Employers should know they play an important role ‘in whether or not their employees’ households and families are going to be food secure,’ says researcher
As grocery prices keep climbing, having a job – even a permanent full-time job – is no longer enough to guarantee that all Canadian workers can afford to eat. As a result, researchers say that food insecurity is quietly undermining productivity and well-being in workplaces across the country.
“Two-thirds of food insecure households relied primarily on employment income. So that means the majority of their income came from wages, salaries, jobs,” says Tim Lee, research program co-ordinator for PROOF, a research program at the University of Toronto focused on household food insecurity.
These findings challenge the dominant perception in Canadian society that food insecurity is only experienced by those who are unemployed or precariously employed.
“It pushes back against these preconceived notions about who's financially struggling or in need in Canada … people relying on social assistance or fixed incomes,” Lee says.
“A big part of this problem lies within employment and employment incomes.”
Why food insecurity matters at work
Research now links food insecurity directly to core work outcomes. Jason Moy, a doctoral student at the Michael G. Foster School of Business at the University of Washington, is co-author of a recent paper in the Journal of Applied Psychology titled “The Effects of Food Insecurity on Work Outcomes”.
“Overall, we found that food insecurity has a negative effect on employees’ task performance, work engagement, and helping behaviors (i.e., organizational citizenship behavior) due to increased anxiety,” he said in an email.
Lee adds that Canadian evidence already shows that the health impacts of food insecurity are severe and wide-ranging.
“A lot of the work that we've done and we see in Canada shows that being food insecure, living in a food insecure household, is very bad for people's health, it can lead to difficulty managing chronic diseases, it can also lead to worsening chronic conditions,” he says.
“It's associated with a wide range of disorders, from physical to mental, increased risk of hospitalization, and certainly all of these would impact people's ability to [function] in the workplace.”
Better wages, job quality and limits of charity
In PROOF’s latest research and work, job quality and stability were shown to be critical, beyond what Lee says are insufficient stop-gap measures offered by employers, such as grocery discounts or workplace pantries.
While well-meaning, such measures don’t put a dent in the financial realities of struggling households and can even be stigmatizing, he explains. Employers should instead be focusing on the root of food insecurity: not enough income to cover food costs.
“I think what's really important for employers to know is that they play an important role in whether or not their employees’ households and families are going to be food secure,” Lee says.
“Really, it boils down to, in large part, providing adequate job security and adequate and sufficient wages.”
Job quality is just as important, he says, because a job can offer more financial leg ups through benefits, childcare leave, flexible schedules, and the like, regardless of the wage. Jobs with longer tenure were also found to contribute to better rates of food security.
Fair, living wage is the goal
Moy’s field research shows that providing food at work can reduce anxiety and improve performance and engagement in the short term. Where budgets are tight, he writes, “we also encourage organizations to offer discounted food to food-insecure employees. This can be achieved by negotiating discounts with local grocery stores.”
Lee is more cautious about those measures when they substitute for fair pay.
“It speaks to a problem of inadequate wages and fairness,” he says.
“If employers aren't able to provide adequate wages, and they're trying to make up for it through some sort of food support program, whether that's a pantry or gift cards, I think they need to think deeply about how their businesses are operating. I think there's just a moral imperative for employers to provide a fair wage.”
Lee suggests that employers begin by examining job design and pay relative to local costs. For those working with tighter budgets, that can translate into living wage analyses, phased pay adjustments and transparent communication about how compensation will evolve.
“Looking at how far wages are from the living wage in an area, and even if not immediately increasing wages, setting out a pathway,” Lee says.
“Setting out a plan that provides some level of stability or certainty towards moving towards that. I think that could be a start.”
