First stories from parents

The first participants for this research were recruited via the Single Parents Action Group (SPAG) Facebook group. In what follows I have extracted some of the key points from their stories they have generously made available to this research and for the purpose of this blog.

As of 1 January 2013, all the remaining 100,000 parents who had been able to stay on parenting payment after the 2006 Welfare to Work changes, were transferred to Newstart if their youngest child had turned 8 years old (see ACOSS briefing for more background). On SPAG, women had been sharing stories of the hardships they had experienced since the Parenting Payment – NewStart changes. They also shared stories of the strategies they had adopted to cope with the loss of in many cases what amounted to over $100 per week (taking into account the impact of changes to taper rates between the two payments).

Others on SPAG were interested in recruiting people for a television documentary being planned which would capture the darkest impacts of the changes such as the stories of those who had been forced into prostitution or other illicit activity as ways of avoiding the low paid trap.

One told harrowing stories of how they had been helping others by delivering food to homeless people, only to find women and children sleeping under bridges. The particular correspondent of this story, called out to the members of SPAG to unite to provide support for people at risk of losing their homes, so that the community could provide responses to problems the politicians wouldn’t.

There were also stories written by parents who had to work long hours and how this would mean, since they were in single parent families, the children would spend even less time with the only parent they had.

There were messages on the SPAG page from women trying to decide whether it would be better to use their last remaining money to put petrol in the car to go to work to earn money, or buy food so that her family did not have to go hungry again at night, and also about the related difficulty of applying for time off from work, in order to collect food or petrol stamps from the Salvos.

Leanne’s story - link to full story here

Leanne’s story illustrates how many of the parents who are now on Newstart have varied backgrounds. In her case she was married for 10 years before exiting a relationship from a partner who had a gambling addiction. Her newfound independence as a single parent initially on parenting payment meant she felt for the first time she was in control of her family’s finances, and that there was enough money to get by on. But then after a period when she was not on income support, Leanne needed to go back onto parenting payment, only to find the social policy rules had changed and that she was placed on Newstart, replete with the 15 hour participation requirements. Like others in this research, Leanne’s experiences of the system once she has been placed on Newstart are radically different to those of it previously when she had been on parenting payment.

The work she had already been undertaking at her children’s school was not recognised as ongoing because she was employed as a casual, and therefore did not satisfy her participation requirements. Leanne showed great initiative and perseverance to get her role at the school recognised especially by embarking on a traineeship in administration there, and eventually by getting the school’s employment contract to reflect the ongoing nature of the work. Unfortunately this initiative and capacity to work with the system to get the best results for herself, were once again affected by changes in the external environment (a school amalgamation) that caused the job to be terminated.

In order to satisfy her participation requirements Leanne was required to take a second job, meaning she would have to put her younger child in after care and give her son in year 7 a key to the house. Perhaps the most dramatic element of Leanne’s story is when she tells how her son, like as she observes, the other teenage children of the single parents in her neighbourhood, begins to truant and fall off the rails.

Then the ‘wheels fell off’. My eldest and his friends had been getting into serious trouble at school. What I noticed about the situation was the similarity in all our family situations. The children were all boys, all parents were low income earners, half had sole parents who were trying to work / study / volunteer and most of the children were the eldest sibling. I quit the second job after looking at risk and protective factors for psycho-social development in adolescents. The only risk factors I had any control over were – authoritive parenting and parental supervision. (Leanne)

Leanne felt compelled to quit the second job so that she could fulfil her parenting role, and found herself once more subjected to participation requirements. She reports finding her employment service agency unsympathetic to her situation, that she is forced to attend job club and other activities she is already over qualified for. They send her to job interviews she is too afraid to say no to attend, because of her fear of receiving participation reports. Her experiences of the bureaucracy of her reporting requirements is Kafka-esque to the point where she is afraid to correct mistakes she notices on their file, for fear of inducing more frustration for herself, and for the staff who serve her.

Leanne decided to enrol to train to become a community services worker a qualification she completed without support from employment services that satisfied her participation requirements. The sense of relief she expresses at no longer being subject to the employment services regime is palpable. She notes that the withdrawal of the pensioner education supplement affected her ability to be supported while she did this.

Financial uncertainty, hardship, and relying on the generosity of her friends and her social networks had enabled Leanne to get through these periods living on Newstart. Leanne counts herself lucky because she is paying off a mortgage that while still a significant drain on her meagre income, is not as high as the rents others in metropolitan locations must pay. However, there are costs of repairs and maintenance associated with being a home owner she finds it problematic to pay.

For Leanne, being on Newstart has increased her financial uncertainty, when situations she managed to negotiate backfired because of changes over which she had no control. These episodes of uncertainty speak of sorrow or sadness, like she is being abused or punished when she has not done anything wrong. In fact, what she had done was do everything she could do to have her skills, capabilities and needs recognised within the systems rules which seemed to frustrate her efforts at every turn.

Kelly’s story - link to full story here

Kelly is a sole parent whose youngest child turned 8 in the last quarter of 2012. Kelly decided to leave her job once her payment changed to Newstart so that she could avoid being caught in a low paid trap, meaning she would have to work more hours to cover her costs and spend less time with her daughter. She also decided to move to another area in the hope she could find a job that would better suit her commitments as a mother, and so that she could pay less rent by housesitting. Kelly said:

...that’s why I chose to leave my job, I wasn’t going to buy into that and work more hours, I’d rather modify my lifestyle and move somewhere more affordable so I could still be supported in what I needed in life - I’ve got a contact through a friend who has a one bedroom converted garage cabin place, we were living a 3 bedroom, now we are going to live in a little cabin, and that won’t compromise our happiness, and I’ve rather do that than have that lifestyle than live in the 3 bedroom house where I was having to you know not see my daughter very much because of that and work long hours (Kelly).

Kelly had experienced an employment service agency in a rural area who she had found helpful prior to her participation requirements becoming mandatory. Once she was activated by the 8 year old child rule, she began to visit an agency in another district where she had moved, which was a $32 and 1 hour journey away.

Unfortunately for Kelly, she had moved to an area where there were few jobs that matched her qualifications. The support she had requested from her employment services provider to help her update her resume was overlooked through a persistent focus on participation requirements and compliance.

When she reported not having been well, she explains she was treated badly by the receptionist who told her she would have to get a medical certificate or she would be reported for a participation failure meaning she could lose some of her payment. Kelly commented on how the focus on compliance here diminished her needs as a human being which were as she was recovering from an illness to be treated with some sympathy. The handling of her illness while she was also caring for her sick child again reinforces the misrecognition of the role of carer it was her natural priority to fulfil.

Being threatened with participation failures made Kelly feel bullied by her employment provider, and misunderstood while her needs for support went unanswered. Like Leanne, Kelly had voluntarily upgraded her qualifications and had not received any support from the employment service to do this and found the withdrawal of the pensioner education supplement made it impossible for her to study.

Her experience with this agency was so unpleasant and unhelpful, she “resigned herself” to moving away to another area, so that she could did not have to work with that employment consultant who she felt had treated her unfairly.

Kelly made conscious decisions to choose a lifestyle that would enable her spend the time with her 8 year old daughter she feels is the right things for a parent to do. She is aware she is lucky in this respect and that not everyone is able to find ways to live frugally enough to do this.

I know that I can make ends meet by going back to basics, but not everyone is able to live like that. I guess this makes me fairly unique that I have learnt how to live back to basics and feel confident that I can do that, whereas a lot of women don’t have the material independence to survive like that and need to take on jobs to keep their living standards at a level like that.

Implications for social policy

While ending long term welfare dependence was the aim of the welfare to work policy changes, it affects all parents equally regardless of their history of benefit receipt. However, the broad brush approach, sometimes known as tough love, has begun to reveal some defects of major significance for social policy makers.

Firstly, many of the women affected by the Parenting Payment – Newstart changes had already been working (about 60% - see article by Eva Cox about this). The changes have made it more difficult for them to survive by balancing work with caring, to the extent they have been forced to make radical changes to their circumstances which in some cases, like Kelly’s, have actually made them more welfare dependent.

Secondly, the capacity to exercise autonomy, self-efficacy and choice, have all been severely impacted by the changes once they have been exposed to the rules of activation and the punitive nature of the employment services compliance system. The focus on compliance rather than employment assistance services has introduced high levels of antagonism as the service user comes to mistrust the service and the client worker relationship. The approach has denied access to the basic services that might have enabled them to find suitable work, and provide social and economic continuity for their families.

Yeah, I just think of like they’ve cut our payments back and the'y’re making us see these people and they’ve got all these offices, and how much money is going into these services is it worth the output, and like, if there’ve got 5 offices in one street and you’re paying rent on all those buildings and ECs in there, why can’t they just pay us back the money and just give us back the money and give us one centre to go to, and I know some people need more support than I do, but I’m not one of those and to be forced through this system it’s just like putting a round peg in a square hole, it just doesn’t fit. (Kelly)

Employment services have been experienced not as environments in which they have been enabled to participate to negotiate or construct roles and identities that align with their capabilities or preferences, but as institutions which actively prevent that from occurring.

They put everyone into the same basket, it’s not saying well do you need help, not grading people in degrees of help they need, or individualising treatment according to what sort of help the need, well not treatment, support, the support I need is a good computer with office so I could do a resume, and if there was someone there who could quickly look over my resume and make suggestions, that would have been ample support, I think in the degrees they are trying to over support us,, and it comes across as harassment, because I’m educated I can do this sort of stuff if given the resources and where are these computers where I can sit down and do my resume. (Kelly)

These single parents have exercised choices they believe are rational for example by not getting into low paid jobs with high number of hours, but which have also exacerbated levels of disadvantage they experience, increased their level of poverty, and made them become vulnerable and dependent on welfare. As Kelly said:

I know of a lot of women there who don’t have that ability who are being forced into low paid jobs who are really stressed and worried about what’s happening to their kids while they are not home, and just keeping on top of everything they have to do.

Socially beneficial activity such as helping the school with NAPLAN exams, and using this as a venue for networking for potential future work were not accepted as valid forms of activity for the 15 hour activity rule, even though it is known the 80% of people find their next job through friends and word of mouth (DEEWR 2013).

The cases I have encountered to date have also indicated the complex reasons why these parents are doing it on their own, not always by choice and because of intolerable factors in the relationships they have left. While the myth of the welfare dependent and morally deficient underclass informs policy assumptions about sole parents, the facts are that many of the women in this research show extraordinary resilience and entrepreneurialism in their efforts to secure conditions of employment that are safe for themselves and their families. This means being at home to care for their children after school.

However, few jobs are available in the professions for which they are qualified – yet they are forced to apply for and take up jobs to meet their participation requirements in lower paid and insecure roles. Meanwhile they are subject to ongoing supervision by employment services while actively attempting to find jobs that reflect their capabilities as this final quote from Leanne indicates.

So presently I am attending weekly ESP ‘training’ sessions where I am advised on how to look for work as I am considered one of the most employable job seekers. Really!? I am also working approx. one day a week enjoying doing Project work for a school in partnership with our local health department and local university. I have also picked up another short term role for this term facilitating two orientation sessions at our local TAFE provider. I’m spending at least two full days per week writing job applications, addressing key selection criteria. Oh, and you know, I’m also caring for my children! (Leanne)