Hard News: Welfare: Back to the Future?
200 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last
-
Sue,
@Danyl Mclauchlan
thank you!
you made it simple, have been trying to explain my 'new future' situation to people and not being able to do it well. now I'm just using your description of my new life as an empowered no longer referred to as an invalid.many invalids are like me we get reviewed medically every 2 years, in the hope that some miracle cure or recovery has occurred, becuase trust me, if i could get cured and off this thing i would be there in a flash. CURE ME!!!!!
-
I think they are using the next Governments Minimum wage figures.
Addendum..
On the other hand maybe they've let the cat out of the bag that they intend to usurp Labours campaign promise to raise the m/w to $15. It is the sort of disingenuous underhand skulduggery we expect from this mob. -
Sue,
The benefit clawback rate would be cut from 70c for every dollar earned above $80 a week to 55c for every dollar above $20.
personally i see that as an encouragement not to even attempt working or to try and work more hours. On occasion i get above $80 a week and I'm fine with the current clawback after $80.
-
have been trying to explain my 'new future' situation to people and not being able to do it well. now I'm just using your description of my new life as an empowered no longer referred to as an invalid.
My relative in his early 60s with a chronic heart condition would be excited to learn that he, too, is no longer an invalid who can barely walk - but a 'Jobseeker' who needs to be actively managed back into the workforce and transferred to a state work scheme if he fails to do so within six months.
-
My younger brother (not the one with the toddler), who's sufficiently visually-impaired that he's a member of RNZFB, will also be thrilled to hear that there are employers falling over themselves to employ an invalid. It'll make a change for him from the history of rejections stemming from the need to accommodate someone who's able to see but just not terribly well. He could legally drive, but is smart enough to know that it's probably not a good idea to try.
Our society is incredibly discriminatory. His work history has been largely volunteer, and one very fortunate stint with a tertiary provider; the kind of place that takes EEO seriously. No other employer wants to know, but it seems that the WWG members are aware of things that people who've been exposed to disability employment just don't see. If you'll pardon the pun.
-
Well meaning Winz staff and work scheme staff are not mental health professionals, so maybe its a really dumb idea to loose the destination between Unemployed people looking for work, and people who have been assessed by medical actual professionals, as being unwell.
I know someone with severe schizophrenia (invalids benefit) who volunteers as a receptionist at a Christian community centre. She has never had a paid job in her adult life and is basically unemployable, but I suspect a Winz staffer would look at her volunteer work and try and 'manage' her into the workforce, which would go pretty badly for everyone.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Like "Empowered" is the new "vulnerable"
Doubleplusgood
-
Heather Gaye, in reply to
My younger brother (not the one with the toddler), who’s sufficiently visually-impaired that he’s a member of RNZFB, will also be thrilled to hear that there are employers falling over themselves to employ an invalid.
I heard Matthew Hooton say something on RNZ the other day about employers deciding over two candidates and taking the one that’s been on the dole for longer.
I’m wondering if the “investment” into getting people back into work bypasses direct support of beneficiaries in favour of providing subsidies or tax incentives to companies that hire long-term unemployed.
-
ALSO, Labour's "where are the jobs" line is satisfyingly succinct, but I'd quite like 'em to also thrash together a line on "this is going to drive wages down, so while you may already have a job, don't think for a second that these changes won't affect you."
-
DexterX, in reply to
To expand on that bent slightly Welfare Reforms will be coupled with Labour Market Reforms.
Early in this Nat govt's second term the restructure of WINZ and a reduced cost of welfare will be coupled with the reform of the employment legislation - an outcome of which will be a reduced cost of labour.
This makes an interesting read:
http://www.nzbr.org.nz/site/nzbr/files/NZBR%20Sub%20%20WWG%20Paper%20Reducing%20Long%20Term%20Benefit%20Dep%20The%20Options.pdfNeither of these measure will solve the problem with the economy - it will only make matters appear better for some and a lot worse for others.
-
I hope the Welfare Working Group report is now quietly tossed aside as it becomes obvious that people are no more to blame for finding themselves requiring welfare support than they are for living in an earthquake zone. When there is need the country should respond, and for most only short term assistance is required.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
an outcome of which will be a reduced cost of labour.
Which is precisely the last thing we want. If we're supposed to be chasing Australian income and productivity levels, cheapening labour is completely counter-productive. Making it more expensive, along with a discouragement from dumping money into capital purchases that are not means of production (such as, say, accommodation), is where we need to be headed. We don't need to be trying to reverse labour protections so that wage levels drop.
Not that the BRT gives a shit about increasing wage levels, of course, so long as its members can afford to refresh the Bentley bi-annually and drink their weight of Dom or Veuve every festive season. -
Another really shitty idea from the UK, coming to NZ soon?
Re-categorise everyone as seeking work, get a computer to test their ability to work, et voila!
-
Re-categorise everyone as seeking work, get a computer to test their ability to work, et voila!
Actually, under the WWG it's a lot worse than getting a computer to test your ability to work. They get a private contractor who gets paid on their number of work placements to test your ability to work.
-
Che Tibby, in reply to
cheapening labour is completely counter-productive.
indeed. rising employment during the noughties brought national productivity down, due to all the low-skilled people entering workplaces.
goes to show that productivity-measured-as-money-per-hour is a bit broken.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
productivity-measured-as-money-per-hour is a bit broken.
Depends how you measure the money. If it's output value, then not broken at all. If it's input cost, however...
-
As usual, Gordon Campbell delivers an excellent analysis of the report.
Given the likely economic impact of the earthquake (especially to the local economy), and presuming the Key government continues it's hands-in-the-pockets-and-shrug approach to implementing policies that might improve economic growth, I foresee any attempt to follow the WWG recommendations as a mechanism to immediately revictimise the working-age residents of Christchurch. Hopefully, this means it is doomed.
-
Sacha, in reply to
I hope the Welfare Working Group report is now quietly tossed aside as it becomes obvious that people are no more to blame for finding themselves requiring welfare support than they are for living in an earthquake zone.
Good analogy but you'd need to argue it more forcefully and widely before anything resembling common sense is applied by the current lot. Could argue that EQC shouldn't be incentivising heaps of folk to move to quake zones because their payouts are so generous; that sort of line.
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
Rich, that's a great report from the Guardian. ATOS and its insensitive and inaccurate methods have been enraging the UK disability sector for months. I wondered when I read the WWG report and the language used whether ATOS has quietly been lobbying them for work in this part of the world.
-
Sacha, in reply to
I foresee any attempt to follow the WWG recommendations as a mechanism to immediately revictimise the working-age residents of Christchurch. Hopefully, this means it is doomed.
It will be sold as an efficiency measure to cut state sector costs - to fix our private sector debt/productivity problems, you understand. Oh and to subsidise the insurance industry, naturally.
-
Sacha, in reply to
rising employment during the noughties brought national productivity down, due to all the low-skilled people entering workplaces.
And the reverse dynamic has increased the "average" wage over the last year (as the media breathlessly echoed Key recently) - but by removing a heap of the lower paid from employment altogether, not because things are rosy in everyone else's pay packets. Statistics, lies, etc.
-
Some on asked what about the children.
Making reference to Gordon Campbell’s Scoop article, which mentions the Tavita case where the Court of Appeal found that when considering a deportation the Immigration Department needed to consider the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to which the NZ Govt had adopted.
There are grounds the under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to challenge the more extreme Welfare Reforms suggested under the WWG final report – three strikes and there is no benefit/job seekers subsidy.
This link takes you to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the relevant articles of which are 19, 20, and especially articles 26 & 27.
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/44/a44r025.htm
I don’t see NZ as having a Welfare problem, and the extreme measure proposed by the WWG reforms mostly disgust me. Have figures on long-term lifestyle welfare dependency been published anywhere and the basis for 100,000 is?
The problem isn’t the unemployed or the under employed the problem is the problem, which is the management and performance of the economy.
-
And the reverse dynamic has increased the “average” wage over the last year (as the media breathlessly echoed Key recently) – but by removing a heap of the lower paid from employment altogether, not because things are rosy in everyone else’s pay packets. Statistics, lies, etc.
I think the increase in the average wage is mostly due to the tax cuts. I believe the median wage has declined over the last two years.
-
Che Tibby, in reply to
ah, so that'll be both less low-income AND more high-income.
that's rings true
-
Sacha, in reply to
Transfer of money from bottom to top, yes - exactly as planned. Makes sense if you believe the best way to increase the country's overall wealth is to give more money to those who already have it; to reward 'success'. Ideologically consistent. Mighty convenient for the well off, too.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.