|
Post by muggins on Oct 26, 2018 8:32:08 GMT 7
Very interesting conversation on this subject on Senator Rachel Siewert's facebook page. www.facebook.com/RachelSiewert/Senator Siewert is even offering to help with dsp rejectee's, through her dedicated centrelink liaison officer. Senator.siewert@aph.gov.au Hard to find a pollie like her that gives so much time, and genuinely represents the people. It seems the money,power and influence has not gone to her head like most pollies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2018 10:21:06 GMT 7
Agree to disagree at least on Siewert as she has been the most consistent on our side in her time in parliament over the decade. As for Hill he responded to my correspondance on FB and email but guess others had different dealings. I thought he was good. One of the few in Labor who at least had the decency to speak out against the reviews and idc what the motivation was as long as they do it.
|
|
|
Post by snooks on Oct 30, 2018 5:32:35 GMT 7
I think that I can put my issues about a review to sleep now. That's great news for many people that worried about what would happen over the coming years
|
|
|
Post by kimmy on Oct 30, 2018 17:10:54 GMT 7
I think you can feel some sense of relief on this one Snooks. Those reviews have done nothing but cause unwanted stress and worry for numerous individuals. Targeting vulnerable, unwell people in society is not only menacing but plain and simple WRONG. Now that Dr Karen Phelps is sitting in Parliament there will be a number of enquiries made in relation to suspected corruption and injustices that have occurred over the past years.
|
|
|
Post by cripple on Oct 31, 2018 1:18:18 GMT 7
I was one of the under 35s. I was 34 and 10 months. It was going back a couple or so years now I passed the review but it was a tough one
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 6:28:30 GMT 7
I was one of the under 35s. I was 34 and 10 months. It was going back a couple or so years now I passed the review but it was a tough one Get that FOI cripple! If you passed under the new legislation you are in with a chance of UP. 20points on one table, 1-2 hrs work capacity, no further work capacity for 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by cripple on Nov 3, 2018 19:07:32 GMT 7
My reading is a bit funny please help me out Does this mean there not doing the reviews any more ? All of the reviews Or are they stopping the sweep out for the people put on befor the new tables befor 2012
I had my review from the crackdown and I passed its was a heavy review though. Then I was thrown in the can ( jail ) for 6 months for running a muck on the piss and after I found out that they did another review . Apparently they do reviews when anyone goes to jail. I think this pre jail review might of sealed the deal
What’s the difference between a review and a re assessment
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 6:29:42 GMT 7
There are many different types of reviews cripple, many you may not be even aware have happened. See below:- guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/6/1/1/20A reassessment is a thorough going over of your DSP eligibility, to see if you still, or will qualify for DSP/DSP UP. Some things they may call a review are actually reassessments. They love playing word games! Cheers bear
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 7:26:45 GMT 7
Can traveling overseas even for only 3 weeks trigger a review?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 8:08:46 GMT 7
Can traveling overseas even for only 3 weeks trigger a review? I doubt that very much! But as we all know; we can never say never 100%. These two examples are just the system taking our supplements after six weeks away and/or determining our AWLR and if we've provided a true record of the duration we'll be away. That's my take on it, cheers bear overseas selective pensioner entitlement reviews, AND 6-month overseas reviews.
|
|
|
Post by cripple on Nov 4, 2018 15:07:03 GMT 7
What’s AWLR
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 15:15:03 GMT 7
Australian Working Life Residency. That's how long you have lived in Australia from age 16 to Aged Pension, whether you've worked or nor. It must be 35 years for the full payment overseas and reduces the less you've lived here. See link:- guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/1/1/a/340
|
|
|
Post by quantumranger on Nov 4, 2018 22:14:22 GMT 7
Wonder if it's safe to do a bit of work now. A friend of mine worked 10 hours a week and he triggered a review and decided to stop working because if he continued working he will be on Newstart and that combined with his 10 hours of work would not have been enough money for him.
|
|
|
Post by latindancer on Nov 5, 2018 7:32:57 GMT 7
According to Centrelink rules, people on DSP are allowed to work for a certain number of hours a week. This varies according to how long the person has been on DSP and therefore which set of rules they are still governed by. After that allowable number of hours, their payment is decreased by 40 cents in the dollar. Then if more than a certain number of hours are worked in one fortnight, their payment is suspended (not cancelled). A phone call is all it takes to be reinstated if those hours are not going to continue.
I can't see how they can bump people off DSP and back onto Newstart, except if that person is quite young (under 35) and they have a lot of their working life ahead of them. But apparently they do. Does anyone know how often this occurs ?
Quantumranger, at a reasonable guess, I think you may be safe if you work up to the number of hours you are allowed to work before your Centrelink payment is reduced.
Here is a random thought : those Centrelink people who are currently enforcing the Liberal agenda will still have their jobs if (hopefully when) Labour get into power at the next election. I wonder how they will treat people after then ? Perhaps this is a large part of the problem ? No matter which government is in power, there is possibly a core group of horrors still working in Centrelink...often deeply conservative, sometimes older people who grew up with quite a different world-view from us.
I ran into one of these people in a different government department just the other day. Without going into the details of it all, let me tell you all that I was horrified. And this was the SECOND such person in that department who I had run into. It just staggers the mind that such people are in power. However I am in Queensland...redneck country, even though I live in the capital.
|
|
|
Post by tasjo on Nov 5, 2018 9:05:51 GMT 7
My understanding of the DSP process as a recent qualifier is that the number of hours you are able to work or study (up to 30 a week with the income threshold as well) is now the same regardless of when you qualified... With one big but... And this applies to anyone on DSP... If the person receiving DSP is reviewed they would need to meet the qualifying criteria which is an inability to work or study more than 15 hrs a week 'with support' within 2 yrs. I suspect that someone regularly working more than 15 hrs a week would have a hard time showing they qualified. The issue for new applicants is also the assumption that if someone is assessed at 7-14 hrs a week that 'with support' their capacity can increase. This happened to me on my initial JCA, even though noone could tell me what support I could have that would increase my capacity with degenerative conditions.
The income threshold before DSP gets reduced is around $160 a fortnight for singles and $300 a fortnight for couples... After that DSP is reduced by 40c in the dollar until you reach the income threshold (approx $50k a year for singles and around $70k a year for couples)... If couples are both on a pension 40c is taken from both. For an income of $300 a week couples both on pensions lose approx $150 a fortnight each.
Essentially if someone earns $30/hr or more and is working 30 hrs a week they would be over the income threshold... Those receiving a part pension would likely be in supported workplaces and quite likely manifest grants that wouldn't be subject to review in the same way.
|
|