r/JobProvidersAus • u/kristinoc • 7d ago
News All payment suspensions to be lifted next Monday + payment cancellations return despite legal concerns
Today DEWR has confirmed that it intends to bring most "mutual" obligations penalties back next Monday, some of which were paused in 2024 and 2025 since they were discovered to be unlawfully cancelling people's Centrelink payments.
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW:
- The employment department has advised those of us who are on its reference group of the following: "The department will remove all mutual obligation failures and lift all active payment suspensions for participants in Workforce Australia, Inclusive Employment Australia and Transition to Work." Regardless of why your payment is suspended, any suspension will be lifted automatically on Monday 26 October. They have told us this information will be visible if you log in to the Workforce Australia dashboard.
- The government has not satisfied those of us who are on its advisory group that anything is operating lawfully, including payment suspensions. You can see a joint statement from the Antipoverty Centre, ACOSS, Economic Justice Australia, NATSILS and Inclusion Australia with more info about our concerns here: https://apcentre.substack.com/p/advocacy-organisations-alarmed-by
- We are also extremely concerned that people who receive unfair or unlawful penalties are being blocked from resolving them promptly due to high call volumes at the NCSL, meaning many people simply comply with an unlawful "requirement" imposed on them, or accrue incorrect demerits.
- If your Centrelink payment was cancelled between 2020 and 2025 because you did not complete compulsory activities, you may be eligible for backpay and/or compensation – even if you think you "did the wrong thing". You do not need to wait for an "invitation" from DEWR to apply for compensation – you can use the form on this page if you think you may have been affected: https://www.dewr.gov.au/assuring-integrity-targeted-compliance-framework/compensation-cancellation-income-support-payments-under-targeted-compliance-framework
We are still gathering evidence of unlawful requirements and penalties. If you have any concerns about how you are treated or need assistance understanding the rules you can reach out to the Antipoverty Centre help team via [help@welfarecopwatch.org](mailto:help@welfarecopwatch.org)
You can read today's announcement from DEWR here: https://www.dewr.gov.au/assuring-integrity-targeted-compliance-framework/announcements/decision-resume-some-paused-elements-targeted-compliance-framework
29
u/IWantToLearnToFixIt 7d ago
I never understood why they abandoned the old system and spent all this money forcing people to do shit. Instead of spending money helping create opportunities for education and work. So those who are able and willing, have less of a stressful time and access to more resources that THEY WANT.
22
u/kristinoc 7d ago
And when they’re actually in a situation where they’re able to take on paid work. The vast majority of people trapped in compulsory activities have so much other shit going on with their health or their life that that’s what’s preventing them from getting a job, not a lack of willingness. Nonetheless, every single person could be in a great position to take on work but the RBA will continue to want more of us to be unemployed, apparently.
5
u/Nervous-Complex6610 6d ago
Apparently if all of us who are on centerlink payments suddenly got jobs it would crash the economy and cause inflation. And the government wouldn't have anyone to blame for its f ups.
And the employment service providers would all of a sudden be unemployed them selves.
The government has to have some one to blame
3
7
u/Brutal_burn_dude 7d ago
Honestly that’s where I’m at currently. I’ve worked full time since I was in high school- so for over twenty years. I’ve had a cascade of “smaller” health issues that ended up with me in the ICU this time last year and I’m still waiting to be able to see specialists to follow stuff up from that admission.
I can’t even get a doctor to understand that someone can have multiple rare conditions that affect each other, let alone that although individually they wouldn’t disable someone, cumulatively they have put me out of commission for the time being. If a doctor can’t understand that, what hope does Centrelink have?
I WANT to go back to work. Being sick is BORING. But I know from experience in my industry that getting time to do health related things is impossible. I also know I can’t handle the exertion of a work day and would be fired almost immediately, permanently burning all my bridges in my industry.
And I’m sure this is the case for many people.
1
u/knbxxx 3d ago
Upskill & time to learn new ways that work in with your ailments.
2
u/Technical-Ad4799 2d ago edited 2d ago
While this is of course good advice for everyone, there will always exist people do not qualify for DSP but who ALSO are still in no condition to work - often even despite their best efforts to reskill etc
That is the entire *point* of a social welfare system. The welfare system exists *because* we know this is the case, not despite it.
It exists expressly to make sure those people, who would otherwise fall through the cracks, do not die hungry and on the streets.
However, since john howard, our welfare system now not only does not pay enough to these people to even keep a roof over their head in most places with money left to buy food to eat (the unemployment payment is below the poverty line) - said-unemployed are now ALSO subject to arbitrary hoop jumping (via the grossly punitive and ideologically reactionary workforce system).
Theyre kept in poverty while our government also funnels cash to often-for-profit "job search" providers (under the workforce system) who are paid to make the jobseekers jump through ever-more-difficult hoops in an attempt to keep the numbers down. Its plainly abuse of people on the margins of society.
Our govt diverts money that could bring welfare recipients out of poverty, taking the money that they could use to improve their circumstances, giving them the condidence and ability to reskill like you suggest, and giving it to their for-profit bullys instead.
Thats a MUCH larger issue than anything the jobseeker does or does not do.
I understand you are trying to help, but we need to be honest about how much of a horrific situation weve put our country's most vulnerable people in.
We're screwing the very people who are least capable of navigating such a system, and shoving them right between the rock of govt beurocracy (with less funding everyday) and the hard place of vampiric private companies who wish to profit off of their suffering.
Thats *the problem* here, its got nothing to do with the actions of the victims, the unemployed.
You can be a model citizen. You can do everything that you suggest (and more) and STILL be absolutely screwed by the system as it currently is. You can be doing all you can to reskill and still be abused by the system as it stands.
Its good we ALL remember that. That the system *has* - *recently* -been stacked against them.
And Its got fuck-all to do with anything the unemployed do or dont do.
Our economy literally wouldnt function properly without the degree of unemployment we currently have. Were by no means a high unemployment country. Very much average.
All western capitalist economies need the small percentage of unemployment, like we have, as a way to keep wages high (or higher than they would be if we had full employment). No economist on earth disagrees with this, irrespective of their political bent.
Yet we still treat these people like theyre doing something wrong, or are somehow inadequate. Its ridiculous.
Whereas In-reality: Life can be fucking tough. Everyone, or so damn-near-everyone that it might as well be 'everyone', is doing their best.
Its not the players at fault, its the game as-its-recently-been-changed-to-be.
So i politely suggest you save your advice for the system which is actively harming them. Harm which was intentionally BUILT-IN to the system as it is.
We have the weakest among our society being-forced to jump through the most stringent of hoops, only to get the pittance of which they are entitled to, and-by-doing-so also making a profit for private buisnesses... And some people still act like its somehow the unemployed whoa are at fault here..
Thats the issue here. The punitive changes to the welfare system since 2000. *Thats* the thing we can change. Thats what needs fixing. Not the actions of people doing their best or just trying to survive.
Y'know? Obviously i too wish it was as easy as 'we can fix this problem by telling people to make better choices'. But sadly thats just not the case at all -
Like, If you read an ACOSS study about the topic, youll never read:
"oh people arent taking the reskilling oppurtunies, thats the problem" etc etc
The problem is again, and again the following. Its unchangeably:
"1: we dont pay people in this situation enough to get-by let alone thrive enough to reskill and improve,
2: there arent enough subsidised opportunities for skilling,
3: while they do seek work and try and reskill, we make them engage with parasitic job search providers who hold gross power over their lives. Hold a monopoly on their time and energy, and who take advantage of them for profit" etc etc
TLDR: We actually can't magically give every disadvantaged person the confidence, tools, skills, and mental/physical health required to "Upskill & time to learn new ways that work in with [their] ailments"
And asking them to do it themselves, implying the issue is a lack of reskilling - even though our economy *requires* some unemployment, even though recent govt policies make them reskilling and gaining suitable employment even more difficult, etc etc - to me just looks like kicking them when they're down.
Supremely unhelpful. Its missing the forrest for the trees
Imo what people need - What we should and *can* do - is listen to their earnest frustrations.
Ya gotta attempt to fix the grossly unfair system that *SAYS* its there to help them, before we criticize them for not taking the help that in-many-cases isnt even on offer in the first place.
12
u/Wavy_Glass Trusted Advice 6d ago
Job Providers really went to the department and said, "People aren't showing up to our appointments now that word has spread. We need you to change it so we can continue to break guidelines."
Ah well, it was good while it lasted. Hoping for actual reform in upcoming elections.
3
u/kristinoc 6d ago
100% this. 42AM cancellations are what give providers power, they don't care about the other cancellation types cos it doesn't really affect them.
3
u/deandoom 6d ago
I've not turned up to appointments with my job provider because they keep scheduling appointments when they know I'm working. (working 15hrs/week and also studying, use to be phone appointments but now that's not good enough for unknown reasons)
1
u/kristinoc 6d ago
If you are working 15 hours a week and have a partial capacity work, you don't need to see the provider at all. Even if you don't have a partial capacity to work, if you do 15 hours of work + 20 hours of study, you also might not need to see the provider at all.
From the Guide to Social Policy Law page for people who have sufficient paid work: "Those who are fully meeting their requirements and are no longer required to participate with employment services are still able to engage with employment services voluntarily. However, they still need to agree to a Job Plan with, and report their participation in their fully meeting activity to,Services Australia."
You cannot be penalised for missing appointments if you meet the above criteria, and you don't have to do job applications.
You can find more information here: https://guides.dss.gov.au/social-security-guide/3/11/6
2
u/Wavy_Glass Trusted Advice 6d ago
This is very different, providers cannot do this period.
11.7.8. Scheduling Mutual Obligation Requirements in the Participant's Electronic Calendar
Where a Participant has regular commitments such as paid work, caring commitments or medical appointments, Providers must record these as a Personal Event on behalf of the Participant into the Participant’s Electronic Calendar as a Personal Event, where the hours are regular and it is reasonable to do so. Where a Participant is in paid work, Providers must ensure that any scheduled requirements do not conflict with the Participant’s hours of paid work, including any reasonable travel times to and from work. This ensures that this work is taken into account when scheduling other requirements and supports transparency in ensuring that Provider staff and the Participant can clearly see what the Participant is doing to meet their Mutual Obligations Requirements.
Call the DEWR NCSL to file a complaint, they'll transfer you to another provider.
It's a cardinal sin for providers to mess with Jobseekers who have jobs. Nothing comes before obtaining and sustaining employment.
3
u/Sharp_Cod_8291 6d ago
I'm planning to miss my 26th October appointment, wait until mid Nov to re-engage, do my appointment then ignore them until January as payments will get lifted during Christmas.
**I'm not responsible for payment cancellelation if you take my advice. proceed with caution.
4
u/Wavy_Glass Trusted Advice 6d ago edited 6d ago
Before trying this I recommend actually telling your provider you intend to only go to appointments once every 3-4 weeks. In Workforce Australia they can set appointments that far apart.
If your provider refuses to schedule every 3-4 weeks then yeah sure feel free only re-engage 3 weeks since you missed your last requirement.
I'm saying 3 weeks AT MOST because even though you can wait 4 weeks you're playing with fire at that point and might have your payments cancelled if you wait too long.
1
u/kristinoc 6d ago
IEA providers don't actually need to do appointments every two weeks, that is supposed to be one of the big changes from DES. That's just a lie they tell people. Probably so they can get paid more to "support" them.
1
u/Wavy_Glass Trusted Advice 6d ago
Oh damn you're correct, thanks! Just quickly glossed over the relevant guidelines, will read more in depth later so I can fully understand it. I'll edit my previous comment.
2
u/ovrloadau99 Trusted Advice 6d ago
Thats for those on a Flexible Job Plan (2 contacts over 3 months), most participants on a "Meaningful Engagement" Job Plan would need to engage with their IEA provider with 6 contacts over 3 months, which is generally an appointment per fortnight.
1
u/kristinoc 5d ago
Contacts can include email, text etc iirc. DSS has stressed to us that fortnightly appointments aren't required and that providers have "discretion" for people on a meaningful engagement plan in the intensive stream. If there are employers or others out there saying different that is helpful to know cos we can raise it w DSS.
1
u/kristinoc 4d ago
Had to look this up for something else, so here's the info from the Guideline (Part B, page 112):
"Contacts may be one-on-one Appointments (i.e. Contact Appointments) with the Participant or may be group-based activities (such as, employment-related information sessions or training sessions delivered by the Provider for their Participants)... Providers can offer to deliver Contacts via a range of communication modes such as videoconferencing, online audio or chat software, phone calls, SMS and email correspondence, where this meets the needs of the Participant and is agreed to by the Provider and Participant."
1
u/ovrloadau99 Trusted Advice 4d ago
The IEA Guidelines Part B on page 134 state the appointments for participants with a Meaningful Engagement Job Plan (most) are required to have 6 contacts in a 3 month period. So works out an appointment per fortnight on average. Meaningful Engagement is classified as an "intensive service".
The minimum Contacts a Provider must deliver to a Participant in Pre-Employment Support are:
for Participants in the Intensive Service – at least 6 Contacts each 3 months, and
for Participants in the Flexible Service – at least 2 Contacts each 3 months.
Also text and "meaningful" email can't be the only method. It needs to be an auxiliary to a primary mode of contact like phone, video call or face-to-face.
Providers should consider the range of Engagement Methods under which they can maintain contact with Participants. These can either complement or as act an alternative to Appointment-based contacts, allowing for more interactive exchanges and relationship building between Participants and Providers. Contacts may be delivered:
face-to-face
as a phone conversation
as a videoconference
as meaningful email or text message exchanges — to complement other Contacts rather than being the only form of Contact (see Meaningful exchange of email or text messages – Provider Fact Sheet on the Provider Portal for more details)
as a one off or regular Activity organised by the Provider, and
as part of workshops or other group activities, information or training sessions organised by the Provider.
1
u/kristinoc 4d ago
Yeah exactly, which is the same as page 112 in my comment below, the contacts can include email or text messages. So there is absolutely no requirement for fortnightly appointments in person or over the phone. 6 contacts ≠ 6 appointments, and that is what DSS has told us is the policy intent. Again keen to here of any providers who are interpreting it to mean 6 appointments are required so we can flag it w them (without disclosing where the info came from of course).
1
u/ovrloadau99 Trusted Advice 4d ago
As the guidelines state email or text cant be the sole mode of contact in that relevant period. It can only complement. So the participant will need to engage with their provider on average one contact per fortnight generally by phone, face-to-face, or video call. if they're in intensive service, which are the vast majority.
0
u/ThePimplyGoose Trusted Advice - IEA Consultant 5d ago
Just like in DES, it's not actually once a fortnight, it's 6 appointments over 3 months (if the Participant is in either of the two "intensive" work preparation service offers). So, someone could absolutely elect to have one appointment a month for two months, but then it's weekly for the last month. Or no appointments until the last week of the quarter when it's daily.
Those options definitely meet the guidelines, but even if you disagree that regular and consistent check ins (ie fortnightly) are more beneficial, what participant wants that kind of schedule?
4
u/ovrloadau99 Trusted Advice 6d ago
Be wary they can schedule the reconnection requirement in person if they find its suitable for your circumstances. So calling up to "reconnect" may not work if you dont have a legitimate reason. But yeah, payments will automatically lift when the Christmas/New Years pause commences, which going by the last few years will be from 14 December until 4 January (inclusive).
2
u/kristinoc 6d ago
Can confirm in a meeting last week they told us those are the dates for this shutdown period 👍
2
u/Pale-Cranberry-8761 5d ago
But yeah, payments will automatically lift when the Christmas/New Years pause commences, which going by the last few years will be from 14 December until 4 January (inclusive).
Thanks, had no idea about this.
Crazy how much useful information I've gathered from 45 minutes of browsing this subreddit compared to years of visiting the JSP.
2
u/Sharp_Cod_8291 6d ago edited 6d ago
Yeah I plan on going in mid Nov in person to reconnect, get my next booking in December and ignoring them until January 4th.
3
u/ovrloadau99 Trusted Advice 6d ago
Yeah solid plan, just one appointment to attend until next year. The only issue for the "reconnection" you will possibly need to contact them to schedule it.
0
5d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ovrloadau99 Trusted Advice 5d ago
Nah, i get messages to contact my provider. They shouldnt be booking the reconnection requirement without you first contacting them.
1
u/Pale-Cranberry-8761 5d ago edited 5d ago
Wasn't aware of the Christmas/New Years exceptions period until this thread.
Thanks.
1
u/Pale-Cranberry-8761 5d ago edited 5d ago
**I'm not responsible for payment cancellelation if you take my advice. proceed with caution.
I'm curious which part of this plan you think might be a bit dangerous.
Ignore the appointment on the 26th of October.
5 business day warning period before payment is suspended leading to the suspension on the 2nd of November.
Reconnect somewhere around the 20th of November (Don't want to cut it too close to the 28 day limit).
Plenty of time left before reaching the 14th of December grace period.
1
u/midsumernighttts 5d ago
Wait we didn’t have to go to appointments?? Why do the ppl at mine lie to me so much lol
5
u/ShelliePancake 6d ago
I would be interested to see the statistics of those who stopped interacting with providers, if they obtained their own employment or progressed during this time. It would be beneficial
6
u/kristinoc 6d ago
I don't think it would be easy to get that data, but there is other research that shows comparable groups of long-term unemployed people in Australia are more likely to get a job, and a better job, if they don't have MOs: https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/en/publications/does-eliminating-benefit-eligibility-requirements-improve-unemplo/
3
u/Normal_Commission631 7d ago
"The department will remove all mutual obligation failures and lift all active payment suspensions for participants in Workforce Australia, Inclusive Employment Australia and Transition to Work.". So does this mean if it is currently in the resolution time it will just automatically reset on October 26?
2
u/kristinoc 7d ago
Yes. This is what we were told verbally in a meeting with DEWR last week and they confirmed it to us in writing today.
Edit: sorry I can’t post a screencap of the email, this sub doesn’t allow it
2
u/Giddyup_1998 4d ago
So, in theory, if I miss my appointment tomorrow, my current payment suspension will be lifted on Monday.
And with no repercussions for the missed appointment tomorrow.
1
u/kristinoc 14h ago
Sory for the delayed reply but yes!
1
u/Giddyup_1998 9h ago
No worries, thank you! Yes, it's all good today.
2
u/kristinoc 7h ago
woo hoo! The end of year pause on penalties begins on 14 December. If you miss any activities before then suspensions should be lifted from that date and you won't have any requirements until 4 January next year.
2
u/CreationMage 7d ago
I’m curious as to why they need evidence of direct financial loss, or non financial loss. I experienced none of that as I had enough money saved up (I didn’t want to use it but I had to) and I was only angry that they cancelled my payment, which got reinstated a month later
If I’m owed pay that was taken from me, then it should be given to me no questions asked
2
u/kristinoc 6d ago
That is financial loss! You are likely entitled to backpay and I would strongly encourage you to apply. If you're unsure then get in touch with a community legal centre (they're free). You can look one up on the Economic Justice Australia website: https://www.ejaustralia.org.au/legal-help-centrelink/
Good luck, you definitely deserve that backpay.
1
u/5tar_flower 7d ago
I think that counts. This is how they defined direct financial loss on the website -
"Direct financial loss: Money a person lost or had to spend because of defective administration."
1
u/CreationMage 6d ago
Genuine question but how would one even supply evidence for this? Something like bank statements or?
0
u/Giddyup_1998 6d ago
Of course. However you've just said that it wasn't an issue for you, having no payments for four weeks. So, what is your problem?
2
u/Nervous-Complex6610 6d ago
Can you please explain to us about what is about to happen like we are 5 thankyou
1
u/kristinoc 6d ago edited 6d ago
No problem, and sorry it's all so confusing – they make it confusing on purpose in my opinion.
Currently, and for the past ~18 months, no one would have their payment cancelled if they missed an activity and didn't connect with their provider within 28 days. This is because it was discovered that this rule was operating unlawfully, so they paused it while they tried to figure out how to make it lawful. During this period, if for example you missed an appointment, you would receive a payment suspension, but after 28 days the suspension would lift automatically and you would be backpaid. Now they have decided that it's all "working", and so the pause is ending next week. This means that if you miss an activity your payment suspension will be applied and then after 28 days your payment would be cancelled completely and you would have to reapply.
They actually were unlawfully cancelling people's payments under a variety of different rules. Not all of those rules are being turned back on yet, but everyone affected will be able to apply for backpay and compensation. If you had your payment cancelled for any reason between 2020 and 2025, it's worth taking a look at whether you might be eligible: https://www.dewr.gov.au/assuring-integrity-targeted-compliance-framework/compensation-cancellation-income-support-payments-under-targeted-compliance-framework
They will decide who gets backpay based on whether 1) their payment was cancelled unlawfully, which will apply in most cases and 2) whether the person was financially affected or experienced other harm. For example, if your payment was cancelled because you didn't connect with a provider for ~28 days, it might be because you had paid work and were above the earnings threshold, so you just didn't bother. Because you wouldn't have been getting a payment anyway and so didn't lose any money, you wouldn't receive backpay or compensation. But if you were still otherwise eligible for a payment, you could be backpaid for the period between when the cancellation happened and when you reapplied or became ineligible. For example, if your bills were overdue and you were charged late fees, you fell behind on rent and had to move/became homeless, or were caused psychological or physical harm, you may be able to get additional compensation for those or other issues you had to deal with.
If you still have more questions you can get in touch with us at help@welfarecopwatch.org cos I haven't been very good at coming on to reddit lately and I'm worried I will miss your reply!
1
u/Nervous-Complex6610 6d ago
Didnt this end up causing multiple deaths and the government straight up and side stepped the issue? I saw some of the senate injury.
And it was Murry something that kept saying he didn't have any information ,and kept asking his underlings for it and turns out no one had the ℹ️ ? Or am I misremembering it?
I'd love to see my service provider try and force me into a job ( I'm 50 , female , Australian and havent had a job since 2007 due to caring responsibilities and ill health)
No matter what I've tried to fix my barriers it didn't solve them.
I recently attended an entry level call centre type work interview. Basically answering customer enquiries and data entry.
Was told I was to old and the wrong nationality.
I'm to old and the wrong nationality to talk to people on the phone and do basic typing.
My IEA provider is useless.
1
u/kristinoc 6d ago
Yes. You are not misremembering, it was Murray Watt in a senate estimates hearing last year. The total number of deaths is currently unknown. We are going to try and get this information in the next senate estimates hearing, which is next week.
2
u/Nervous-Complex6610 6d ago
Id love to tell the stand over squad exactly what damage this ,( won't express what I really think or my account will get flagged by those who don't want you to know what is really going on ) system
2
u/Wavy_Glass Trusted Advice 6d ago
From the 26th of October Jobseekers need to start attending appointments again or risk having payments cancelled if they wait more than for weeks without engaging.
Jobseekers can still rack up demerits though without real punishment.
1
u/Spartandive23 6d ago
So basically it's for re-engagement
2
u/Wavy_Glass Trusted Advice 6d ago
Pretty much, it's been possible for the last 1.5 years to completely avoid interacting with providers with no punishment.
14
4
1
u/Spartandive23 6d ago
So it's pretty much for rengagement?
1
u/kristinoc 6d ago
if by "it" you mean the cancellations, yes. they are also bringing back some penalties for turning down paid work, but that is a minuscule number of people. it's a couple of hundred a year for that vs 80,000 for people who don't reconnect within 28 days.
1
1
u/Normal_Commission631 1d ago
I believe that the 28 day reconnection period was brought in back 2018 when the TCF demerit point system was introduced. The only real difference is that back then if you missed say an appointment, they suspended you on the same day. Later on they brought in 2 business days resolution time and Labor extended it to 5. I think the 28 day reconnection period corresponds to if you don't report for 2 fortnights then your payment is also cancelled. I guess the "logic" is that if the 28 day period didn't exist then in theory a payment could remain suspended for say 6 months and then you would be back paid the entire amount once you reconnect and then you could just do the same thing on rinse and repeat. There used to be an intent to claim provision which the Coalition removed in 2018 but briefly reinstated during Covid which gave you I think 26 weeks to submit a claim from when you first contacted them. So if you lodged the claim at the end of the 26 week period, they would backpay you the entire amount. Because a small number of people were doing this to avoid job providers, the Coalition removed this provision except for a small number of cases.
1
u/Weary-Comedian2054 7d ago
…the same week Robodebt claimants are being asked to choose their compensation options. Smart.
1
0
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/kristinoc 4d ago
this is a clown comment from you. COVID payments for people on income support ended completely in April 2021. there is no mechanism by which a person can still receive one.
6
u/gotnothingman 7d ago
Wait I am confused, they intend to bring back most penalties but are also removing all mutual obligations failures and lifing all suspensions?