Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

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. 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

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. 

Key statistics 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

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. 

Key messages 

Policy implications 

Gaps 

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.