LAUNCESTON — A decision of the state Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) has rendered void hundreds of thousands of Newstart agreements entered into by unemployed people.
The decision, handed down on April 18, resulted from an appeal by Unemployed Workers Union activist Bill Bartlett against a decision to cancel his Newstart allowance for failure to agree to terms proposed by the Commonwealth Employment Service. The AAT reversed the decision, finding that many CES procedures were not in accordance with the law.
The tribunal found that some sections of the CES policy manual were "grossly inadequate and misleading" and without any legal basis. Further, form letters sent out by the CES fail to clearly state Newstart agreement requirements, and notification of CES decisions and reasons for decisions was inadequate.
The AAT also found that it was improper of the CES to require unemployed people to agree to terms designed solely to enable officers of the CES or Department of Social Security to monitor compliance or "check up" on unemployed people.
"It has been standard practice for the CES to require people on Newstart allowance to agree to produce lists of job applications and employers contacted", says Bartlett.
The consequence of the decision, according to Bartlett, is that more than 466,000 current Newstart agreements nationally are invalid and certainly unenforceable legally.
Bartlett has urged unemployed people, especially those with agreements containing provisions that require them to furnish proof of their work efforts, to contact the CES and demand their agreement be modified immediately. If the CES does not comply, clients should refuse to comply with illegal agreements.
Those uncertain of their position can contact the Unemployed Workers Union on (003) 34 2903 or at 103 Wellington St, Launceston.