Home aids affected by new abatements

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 32967, 13 July 1972, Page 6

Home aids affected by new abatements

Recent changes in income exemptions for social security beneficiaries who wish to work have had an adverse influence on the home-aid service run by the Nurse Maude District Nursing Association.

Four women affected by the new’ abatements on allowable income have already left the service. More may do so if they also feel it is not worth their tvhile to continue working for a limit of $lO a week—or for $l2 a week if they have dependent children.

| Between 20 and 30 other home aids have had to drop < time to 11 working hours I a week for the association | to keep within the eamI ing limit. The women conI cemed are receiving I Social Security benefits as I deserted wives, widows, or ; wives of beneficiaries. The ( aids’ allowable earned income has been reduced ’ by $3 a week or by $5 a week if they have depeni dent children. I Anyone on Social Secur1 ity benefits who earns $25 or under a week suffers an abatement of benefit of $1 in every $2 over the $lO a week allowed. An income exceeding $25 a week has an abatement rate of $3 in $4 for an amount in excess of $25. "Home aids can only do 11 hours work a week to earn $lO, if they are on a benefit and have no other unearned income,” said Miss N. A. Tait, the association’s superintendent of domiciliary services yesterday. CAPABLE OF MORE “In a total of 11 hours a week, a home aid may do three hours work three times a week and an extra two hours duty. Most of the women are capable of doing considerably more,” Miss Tait said. “Fit and vigorous women in their forties can do about 20 hours a week for us and

still be home before their school-age children, and fulfil their other home obligations. They want to work longer hours, and we need them—but in many cases they feel is is not worth their while when restricted to earning $lO a week.” The Nurse Maude District Nursing Association has about 210 home aids on its register, built up over the years to fill a growing community need. Not all, of course, are . beneficiaries. But those who are will go on restricted serr vice, will leave, or have 1 already left, Miss Tait said. L New aids will have to be l found to replace them. This _ will not be easy. Miss Tait agreed that a 1 fit woman with no depeni dants who wished to work f full-time need not claim Social Security benefits availl able to her. ’ REINSTATEMENT j “But if she becomes ill and cannot work she may have to 1 wait months before she can . get a benefit,” she said. “In the meantime, she may have to live on a reduced pension and have no other money i coming in. We know of such cases and, as I see it, it is s easy enough to give up a > benefit but difficult to get it ; fully reinstated.” ? Many other women besides t Nurse Maude home aids were i very reluctant to jeopardise t their benefits, knowing of the 1 delays and difficulties in get-

ting them, Miss Tait said. Yet these women were keen to do some kind of work to keep themselves occupied and to give service while able to do so.

Several years ago, women on Social Security benefits who were prepared to do domestic work in hospitals and homes for the aged could earn $3 a week more than by doing any other work, she said. But this did not apply any more. “We would like to see this extra allowable income exemption introduced again to make it worth while for women to give this kind of service which is needed so greatly in the community,” said Miss Tait.

“To keep up our standards of service to patients, we shall have to employ more home aids for the same amount of work being done,” she said. “From the administrative point of view, this becomes very unwieldy. Our patients will have many changes of home aids, which may upset them, and, during the winter months when there is so much sickness about, it will mean that our service is taxed to capacity unnecessarily.” THERAPEUTIC Many of the women employed by the association as home aids are widows who have been told by their doctors to find an interest outside their homes. These women are happier when making a contribution to a community effort, and have found that their health improves with work. “This new abatement will encourage women to work privately for more money than allowable and not de-

clare their full earnings. It could become a common practice in cases where the allowable income is not sufficient,” Miss Tait said.

Asked for his comment, the Acting Director of the Department of Social Welfare (Mr E. S. Henzel) said that the new allowable income rate was in accordance with the recommendation made by the Royal Commission on Social Security.

“The commission heard submissions from interested parties, including Miss Tait of the Nurse Maude Association,” he said. “The Government has accepted the basis of the Commission’s recommendations, and has instituted the exemptions now applicable. “Any woman should be quite clear as to the financial effect there would be if she continues working at the same rate as she is now earning,” he said. “For instance, a home aid earning $2O a week under the new exemption rate would have a $5 a week deduction, from her benefit. This would leave her with $l5 out of $2O a week. If she gave up work, she would lose that $l5 altogether.” NEW RATES In explaining the new rates of social security benefits, Mr Henzel said: “It would take a total income of $43 a week to completely exclude payment of a benefit to a single person; $61.80 total income a week for a married couple (married couples with children may be eligible for more than this); $43 total income a week for a widow; $59 total income a week for a widow with one dependent child; $63 total income a week for a widow with two dependent children.” For additional children there are further increases in the limit of total weekly income.