IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/gender/v32y2025i4p1482-1494.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Care Paradoxes in Maintaining Precariousness: A Case Study of Australia's Aged Care Work

Author

Listed:
  • Celina McEwen

Abstract

The paper examines why despite many inquiries and government reforms, the working conditions of aged care workers have remained precarious. The study draws on an analysis of Australian workforce survey data, government documents, and hearing transcripts from a recent Royal Commission into the sector's workforce and care practices. The results paint a complex and nuanced picture of how the government and providers rely on older or culturally and linguistically diverse women to carry out high standards of quality care with minimal worker benefits and protection while devaluing their work as unprofessional. The analysis also highlights the coexistence of four types of precariousness in aged care work: precariousness as a social category, a shared experience, a set of work practices, and management. Further, I find that a series of paradoxes rooted in cultural perceptions of care and older and/or diverse women maintain precariousness at work by constructing workers as the problem, entrenching disadvantage borne from intersectionality and shifting the burden of responsibility and part of the cost of caring for older people onto workers. I suggest that little improvement is possible until the systemic and sociocultural issues around care and the workers engaged in the transaction of care are tackled together as a whole.

Suggested Citation

  • Celina McEwen, 2025. "The Role of Care Paradoxes in Maintaining Precariousness: A Case Study of Australia's Aged Care Work," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 1482-1494, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:32:y:2025:i:4:p:1482-1494
    DOI: 10.1111/gwao.13240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.13240
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/gwao.13240?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:32:y:2025:i:4:p:1482-1494. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0968-6673 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.