JobKeeper and Aviation employees in Oz.

[601]

All this arguing about the funding, but no-one seems capable of answering my query about which others, besides Toll Dnata, are adversely affected.

That is easy.
Just listen or read social media and you will find a lot who will say that they are adversely affected.

Now it depends on your definition of "adversely affected"

Does it mean people who have not received any payment because they did not meet the criteria or people who are receiving more now that what they were being paid before.
The latter may not be "adversely affected" now but they will let everyone know that they are in the future when JobKeeper stops and they have to go back to what they were being paid before.

[Clare Prop]

As I understand it people not eligible for Jobkeeper can access Jobseeker? Does this apply to the Dnata people?

A lot of people registered for it, including myself, but (thankfully) didn't end up having the required drop in turnover to be eligible for it. This means my part timer missed out on a significant pay rise, so I guess she was adversely affected...

[witwiw]

people not eligible for Jobkeeper can access Jobseeker

Not everyone, unfortunately. Several people I know who have been stood down without Jobkeeper don't qualify for Jobseeker because they are over the aged pension age. They had been working full time, paying taxes still, but there is foreign ownership (non aviation sector) which excludes the Jobkeeper payment..

[kddk]

A lot of dnata staff not eligible for jobseeker if partner over the centrelink threshold poor show by the govt these workers pay their dues here as does dnata , a lot have been left on zero income and families are suffering due to significant income loss . It shouldn’t matter where a buisiness was owned as the pm clearly said this was to keep employees connected to their employers it should have had zero benefit to the company. I believe Emirates are paying staff 50% salary from June 30 so at least some relief for some people out there .

[down3gr33ns]

would set the scene in simple, maybe humorous, way.

I doubt those people excluded from the benefits see anything funny in current matters as it affects them. Rather an unsympathetic attitude on your part..

Government borrowing is a matter of course in their doing business, name one in Australia that hasn’t borrowed/isn’t borrowing to fund projects. You seem to think borrowing is an evil process. Yes, it comes at a price one way or the other either in monetary terms or human terms. You “alluded” to stimulus. Wouldn’t paying those who have missed out the JobKeeper amount provide the stimulus you mention? In lots of cases they could then pay the rent, pay their bills and buy food (have a look at the increased demand that Food Bank is reporting. Even the Victorian Parliamentary kitchens are preparing and distributing 4500 meals a day for those affected by the current circumstances - unprecedented to my knowledge). These people would have some money to spend which in turn flows to other services (landlords, utilities and shops) and be helpful in a widespread manner. The recipients of this spending go on to spend it further - aka stimulus..

..why would you go out and spend money - and pay interest - on the proportion of money that no longer has to be spent??

I would expect the reality is that those denied JobKeeper will access JobSeeker. It follows, then, that the money not being spent on the former (for those currently eliminated from it) will be spent on the latter. That, in turn, erodes the ”saving” of $60b. Some of that money “saved” will be spent, it’s just a matter of under which scheme it occurs.

Attempting to put it in some perspective, Toll Dnata has 6000 people missing out on JobKeeper. $1500/fortnight for the term of JobKeeper comes to around $120m over the length of the scheme. Extrapolating that to, say, 1000 people in the aviation sector in the same boat as Toll Dnata, the figure goes to $200m - small bikkies in the grand scheme of things. Now there are many more exclusions (casuals, arts, university academics &c) so, for arguments sake, let’s assume there are 1 million people currently excluded. Paying them Job Keeper would total around $20bn. Using your logic of savings, this represents a “saving” of $40bn on the original estimate – an estimate the government was prepared to fund if necessary. As I said, some of the money will be spent one way or the other, it’s just a matter of how so that $60bn will get eaten into and is not a "saving" in its entirety.

Finally,

that no longer has to be spent

Because it discriminates against a significant number of people deserving of it - no other reason.

-

[patagonianworelaud]

Just listen or read social media and you will find a lot who will say that they are adversely affected.

Cannot, don't have access to it, hence the post.

Looks like it was futile though, thread went off at a tangent.

[Ragnor]

Makes me wonder, when jobkeeper runs out that's when the axe will fall. Virgin, Qantas, Jetstar. what that space

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

Originally Posted by Ragnor

Makes me wonder, when jobkeeper runs out that's when the axe will fall. Virgin, Qantas, Jetstar. what that space

the stand downs were announced before jobkeeper was, so my guess will be those without useful work will simply remain stood down without a govt subsidy.

Cheaper to keep people stood down without pay than to start paying out redundancies

I’d bet they wait till the end of the crisis when they know exactly how many people they’ll need in the post COVID world before people are permanently sacked

[ringbinder]

Going against my own statement that we stick to the thread topic, I cannot help myself from joining in on the divergence.

Galdian has failed to answer several questions put to him as a result of his comments:-

How do you rationalise the standing down of many thousands without any support whatsoever whilst others doing the same job for another local employer are getting government support?

and

Or, Galdian, do you support discrimination when it comes to helping those doing it tough?

These were asked but which were side-stepped. Why, because answering doesn’t support a particular argument?


and, to answer one of Galdian's:

..why would you go out and spend money - and pay interest - on the proportion of money that no longer has to be spent??

Only not being spent because too many people have been unfairly locked out of a scheme that should have helped every Aussie worker paying tax but now without any income.

[galdian]

Originally Posted by down3gr33ns

I doubt those people excluded from the benefits see anything funny in current matters as it affects them. Rather an unsympathetic attitude on your part..

Government borrowing is a matter of course in their doing business, name one in Australia that hasn’t borrowed/isn’t borrowing to fund projects. You seem to think borrowing is an evil process. Yes, it comes at a price one way or the other either in monetary terms or human terms. You “alluded” to stimulus. Wouldn’t paying those who have missed out the JobKeeper amount provide the stimulus you mention? In lots of cases they could then pay the rent, pay their bills and buy food (have a look at the increased demand that Food Bank is reporting. Even the Victorian Parliamentary kitchens are preparing and distributing 4500 meals a day for those affected by the current circumstances - unprecedented to my knowledge). These people would have some money to spend which in turn flows to other services (landlords, utilities and shops) and be helpful in a widespread manner. The recipients of this spending go on to spend it further - aka stimulus..



I would expect the reality is that those denied JobKeeper will access JobSeeker. It follows, then, that the money not being spent on the former (for those currently eliminated from it) will be spent on the latter. That, in turn, erodes the ”saving” of $60b. Some of that money “saved” will be spent, it’s just a matter of under which scheme it occurs.

Attempting to put it in some perspective, Toll Dnata has 6000 people missing out on JobKeeper. $1500/fortnight for the term of JobKeeper comes to around $120m over the length of the scheme. Extrapolating that to, say, 1000 people in the aviation sector in the same boat as Toll Dnata, the figure goes to $200m - small bikkies in the grand scheme of things. Now there are many more exclusions (casuals, arts, university academics &c) so, for arguments sake, let’s assume there are 1 million people currently excluded. Paying them Job Keeper would total around $20bn. Using your logic of savings, this represents a “saving” of $40bn on the original estimate – an estimate the government was prepared to fund if necessary. As I said, some of the money will be spent one way or the other, it’s just a matter of how so that $60bn will get eaten into and is not a "saving" in its entirety.

Finally,

Because it discriminates against a significant number of people deserving of it - no other reason.

-

Apologies for delay, I think we don't disagree on too many points....maybe just degrees.

As I'm now,unemployed and no access to any Federal govt assistance (for reasons I understand) I find it hard to see how I'm unsympathetic to any in the same situation.
I thought I explained my concern with a touch of whimsy or humour, if no-one agrees suppose I can scratch "comedian" off my list of potential future careers. Thanks for the heads up!

As I write this I see a couple of other questions from Ringbinder, sure will not satisfy anyone but:
- all this crap happened in a small period of time
- I think ANY Oz govt would have handled in a similar fashion with available information, libs, lab, anyone
- there will ALWAYS be perceptional winners/losers in these circumstances, you'll always have bitching and moaning regardless of the party in power
- life's imperfect.

You want to make it YOUR perception of those that have missed out and deserve $$ from the govt, so be it.

You have kids??

I don't - yet I consider the debt and interest that YOU want to place o YOUR kids/grandchildren and ongoing by taking a $60BN credit card to the pub for a big night out.

Sure your kids/grandkids will thank you.
Cheers

[rcoight]

galdian, I understand and agree with you 100%.

[Bend alot]

If inflation remains under control - the money does not need to be paid back!

The government borrowed the money from the government (us), - they generated it on a keyboard.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed...sponse-package

Given every country has been affected inflation should remain stable compared to other countries.

[Buster Hyman]

Originally Posted by patagonianworelaud

... which others, besides Toll Dnata, are adversely affected.

I know of one small Pacific carrier whose staff here are ineligible. In fact, they were mentioned in the media by MP Craig Kelly (not a great advocate but, you know...). If it applies to one then surely it would apply to all.

[Tom Sawyer]

I believe none of the employees for of any of the ME3 airlines in Australia were eligible due to the foreign ownership clause, despite them being Australian residents/citizens and tax payers. There have been some job cuts and maybe more to follow. Not sure what happened to the proposed amendment motion that was meant to go before Parliament????

[C441]

I'd rather a $60 Billion overestimate than a $60 Billion underestimate, and then some, that was the NBN……...

[down3gr33ns]

I believe none of the employees for of any of the ME3 airlines in Australia were eligible

one small Pacific carrier whose staff here are ineligible

Toll Dnata has 6000 people missing out on JobKeeper

but there are those that think that is OK because it "saves" $60bn *. Apparently the human cost is just too bad.

Is it not the case that those employees pay Australian tax, spend their money (when they had it) in Australia to contribute to the overall economy, their employers pay the payroll tax despite there being foreign ownership and are obliged to pay the SGC? Why the differentiation, their operations in Australia would be no different if they weren't foreign owned?

* by the time those locked out of Jobkeeper go onto Jobseeker, a good part of that $60bn will disappear as I mentioned earlier. Some just can't seem to grasp that simple point.

[Buster Hyman]

I'm surprised that the usual Law firms aren't jumping onto a class action to recover Tax monies paid by these groups (if they're not eligible for support). The Govt. have opened an interesting can of worms here.

If you look at it from another perspective...would that mean employees of Australian companies in the UK, for example, can claim Jobkeeper?

[Car RAMROD]

Yes Buster, very interesting can indeed. I agree.

aussies employed by the likes of DNATA (and I’m sure there’s more outside of aviation) who have been paying Australian income tax, who are not eligible for Australian government jobkeeper support because they are owned by a “foreign entity” or whatever it is, can those people recover all tax previously paid whilst working for said companies and in future not pay any more tax whilst working for said companies?

[Checklist Charlie]

Just a small point, employees do not claim "JobKeeper", their employers do (from the ATO).

CC

[ECAMvsEICAS]

The employee is not entitled to Jobkeeper. The employer is. A Foreign company is not entitled to claim Jobkeeper. Australian Tax paid by an employee is irrelevant, as it’s not their claim.