The Herald reports the fire at will law is already claiming victims, after Sue Bradford revealed a beneficiary has been denied help for his job relocation costs because Work and Income considered his 90 day ‘trial’ period to mean he was a temporary rather than a permanent worker.
Work and Income said it had concerns he would be unable to find another job if a 90-day trial period he faced did not work out, so instead of giving him the $900 bond he need for relocation he and his family were forced to stay in a camping ground for three weeks.
As usual, Bradford is on the money:
“This man is committed to getting off the benefit and into paid work. He’s moved cities and is trying to do his best for his family. All jobseekers deserve to be treated the same, whether the employment they secure is under the 90-day rule or not.”
Yep, it’s pretty shit. But I suspect it won’t be the last we’ll hear of people facing discrimination from government agencies and employers because of the fire at will law. That’s what happens when you ram through legislation under urgency and refuse to let the public have its say.