Passing the Buck: why Victoria’s Covid is raging in private aged care homes

by | Jul 24, 2020 | Business

The deaths of 80 elderly people are imminent as a result of COVID-19 spreading through private aged care homes. Aged care behemoths were granted an extra $200m to cope with the pandemic but refuse to provide critical paid pandemic leave to an overwhelmingly casualised workforce, claiming it’s the government’s responsibility. The government says the buck stops with aged care operators. Meanwhile, Victoria’s publicly owned homes, with mandated staffing requirements, have few reported cases of COVID-19. Dr Sarah Russell investigates.

Victorian Premier Dan Andrews said “a bunch” of aged care workers were among those going to work when sick or while waiting for test results. “Let’s not judge them. Let’s try and work out what is driving it,” he said.

What’s driving it is simple: the marketisation (“corporatisation”) of aged care. Along with the entrance of private equity firms and superannuation and real estate investment trusts into the residential aged care sector as a result of the Aged Care Act (1997) came the casualisation of the workforce and a reliance on holders of 457 visas. Many staff in aged care are poorly paid and not entitled to paid leave.

Put simply, they cannot afford not to work. To make ends meet, casual staff work in several different aged care homes. Moving between homes has likely contributed to the spread of coronavirus in Victoria.

Aged care is now big business

Residential aged care in Australia is big business. The federal government spends a whopping $12.4 billion each year on aged care. Yet, in a recent letter to me, it was acknowledged that the government outsources responsibility for a coronavirus “outbreak management plan” to private providers. The government washes its hands of any responsibility.

Companies such as Estia Health, Japara, Regis and Bupa have large portfolios of aged care homes. Bupa Aged Care, for example, has 72 homes. It receives almost half a billion dollars in government funding each year.

The irony of the move towards a free market system is that private companies continue to put out their hands for more government money – without any transparency about how they spend our taxes.

Despite this lack of financial transparency, the Government recently gave the aged care industry an extra $205 million. When announcing the extra funding, Aged Care Minister Richard Colbeck, said: “This will contribute to the genuine extra costs that they’re incurring as they manage the COVID-19 outbreak.”

One extra cost is paid leave for staff who are required to self isolate. However, Leading Aged Services Australia, the peak body for private providers, claims the government should contribute to any paid pandemic leave. Didn’t the government just contribute with the $205 million?

Aged care operators exploit lockdown to squeeze more grants from Government

The government continues to sit on its hands. The Fair Work Commission wants to hear more advice before making a final decision about paid pandemic leave for aged care staff. Seriously? How many residents must die before the commission makes a decision?

There are currently 66 aged care homes in Victoria with Covid-19 cases. These include Estia Health, Japara, Regis and Bupa aged care homes. With some 197 residents infected, it has been estimated that 40 per cent of them will die in coming days/weeks. So 80 deaths are imminent. This is four times as many who died in Newmarch House in New South Wales.

Without a public inquiry into the errors made during that outbreak, some aged care homes in Victoria seem destined to make some of the same mistakes.

Horror story unfolding

It is all so sad – and so avoidable. If governments had acted on the recommendations from numerous inquiries over the past decade – if they had listened to residents, relatives and staff – we would not have this horror story unfolding.

Peak bodies representing aged care providers have successfully lobbied the federal government for “flexibility in staffing”. Unlike childcare centres, hospitals and schools, there is no requirement for aged-care homes to have mandated staff-to-client ratios. This flexibility results in many aged-care homes being understaffed.

Aged care advocates and relatives of residents knew about the staffing crisis in aged care long before the pandemic. The government also knew. It gave $2 million to an Aged Care Workforce Strategy Taskforce. Once you waded through the report’s managerial speak – “the creation of a research translation ecosystem”; “touchpoints for consumers in their ageing journey”; and “a well-supported research translation pipeline”; you reached its conclusion: staff ratios were not needed. Staffing ratios will not “necessarily result in better quality of care outcomes.”

As a result, some aged care homes continue to operate without a registered nurse who is on site 24 hours a day.

Victorian-owned homes the stand out

The exception is Victorian-owned public aged care homes, which operate under the Safe Patient Care Act. This act prescribes ratios of registered nurses. On the morning shift, one registered nurse is required for every seven residents; in the afternoon, one registered nurse for every eight residents; and on the night shift, one registered nurse for every 15 residents.

Compare this with staffing in privately owned residential aged care homes, where a single registered nurse is often required to look after more than 100 residents.

Not surprisingly, data from the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission indicates outbreaks in Victoria are almost exclusively a private sector aged-care issue. State-owned nursing homes comprise about 200 of the 750 in Victoria, but of the 66 aged care homes that have reported a COVID case since June, just six are state-government run.

10-hour online COVID course

Soon after the pandemic hit, Leading Aged Services Australia recognised the need to hire more staff in private aged care homes. It began promoting The national COVID-19 redeployment program, which aims to train a large numbers of unemployed people to work in aged care homes.

And the training required? A 10-hour online course. Considering the complexities of working in an aged-care home during a pandemic, it is inconceivable that someone with 10 hours of training is qualified to provide competent care. You simply can’t learn how to use PPE safely in an online video.

The pandemic has once and for all highlighted the systemic issues in aged care that were hiding in plain sight. What more will it take before the federal government finally admits that the care of vulnerable older people is too important to be left to the whims of the free market?

It is time the government ditched the Aged Care Sector Committee’s Aged Care Roadmap that has driven aged care down the neoliberal road and over the cliff.

Are political donations protecting Bupa’s aged care licence?

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr Sarah Russell

Dr Sarah Russell

Dr Sarah Russell is a public health researcher who specialises in qualitative research. She has been the Principal Researcher at Research Matters since 1999. She is also the Director, Aged Care Matters. She believes the aged care system requires greater scrutiny, accountability and transparency.

12 Comments

  1. Avatar

    Thanks to Dr Russell for a fine but damning analysis. There are two major metrics that help to define a civilized society.
    How we nourish and educate our young and how we respect and protect our seniors and elderly.
    The LNP Governments have failed on both accounts since the days of their much vaunted icon, Pig Iron Bob.

    • Avatar

      There are also some of in between age; the ill, disabled, unemployed or underemployed, homeless.

      • Avatar

        Hi Mr Hotspringer;

        Indeed the care for our underprivileged and under/un-employed had been a feature of Australian democracy for short periods…. it gave us the right to proudly refer to our country’s ethos as uniquely egalitarian but the adoption of the doctrines of the of Austrian and Chicago Schools put pay to those values. The flog everything not nailed down to the nearest ‘greed is good’ mob and the monetization of everything else is in harmony with the quick destruction of the planet

    • Avatar

      It was pig iron Bob who commenced federal funding for aged care it was not Chiefly and his labor successors . Please be accurate in your smears .

      • Avatar

        Yeah; five bob, every contestable election, if my memory still serves me, that’s why he had two nicknames “Five Bob” by the pensioners and “Pig Iron Bob” by the population in general.

  2. Avatar

    Where ever profit comes into conflict with aged care, public health, environmental care, profit will win.

  3. Avatar

    “Victoria’s publicly owned homes, with mandated staffing requirements, have few reported cases of COVID-19” — yes but virtually all the publicly owned aged care homes are all in regional Victoria where there mostly non-existent community transmission and virtually no opportunity for staff or visitors to contract it and bring it into the homes given the closed “borders” with metropolitan Melbourne. There are no outbreaks in private aged care home in regional Victoria either. There are many arguments that can be advanced in the public versa private debate but the inference intended to be drawn by this claim is really quite without merit.

  4. Avatar

    Yes a marked difference between the big not for profit providers as well like Bolton Clarke ( district nursing RSL care ) Blue Care Wesley Mission. The public pbi providers also access the still substantial fbt exemption of $16000 a year tax free to staff which means a higher paid and better skilled presumably workforce

  5. Avatar

    I think money could be spent on upgrading people’s homes (the 25k per household as the building stimulus package straight up) and putting in support services so they can stay in their own homes longer. Free Packages for portable one bedroom granny flats that can be placed on children’s/family members property then removed and reused when no longer needed
    ALL!!! aged care same as Government nurse patient ratios

    • Avatar

      The regulations in Victoria concur ‘Council laws vary, but typically the occupant must be a dependant, and the building must be removed once they die or move out’ but why should a granny flat be removed?

      Further, what incentive is there for ensuring good quality accommodation if it can only be used for the remainder of the dependent’s life? Why couldn’t another independent older person use versus higher rent or purchase price for a unit or apartment?

      Again, obsessive monetisation of property and the fear that permanent granny flats may impair real estate market values whether buying, selling or renting (not to forget retirement villages and/or aged care homes)?

  6. Avatar

    So who was the genius who changed the law to allow the corporate foxes into the henhouse in 1997? None other than St John. Another of his fine legacies.

  7. Avatar

    interesting information about State & Private homes .If the Victorian Govt can do it so well why has it allowed the private sector to develop ? i would suggest is did not want to ensure the funding. It is very clear that Victorian homes did not or refused to learn from the issues in NSW when they occurred several months earlier.

    I would have thought the Belt & Road package with Beijing would have benefitted Victoria .

QED

Case for Federal ICAC

Quad Erat Demonstrandum

Revolving Doors

Revolving Doors

Video Channel

The West Report

Support Us

subscribe to michael west media

[ Click to find out more ]

Michael West Email

Get Our Weekly Newsletter

Unsubscribe anytime.

Thank you! We'll also confirm via email.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This