Politics Centrelink

[Goroyals22]

This is in reference to the job provider network or whatever the bloody thing is called now:



I feel like more should have been made of this. That's a lot of money pissed up against the wall (which in my opinion is what happens to most of the money that gets shovelled out to the for-profit profiteers in this sector).

Its interesting in my area the top performing provider was a non for profit. Offered much better service and assistance the other two under jobactive… strangely they lost their contract and the two for profits doors stayed open.

 

[Over The Post]

Yup. We were given seven days from 1 July to switch to a different JSP if we weren't happy with the one we were allocated. The new JSP made first contact with me via a generic sms yesterday, 3 weeks. They also seem to be unaware that I have had a full-time casual job since Feb and I've been off sick recently, hence still getting dole.

 

[Over The Post]

Further to the above saga, got a nastygram earlier in the month about not meeting my points. Eventually spoke to a human at MEGT, he didn't know shit and wanted to hear my life story again, got to the end of the call and it turns out he was just a phone droid in a call centre and I would get a call from someone at my actual JSP branch who could actually do something.

Needless to say that is the last I have heard from them.

In good news:

Robodebt royal commission established to investigate almost $2 billion in unlawful debt claims

The government establishes a promised robodebt royal commission to investigate the former government's illegal debt collection scheme that wrongly attempted to claim almost $2 billion from Centrelink recipients.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Its interesting in my area the top performing provider was a non for profit. Offered much better service and assistance the other two under jobactive… strangely they lost their contract and the two for profits doors stayed open.

It's just a money-laundering scam, the whole jsp thing

 

[Over The Post]

Got a txt yesterday "reminding" me of my hitherto unknown appointment with JSP this morning.

Almost half an hour in shit traffic to get there, the "consultant" my appointment was with is not in today, I can either wait for another consultant who has someone with him and someone else waiting, or else they can mark me as "attended" and I'm free to go.

Explain I shouldn't be there anyway due to being off sick, the call centre guy hadn't put anything in about that, the best the guy could do was reduce my points so I don't have to jump as high. He said there's nothing on the system about medical exemption (see several posts above where the "consultant" didn't even want to see it) despite me uploading it and I should see Centrelink in person. Mentioned the situation (last year? Year before?) where Centrelink had pissed my GP off by rejecting an exemption because my situation was "not temporary". Bloke's eyes lit up, apparently that is centrelinkspeak for "get an application in for DSP and it'll probably be approved" but of course my then JSP had no idea and we went down the road of monthly performing-seal circus tricks instead.

Can't wait to **** these clowns off forever.

 

[Goroyals22]

Got a txt yesterday "reminding" me of my hitherto unknown appointment with JSP this morning.

Almost half an hour in s**t traffic to get there, the "consultant" my appointment was with is not in today, I can either wait for another consultant who has someone with him and someone else waiting, or else they can mark me as "attended" and I'm free to go.

Explain I shouldn't be there anyway due to being off sick, the call centre guy hadn't put anything in about that, the best the guy could do was reduce my points so I don't have to jump as high. He said there's nothing on the system about medical exemption (see several posts above where the "consultant" didn't even want to see it) despite me uploading it and I should see Centrelink in person. Mentioned the situation (last year? Year before?) where Centrelink had pissed my GP off by rejecting an exemption because my situation was "not temporary". Bloke's eyes lit up, apparently that is centrelinkspeak for "get an application in for DSP and it'll probably be approved" but of course my then JSP had no idea and we went down the road of monthly performing-seal circus tricks instead.

Can't wait to * these clowns off forever.

The separation there is that Centrelink wont put you on a suspension for your medical issues so the consultant really cant do to much to over ride it.. they don’t have access to Centrelinks system on that front to see if you have even uploaded the med cert so they have actually said the right thing to go back to Centrelink to sort it out.

The JSP has nothing to do with the Dsp process either so theres no point getting shirty at them about it. They do a lot wrong but they cant get out of their lane so your beef is with Centrelink

 

[Number37]

The separation there is that Centrelink wont put you on a suspension for your medical issues so the consultant really cant do to much to over ride it.. they don’t have access to Centrelinks system on that front to see if you have even uploaded the med cert so they have actually said the right thing to go back to Centrelink to sort it out.

The JSP has nothing to do with the Dsp process either so theres no point getting shirty at them about it. They do a lot wrong but they cant get out of their lane so your beef is with Centrelink

BS.

Their obligations to their clients extends beyond just pinging them for non-compliance.
Their clients are obligated to report changes in circumstances to them, and they are then obligated to report on those changes to Centrelink.

It is their job to be an intermediary between their client and Centrelink. It is written in their agreement with the client, in their agreement with Centrelink and in the client's agreement with Centrelink.

They choose not to because there is no money in it for them.
By assisting their client, they would stand to lose money.

 

[Goroyals22]

BS.

Their obligations to their clients extends beyond just pinging them for non-compliance.
Their clients are obligated to report changes in circumstances to them, and they are then obligated to report on those changes to Centrelink.

It is their job to be an intermediary between their client and Centrelink. It is written in their agreement with the client, in their agreement with Centrelink and in the client's agreement with Centrelink.

They choose not to because there is no money in it for them.
By assisting their client, they would stand to lose money.

Actually its not their job to act as an intermediary between yourself and Centrelink… if you have dropped something into Centrelink and they have lost,ignored, forgotten ,wiped their bum with it , its got nothing to do with your provider.

The provider as stated can only see if an exemption or suspension of obligations is applied when Centrelink put it on. It comes up showing suspension- temporary medical exemption and the end date. They don’t see the Doctors report. If a job seeker capacity interview was done they can review that but its rare as hens teeth unless you have an interview with a centrelink worker.

Now if medical cert was given to the provider they would have shuffled you to Centrelink anyway and marked you did not attend ill which means no penalty.. either way your beefs with Centrelink

 

[Number37]

Actually its not their job to act as an intermediary between yourself and Centrelink… if you have dropped something into Centrelink and they have lost,ignored, forgotten ,wiped their bum with it , its got nothing to do with your provider.

The provider as stated can only see if an exemption or suspension of obligations is applied when Centrelink put it on. It comes up showing suspension- temporary medical exemption and the end date. They don’t see the Doctors report. If a job seeker capacity interview was done they can review that but its rare as hens teeth unless you have an interview with a centrelink worker.

Now if medical cert was given to the provider they would have shuffled you to Centrelink anyway and marked you did not attend ill which means no penalty.. either way your beefs with Centrelink

More BS.
It is a choice that providers make, to not assist their clients, in circumstances where there isn't a buck in it for them.

At their first interview with the provider do clients fill out a questionnaire about their circumstances which is used to configure their obligations?
Yes.
As part of that questionnaire is there a question about barriers a client has?
Yes.
Once a client has completed their first interview can they subsequently amend their answers to that questionnaire?
Yes.
Can the provider subsequently amend a client's answers to that questionnaire?
Yes.


If the provider amends the answers to the questionnaire and adjusts a client's obligations it is flagged by Centrelink.
Centrelink then contacts the client to get an explanation for the change in circumstances.
Client provides Centrelink with documentation. All good.
Client doesn't provide Centrelink with documentation, Centrelink overrides the change in circumstances and restores default mutual obligations.

That is how the system is designed to work.
That isn't how the system works because providers choose not to assist their clients with anything that would result in them getting a decrease in funding for that client.
As soon as a provider flags the change, their funding for that client changes. That's why they won't touch it and instead they shuffle the client off to Centrelink. In the meantime they still get paid for assisting the client.


If a client says to a provider "I want to do one of your courses" does the client get shuffled off to Centrelink to modify their obligations?
No.
Why?
$$$$$$ for the provider.

 

[Goroyals22]

More BS.
It is a choice that providers make, to not assist their clients, in circumstances where there isn't a buck in it for them.

At their first interview with the provider do clients fill out a questionnaire about their circumstances which is used to configure their obligations?
Yes.
As part of that questionnaire is there a question about barriers a client has?
Yes.
Once a client has completed their first interview can they subsequently amend their answers to that questionnaire?
Yes.
Can the provider subsequently amend a client's answers to that questionnaire?
Yes.


If the provider amends the answers to the questionnaire and adjusts a client's obligations it is flagged by Centrelink.
Centrelink then contacts the client to get an explanation for the change in circumstances.
Client provides Centrelink with documentation. All good.
Client doesn't provide Centrelink with documentation, Centrelink overrides the change in circumstances and restores default mutual obligations.

That is how the system is designed to work.
That isn't how the system works because providers choose not to assist their clients with anything that would result in them getting a decrease in funding for that client.
As soon as a provider flags the change, their funding for that client changes. That's why they won't touch it and instead they shuffle the client off to Centrelink. In the meantime they still get paid for assisting the client.


If a client says to a provider "I want to do one of your courses" does the client get shuffled off to Centrelink to modify their obligations?
No.
Why?
$$$$$$ for the provider.

You have no idea what your talking about….

The provider can do nothing that decides what a client’s obligations outside of decreasing job search for part time work which doesnt meet their obligations for example, nor can they suspend a client for illness in the system .. that is done by centrelink..

Now a Jsci should be done every six months by the provider or when someone’s circumstances change (eg.. lost employment, change living arrangements, further medical issues being disclosed ) which they then should trigger an Esat through Centrelink and they then make the call where it goes from full time to part time obligations, benchmarks hours change or client goes on suspension. It has nothing to do with the provider and they don’t make the call on those things.

 

[Number37]

You have no idea what your talking about….

The provider can do nothing that decides what a client’s obligations outside of decreasing job search for part time work which doesnt meet their obligations for example, nor can they suspend a client for illness in the system .. that is done by centrelink..

Now a Jsci should be done every six months by the provider or when someone’s circumstances change (eg.. lost employment, change living arrangements, further medical issues being disclosed ) which they then should trigger an Esat through Centrelink and they then make the call where it goes from full time to part time obligations, benchmarks hours change or client goes on suspension. It has nothing to do with the provider and they don’t make the call on those things.

Weasel worded BS.

Providers adjust client's obligations all day, every day.
The new system makes it even easier for providers to adjust client's obligations.



"Provider will set..."
"...based on your personal circumstances"

Not that difficult to understand.
Stop making up shit.

 

[Goroyals22]

Weasel worded BS.

Providers adjust client's obligations all day, every day.
The new system makes it even easier for providers to adjust client's obligations.

View attachment 1495315

"Provider will set..."
"...based on your personal circumstances"

Not that difficult to understand.
Stop making up s**t.

Hey idiot, did I not say in my last response that providers can adjust your job search targets for example if you are doing part time work , for example that, doesn’t meet your obligations which is exactly an example of what you have tried to get me on….

They are still not able to suspend people on medical grounds, its a Centrelink requirement.. its pretty simple, if you don’t want to deal with a provider go get a job you can do, not your dream job or apply to Centrelink for the DSP if your so sick or have a disability.

 

[Number37]

Hey idiot, did I not say in my last response that providers can adjust your job search targets for example if you are doing part time work , for example that, doesn’t meet your obligations which is exactly an example of what you have tried to get me on….

They are still not able to suspend people on medical grounds, its a Centrelink requirement.. its pretty simple, if you don’t want to deal with a provider go get a job you can do, not your dream job or apply to Centrelink for the DSP if your so sick or have a disability.

Hey weasel worder...you're floundering around making shit up. Worse than that you just repeating the same disparaging garbage that providers have become famous for.
Providers have a bad habit of telling their clients only part of the story, the part that suits their money money money for us narrative.
Almost always it includes threats to clients about stopping payments.
I've seen thousands of cases where clients have been told complete BS by their providers. THOUSANDS.
About 75% of cases are resolved in the clients favour, before it gets to a contested hearing....usually the issue is some minor thing that could have been avoided had the provider done their F'ing job.
It's a bit rich for providers to disparage their clients when the majority of people that work for providers can't do their F'ing job.

 

[Goroyals22]

Hey weasel worder...you're floundering around making s**t up. Worse than that you just repeating the same disparaging garbage that providers have become famous for.
Providers have a bad habit of telling their clients only part of the story, the part that suits their money money money for us narrative.
Almost always it includes threats to clients about stopping payments.
I've seen thousands of cases where clients have been told complete BS by their providers. THOUSANDS.
About 75% of cases are resolved in the clients favour, before it gets to a contested hearing....usually the issue is some minor thing that could have been avoided had the provider done their F'ing job.
It's a bit rich for providers to disparage their clients when the majority of people that work for providers can't do their F'ing job.

Wow… you must hang around in a lot of providers for a long period of time to see these thousands of cases… are you employed to do this or is your payment just the dole??

So you couldn’t deny what I said so now its just a general everyone is garbage blah blah blah rant…

 

[Number37]

Wow… you must hang around in a lot of providers for a long period of time to see these thousands of cases… are you employed to do this or is your payment just the dole??

So you couldn’t deny what I said so now its just a general everyone is garbage blah blah blah rant…

I wouldn't hang around providers, they are worse than dodgy used car salesman.
F'ing parasites who have no business dealing with vulnerable people.

 

[Goroyals22]

I wouldn't hang around providers, they are worse than dodgy used car salesman.
F'ing parasites who have no business dealing with vulnerable people.

So your full of it then….no problem, take some responsibility, go to Centrelink and sort it out….
Atm your going to McDonald’s and asking them to sort out issues with a Whopper from Hjs.

 

[Number37]

So your full of it then….no problem, take some responsibility, go to Centrelink and sort it out….
Atm your going to McDonald’s and asking them to sort out issues with a Whopper from Hjs.

Vulnerable people shouldn't have to go through the wringer just because provider workers refuse to do their job properly.
Providers are making millions already, why do their workers have to carry on worse than dodgy used car salesman just to spite vulnerable people?
How about providers just do their job and stop deliberately misleading vulnerable people?
If provider workers can't do their job just own up, take some responsibility, no need to take their incompetence out on vulnerable people.

 

[Gethelred]

Cease the personal attacks, Number37 and Goroyals22.

Argument and disagreement is fine. Attacking each other is not.

 

[Number37]

Cease the personal attacks, Number37 and Goroyals22.

Argument and disagreement is fine. Attacking each other is not.

I've edited my post.
Is that acceptable?

 

[Goroyals22]

Vulnerable people shouldn't have to go through the wringer just because provider workers refuse to do their job properly.
Providers are making millions already, why do their workers have to carry on worse than dodgy used car salesman just to spite vulnerable people?
How about providers just do their job and stop deliberately misleading vulnerable people?
If provider workers can't do their job just own up, take some responsibility, no need to take their incompetence out on vulnerable people.

Again. If you have a medical issues apart from referring you back to Centrelink after doing s jsci there is nothing the provider can do. They can’t suspend you from obligations ,thats Centrelinks role.

 

[Number37]

Again. If you have a medical issues apart from referring you back to Centrelink after doing s jsci there is nothing the provider can do. They can’t suspend you from obligations ,thats Centrelinks role.

More weasel words.
A change in a client's circumstances can be flagged by the provider. It is their job to monitor a client's circumstances. They schedule appointments with clients so that they can directly monitor a client's circumstances. A condition in client agreements is that they will inform providers of ANY change in circumstances. Repeat, ANY change in circumstances.

By flagging the change in circumstances on the system, it puts the ball in Centrelink's court.
By not flagging the change and instead forcing the client to deal directly with Centrelink, the ball remains in the client's court.
The ball remaining in the client's court conveniently allows the provider to continue to collect money for having the client on their books.
It's a win for the provider and a win for Centrelink and a loss for the client.
Providers and Centrelink game the system. Almost always they get away with it because they prey on people being too scared to lose their payments.

Again, thousands of examples.

 

[Number37]

Just for you Goroyals22






For those getting screwed by Centrelink or providers:
Don't believe everything your provider tells you.
There's help out there if you need it.

LawAccess NSW
1300 888 529
Centrelink problems - How Legal Aid NSW can help you - Legal Aid NSW

Basic Rights Qld
1800 358 511
Welcome to BRQ - Basic Rights Queensland

Social Security Rights Victoria
03 9481 0355
1800 094 164
Social Security Rights Victoria

Community Legal Centres SA
Home | Community Legal Centres South Australia | Free Legal Advice

Welfare Rights and Advocacy Service WA
08 9328 1751
https://www.wraswa.org.au/

 

[Goroyals22]

Just for you Goroyals22

View attachment 1496221

View attachment 1496224


For those getting screwed by Centrelink or providers:
Don't believe everything your provider tells you.
There's help out there if you need it.

LawAccess NSW
1300 888 529
Centrelink problems - How Legal Aid NSW can help you - Legal Aid NSW

Basic Rights Qld
1800 358 511
Welcome to BRQ - Basic Rights Queensland

Social Security Rights Victoria
03 9481 0355
1800 094 164
Social Security Rights Victoria

Community Legal Centres SA
Home | Community Legal Centres South Australia | Free Legal Advice

Welfare Rights and Advocacy Service WA
08 9328 1751
Welfare Rights & Advocacy Service (Western Australia) | Not for profit community legal centre providing independent advice and advocac

Again all your quoting is what I’ve already said…

A reduction in work capacity can only be done by Centrelink. The provider isn’t able to do this.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Got a txt yesterday "reminding" me of my hitherto unknown appointment with JSP this morning.

Almost half an hour in s**t traffic to get there, the "consultant" my appointment was with is not in today, I can either wait for another consultant who has someone with him and someone else waiting, or else they can mark me as "attended" and I'm free to go.

Explain I shouldn't be there anyway due to being off sick, the call centre guy hadn't put anything in about that, the best the guy could do was reduce my points so I don't have to jump as high. He said there's nothing on the system about medical exemption (see several posts above where the "consultant" didn't even want to see it) despite me uploading it and I should see Centrelink in person. Mentioned the situation (last year? Year before?) where Centrelink had pissed my GP off by rejecting an exemption because my situation was "not temporary". Bloke's eyes lit up, apparently that is centrelinkspeak for "get an application in for DSP and it'll probably be approved" but of course my then JSP had no idea and we went down the road of monthly performing-seal circus tricks instead.

Can't wait to * these clowns off forever.

needs to be an online portal to lodge details of illness etc rather than use a call center. Would allow proof that you had submitted it and put onus on the JSP to follow up as they see fit, rather than all the information loss that occurs from useless phone droid types

 

[Gralin]

needs to be an online portal to lodge details of illness etc rather than use a call center. Would allow proof that you had submitted it and put onus on the JSP to follow up as they see fit, rather than all the information loss that occurs from useless phone droid types

then you need access to be able to scan in a cert and upload it

Mutual obligations and work for the dole need to just be scrapped completely

the points system can go in the bin too

the JSPs can all go in the bin as well, imagine if the money they were leeching just went to the people in poverty to actually help them