aged care failings over COVID-19

              Three-quarters of deaths from COVID-19 in Australia have been in aged care homes. Experts say that the pandemic is only exposing systemic weaknesses. Sophie Cousins reports. For the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia stood out as an exemplar of how best to respond. At the time of writing, Australia has recorded just over 27 000 cases in a country of 25 million people, with fewer cases per person than most other high-income countries. While Australia has a natural advantage as an island, it also swiftly built surge capacity in the health system; deployed robust test, trace, and isolate systems; rolled out effective public health campaigns; and provided the eligible population with an economic safety net. The country also declared a pandemic before WHO. But as time went on, a major weakness emerged: residential aged care homes. There have been just over 2000 cases of COVID-19 in residential aged care in Australia. Of the 904 deaths from COVID-19 in the country at the time of writing, 682 have been in aged care homes, mostly in the state of Victoria. That 75% of the country's deaths have occurred in such facilities gives Australia one of the highest rates worldwide of deaths in residential aged care as a percentage of total deaths. It has left families grieving and experts angry that their pleas to reform the sector had long been ignored. “Homer Simpson could have seen the catastrophe in aged care coming with COVID-19 because it was there in your face”, said Professor Joseph Ibrahim, head of the Health Law and Ageing Research Unit at Monash University (Melbourne, VIC, Australia) and an expert witness at Australia's Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. “All I know is that you can't accept things as they are, because they're not right.” In 1997, the Australian Government transformed the system under the Aged Care Act into a free-market model that was, in Ibrahim's words, “ill-conceived and never worked”. Transforming the model of care meant that aged care and health care would be treated as two different separate industries. As a result, private investment into aged care was able to flourish, which, experts say, turned people from patients into consumers. “Back then, aged care was criticised as too institutional, so it was packaged as a social model of care whereby you don't need regulation”, said Kathy Eagar, professor of health services research and director of the Australian Health Services Research Institute at the University of Wollongong (Wollongong, NSW, Australia). “On that basis, they deregulated staff. By packaging residential aged care as social care, it dumbed down the care and created the perfect storm. This has been a disaster waiting to happen.” Eagar says that, by turning aged care into social care, the sector has been able to justify not having good infection prevention and control measures, sufficient staff ratios, and adequately trained staff. “The system is not fit for purpose. When you have a system that doesn't even require a nurse to be on the premises then the whole thing is going to be a disaster… The pendulum has swung too far”, she said. In 2011, the full funding and policy responsibility for aged care in Australia moved from the state and territory level to the federal government. Today, the sector represents a multibillion-dollar industry that is predominantly publicly funded but largely outsourced to the private sector. Experts say that the pandemic has brought to light systemic problems arising from such a policy. “I don't think anything has gone wrong per se—it was already wrong”, Ibrahim said. “There were not enough workers to start with; the workforce that exists doesn't have the training for a contemporary aged care system. They're not equipped to manage disease complexity and they're not equipped to deal with ethical human rights issues. So, then COVID-19 arrives and there are not enough staff, staff who don't know what they're doing, staff who haven't been trained in infection control.” The first major COVID-19 outbreaks in Australia began in April in aged care facilities in Sydney, initially at Dorothy Henderson Lodge and then Newmarch House. By the time the outbreak at Newmarch House was over in June, 19 residents had died, 37 additional residents had been infected, and 34 staff had fallen ill. These outbreaks should have sounded a major alarm for the sector to prepare for the worst—in addition to harrowing stories coming out of Europe—but soon, COVID-19 swept through Victoria's private aged care homes as stories and images emerged of the horrific conditions inside. A 95-year-old woman in a Melbourne care home was left with ants crawling over a wound on her leg. Other residents had not had food or water for 18 h. There were faeces on the floor. Hundreds of residents were locked in their rooms for weeks as relatives were shut out from visiting their loved ones. Not only were residents infected, but hundreds of low-paid, low-skill workers in the homes were infected too. “If you depend on a low-paid casual workforce who go from home to home, then you can expect COVID-19 to just spread, which is exactly what has happened in Victoria”, Eagar said. “COVID-19 is now a major occupational safety and health risk.” State-run aged care—which operates under the Safe Patient Care Act 2015, which enshrines in law minimum numbers of nurses and midwives to care for patients—has recorded very few COVID-19 cases and no deaths. Private facilities have no such quotas. “Private providers don't necessarily care about aged care—they care about making a profit”, said Sarah Russell, public health researcher and aged care advocate. “What is aged care for? Is it because older people are a great cohort to make money off? Why are we locking people down and locking relatives out? What type of life is that for them?” However, not all private providers make profit, some organisations including Anglicare Sydney, which runs Newmarch House, and BaptistCare, which runs Dorothy Henderson Lodge, are not-for-profit. In 2018, after evidence of abuse and neglect was exposed in residential aged care, Australia's Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, announced a Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. As the Royal Commission continued into 2020, it turned its focus towards the worsening situation with COVID-19 in the aged care system. “This is the worst disaster that is still unfolding before my eyes in my entire career…There was a level of apathy, a lack of urgency and an attitude of futility which lead to absence of action”, Ibrahim told the Royal Commission in early August. In a special report published in early October, the Royal Commission found that the government's attempt to prepare the aged care sector for COVID-19 was “insufficient”. The Commission made six recommendations, which include calling on the federal government to establish a detailed national aged care plan for COVID-19 (it has repeatedly denied that it did not have a plan) and to deploy infection control experts into nursing homes as a condition of accreditation. The report also describes infection prevention and control measures in facilities as “deplorable”. “We heard of workers being told they could only use one glove rather than two, and a guideline at a residential aged care facility that only permitted two masks per shift”, the two commissioners, Tony Pagone and Lynelle Briggs, wrote. Recognising that maintaining the quality of life was just as important as preparing for a pandemic, the Commission urged the government to help aged care providers to “ensure there are adequate staff available to allow continued visits to people living in residential aged care by their families and friends.” A spokesman for Anglicare Sydney said Anglicare agreed with all the recommendations. “The Royal Commission says basically everything that we wanted to be said...we support the recommendations,” the spokesman said. “We want to continue to care for the elderly and vulnerable in society.” Russell, who is calling for the Aged Care Act 1997 to be rewritten from a human rights perspective, said there must be transparency over staffing in facilities so families can make an informed decision on where to send their loved ones. “Staffing transparency is the key”, she said. Eagar, who has undertaken research commissioned by the Royal Commission into the adequacy of residential aged care staffing, found that quality and safety in homes is driven by four factors: total staff numbers, staff skill mix, staff continuity, and clinical governance. © 2020 Ryan Pierse/Getty Images 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. “Our aged care sector basically failed on every one of those dimensions and that is unlike Australia—we're well above the international standards on health care”, she said. “It's unusual for us to fail so badly but we are much worse than comparable countries.” Eagar has also proposed restructuring the aged care system to include age-friendly community services, plus home-based primary-level and secondary-level aged care services and out-of-home tertiary-level aged care services. Meanwhile, Ibrahim hopes that COVID-19 will give rise to smaller, community-run residential aged care homes that have a sense of community and social responsibility. Whether the system, which looks after 200 000 people a year, will be reformed remains to be seen. “COVID-19 has really thrown a spotlight onto the residential aged care sector and shown it to be a broken system in desperate need of reform”, Eagar said. The Royal Commission is scheduled to release its final report in February next year. For more on the aged care Royal Commission see https://agedcare.royalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-10/aged-care-and-covid-19-a-special-report.pdf
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                American Journal of Industrial Medicine
                Am J Ind Med
                Wiley
                0271-3586
                1097-0274
                February 2021
                December 23 2020
                February 2021
                : 64
                : 2
                : 73-77
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences Curtin University Bentley Western Australia Australia
                [2 ]Department of Community Nursing, Preventive Medicine and Public Health and History of Science University of Alicante Alicante Spain
                [3 ]Department of Public Health Sciences University of California Davis California USA
                Article
                10.1002/ajim.23209
                33355943
                cbb1e3ab-1a42-4336-bc23-dd32445051e3
                © 2021

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article