Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search

 

Helping the Newly Unemployed in the Recession

Helping the Newly Unemployed in the Recession

by Keith Rankin, 7 November 2008

Last week, Labour and National announced proposals to assist some persons who lose their jobs as a result of the 2008 recession which is being exacerbated by the global financial crisis.

National's proposal (Transitional Relief Package), which has some flaws, at least addresses the central flaw in the current system of In-Work Tax Credits. Labour's Job Search Allowance does not.

The recession is exposing major deficiencies in a number of assistance programmes, in particular Working for Families and the Accommodation Supplement.

The central deficiency of Working for Families is that, when the income earner of a single income family loses his or her job, the family loses around $60 per week of In-Work Tax Credits in addition to losing all of their wages. The family (Family A) suffers a double blow.

On the other hand, at present, a two income family has the blow of one income earner losing their job softened. Such a family (Family B) currently stands to gain about $60 per week in In-Work Tax Credits as a compensation for losing half of its wages.

National's proposal helps Family A by forestalling the double blow by 16 weeks. Labour's proposal ignores Family A. Labour's proposal only helps Family B.

Working for Families contains other major deficiencies. Family B will most likely not qualify for tax credits if the person becomes unemployed towards the end of the tax year (eg in January), but will qualify if the person becomes unemployed in April. However, if Family B does experience unemployment in April, subsequent re-employment will oblige that family to repay most (possible all) of their tax credits.

In the Great Depression of the 1930s, the experience of "short-time" was as common as that of unemployment. Also, then as now, casual work was common, meaning that hours varied from week to week. Working for Families does not address such variations.

Under the current rules, if single income families have their hours reduced to less than 30 hours per week, they lose their In-Work Tax Credits as well as some of their wages. Marital separation would be one means of restoring those payments, because the rules differ for single-parent families.

The Accommodation Supplement has been around in its present form for about 15 years. It is a programme to assist individuals and families of limited means to pay their rent or mortgage. The payments are calculated via a formula too complex for most intelligent people to address, let alone understand.

In real terms, the Accommodation Supplement programme is being run down. The payment thresholds have not been indexed for inflation in recent years. Indeed, the Accommodation Supplement has been run down as a means of funding Working for Families.

A critical anomaly in this programme is that it provides substantial assistance to families with mortgages, but denies assistance to persons saving for a deposit to finance their first home. Persons with assets in property qualify, whereas persons with more than minimal cash assets do not qualify.

National proposes to raise the upper limit for assistance. This will not help savers (who have cash assets), and will not help unemployed persons who need help but who do not pay levels of rent that are high enough.

For example, a newly unemployed Auckland couple with children would have to be paying more than $410 per week rent before National's boost to the Accommodation Supplement would become effective, and would have to be paying at least $550 per week rent to get the maximum boost.

There are better ways to raise Accommodation Supplements than by raising the theoretical maximum payments. National at least addresses the accommodation issue.

To qualify for any part of National's proposed assistance, a worker has to have been in a job for six months. That's clear.

Labour's five-year qualifying pre-condition for its Job Search Allowance is ambiguous, however. Labour's fact sheet says "at least five years in the workforce". Most journalists have interpreted that as being in a job for five years.

Labour does not say that the person has to have been continuously in the workforce.

The term "workforce" is usually regarded as having the same meaning as "labour force". Adopting international conventions, a person is in the labour force if they are employed for wages for at least one hour per week, are self-employed, are working in a family business, or are unemployed.

A literal reading of Labour's proposal would qualify persons who had been unemployed for five years and had become redundant from a job that only lasted a few months. On the other hand a 30-year old graduate might not qualify because of his or her delayed entry into the workforce.

While National's proposal at best offers limited help, Labour's proposal is subject to the same kinds of inconsistencies that make Working for Families a political time bomb.


ENDS


© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Eric Zuesse: U.S. Empire: Biden And Kerry Gave Orders To Ukraine’s President

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at Strategic Culture On May 19th, an implicit international political warning was issued, but it wasn’t issued between countries; it was issued between allied versus opposed factions within each of two countries: U.S. and Ukraine. ... More>>

Binoy Kampmark: Budget Cockups In The Time Of Coronavirus: Reporting Errors And Australia’s JobKeeper Scheme

Hell has, in its raging fires, ringside seats for those who like their spreadsheets. The seating, already peopled by those from human resources, white collar criminals and accountants, becomes toastier for those who make errors with those spreadsheets. ... More>>


The Dig - COVID-19: Just Recovery

The COVID-19 crisis is compelling us to kick-start investment in a regenerative and zero-carbon future. We were bold enough to act quickly to stop the virus - can we now chart a course for a just recovery? More>>

The Conversation: Are New Zealand's New COVID-19 Laws And Powers Really A Step Towards A Police State?

Reaction to the New Zealand government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and resultant lockdown has ranged from high praise to criticism that its actions were illegal and its management chaotic. More>>


Keith Rankin: Universal Versus Targeted Assistance, A Muddled Dichotomy

The Commentariat There is a regular commentariat who appear on places such as 'The Panel' on Radio New Zealand (4pm on weekdays), and on panels on television shows such as Newshub Nation (TV3, weekends) and Q+A (TV1, Mondays). Generally, these panellists ... More>>


Binoy Kampmark: Welcome Deaths: Coronavirus And The Open Plan Office

For anybody familiar with that gruesome manifestation of the modern work place, namely the open plan office, the advent of coronavirus might be something of a relief. The prospects for infection in such spaces is simply too great. You are at risk from ... More>>

Caitlin Johnstone: Do You Consent To The New Cold War?

The world's worst Putin puppet is escalating tensions with Russia even further, with the Trump administration looking at withdrawal from more nuclear treaties in the near future. In addition to planning on withdrawing from the Open Skies Treaty ... More>>


Binoy Kampmark: Why Thinking Makes It So: Donald Trump’s Obamagate Fixation

The “gate” suffix has been wearing thin since the break-in scandal that gave it its birth. Since Watergate, virtually anything dubious and suggestive, and much more besides, is suffixed. Which brings us to the issue of President Donald Trump’s ... More>>

Gordon Campbell: On The Ethics (and Some Of The Economics) Of Lifting The Lockdown

As New Zealand passes the half-way mark towards moving out of Level Four lockdown, the trade-offs involved in life-after-lockdown are starting to come into view. All very well for National’s finance spokesperson Paul Goldsmith to claim that “The number one priority we have is to get out of the lockdown as soon as we can”…Yet as PM Jacinda Ardern pointed out a few days ago, any crude trade-off between public health and economic well-being would be a false choice... More>>


Binoy Kampmark: Brutal Choices: Anders Tegnell And Sweden’s Herd Immunity Goal

If the title of epidemiological czar were to be created, its first occupant would have to be Sweden’s Anders Tegnell. He has held sway in the face of sceptics and concern that his “herd immunity” approach to COVID-19 is a dangerous, and breathtakingly ... More>>


 
 
 
 
 


 
 
 
  • PublicAddress
  • Pundit
  • Kiwiblog