+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 51 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 509
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,912
    Thanks
    1,744
    Thanked
    3,043
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    http://gu.com/p/4899v

    The government will spend $3.5bn over the next four years on the childcare package – which takes effect after the next election in July 2017 – in addition to the about $7bn a year already budgeted for childcare spending. The new system will:

    • offer more generous payments of 85% of the cost of care to all families earning up to $65,000;

    • remove the $7,500 a year each child cap on payments to all families earning up to $185,000 a year;

    • continue to offer the 50% rebate to families earning over $185,000 and increase the annual cap for each child for these families to $10,000.

    But to save money it will also:

    • remove all childcare subsidies for families earning more than $65,000 where both parents are not in the workforce, replacing them with a sliding scale of payments to encourage parents to increase their hours of casual or part-time work;

    • reduce the number of hours of subsidised childcare offered to non-working families earning under $65,000 to 12 hours a week, but continue to subsidise those hours recognising that children from these families may have particular need of the pre-school education that childcare provides;

    • Stop parents from “double-dipping” by accessing both government- and employer-funded paid parental leave.

    And the entire package depends upon the Senate passing the cuts to family tax benefits proposed in last year’s budget but rejected by the Senate. They included:

    • ending family tax benefit B (paid to single-income families) when the youngest child turns six, saving $1.9bn over five years;

    • freezing all family tax payments for two years, saving $2.6bn over four years;

    • cutting end-of-year family tax benefit supplements, saving $1.2bn over four years.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to ExcuseMyFrench For This Useful Post:

    JR03  (10-05-2015)

  3. #22
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    676
    Thanks
    235
    Thanked
    341
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I did just see something brief on the childcare subsidies.
    Its mixed. On one hand yeh ok maybe sacrificing paid time off for CC rebates is alright. But i still cant help but think its "unfair". Why should i pay tax on my PPL, then have to return to work early because it was shortened, then pay childcare and only then will i be benefitted by cheaper rates IF im eligible. Wth is that.

  4. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Inner West
    Posts
    3,273
    Thanks
    1,892
    Thanked
    1,918
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the WeekBusiest Member of the Week - week ended 19/9/2014Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/7/2014200 Posts in a week100 Posts in a week
    So basically the message to women is: go to work ladies, but don't go getting above your station and thinking you can earn a higher income. Back to the secretarial pool for you luv.

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ScubaGal For This Useful Post:

    Acadaca  (10-05-2015),monkeymama  (11-05-2015),sarahjane914  (10-05-2015),WiseOldOwl  (12-05-2015)

  6. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    8,809
    Thanks
    3,394
    Thanked
    4,803
    Reviews
    9
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ExcuseMyFrench View Post
    http://gu.com/p/4899v

    The government will spend $3.5bn over the next four years on the childcare package – which takes effect after the next election in July 2017 – in addition to the about $7bn a year already budgeted for childcare spending. The new system will:

    • offer more generous payments of 85% of the cost of care to all families earning up to $65,000;

    • remove the $7,500 a year each child cap on payments to all families earning up to $185,000 a year;

    • continue to offer the 50% rebate to families earning over $185,000 and increase the annual cap for each child for these families to $10,000.

    But to save money it will also:

    • remove all childcare subsidies for families earning more than $65,000 where both parents are not in the workforce, replacing them with a sliding scale of payments to encourage parents to increase their hours of casual or part-time work;

    • reduce the number of hours of subsidised childcare offered to non-working families earning under $65,000 to 12 hours a week, but continue to subsidise those hours recognising that children from these families may have particular need of the pre-school education that childcare provides;

    • Stop parents from “double-dipping” by accessing both government- and employer-funded paid parental leave.

    And the entire package depends upon the Senate passing the cuts to family tax benefits proposed in last year’s budget but rejected by the Senate. They included:

    • ending family tax benefit B (paid to single-income families) when the youngest child turns six, saving $1.9bn over five years;

    • freezing all family tax payments for two years, saving $2.6bn over four years;

    • cutting end-of-year family tax benefit supplements, saving $1.2bn over four years.
    I don't think any of this will affect me negatively so it all looks ok to me. I'm happy with the increase to the annual limit, my daughter is currently in daycare 2 days per week but if I were to pick up more work and put her into daycare for a third day, we wouldn't get through the whole year before hitting the limit.

    I do think the removal of the so-called "double dipping" is unfair. Employers don't offer paid parental leave out of the kindness of their heart; its to make them a more attractive employer so they will get the best staff. It's just like being know to pay above market salaries or give really generous bonuses. It's not fair that those businesses can't do whatever they want to attract great staff.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to JR03 For This Useful Post:

    BettyW  (10-05-2015)

  8. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,912
    Thanks
    1,744
    Thanked
    3,043
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by ScubaGal View Post
    So basically the message to women is: go to work ladies, but don't go getting above your station and thinking you can earn a higher income. Back to the secretarial pool for you luv.
    why do you feel it's pushing women towards lower incomes?

  9. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,912
    Thanks
    1,744
    Thanked
    3,043
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by JR03 View Post
    I do think the removal of the so-called "double dipping" is unfair. Employers don't offer paid parental leave out of the kindness of their heart; its to make them a more attractive employer so they will get the best staff. It's just like being know to pay above market salaries or give really generous bonuses. It's not fair that those businesses can't do whatever they want to attract great staff.
    Agreed. And I'm sure private employers would still find ways to pay benefits to new parents.

  10. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,879
    Thanks
    5,206
    Thanked
    3,905
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    When is this supposed to come into effect?

  11. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,246
    Thanks
    6,367
    Thanked
    17,670
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    At the risk of getting my head bitten off I want to ask a genuine question. If new mothers are taking their workplace's PPL which encourages them to return to work, level the playing field, reward them etc etc, why do they feel entitled to a 2nd PPL for the same reason?

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    Lillynix  (10-05-2015)

  13. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    409
    Thanks
    241
    Thanked
    135
    Reviews
    0
    @delirium - My work only offers unpaid maternity leave so i get nothing from them, just the government one, however i believe some workplaces only offer a few weeks paid leave. In this instance i can see why these ladies would need both. 4 weeks is not enough time off with a new baby, especially if you have a csection etc.

  14. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,912
    Thanks
    1,744
    Thanked
    3,043
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    At the risk of getting my head bitten off I want to ask a genuine question. If new mothers are taking their workplace's PPL which encourages them to return to work, level the playing field, reward them etc etc, why do they feel entitled to a 2nd PPL for the same reason?
    It's the other way around. All working mums are entitled to the 18 wks PPL.
    Then depending on your private salary package you get other benefits.

    Personally I made choices in my career to get those benefits, so I wouldn't be overly impressed if they were taken away from me in a matter of weeks.

    However if given enough notice I wouldn't mind. I would just move to a different employer offering better benefits.


 

Similar Threads

  1. The Budget!! #2
    By beebs in forum News & Current Affairs
    Replies: 267
    Last Post: 07-07-2014, 12:12
  2. What does the budget mean for you
    By loislane2010 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 24-05-2014, 13:49
  3. The Budget?
    By Ellewood in forum News & Current Affairs
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 18-05-2014, 18:44

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
FEATURED SUPPORTER
Green Kids Modern Cloth NappiesGreen Kids manufactures gorgeous washable and reusable modern cloth nappies in Oz plus a full range of super absorbent ...
REVIEWS
"Made bed time less anxious"
by Meld85
My Little Heart Whisbear - the Humming Bear reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›