Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I raise this issue because it has come to my attention in recent times that one section of the Department of Social Protection has changed the formula used to assess applications for renewal of family income supplement, FIS. That is most disturbing and frustrating. I will spell out in black and white what has occurred. I have been in touch with various people in the Department and I have spoken to an official there but I am not satisfied as the issue has not been resolved. It should not have arisen in the first place. The case concerns an applicant for renewal of FIS for the fourth year. The person's circumstances have not changed at all in the four years. He got the payment in year one, year two and year three. The logical conclusion is that he would get it in year 4 but the Department sent out an inspector and stopped the payment and it is now assessing his circumstances in a different way. That is the kernel of the issue.

The constituent was contacted by the Department in the context of the renewal of the family income supplement to say that his hours of employment amount to less than 38 hours per fortnight, which means the application was unsuccessful. However, that is not the case. The Department has calculated his hours by virtue of what he earns as opposed to the hours he works, based on the evidence provided by his employer. His employer has given written confirmation of the fact that the individual concerned does work 20 hours per week. Does the reply given to the Minister of State, Deputy White, take cognisance of the serious issue outlined?

I have a copy of the employment details of the person concerned as filled out by his employer. The individual works 20 hours per week at €10 per hour. It is written in black and white. The case concerns a renewal of the family income supplement payment for the fourth year and the circumstances are the same as they were in the previous three years. It is interesting to note what the Department has done. It has identified a monthly gross payment of €800 and an annual gross of €9,600. The latter amount was divided by 52 to give a weekly gross of €184.61 and at €10 per hour it calculates that only 18.4 hours a week are being worked. That is ridiculous and time-wasting. It is causing financial hardship for a family that is doing its best to stay out of a poverty trap. If the policy change had been widely publicised by the Department then it could be accepted, to an extent, but this is more sinister and it is also clandestine. People are trying to weather the recession who are semi-welfare dependent, who do not need this type of bureaucratic nonsense to be thrown at them. I have spoken to a number of officials and tabled parliamentary questions. This week the person concerned has had to visit a social welfare inspector. It is time-wasting and also a waste of money to put officials dealing with a case that does not need to be dealt with at all. I would like to hear in the reply an indication from the Minister that this nonsense will be disposed of and that the status quo will be reinstated immediately.

Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy McCarthy for raising this issue which I will address on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton.

Family income supplement is designed to provide income for employees on low earnings who have families. This preserves the incentive to remain in employment in circumstances where the employee might only be marginally better off than if he or she were unemployed and claiming other social welfare payments. The method of calculating FIS entitlement has not changed for either new or renewal claims. At both new claim and renewal stages, the deciding officer will first check to ensure the minimum hours of employment of 19 hours per week or 38 hours per fortnight are being consistently achieved. Then the average assessable earnings are calculated. To do these, the deciding officer uses the information supplied by the claimant and his or her employer on the claim form, recent payslips and-or a P60.

Where, after this process is followed, the deciding officer remains in doubt as to the FIS entitlement, he or she will either request additional information from the claimant or the case may be referred for investigation to a social welfare inspector, SWI. The SWI will make the necessary inquiries in order to clarify the position which may include interviewing both claimant and employer and inspection of any relevant records or documentation.

The entitlement to and appropriate rate of FIS is calculated based on average assessable earnings plus any other income a family may have using the appropriate income limit threshold with regard to the number of qualified children. To qualify for payment of FIS a person must be engaged in full-time remunerative employment as an employee. That is defined as employment which is expected to last for at least three months and paid work for a minimum of 38 hours per fortnight or 19 hours per week. A couple may combine their hours of employment to meet the qualification criteria.

Once FIS is granted it remains in payment for 52 weeks as long as the customer continues to be engaged in full-time remunerative employment as an employee. However, if he or she ceases to be engaged in full-time remunerative employment as an employee, either through loss of employment or reduction of hours of employment, his or her entitlement to FIS ceases. As with all other statutory decisions made by deciding officers of the Department, FIS claimants are offered the right of appeal to the independent social welfare appeals office.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I refer to the paragraph in the Minister of State's reply which states "the method of calculating FIS entitlement has not changed". It has changed, based on information supplied by the employer and by the applicant. I wish to stress that this is the fourth year for the applicant. In years one, two and three, the application was successful but the renewal application this year is unsuccessful. Therefore, the assessment criteria or the formula has changed because the applicant's circumstances have not.

I will read into the record again the documentation supplied to the Department by the employer. The applicant works 20 hours per week, at €10 per hour but the some wizard in the Department has calculated, based on some unknown formula, that the applicant works 18.4 hours a week. That is based on the Department's assessment. A procedure has been introduced that changes the status quo. If what was in the Minister of State's speech was correct, the application would have been unsuccessful to begin with.

I respectfully request that an official in the Department contacts me to say that this piece of nonsense will stop forthwith and that payment will be reinstated. As I have outlined, new eligibility criteria or an assessment formula has been introduced that is different from the system that was used for the first three years, resulting in the suspension of the payment.

The Minister of State represents the Department of Health and I acknowledge the fact that he has taken time out of his schedule to take this topical issue. I ask that in communicating back to the Department of Social Protection that he requests that the Department would stop referring to people who use the system as "customers" - they are citizens of a republic. I further ask the Minister of State to communicate my frustration to the Department of Social Protection because it is a complete waste of resources. The applicant's circumstances have not changed but the system used by the Department of Social protection has changed.

Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy will appreciate that I cannot really progress the matter any further than I have in the response I have given to the House. I am advised, as I indicated earlier, that the method of calculating FIS entitlement has not changed for either new or renewal claims. The Deputy has set out certain facts about a particular applicant's experience in this regard. Obviously, I cannot deal with a specific case but there is an appeals mechanism in respect of people who make applications and are refused. The Minister for Social Protection herself does not have an appellate role in this either. There is a system in place which should be properly applied. I have no reason to believe that it is not being properly applied but if there is an issue, there is an appeals mechanism to be invoked. I really cannot put the matter any further than that.

Since the Deputy raised the issue, I must say - I know I will get into trouble for saying this - that I share his view regarding the use of the word "customer".