Jump to content

Employment Insurance whistleblower suspended without pay


Recommended Posts

Blather. You think anyone wants to sit around all day doing nothing? You have any idea how long that makes your day? A proper target would be something like how many case files to review in a given period. Statistically, not every batch of files is going to have the same number of improperly filled out paperwork. A quota on results rather than on work could easily require the employee to find reasons to cut people off in order to meet them.

Good thing this isn't a quota then, isn't it?

You sound like somebody who has little to no exposure to people who are quite happy to sit around and collect. I see the full spectrum in my practice, and there are plenty of totally willfully helpless people who are quite happy that you feel uncomfortable doing nothing and would be more happy paying your labor in tax money for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The real story looks more like this:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/02/25/pol-ei-targets-vs-quotas-finley.html

Benefit fraud is a huge problem in this country,

What? Are you Saying that Mike Duffy Collected EI as well?

Seriously, where is your source for this Benefit Fraud? Fraud is a crime.

My Understanding is EI has been the Governments Gravy Train for Decades upon Decades , hosing the employee and Employer while redistributing the yearly surpluses towards billion dollar tax breaks for Banks/Oil and insurance companies increasing their profits on the backs of those who pay into EI.

Obviously there is a level of Fraud within any organization, just ask Nigel Wright. Perhaps this is how he did business in the financial district as well.

Whether you call it Targets or Quotas... its the same thing.

I believe similar issues came up with regards to Revenue Canada.... and "tax cheats" yet many "innocents" were "Targets" if you watch W5, 5th Estate etc.

I think if we are going to look into Fraud, perhaps we could get a much higher return from each Senator..

And Perhaps we should use the Monies allocated for EI towards EI and not towards increasing corporate profits on the backs of those who pay into an insurance, yet get their benefits reduced and premiums increased...

IS she a Whistle Blower? Perhaps not, but is she flagging something morally wrong? Perhaps...maybe it was just in her department.. or maybe a sign of something more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to see a rule that ALL public workers, including MP's and senators, have 100% protection to whistleblow. IF ANY government is doing something wrong than WE, the taxpayers, should know about it and I don't think many Canadians would have a problem with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to see a rule that ALL public workers, including MP's and senators, have 100% protection to whistleblow. IF ANY government is doing something wrong than WE, the taxpayers, should know about it and I don't think many Canadians would have a problem with that.

It's not practical to allow that. There are examples where people need to keep concerns internal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, where is your source for this Benefit Fraud? Fraud is a crime.

My source is the people I know who work in these government departments. The most common infraction is people claiming to be unemployed when they are in fact working. Another is collecting benefits multiple times under different names.

...and yes, it absolutely is a crime, and the investigation into it is serious and important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But in a statement, it says all Service Canada employees are bound by a declaration not to go public with government information.

Oh the horror! Giving "government" information to the "public" ... the people who pay for the system are to be denied info about the system they pay for.

What's wrong with this picture?

Thank goodness for all the brave whistleblowers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My source is the people I know who work in these government departments. The most common infraction is people claiming to be unemployed when they are in fact working. Another is collecting benefits multiple times under different names.

...and yes, it absolutely is a crime, and the investigation into it is serious and important.

Your Source is anecdotal hearsay

You require a statistic to back up your claim regarding fraud and the extent of fraud within the EI system.

Anecdotal is fine, but everyone has a story and has seen something... Eventually there is a bottom line and a %... lets see those data.before making a claim that EI fraud is a huge problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You require a statistic to back up your claim regarding fraud and the extent of fraud within the EI system.

Anecdotal is fine, but everyone has a story and has seen something... Eventually there is a bottom line and a %... lets see those data.before making a claim that EI fraud is a huge problem.

I addressed this issue earlier:

Well, the first sign that thereis a problem with fraud is that every investigator is expected to save $500,000 per year.

"EI fraud threatens the effective operation of one of Canada 's most important social programs. Our investigations reveal that fraudulent claims result in approximately $142 million in EI overpayments and approximately $61 million in penalties on average each year." http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/ei/fraud/fraud_serious.shtml

"In 2011–12, the department processed 2.9 million claims and paid out $16.1-billion in benefits.

While the government knows it overpaid $295-million, it also recognizes that it hasn’t yet identified all the mistaken payments. Estimating those could be worth as much as $578-million, the report found." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-needs-to-crack-down-harder-on-ei-fraud-auditor-general/article11629844/

Your turn: can you show me what evidence you have that setting targets for EI inspectors creates a serious problem for legitiamate EI claimants?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proving that fraud is a "huge" problem has an inherent problem: defining what 'huge' is. Can we say this:

1) Fraud exists

2) The government should continue to spend money on preventing, and detecting fraud at least to the point where the costs to do so result in net revenue savings, when factoring in the fraud prevented/detected.

If so, then the rest of this is simply a management problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your Source is anecdotal hearsay

You require a statistic to back up your claim regarding fraud and the extent of fraud within the EI system.

Anecdotal is fine, but everyone has a story and has seen something... Eventually there is a bottom line and a %... lets see those data.before making a claim that EI fraud is a huge problem.

Yes it is. You know why? Because the people I know are doing the job they were hired to do, and following the agreements they signed not to go public. It's also why those in the know really don't care if you approve of the tactics or not. They're the ones who have to deal with it on a daily basis.

The official data you ask for has already been quoted in this thread, more than once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So less than 10% fraud overall, not bad, not great.

Then take out those who unknowingly did it, add in the way govt sucks at paperwork and still sent $$ to people who had reported not to do so, add in the number of mistakes the EI folks did in calculating payments (oops overpayment) and you wind up with a minor number that in all liklihood will be attacked by the govt spending twice that to root out fraud, or as our esteemed MH said...
2) The government should continue to spend money on preventing, and detecting fraud at least to the point where the costs to do so result in net revenue savings, when factoring in the fraud prevented/detected.

But we know they wont.

We have been over this before, except it was welfare fraud and the end result was it was very minor.

Been there done that !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So less than 10% fraud overall, not bad, not great.

Are you joking? 10% is awful. No organization with actual accountability, like a business with shareholders for example, would ever tolerate a rate like that if they were aware of it.

Edited by hitops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, if you know anyone who actually works in those departments, you also know that your claim is ridiculous. Go talk to an actual investigator, then get back to me.

Maybe Winnipeg/MB has a problem?

Ok, I called him.

He is still laughing.He said its a problem yes, but not nearly what many make it out to be. Shills lump incorrect payments, oversights, our own mistakes (as was alluded to earlier) into the same 'fraud pot' as those who outright and knowingly rip off the system.

Yup, been there done that.

Edited by Guyser2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guyser2,

How would we know how much fraud is going undetected? (How many people are collecting and working under the table, etc...)

What do you think about the government target of each invesigator saving $500,000 per year? Doesn't that suggest that it is worth putting the effort into investigating fraud?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guyser2,

How would we know how much fraud is going undetected? (How many people are collecting and working under the table, etc...)

Studies, investigations of suspected fraud , stats, all sorts of ways to garner an idea of whats out there.

What do you think about the government target of each invesigator saving $500,000 per year? Doesn't that suggest that it is worth putting the effort into investigating fraud?

Why doesnt the govt put it at a Billion (insert pinky in mouth) and that would suggest even more effort should go into it.

Facetious, but I think you get my point.

Think of it this way, Our esteemed Mayor ( :lol::lol::lol: ) said he would stop the gravy train , yet he had no idea there wasnt one to stop. Same thing here. You cannot pull a figure from ones behind as a target and say 'achieve that' without knowing just how good or bad it is out there>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't there a difference of some committed EI fraud outright and some be charged with fraud because the a government changing the laws? This government has a problem with seaonal workers getting EI, and I rather they get EI, since they pay into the fund than going on welfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...