This double dipping crap ****es me off.
Why tear women down who have good EA's, who were able to negotiate a good contract, who are in a unionised workforce? We should be striving for ALL of us to have both employee and government PPL.
Why not aim for all women to have a replacement wage plus super for 6 months? We are 50% of the population, we have to work 15 years longer than our male counterparts to fund our retirements, why should we tolerate this?
Aim for better!
This has got me REALLY worried as we only just found out we are expecting. I truly hope it will never get passed...surely they'd need to give people a moment to change their budgets and work out if they can afford a child before having one!
The nerve of a government coming in on a promise of 6 months full pay to all working parents only to effectively cut any government ppl to any working mum with a few weeks leave as a perk of her employment. What a disgusting, rude and ignorant backflip.
I truly feel sorry for sahm who are now only entitled to $300 for each child. It's a such a small token. I guess from my perspective I was feeling very fortunate to have access to gppl and ppl as it gave me 6 months at home before needing to go back to work. 18 weeks doesn't feel enough with a 12 week old baby going to day care. I don't think I 'deserve' two bites at the cherry as it has been put but it is certainly a move in the right direction for working women.
Nevertheless it's hard to swallow, I've worked hard for my employer the best part of a decade and deserve the 6 weeks I signed up for so long ago.. And I've paid taxes since I was 14 and also think I'm entitled to govt ppl. I don't believe is double dipping, I think I it's an archaic attitude and huge backflip on the 6months full pay they were offering not so long ago. I'm confused and no doubt will spend way too much time reviewing my budget spreadsheet over and over again this week
There are plenty other Rorts, actually involving real *********, that the Government could get their budget savings from.
Imagine you ARE at home. With no family, no friends, your husband works a million hours and you have no support. Should you pay up to $150 a day? Should you even get a place?
We are all contributing to society. You are valuable, so am I. If you want the tax payer to help you be at home with your child should I not get a portion of that (bc I recognise I'm home long term so I shouldn't get as much as you per fortnight if that makes sense)? Anyhoo I digress
I think the language used by the government is more of the issue – the term ‘double dipping’ suggests that people are being unfair and are milking the system. Straight away the sniping starts, and it in no way infers any men double dipping, so is a swipe at women (again) – thanks Minister for Women – glad you got my back!
I think the angst shown in the thread is proof that the government has done a great job pitting people against each other in a bid to ‘win’ their budget wars.
When a government needs to get support by using pejorative language this is all the proof that I need that it will do damage.
Many governments have been doing it – the term ‘dole bludgers’ being a classic example of this methodology. However this government seems to have a heavy reliance on deriding the people it governs: ‘lifestyle choices’, ‘nation of lifters not leaners’ and now ‘double dipping’.
I wish they would get a mirror and start throwing their fancy language at themselves.
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!