International Students and work-hazard exposure: Are we managing their risks?

Recent changes in Canada and Australia allow international students to increase the hours they work outside their studies. 

Previously, international students in Canada were permitted to work only 20 hours per week outside their school programs; that limit has been temporarily removed until December 31, 2023.  Australia moved earlier and lifted a similar cap until June 30, 2023.  In the US, an on-campus 20-hour restriction exists during sessions with additional hours during breaks and specific exceptions for certain groups and circumstances. Demand for workers means more students working more hours in more sectors in the economy.

Clearly, the easing of restrictions on work hours is intended to alleviate labour shortages, particularly in the service sector.  That said, many students work in many other sectors of the economy.  In my own experience, I have met international students working in construction, manufacturing, transportation, warehousing, and healthcare.

Increased Hours = Increased Risk

With unlimited hours on top of studies and on-campus work (often part of their studies), international students are exposed to more hazards.  Recall that risk is the chance or probability of harm from a work-related hazard.  That increased risk is greater than you might expect.

First, the risk of injury and occupational disease is related to exposure.  For most jobs, one can think of exposure in terms of hours exposed to the hazards present in the workplace.  Increased hours alone account for increased risk in the population of international students who engage in employment.  Holding the number of international students constant and increasing their exposure to work hazards through increased hours, increases the likelihood of occupational injury and disease.

Fatigue and Risk

A second factor can increase the risk beyond a straight linear relationship.  The fatigue – risk relationship is an accepted fact.  NIOSH-CDD writes:

Fatigue can slow down reaction times. Reduce attention or concentration, limit short-term memory and impair judgement…High levels of fatigue can affect any worker in any occupation or industry with serious consequences for worker safety and health. 

[See https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/fatigue/default.html ]

Published studies rarely focus on non-work sources of fatigue outside of commuting time and breaks between shifts.  Study time, family needs and other factors can add to fatigue and increase risk.  Some industries have modeled hazards and fatigue related risks [for example, see Transport Canada, Fatigue Risk Management System for the Canadian Aviation Industry - Introduction to Fatigue Audit Tools - TP 14577 available at https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/publications/fatigue-risk-management-system-canadian-aviation-industry-introduction-fatigue-audit-tools-tp-14577 ]

Models and studies of enhanced risk facing resident and foreign students are lacking but the implication of existing knowledge is that the added hours of exposure to potential harms may disproportionately increase risk of injury or disease.

International Student Population

The population of foreign students is not trivial. Australia, Canada, and the US are three of the top five destination countries for foreign international students, accounting for more than 2 million of the estimated 5.6 million international students world wide. 

Rank	Country	International student population (2020)
1	USA	1,075,496
2	UK	551,495
3	Canada	503,270
4	China	492,185
5	Australia	463,643
		3,086,089

 

[see https://studee.com/guides/10-most-popular-countries-for-international-students/ ]

These are significant numbers.  Policy changes expanding hours increase the potential labour supply of this population’s in terms of allowed work opportunities may be needed to address demand for labour in the economy.  Current labour market shortages are evident in many jurisdictions.  Along with inflation, rental housing shortages and increased costs for transportation and study materials (particularly technology), international students may have a greater motivation to take advantage of greater opportunities for employment. 

Stock, Flow and Foreign Student Population Measures

International students pose a challenge for those charged with designing health, safety and workers’ compensation awareness programs for them.  At any given time, the population of international students can vary.  Most courses of study span a calendar year or more.  Study visas may be valid for or across multiple years, but students may enter and leave the jurisdiction as part of their studies or simply to return home for part of any given year. This is the “flow” of international students.

Unlike refugees and new immigrants (definitionally,  permanent or extended-stay residents including asylum seekers) or temporary foreign workers (individuals contracted for periods of greater than a year or returning on a seasonal basis), foreign students are generally in the jurisdiction for shorter periods (not permanently).  At any given time, the population or “stock” of foreign students may exceed the “flow” or count of new arrivals. 

Once a cohort of new immigrants or temporary foreign workers is oriented to health and safety or workers’ compensation in the jurisdiction, they are often considered part of the resident population in terms of knowledge and awareness programs.  With foreign students, the “stock” is ever changing and the challenge of raising awareness, building trust, and informing them of their rights and obligations never wains.

Experience and expectations

Workplace culture is not universal.  Attitudes and beliefs regarding workplace health and safety vary widely.  Experiences and understandings about workplace health and safety and workers’ compensation also vary by country.  It is not reasonable to assume all international students bring the same understanding to the workplace.

Consider the following: 

Canada's top 10 international student source countries (by number of study permit holders on Dec. 31, 2021)
India	217,410
China	105,265
France	26,630
Iran	16,900
Vietnam	16,285
South Korea	15,805
Philippines	15,545
United States	14,325
Nigeria	13,745
Mexico	11,550

[ See https://www.cicnews.com/2022/03/canada-welcomed-450000-new-international-students-in-2021-an-all-time-record-0323762.html#gs.fl1tae ]

 

 

US: Number of international students studying in the US in 2020/21, by country of origin
China	317,299
India	167,582
South Korea	39,491
Canada	25,143
Saudi Arabia	21,933
Vietnam	21,631
Taiwan	19,673
Brazil	14,000
Mexico	12,986
Nigeria	12,860

https://www.statista.com/statistics/233880/international-students-in-the-us-by-country-of-origin/

Australia: Number of international students studying Australian courses January-July 2022
China	141,567
India	86,782
Nepal	51,579
Vietnam	19,932
Indonesia	14,865
Malaysia	14,135
Thailand	14,015
Brazil	13,963
Philippines	13,703
Colombia	13,661

 [ See https://www.education.gov.au/international-education-data-and-research/international-student-numbers-country-state-and-territory ]

With the possible exception of international students from Canada, the US and Australia studying away from home in one of the other countries in this grouping, foreign students will have no prior understanding of the jurisdictional authorities responsible for workplace health, safety and workers’ compensation. I could find no study contrasting the a priori understanding of international students regarding workplace laws, duties, and responsibilities.  While resident citizens will have some understanding from their indirect exposure through media, family, and community, it is unlikely that all foreign international students will bring an equivalent common understanding with them.

International students should not be “lumped in” with strategies designed for other temporary foreign workers.  Most temporary foreign workers are required by their visas to work for specific employers; international students may be employed in multiple sectors by multiple employers and may change employers frequently. This adds a further challenge for those seeking to increase protections for and gain the trust of international students and those who employ them. 

Are workers’ comp and OH&S adapting

Workers’ compensation agencies and prevention organizations are not always quick to react to changes in the demographics of their target populations.  International students are a special demographic segment of their target population. 

As noted, Canada, the US and Australia differ from other countries in who has jurisdiction over workplace health, safety and workers’ compensation laws.  Most countries in the world that have social security arrangements for work injuries have national programs.  While efforts to increase the knowledge of residents on workers’ compensation and occupational health and safety  through advertising and inclusion in high school curricula in Canada, the US and Australia; similar awareness programs and educational curricula may not exist in the home countries of many international students.  Failure to adequately inform international students may lead to their injury, potential under-reporting of hazards, and suppression of workplace rights. 

So, what are authorities responsible for workplace health, safety and compensation doing to address this change?  How are they working to communicate worker rights to this unique population, helping their employers understand risks, and making others in the workplaces more aware to foreign student issues?

To be clear, this is not just a question of language.  Nearly all international students are required to have official language proficiency just to qualify for admission as students.  Understanding, trust, access, and support go beyond translating brochures and webpages.  If you can find a workers’ compensation authority or OH&S doing a great job gaining the trust of foreign students, let me know.  I could find no public-facing statements or studies on this issue.  Foreign students need to know that their status and right to work are not at risk by engaging with health and safety agencies or filing a workers’ compensation claim.

I also found little in the way of data on the risk differences (if any) faced by international students.  Do they experience similar levels of injury or risk as resident workers remains an unanswered question.  Few workers’ compensation jurisdictions identify international students in their data –a necessary categorization if we are to determine work-injury risk, claims rates, or establish the likelihood of under-reporting of workplace injury in this population.

Taking action to help protect international students and serve them requires action by workers’ compensation and prevention authorities.  These actions include:

•       Collecting data on international student injuries

•       Interacting with specific international student groups

•       Determining where international students are working and being injured

•       Educating international students and their employers on their rights and building trust

•       Actively seeking to minimize under-reporting of workplace injury, illness and disease involving international students

•       Comparative research on risk, frequency, severity, and outcomes of injured international students vs. resident student workers

Societally, we want and need international students more than every.  They can be a resource that will help level the gaps in our labour force and skill needs. Takin intentional and robust steps to understand and address their needs is more important now than at any point in the past.   

Are workers’ compensation laws keeping up with changing demographics?

For more than twenty years I have been speaking about demographic change to workers’ compensation insurers in the hopes of spurring policy changes in advance of an aging workforce and greater numbers of older workers in the workplace.  To my regret, my presentations on “Demographic Effects”, while warmly received were not the catalyst for early and significant policy development. 

Population projections presented in the 1990s and early 2000s told us what was coming.  Now, the current census and population data growth confirm those projections. We new this was coming but many policies are still anchored in the past.

One key consequence of changing demographics in Canada, the US, and Australia is the increasing number of older workers in the overall population and the work force.  Workers’ compensation and occupational health and safety are not keeping pace.  The implications of demographic change are obvious:

•     More older workers in the workplace
•        More workers working beyond traditional retirement age
• 
         More co-morbidities and longer recoveries following work-related injury, illness, or disease

We new these issues were coming based on static participation  and employment rates (employment to population ratios) additional economic factors have amplified the trends:

•        Plummeting unemployment rates creating greater demand for retention of older workers
•        Skyrocketing living costs driving more workers back to the labour force
•        Rising job vacancies stoking demand for older worker recruitment and workforce re-entry.

Every corporate planner anticipated a pandemic would arise at some point.  The pandemic timing and its attack on older individuals added stress to a tight labour market:

•        Aging cohorts of healthcare workers hitting retirement age just as demand for their services peak
•        Industries like trucking/transportation with high average age have massive job vacancies, exacerbating supply chain woes
•        Quarantine, isolation, and other prevention measures to control risk to workers driving required work absence with inadequate mechanisms for their support

For older workers, particularly those age 65 to 69, employment rates are trending higher. In the US (source: US BLS Current Population Survey, quarterly, non-seasonally adjusted 2002 and 2022 extracted June 2022):

•       The employed non-farm labour force age 65 and over has increased by 2.5 times since 2002
•        Nearly 20% of persons 65 and older is now employed in the labour force
•        Nearly a third of persons aged 65 to 69 is employed
•        36.4% of males aged 65 to 69 are employed (Q1 2022) vs. 29.5% in (Q1 2002).

Canadian data reveals a similar pattern (Statistics Canada: Labour Force Characteristics – unadjusted - Table: 14-10-0017-01):

·       The employment rate of 65- to 69-year-old has more than doubled from under 13% to more than 26% (May 2002 to April 2022)

·       Employment rate of women aged 65 to 69 has increased more than 2 and a half times over the same period (May 2002 to April 2022)

State and provincial data often show even more dramatic shifts. Extracting provincial data from the same series, British Columbia has seen a massive shift in the employment of workers age 65 and older:

•       The monthly unadjusted BC employment rate of 65- to 69-year-olds now routinely exceeds 35%
•        More than a third of males (36.2% average) and a quarter of females (25.7% average)  age 65 to 69 are employed (Jan-Apr 2022)

A recent Australian study reflects similar increases in participation among older workers (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2021) Older Australians, accessed 10 May 2022):

•        Older Australians (aged 65 and over) had a workforce participation rate of 15% (19% for men, 11% for women).
•        The workforce participation rate of older Australians more than doubled (from 6.1% in 2001 to 15% in 2021) in the last two decades.
•        The participation rate for men 65 and over almost doubled (from 10% to 19%); for women aged 65 and over, the participation has almost quadrupled (from 3.0% to 11%).

The rapidly growing number of older citizens, record demand for labour, economic imperative of rising prices, and the social shift towards working later in life mean the workplace is seeing and will continue to see more older workers.

Many workers’ compensation systems impose limits on benefits for older workers.  Legislation developed twenty or thirty years ago may have reflected a social context that anticipated early retirement; “freedom 55” may have been a mantra decades ago.  Today’s data show the trend is much to the contrary:  working well beyond normal retirement is becoming both a societal expectation and an economic imperative for many older workers.

Most Canadian jurisdictions have some sort of age restriction on receiving workers’ compensation.  The duration of temporary total or partial disability is typically limited to two years following the date of injury for most workers age 63 and older, although there are exceptions for those with documented working plans or typical later retirements. Some jurisdictions have similar restrictions beginning a little later or providing longer duration (Quebec with age 64 and four years maximum) or a little earlier (Manitoba age 61).  Permanent disability provisions are increasingly limiting on-going financial support for workers over age 65 after prescribed duration limits but typically continue to cover disability-related medical and certain other perspectives. (See AWCBC, Workers’ Compensation – Temporary Total Disability Compensation, accessed June 16, 2016 from https://awcbc.org/en/summary-tables/benefits-and-rehabilitation/)

Most US jurisdictions do not have an explicit age limit on temporary total benefits, but many have other limitations on benefits that effectively truncate or permanent benefits for workers of all ages after a certain number of weeks (104 weeks in West Virginia, 312 weeks in Utah, 500 weeks in South Carolina as examples).

Permanent Total Disability may be paid for life or as long as the disability lasts ( see Wisconsin, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa as examples) or have explicit duration limits (300 weeks in Alabama for example) or age limits linked to Social Security retirement ( as in Montana and Tennessee).

Some jurisdictions have evolved their coverage over time. In Minnesota, permanently disabled workers may receive benefits for life, to a presumed retirement age of 67 or 72, or for a term of 5 year depending on when the injury occurred.    

In many states, there are “settlements” or “compromise and release” arrangements (as in California) that may capitalize a present value award but typically factor in jurisdictional limits.  (See NASI, 2021 Workers’ Compensation Report – 2019 Data [Appendix D- Table D] – retrieved June 16, 2022 from https://www.nasi.org/research/workers-compensation/workers-compensation-benefits-costs-and-coverage/)

Australia’s coverage provisions under the individual state workcover schemes are varied.  Western Australia removed its restrictions in 2011, Queensland does not have a retirement provision per se but does have a five-year maximum provision.  Some states have a 12  or 24 month provision (New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory), or more complex provisions.  Take Victoria’s coverage of retirement provisions (as extracted from Safe Work Australia,  Comparison of workers’ compensation arrangements in Australia and New Zealand (2019), [Table 2.4e] as retrieved June 16, 2022):

Retirement age means the age at which the worker attains pension age within the meaning of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth).  Under s171, workers are not normally entitled to payments under the Act after attaining retirement age, except in the following circumstances:

if injured within the period of 130 weeks before attaining retirement age or at any time after attaining that age, the worker is entitled to weekly payments for no more than the first 130 weeks of incapacity for work — s169, Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013 or

           if worker’s incapacity after reaching retirement age relates to an injury suffered within the preceding 10 years and if the incapacity is due to inpatient treatment, the worker is entitled to weekly payments for a limited period of up to 13 weeks — s170, Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013

It may be late in this demographic shift but not to late for workers’ compensation law and policy makers to come to grips with this reality.  Here are some suggestions:

1.        Review current law and policy through the lens of older workers to ensure needs are properly addressed.

2.       Recognize that with age often come co-morbidities and conditions that may extend recovery and claim duration that require additional time or treatment over the standard

3.       If legislation limits are triggered by ages such 61, 63, 65 or 67 or indirectly by a cited “social security” eligibility, revisit these limits and increase them at least for the population 65 to 70 where the data clearly show large increases in participation and employment rates.

A glance at the population pyramids as they stand now or projections for the next few decades show this shift is not over.  And unless the population under 50 grows naturally or through significant immigration, the participation of even greater numbers of older workers in the labour force is likely.  Hopefully, public policies can catch up and keep up with this workplace reality.

Older Workers: Are we meeting their OH&S and Workers' Compensation needs?

The number of “older” workers is rising at an unprecedented rate.  Older workers- those age 65 and older- have always been present but their proportion in the workforce has been on the rise at rates that far exceed any change in their proportion of the population. 

For my recent presentations to audiences in the US, Canada and Australia, I customized the country-specific data on older workers.  Aside from scale, the charts from each country were remarkably similar. In each of those countries, data about older workers shows:

• Workers over the age of 65 are increasingly continuing in, returning to, and entering the workforce
• Older workers are increasing in both full and part-time categories
• The trend has picked up pace since the early 2000s

Older workers are an increasing reality in the workforce

The phenomenon has not gone unnoticed.   Recent articles in the popular press have highlighted this change. 

“More than 53 per cent of Canadian men aged 65 or older were working in some form in 2015, including 22.9 per cent who worked full-time throughout the year, compared with 37.8 and 15.5 per cent, respectively, in 1995…”  [Michelle McQuigge, “More older Canadians choose to keep working, census finds,” McLean’s / The Canadian Press . Nov 29, 2017 ]

“Overall, 255,000 Americans 85 years old or older were working over the past 12 months. That's 4.4 percent of Americans that age, up from 2.6 percent in 2006, before the recession. It’s the highest number on record.”  [Andrew Van Dam, “A record number of folks age 85 and older are working,” Wonkblog Analysis , Washington Post, July 5, 2018]

“[T]he number of people over 65 remaining in the workforce has increased from 9.4 per cent in 2006 to 21 per cent in 2016.”  [Gegory Bray, “Older workers are still clocking on beyond retirement age”, The Observer, July 12, 2018]

The US quarterly data demonstrate this dramatic increase.  The 1999-Q4 count was just under 4 million workers age 65 and older.  By 2018-Q2, the number was just shy of 10 million.  And employment is not limited to those in their mid-to-late sixties.  Older workers who are farmers, clergy, or supreme court justices may make headlines but workers in their seventies, eighties and beyond are increasingly represented across a broad spectrum of occupations. 

“A record number of folks age 85 and older are working.
Overall, 255,000 Americans 85 years old or older were working over the past 12 months. That's 4.4 percent of Americans that age, up from 2.6 percent in 2006, before the recession. It’s the highest number on record.”[ Andrew Van Dam, “A record number of folks age 85 and older are working. Here’s what they’re doing,” Washington Post [Wonkblog-online], July 5, 2018]

Similar trends in US, Canada and Australia

Using employment data from the US Current Population Survey (CPS).  Employment of those over age 65 has risen from about 10% of the population in that category in the early 1980s to 19% in 2018-Q2 [extracted from CPS using Unadjusted Employment – Population Ratio- Quarterly data].   

Charting this phenomenon in terms of full and part-time work shows trends that persisted despite the global economic crisis of the early 2000s—and may have accelerated, in part, because of it.  For the Canadian data, I compared the growth in both full and part-time employment to the change in population category. This chart is based on a CANSIM extract of monthly employment data, not seasonally adjusted. 

For a recent Australian presentation, I looked at monthly data but restricted the extract to categories of workers who identified and “full time” and reported 35 hours or more of work in the previous week.  For the part-time, I selected only those who identified as working part time and reported from one to 34 hours of work in the previous week. These restrictions likely understate the count but provide solid evidence of a steep increase in the working populations in both full and part-time categories. 

Implications for older workers … and those who will eventually joint their ranks

What are the implications of increasing numbers of older workers?  There are risks to workers themselves.  While there is strong evidence that work is actually good for your health and well-being, older workers have some greater risks:

Bodies change with age putting different joints and systems at risk of injury and disease

• Co-morbidities tend to increase with age, a factor that may complicate risk
• Working more years increases exposure to toxins and processes associated with work (thereby increasing the possibility of occupational disease)
• Recovery times for many injuries increase with age
• Degenerative conditions and the processes of normal aging may increase the risk of injury for previously “safe” work
• Medications necessary to control common conditions associate with age may alter perception, reaction times, strength, tolerance and stamina changing the factors that influence risk (and recovery). 

Some implications for Employers

Employers have a duty to protect all workers and older workers may face different risks as they age, even if they are in the same occupation and work location.  A female care aide in a long-term care facility always faces slip and fall risks but the risk of fracture as a consequence of that fall climbs sharply with age.  Employers need to know how risks change with age and take steps to reduce risk and prevent injury.

We all know older individuals who are extremely fit in mind and body.  We know that an astronaut can effectively do that job in his late seventies and that there are marathon runners in their 90s.  We all age but we age individually.  Arbitrarily banning all those over 80 from driving would be ageism; functional testing can avoid some arbitrary age limits.  How testing might be applied to power-line electricians, transport vehicle operators, or airline pilots may be successfully implemented but there are still risks.  Commercial airline pilots face age restrictions in some countries but the maximum age limit may be 60 or 65, apply to either or both captain and co-pilot, and may be absent all together in some countries.  Employers and regulators must address these risks for the safety of all their workers and others in the workplace.

We know that “newness” to a job is a risk factor for work-place injury.  Many older workers may be engaging in new jobs or working in new locations that may carry different risks from past experiences.  Employers must avoid the pitfall of assuming age, knowledge and experience obviate the need for orientation and risk-specific awareness. 

And for workers’ comp (and disability) insurers and law makers

Public policy decisions are developed in a context that often includes limited data. Most data sets are historical and that typically means legislation is driven forward while looking in a rear-view mirror. 

Laws or policies that have an inherent assumption of retirement at a specific age or based on historical norms are no longer adequate.  The default assumption that, but for a work injury or disability, retirement would have occurred by age 60 or 65 is no longer be justifiable.  Wage continuance and compensation for injured or disabled workers beyond age 65 ought not to be arbitrarily limited when societal expectations have changed so dramatically.

There are implications for rehabilitation and return-to-work practice as well.  Disability management professionals and return-to-work coordinators will increasingly face accommodation challenges for older workers who anticipate and expect to work rather than be steered to a pre-mature and unwanted departure from the workforce.  With societal acceptance and even need for older workers, the parameters of “early retirement” may well move north of 70.

Changing expectations of when we will retire

In the 1980s and 90s, the expectation of “freedom 55” was common among the working population.  According to recent surveys of the working population:

• In  the US [2017 data], the majority of workers (53 percent) plan to work past age 65, (13 percent plan to never retire). [Transamerica, 18^th Annual Transamerica Retirement Survey: A Compendium of Findings About American Workers, June 2018, TCRS 1364-0618]
•  In Australia [2016/17 data], 50% of workers intended to retire between 65 and 69 years (53% of men and 47% of women) and 20% intended to retire at 70 years and older (22% of men and 18% of women) [Australia Bureau of Statistics,  6238.0 - Retirement and Retirement Intentions, Australia, July 2016 to June 2017, December 20, 2017]
• In Canada [2015 Census Data], Over 53 per cent of men and 38 of women aged 65 or older were working.  [ Statistics Canada, Census in Brief: Working Seniors in Canada,  Release date: November 29, 2017]

           

The reality of an increasing population of older workers requires adjusting our expectations and actions toward employment, prevention/OH&S, and workers’ compensation.  The trend toward greater participation of older workers in the labour force is not going away.     It is time to reassess policies and our own perceptions regarding the length of our working careers.