Not-for-profit’s social workers share stories of errors, delays and two-hour phone wait times
The automation of Centrelink
is “deliberately designed to make it hard for people”, according to a
new report from Anglicare Australia, with stories of errors, delays and
up to two-hour phone wait times.
Anglicare’s social workers said they spend so long helping clients with Centrelink they were devoting the equivalent of 343.2 full-time employees across Australia – 13,041 hours a week – just to help clients navigate the system.
Kasy Chambers, Anglicare’s executive director, said automation and increasingly difficult processes were having a disproportionate effect on the country’s most vulnerable people.
“The more vulnerable you are, the more likely it is that you have quite a complex issue,” she said. “Automation isn’t a problem in and of itself. But when you have a number of issues, that’s when it’s really difficult to interact with an automated system.
“We are not having a go at Centrelink staff – they are as frustrated by this as we are. But there is a need for more tailored services. There are times when all of us would have a question too complex for a computer.”
The report recommends the government boost funding to provide more flexible services, face-to-face options and training for staff to recognise and cope with customers with trauma or mental health issues.
It also recommends a rise to the base rate of payments like Newstart. Social workers and recipients found many payments were “too low to achieve a minimum standard of living”.
Five million Australians rely on income from Centrelink, and in 2016-17 there were 168,709 recorded complaints against the system, a rise of 54,974 from the previous year. The report attributes these complaints to the controversial “robo-debt” program and an increasingly difficult user experience.
The survey of 218 Anglicare staff and their clients was conducted in southern Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia. It found that the equivalent of 6.6 full-time employees were spending their time dealing with just Centrelink issues – extrapolated to 343.2 staff nationwide.
The survey collected stories from clients of long wait times, poor treatment and staff giving out inconsistent information.
“The publicly stated average time [16 minutes] is never the experience I’ve had in all the years I’ve been contacting Centrelink,” one social worker said. “There is nothing under an hour.”
One client said the information she received was frequently inconsistent and varied depending on who she spoke to. “There’s no predictability – it’s basically who you get on the day,” she said.
In Tasmania, Anglicare workers pointed to a case where inflexible criteria for the disability support pension had led to an unreasonable delay in processing claims.
New rules in 2015 required that applicants could only be assessed by doctors who had been contracted by the Department of Human Services. But there were no department-approved medical practitioners in Tasmania.
This meant assessments had to be conducted by phone or video call with approved practitioners on the mainland.
“My client was required to set up a Skype-type interview with a psychologist of Centrelink’s choosing but the Centrelink office would not make their computers available for this,” one social worker said.
“We had to use an Anglicare laptop with a camera, install the software, complete a test ... If this client did not have a community service worker with her she wouldn’t have been able to complete the process and would have fallen at the last hurdle.”
Sixty-six per cent of Anglicare’s surveyed staff said the anxiety and distress caused by Centrelink’s poor service meant clients often needed additional support in mental health and other areas.
Thirty per cent said they spent so long on Centrelink issues it reduced the time they had to help other clients.
“That’s what made us do the research,” Chambers said. “All staff sensed they were spending a lot longer dealing with sometimes quite simple Centrelink issues.
“This would be happening to the Salvos, to Centacare, to anybody who is providing this kind of service. It’s not just Anglicare.”
Anglicare’s social workers said they spend so long helping clients with Centrelink they were devoting the equivalent of 343.2 full-time employees across Australia – 13,041 hours a week – just to help clients navigate the system.
Kasy Chambers, Anglicare’s executive director, said automation and increasingly difficult processes were having a disproportionate effect on the country’s most vulnerable people.
“The more vulnerable you are, the more likely it is that you have quite a complex issue,” she said. “Automation isn’t a problem in and of itself. But when you have a number of issues, that’s when it’s really difficult to interact with an automated system.
“We are not having a go at Centrelink staff – they are as frustrated by this as we are. But there is a need for more tailored services. There are times when all of us would have a question too complex for a computer.”
The report recommends the government boost funding to provide more flexible services, face-to-face options and training for staff to recognise and cope with customers with trauma or mental health issues.
It also recommends a rise to the base rate of payments like Newstart. Social workers and recipients found many payments were “too low to achieve a minimum standard of living”.
Five million Australians rely on income from Centrelink, and in 2016-17 there were 168,709 recorded complaints against the system, a rise of 54,974 from the previous year. The report attributes these complaints to the controversial “robo-debt” program and an increasingly difficult user experience.
The survey of 218 Anglicare staff and their clients was conducted in southern Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia. It found that the equivalent of 6.6 full-time employees were spending their time dealing with just Centrelink issues – extrapolated to 343.2 staff nationwide.
The survey collected stories from clients of long wait times, poor treatment and staff giving out inconsistent information.
“The publicly stated average time [16 minutes] is never the experience I’ve had in all the years I’ve been contacting Centrelink,” one social worker said. “There is nothing under an hour.”
One client said the information she received was frequently inconsistent and varied depending on who she spoke to. “There’s no predictability – it’s basically who you get on the day,” she said.
In Tasmania, Anglicare workers pointed to a case where inflexible criteria for the disability support pension had led to an unreasonable delay in processing claims.
New rules in 2015 required that applicants could only be assessed by doctors who had been contracted by the Department of Human Services. But there were no department-approved medical practitioners in Tasmania.
This meant assessments had to be conducted by phone or video call with approved practitioners on the mainland.
“My client was required to set up a Skype-type interview with a psychologist of Centrelink’s choosing but the Centrelink office would not make their computers available for this,” one social worker said.
“We had to use an Anglicare laptop with a camera, install the software, complete a test ... If this client did not have a community service worker with her she wouldn’t have been able to complete the process and would have fallen at the last hurdle.”
Sixty-six per cent of Anglicare’s surveyed staff said the anxiety and distress caused by Centrelink’s poor service meant clients often needed additional support in mental health and other areas.
Thirty per cent said they spent so long on Centrelink issues it reduced the time they had to help other clients.
“That’s what made us do the research,” Chambers said. “All staff sensed they were spending a lot longer dealing with sometimes quite simple Centrelink issues.
“This would be happening to the Salvos, to Centacare, to anybody who is providing this kind of service. It’s not just Anglicare.”
No comments:
Post a Comment