The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER FOUR: ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL STATUS BY CARING ROLE

4.1 Previous research has suggested that being an unpaid carer can impact on working patterns and labour market participation. In the Care 21 report, few unpaid carers reported being supported to maintain a balance between their working and caring commitments. This section examines the economic and financial status of carers and non-carers and identifies differences between sub-groups of carers with the intention of indicating any particularly vulnerable types of carers.

Economic Status

4.2 Figure 4.1 displays the economic status of carers and non-carers. Overall, there were no differences in the economic status of carers and non-carers. However, the results demonstrate that carers are not just or usually retired people, half (50%) are in paid employment. In fact, carers account for 13% of the working population, although 30% of carers of working age ¹² are not in employment. Additionally, 5% of carers are actually themselves long-term sick or disabled.

Figure 4.1: Economic status of carers and non-carers 1999 - 2004 (%)
Base: Carers = 10370; Non-carers = 76245

4.3 Additionally, there were differences dependent on working age which reveal that a higher proportion of non-carers than carers of working age were in paid employment (70% compared with 65%). The results are displayed in Table 4.1. In order to investigate this is more detail, the household working status of carers and non-carers of working and non-working age was analysed. A quarter of carers live in non-working couple households (compared with 17% of non-carers) and a lower proportion of carers than non-carers of working age live in working couple households (42% versus 49%).

Table 4.1: Household working status of carers and non-carers of working and non-working age (%)

4.4There are clear differences in economic status between those caring within and outwith the household. The results are displayed in Figure 4.2. A third of those caring for someone within the household are retired compared with 20% of those caring for someone in another household (and 26% of non-carers). Conversely, 59% of those caring for someone in another household are in paid employment compared with 30% of those caring for someone in the same household (and 51% of non-carers). Although it might be expected that these results are simply due to the age of these individuals, there are significant differences in the proportion of both types of carers of working age that are in employment, with 50% of those caring in the household and 77% of those caring out of the household being in employment.

Figure 4.2: Economic status of carers providing care in and outwith the household, compared with non-carers
Base: Care in house: 16 - 24 = 122; 25 - 34 = 307; 35 - 44 = 477; 45 - 59 = 748; 60 - 74 = 863; 75+ = 242; All = 2759. Care outside house: 16 - 24 = 398; 25 - 34 = 971; 35 - 44 = 1576; 45 - 59 = 2721; 60 - 74 = 1583; 75+ = 355; All = 7604. Non-carers: 16 - 24 = 6589; 25 - 34 = 12418; 35 - 44 = 14092; 45 - 59 = 16646; 60 - 74 = 16626; 75+ = 9832; All = 76203.

4.5 In order to investigate this in more detail, the economic status of both types of carers of different ages was investigated (see Table 4.2). In every age group, a higher proportion of those caring outwith rather than within the household are in paid employment. This was particularly marked in the 25-34 age group, where 71% of those caring out of the household compared with 38% of those caring in the household were working. Similarly, in every age group, those caring in the household were more likely to be looking after the home or family than those caring outwith the household ( e.g. 42% compared with 17% of those aged 25-34 years old).

Table 4.2: Age and household type of carers providing care in and out of the household compared with non-carers (%)

4.6 Overall, a higher proportion of adults caring in the household than those caring outwith the household and non-carers live in non-working households (64% versus 29% and 38% - see Table 4.3). This might have been expected, given that adults caring in the household are more likely to be older individuals. However, when the working age of adults was considered, the results suggest that this pattern cannot be purely related to age. That is, 47% of adults caring in the household of working age lived in non-working households compared with 15% of adults caring outwith the household and 18% of non-carers.

Table 4.3: Household working status of carers providing care in and outwith the household of working and non-working age (%)

4.7An important difference previously identified as a factor influencing the extent to which carers are able to maintain a work life balance is the level of care that adults provide. In order to analyse caring intensity in more detail, the characteristics of sole carers in the household providing continuous care, those providing more than 20 hours a week, those providing less than 20 hours, and those providing varied levels of care were compared with non-carers.

4.8 There were very few differences among carers providing varying levels of care, and it is probable that any differences may be linked to the age of these carers (see Table 4.4). Those providing continuous care were generally older adults. That is, 50% of those providing continuous care were aged over 60 years old compared with 38% of those providing less than 20 hours a week and 37% providing more than 20 hours a week.

Table 4.4: Age of sole carers within the household providing varying levels of care compared with non-carers (%)

4.9 As can be seen from Figure 4.3, a lower proportion of carers providing continuous care were in paid employment that other carers (14% versus 41% of those caring for less than 20 hours a week and 40% of those caring for more than 20 hours). As well as the effect of the intensity of their caring, this may be linked to the fact that those providing continuous care were older individuals. For example, 50% of carers providing continuous care are of working age compared with 64% of those providing more than 20 hours a week and 60% of those providing less than 20 hours.

Figure 4.3: Economic status of sole carers providing varying levels of care compared with non-carers (1999 - 2004 %)
Base: Carers providing less than 20 hours a week = 193; Carers providing more than 20 hours a week = 160; Carers providing continuous care = 1035; Carers providing varying levels of care = 146; Non-carers = 76203

4.10 Although the majority of all types of carers lived in non-working households, this was more often the case where the adult was providing continuous care (85% versus 60% providing less than 20 hours a week and 38% of non-carers - see Table 4.5), most likely as a lower proportion of adults providing continuous care are of working age.

Table 4.5: Household working status of sole carers within the household providing varying levels of care compared with non-carers (%)

4.11 The results indicate that 40% of sole carers are permanently retired from work compared with 25% of other carers and 20% of non-carers (see Figure 4.4). Just under a quarter of sole carers (24%) and 17% of other carers compared with only 9% of non-carers) look after the home or family. In fact, just under a quarter of sole carers (23%) are in paid employment compared with 38% of other carers and 57% of non-carers. Only 42% of sole carers of working age are in employment compared with 58% of other carers. This would indicate that the differences in employment patterns between these two groups of carers are not simply related to age.

Figure 4.4: Economic status of sole carers, other carers who care in the home, and non-carers
Base: Sole carer= 1542; Other carer= 1197; Non-carers = 49708

4.12 In further support of this, is the finding that a higher proportion of other carers than sole carers of every age group were in paid employment. For example, 34% of other carers aged between 18 and 34 years old were working compared with only 20% of sole carers (and 62% of non-carers). The opposite pattern of results was true for those individuals looking after the home or family ( i.e. 50% of sole carers aged between 18 and 34 years old compared with 20% of other carers).

4.13 The majority of both sole carers and other carers live in non-working couple households (74% and 52% respectively) compared with only 29% of non-carers (see Table 4.6). In contrast, 43% of other carers and 64% of non-carers live in couple households where at least one adult works compared with only 21% of sole carers. Both types of carers of working age were more likely than non-carers to live in non-working households. That is, a higher proportion of sole carers of working age than other carers live in non-working households (59% versus 38%) compared with only 23% of non-carers. These results indicate that sole carers are more likely to live in non-working households and this -appears to be linked to their caring role rather than their age.

Table 4.6: Household working status of sole carers and other carers providing care in the household of working and non-working age (%)

Young carers

4.14 Young carers ( i.e. those aged under 18) have previously been identified as a vulnerable group. As the SHS only captures information on people aged 16 and over, this analysis refers to young carers aged 16 and 17. However, there were very few significant differences between carers and non-carers of this age. There were no differences in relation to economic status, with 18% of carers and 21% of non-carers being in paid employment, and 50% of young carers and 52% of young non-carers being at school. In fact, 15% of young carers were not in education, employment, or training compared with 10% of non-carers (again these differences were not significant). However, there was a difference in relation to household working status (see Table 4.7), with a higher proportion of young carers than young non-carers living in non-working households (30% versus 17%). Taken together, the results indicate that 16 to 17 year old young carers do not appear to be any more disadvantaged than non-carers of their age, other than the fact that they are more likely to live in non-working households.

Table 4.7: Household working status of 16-17 year old young carers compared with non-carers (%)

Income

4.15 There was no overall difference in the household incomes of carers and non-carers, however, there are some age and household working status related patterns. The results are displayed in Table 4.8 and Table 4.9. Up until the age of 44, carers live in lower income households than non-carers, and this pattern reverses among adults aged 75 years and older. That is, 35% of carers versus 41% of non-carers aged between 16 and 24 years old live in households with an income of £20,001 or more whereas 11% of carers compared with 6% of non-carers aged 75 years and older live in these types of households. This indicates that younger carers are more financially disadvantaged than other adults their age whereas the opposite is true for older carers.

Table 4.8: Age and household banded income of Carers (%)

Table 4.9: Age and household banded income of Non-carers (%)

4.16 Generally, adults caring outside rather than inside the household live in households on higher incomes (see Table 4.10). That is, 37% of those providing care outside the house live in households with an income of £20,000 or more, compared with 22% of those caring within the household (and 38% of non-carers). This was also true of carers of working and non-working age. To illustrate, 29% of adults caring in the household of working age live in a household with an income of £20,001 or more compared with 44% of adults caring outwith the household and 49% of non-carers. This pattern was also true of adults of non-working age (11% of those caring in the household compared with 16% of those caring outwith the household).

Table 4.10: Household banded income of carers providing care in and outwith the household of working and non-working age (%)

4.17 Given that the majority of sole carers do not work, it is perhaps unsurprising that a higher proportion of sole carers than other types of carers and non-carers live in lower income households (see Table 4.11). Only 16% of sole carers live in households with an income of greater than £20,000 compared with 35% of other carers and 48% of non-carers. Even among working individuals, a lower proportion of sole carers than other carers live in households with high incomes (30% of sole carers and 55% of other carers compared with 64% of non-carers live in households with an income of £20,001 or more). This indicates that sole carers living on low incomes may be more linked to their caring role than their working status.

Table 4.11: Household banded income for sole carers and other carers providing care in the household for those working and non-working (%)

Other financial (and inclusion) indicators

4.18 There were no significant differences between carers and non-carers in relation to how well the household was managing financially. The results are displayed in Table 4.12 and Table 4.13. However, younger carers are less likely than younger non-carers to live in a household that copes well financially (32% versus 40%).

Table 4.12: How household is managing financially by age of carer (%)

Table 4.13: How household is managing financially by age of non-carer (%)

4.19 Younger carers were less likely than younger non-carers to have savings or investments (39% versus 47% - see Figure 4.5). However, older carers were actually more likely than older non-carers to have savings or investments (65% of carers aged over 75 years old compared with 57% of non-carers). This is an interesting result, indicating that older carers appear to be better off financially than older non-carers.

Figure 4.5: Whether carers and non-carers have savings or investments
Base: Carers: 16-24 = 520; 25-34 = 1278; 35-44 = 2053; 45-59 = 3469; 60-74 = 2446; 75 plus = 597; All = 10363. Non-carers: 16-24 = 6427; 25-34 = 12252; 35-44 = 13902; 45-59 = 10818; 60-74 = 10994; 75 plus = 9791; All = 75317

4.20 Younger carers were less likely than younger non-carers to have a bank account (79% compared with 90% - see Table 4.14).

Table 4.14: Whether respondent has account (%)

4.21 Those caring in the household appear to be coping less well financially than those caring outside the household and non-carers (see Table 4.15). That is, 33% of adults caring in the household said that their household manages well financially compared with 49% of those caring outside the household and 46% of non-carers.

Table 4.15: How household is managing financially by age of carers providing care in and out of the household compared with non-carers (%)

4.22 Those who provide care in the household were least likely to have savings or investments which would perhaps follow, given that these individuals have lower annual incomes. The results are displayed in Figure 4.6. That is, 42% of those providing care in the household had savings or investments compared with 50% of those providing care out of the household and 55% of non-carers.

Figure 4.6: Whether respondent has savings or investments by age of carers providing care in and outwith the household, compared with non-carers
Base: Care in house: 16 - 24 = 122; 25 - 34 = 307; 35 - 44 = 477; 45 - 59 = 748; 60 - 74 = 863; 75+ = 242; All = 2759. Care outside house: 16 - 24 = 398; 25 - 34 = 971; 35 - 44 = 1576; 45 - 59 = 2721; 60 - 74 = 1583; 75+ = 355; All = 7604. Non-carers: 16 - 24 = 6589; 25 - 34 = 12418; 35 - 44 = 14092; 45 - 59 = 16646; 60 - 74 = 16626; 75+ = 9832; All = 76203.

4.23 Taken together, the results suggest that carers who provide care in the household are more financially disadvantaged than carers providing care outside the household. This may be a consequence of the fact that co-resident carers provide more intensive caring. Overall, t he results of the financial variables also indicate that younger carers are in a disadvantaged position compared with non-carers of the same age group.

4.24 There were no significant differences in the types of areas that carers and non-carers live in. There were no significant differences in relation to area or urban/rural classification. However, more sole carers and other carers than non-carers live in the most deprived areas in Scotland (26% and 23% versus 14% of non-carers living in non-single households). A significantly higher proportion of adults providing care inside than outside the households live in Glasgow (17% compared with 10%). Similarly, in terms of health board area, more adults in Greater Glasgow cared inside rather than outside the household (21% compared with 16%). An important difference is that a significantly higher proportion of adults caring within their household live in more deprived areas than those providing care outside the household (24% compared with 14%).

4.25 A lower proportion of sole carers than both other carers and non-carers had internet access at home (33% versus 54% and 53%). Overall, a lower proportion of sole carers than other carers have access to a motor vehicle (62% compared with 72%, and 81% of non-carers). There were also age differences, with a higher proportion of other carers than sole carers up to the age of 59 years old having access to a motor vehicle ( e.g. 78% versus 67% for those aged 45 - 59 years old). However, the opposite pattern of results is true for individuals aged over 75, with 60% of sole carers and 50% of other carers having access to a motor vehicle.

Key Points

• Half of all carers are in paid employment, although just under a third of carers of working age are not in employment.
• Of adults of working age, a higher proportion of those who care outside rather than inside the household are in employment, whereas a higher proportion of those who care in rather than outwith the household live in non-working households.
• Those who care in the household live in lower income households, cope less well financially, are less likely to have savings or investments, and more commonly live in the most deprived areas in Scotland than those who care outside the household.
• Sole carers were less likely than other carers in the household to be in paid employment and were more likely than live in lower income households.
• Sole carers providing continuous care more commonly lived in non-working households and were less commonly in employment than other sole carers.
• A higher proportion of young carers (aged 16 and 17) than young non-carers live in non-working households.
• Younger carers ( i.e. aged 16-24) more commonly live in lower income households than other adults their age, whereas older carers more commonly live in higher income households than other adults their age.
• Younger carers were less likely than younger non-carers to live in a household that copes well financially, were less likely to have savings or investments, and were less likely to have a bank or building society account.
• Older carers were more likely than other adults their age to have savings or investments.

« Previous | Contents | Next »