Tens of thousands of fraudulent flood assistance claims have been made this year, with more than $10 million dollars in support denied.
Key points:
There have been 3.5 million claims for flood support between February 28, 2022 and July 31, 2022
There have been more than 27,770 claims that have raised suspicions
More than 793 criminal investigations have been launched into suspected fraudulent claims
Payments have been offered to people impacted by floods in New South Wales and South-East Queensland in February and the recent Sydney floods in July.
Government Services Minister Bill Shorten has raised concerns that, while money is being offered to those who need it, others are taking advantage of the system.
“I believe that the taxpayer-funded safety net needs to go to those who need it and it really makes my blood boil when I think that there are some people out there taking advantage of other people’s misery to steal $1,000,” he said.
“What is going on with people? How can people think like that?”
The support on offer includes the Australian Government Disaster Recovery Payment of $1,000 per adult and $400 per child, as well as the Disaster Recovery Allowance which provides 13 weeks of support at the rate of the JobSeeker allowance.
About 3.5 million claims have been made for assistance between February and July following the floods.
Bill Shorten says it is important fraudulent claims are detected. (ABC News: Nick Haggarty/File)
Of those, there have been 27,770 cases that appear to be suspicious and about $10.5 million in support has been denied.
Mr Shorten said it was important that all fraudulent claims were picked up by the system.
“I’m very mindful that this is taxpayer money and I’m mindful that taxpayers are happy to help their fellow Australians in trouble,” he said.
“But they do expect government agencies to be as careful as they can separating the legitimate from the illegitimate.”
Mr Shorten said he was concerned there had been, or could still be, opportunistic behavior that was “robbing” from flood victims.
“I’m asking Services Australia: ‘Are we catching everyone?'” he said.
“I want to make sure that our detection systems for fraud are what they should be, and anything other than that undermines public confidence in the provision of support for victims.”
He said there were now 793 criminal investigations underway.
More than $1 billion has been handed out to Australians this year in flood support.
Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume.
Probe finds lead emergency agencies failed in flood response.(ABCNews)
McDonald’s has been slapped with a wage theft claim of at least $250 million in the Federal Court over alleged denial of paid breaks to workers.
Key points:
McDonald’s workers were allegedly denied 10-minute breaks that they were entitled to
SDA is seeking at least $250 million in compensation plus penalties on behalf of the workers
The fast food giant intends to defend the allegations
The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association (SDA) is seeking compensation on behalf of more than 250,000 current and former McDonald’s workers across Australia.
If successful, the union said the claim would be one of the largest of its kind in Australia’s history.
The SDA is alleging workers at more than 1,000 current and former McDonald’s sites were denied their uninterrupted 10-minute break when working four hours or more during a shift.
South Australia branch secretary Josh Peak said McDonald’s workers were told if they want their paid break, they cannot get a drink or go to the toilet.
He said in almost two years of investigation the union had heard more than 10,000 accounts from former and current employees, including young Australians, at McDonald’s stores across Australia.
“Workers were systematically, deliberately denied the rights to those breaks,” Mr Peak told ABC Radio Adelaide Breakfast.
“It’s just not good enough that a large employer such as McDonalds would create a scheme that leads to people not being paid correctly or getting base entitlements.”
The statement of claim alleged workers had to seek permission to get a drink or go to the bathroom and could be directed to resume work before their 10-minute break was up.
Mr Peak said workers were misled or not informed about their rest break entitlements and the multi-billion dollar corporation should be penalized for it.
“It is really outrageous behavior to be tricking young people into thinking they are not entitled to go the toilet if they used their paid entitlements,” he said.
“Workers never got their paid 10-minute rest break and when workers did ask for it, they were told ‘we don’t do that here because you can go the toilet whenever you like’, which is completely ludicrous.”
Josh Peak said McDonald’s workers should be entitled to paid breaks.(ABCNews)
The claim named 323 McDonald’s operators who allegedly denied paid rest breaks to workers over the past six years.
McDonald’s Australia issued a statement in which it denied the claims.
“McDonald’s believes its restaurants complied with applicable instruments, provided rest breaks to employees and were consistent with historic working arrangements,” a McDonald’s spokeswoman said.
“Those arrangements have been known to the SDA for many years. The manner of taking breaks has not been challenged or raised by the SDA as a matter of concern throughout successive enterprise bargaining processes for new industrial agreements.
“We are very mindful of our obligations under applicable employment laws, including the former enterprise agreement and the Fast Food Industry Award, and continue to work closely with our restaurants to ensure employees receive all correct workplace entitlements and pay.”
Claim originates from SA
The new claim is in conjunction with the SDA’s 15 existing Federal Court claims against McDonald’s Australia and 14 franchisees — seven of them in South Australia.
In December 2020, 14 McDonald’s employees at the Frewville and Mount Barker restaurants lodged a compensation claim after allegedly being denied their 10-minute rest break.
As a result of that action, the investigation extended nationwide.
Isabella worked at McDonald’s in Adelaide CBD.(Supplied)
Isabelle, who worked at McDonald’s in the Adelaide CBD for almost five years, said she was not given her entitled 10-minute break, but instead was allowed drink breaks freely during shifts.
“The drink break was only for 20 seconds, or as fast as you could drink and then come back to work straightaway,” she said.
“I’d spoken to my bosses about it and they just told us that we didn’t get them, they chose to do something different, and that it was legal, it was all fine.
“There were a lot of managers who would get angry if you needed to go to the bathroom and have a drink break.
“They saw it as you being lazy and not actually doing what you need to do.”
She said she was scared of other managers at her former workplace, even when she was in managerial positions.
“I remembered thinking, what do I need more? Do I need a drink more or do I need to go to the bathroom more — and then you just pick from there,” she said.
“Now that we’re going into an actual, normal workplace, we know that that definitely wasn’t normal to be stressed about going to the bathroom or getting a drink.”
Mr Peak said the same story was being repeated across the country.
He said the claim was also about sending a message to other franchises.
“It’s also about sending a signal right throughout the entire fast food industry that young workers, just because they’re young, doesn’t mean you can lie to them.”
Trawl fishers have ramped up calls for compensation following the federal government’s announcement that it will establish six offshore wind energy zones.
Key points:
Commercial fishers say they should be compensated if they are barred from fishing in parts of the ocean
They are particularly worried about the size of the areas that could become off-limits
Star of the South is encouraging concerned parties to participate in the consultation process
Waters off Gippsland, Portland, the Hunter Valley, Illawarra, northern Tasmania, Perth and Bunbury have been earmarked for development.
But fishers are concerned they will be excluded from the sections of the ocean where the turbines are built.
The most progressed wind farm proposal is the Star of the South project in Gippsland.
“I think it’s obvious that Australia is moving to a lower carbon future,” South East Trawl Fishing Industry Association executive officer Simon Boag said.
“The problem we have is that the federal government has already given out rights … to go commercial fishing.
“Then they appear to be giving out a second set of rights to put in wind farms.
“The two are obviously to some extent mutually exclusive.”
If built, the Star of the South wind farm may resemble Veja Mate in Germany.(Supplied: Star of South)
Bottom line for fishers
Mr Boag’s organization represents the interests of owners, fishers and sellers in the trawl fishery of south-eastern Australia.
He said fishing or quota rights sat “in the balance sheets of fishing businesses”.
“Fishing businesses borrow against them. They’re bought and sold between fishing businesses,” Mr Boag said.
Fishers already work around oil and gas platforms in Bass Strait.
Mr Boag said the exploration phase for new oil and gas developments was intrusive for the industry, but the longer-term exclusion zones were only a few hundred square meters.
“These wind farms are more or less a 500-square-kilometre exclusion,” he said.
“We’re assuming trawlers can’t go in there.
“What we need and want is that if we’re giving up our rights to go fishing and they’re going to build a wind farm and we’re all going to enjoy the electricity … that the fishing industry is adequately compensated.”
A 60-day consultation period was initiated alongside last week’s wind energy zone announcement.
Star of the South acting chief executive officer Erin Coldham encouraged people who used the waters to engage in the consultation process.
She said Star of the South’s turbines would be between seven and 25 kilometers from the coast of Woodside Beach, McLoughlins Beach and Port Albert.
“We’re aiming to get power into the grid by the end of this decade and we think that’s important, noting Yallourn [power station] is closing by 2028,” Ms Coldham said.
Victoria’s transport industry advocacy body is supporting two former truck drivers in their fight to close a loophole in pedestrian road tragedy compensation.
Key points:
The Victorian Transport Association is supporting two truck drivers’ fight to access pain and suffering compensation
A Geelong lawyer is sending a proposal to the Victorian government to fix a legal loophole
One traumatized truck driver’s wife has come out of retirement to help support their family
Portland man Ian Medley and Geelong man Kevin Reggardo were both driving for work when pedestrians were hit through no fault of the driver.
Both men said they were traumatized after witnessing the tragic deaths. They have been unable to return to work and regular life activities no longer brought them joy.
Mr Medley and Mr Reggardo have accessed limited compensation under the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) no-fault scheme, but were unable to seek damages for the pain and suffering they have experienced.
This is due to a loophole that left no insurer to claim against on behalf of the pedestrian.
The men’s lawyer, Tom Burgoyne, principal at Fortitude Legal, said the legislation could be changed to allow TAC to act as the nominal defendant for damage and pay the claim.
This is currently the case when an unregistered motorist with no insurer to claim against deliberately drives into a truck.
Left with long-lasting trauma
Kevin Reggardo’s wife of 35 years, Sue Bickerton, said she had to come out of retirement to work three jobs in aged care and hospitality to make up for the family’s financial loss since the 2018 incident.
Sue Bickerton and Kevin Reggardo want access to pain and injury compensation.(Supplied: Sue Bickerton)
She is urging the Victorian government to change the law to enable truck drivers who experience tragedy, like her husband, access to compensation for their pain and suffering.
“Kevin left for work that morning and that Kevin will never come home again,” Ms Bickerton said.
“He got up for work, loved his job, off he went, ‘See you later, love’.
“From that day on, I have had to learn to live with another person in a totally different relationship.”
Ms Bickerton said the tragic incident during a regular day at work up-ended their lives.
“I have had to be the support person, the counselor, the one that sits up with him at night-time while he goes through the incident again and again,” she said.
“I am the one getting him to get some confidence to hop in the car again, to deal with anxiety when he sees people on the side of the road.”
A ‘time of need’
Victorian Transport Association chief executive Peter Anderson said it was sad “the system” had let truck drivers down in their “time of need”, and backed calls for change.
He said it had ripple effects throughout an industry that was experiencing severe staff shortages.
“Incidents like these don’t enhance the image of our industry,” Mr Anderson said.
“When people say they don’t want to come back, it puts other people off as well because they don’t want to go through these experiences either.
“How we make sure this never happens again is difficult, but we should have a greater level of support and understanding for those who have gone through it.”
A proposal for change
A Victorian government spokesperson said it would consider ways to further support victims of road trauma and workplace incidents.
“This is a complex area of law that crosses over into several areas of government,” the spokesperson said.
Tom Burgoyne wants the Victorian government to consider his changes.(Supplied: Tom Burgoyne)
Mr Burgoyne’s proposal to the Victorian government is for TAC to step in as the nominal defendant for pedestrians in “strict scenarios”, but not to provide comprehensive coverage for pedestrians.
He said the “strict scenario” would include when the heavy vehicle driver was found blameless, and it had been established that the pedestrian moved into the path of the vehicle.
“This is unfortunately an occupational hazard, and a legal and insurance abyss for damages,” Mr Burgoyne said.
