Single mothers have told of having to miss paid work to attend a ParentsNext appointment or being encouraged to sign up to unnecessary training by providers running the federal government’s $110m-a-year program.
The scheme, part of Australia’s sprawling outsourced billion-dollar welfare-to-work system, pays companies and charities to provide guidance and support to single parents on benefits whose children are aged between nine months and five years old.
About 80,000 parenting payment recipients are compelled to attend appointments and take part in activities – such as playgroup, storytime or education courses – to assist them with parenting and prepare them for work.
While the scheme has been reformed since it was rolled out nationally in 2018, single mothers interviewed by Guardian Australia say many problems remain.
Danni Ramage, a single mother of a five-year-old, said she had been forced to miss a day’s work to attend an appointment with her provider, atWork Australia.
“When I first started my last job, I had to take the day off work because she was insistent that I come in,” she said. “That cost me about four-and-a-half hours – I was getting $26 an hour.”
It echoes complaints from a jobseeker in the new $7bn Workforce Australia program interviewed by Guardian Australia last month who also fielded requests from atWork to attend appointments, despite working full-time hours.
On another occasion Ramage said she was hassled by a consultant, who asked her to attend a face-to-face appointment shortly after a major surgery.
“She was [then] just like, ‘I will just give you a ring,’” Ramage said. “I was like, ‘I provided you with a medical certificate to exempt me for six weeks.’
“She rang me anyway. I said, ‘You need to leave me alone to recover.’ She wasn’t happy about but she left it at that.’”
Ramage, who sometimes works 30-40 hours a week as a casual, said ParentsNext was “nothing except a headache”.
“It’s beyond frustrating,” she said. “There’s me losing wages where I’m not even getting help. I honestly think it’s a waste of the taxpayer dollar.”
AtWork Australia declined to comment, referring questions to the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations.
Another participant, Cheryl*, said she was contacted by her ParentsNext provider when her son was nine months old.
Cheryl, who lives in regional South Australia, said she was told by her consultant her options were doing playgroup sessions in the nearest major town or signing up to an education course.
Cheryl said she had been running her own business and planned to return to this once her son was older. She already had a certificate three in business and did not need to complete a separate education course, as her consultant had insisted.
“I explained this to [the consultant] and she said, ‘No, no, no. You’ve still got to be doing something,’” Cheryl said.
Her provider, YourTown, disputed this, saying Cheryl had “agreed to a work preparation activity to explore study options for upskilling” and that playgroup was only mentioned as an example of what other participants were doing.
A department spokesperson declined to comment on the individual cases.
ParentsNext providers can claim an outcome payment of $600 if a person completes an eligible education course. An audit revealed by Guardian Australia found nearly 60% of these claims were invalid.
Critics have argued ParentsNext is “sexist” and does not recognise that raising children is work. Participants can have their benefits suspended if they fail to attend activities.
Supporters say the scheme has helped parents prepare to return to work when their children reach school age.
Labor was critical of the scheme while in opposition and the employment minister, Tony Burke, told Guardian Australia in July he was “looking closely” at the program.
The current ParentsNext contracts expire in 2024.
A spokesperson said the department undertook “regular assurance activities for its programs”.
The spokesperson said that between September 2021 and March 2022, 23% of claims from ParentsNext job agencies for wage subsidies, education and employment outcomes and general assistance were “deficient”.
“Further engagement with providers resulted in recovery action being reduced and undertaken in 15% of the identified cases,” the spokesperson said.
* Not her real name
Do you have a story? luke.henriques-gomes@theguardian.com
