Part 3: Stay at home mum starts her own business

In Part 1, Stay-at-home mum Melissa, discussed her values and goals with a career counsellor. In Part 2, she began studying and discovered that she loved learning and the course she'd selected, but faced some unexpected obstacles including unemployment. In Part 3, Melissa has thought about her transferable skills and now puts it all together! 

Melissa begins her own business

“I used my research skills to find more about being a personal concierge and found iCALM which was really helpful. And so now I’m a personal concierge and my business is called Allow Me To Assist." www.allowmetoassist.com.au

Finding the right name

"It took weeks to get a business name I was happy with. I wanted the name to tell the story and wanted a logo that fitted. It had to be easy to read, appeal to older people and not be ambiguous. I’d never had thoughts of having my own business, but it’s the door that opened and I love what I do, even though it’s not what I’d planned."

The importance of trust

"One of the important things is to meet people and make genuine connections. I usually set up a personal meeting first and that’s my client’s opportunity to check me out and get a sense of my trustworthiness.

My clients need to feel ok with me, to see if I’ll fit in with what they need. People might need me to fill a gap when life has got overwhelming, they might ask me to do their banking, shopping, take their car for a service or feed the cat! They need to be able to trust me with their credit card or car, so building trust is a large part of what I do."

What I do

"I’m getting known now, and have some really good client testimonials which is great. Some of my regulars call me their fairy godmother, because I’ve helped out during family emergencies. 

Not everyone has access to extended family to call on when things get too much for them, and they need to be cloned to be in two places at once. I have your back, and can get you out of time related trouble.

I’ve got my weekly and fortnightly regulars; I take some elderly people out for mid week morning tea and specialty shopping, or even to medical appointments because their children are working in the city. Others call on me occasionally when something major is happening, like a 40^th birthday party, when I help with the organising, invitations and decorations.

I also do packing support, debriefing, making coffees and supplying food when someone has just shifted. I’ve reminded businessmen that important family events are coming up, and am always very discreet! Tact, diplomacy, and confidentiality are important.

Some people are intimidated by doing things online – I’ve shopped and sold things on eBay, I’ve booked a cruise, and even sold a car. It’s extremely varied!”

What a journey! From a stay-at-home mum wondering what to do with her life, to studying, to running her own business, Melissa has been challenged, overcome unexpected obstacles and found a rewarding work-life balance which complements her personality and supports her personal and family values.  And for her to say “I couldn’t have done it without you, Sue” is a very humbling thought.

.

Part 1. Discussion of the 2014 Coalition budget - a Christian perspective.

I've just read an outstanding article; it's long and well worth reading in its entirety. It appeared in Ethos and was written by an intelligent, articulate, well educated Christian man, Dr Brett Parris, who is concerned by the 2014 federal Coalition budget. He discusses a number of significant factors in detail.

Unfortunately mainstream public perception of Christian groups is deeply tarnished, and this hasn’t been helped by the government requiring schools to employ Christian chaplains in order to receive a particular funding package. In my opinion, Mr Pyne has also aggravated the situation with his comments to Christian School Leaders that "the Abbott government had a 'particular responsibility' to private education, that they 'don't have for state schooling'. This sets up an unpleasant 'if you're with us you'll get funding, if not you won't'.

For non-Christians the original article provides positive insight we rarely hear about in the main stream media, where if it isn’t a catchy slogan, a smirking comment about a Christian acting foolishly, or a priest behaving badly, it isn’t reported. And that’s a real shame because this article is worth reporting and discussing.

Dr Parris discusses five factors which make the budget a low point in Australia’s modern history and which he believes should “continue to spur Christian leaders into outspoken and courageous resistance.” 

The first factor  is the one many people including me have commented on - lying. “Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s and Treasurer Joe Hockey’s wholesale trashing of so many pre-election promises is breathtakingly cynical, surprising even a jaded electorate” 

When public trust in our elected representatives is eroded so badly and people feel betrayed, shocked at the blatant disregard for common courtesy and decency, and feel that they’re being treated with contempt, it’s going to be very hard to have an informed discussion about anything. Trust lost is hard to regain, although, sadly, having a trusting, well informed electorate doesn’t appear to be either valued, or high on the agenda of the Coalition.

The second factor is related to neoliberal economics. Dr Parris describes neoliberalism clearly and without fuss. Do you remember the story of the goose that laid golden eggs? Neoliberalism is to do with the fantasy that trickle down economics will provide golden eggs for everyone - it's a win/win situation!!! …but really, money only flows to the owner of the goose who doesn't want anyone else to benefit from his wealth.

"Neoliberalism is obsessed with small government as a matter of principle without understanding the important role that public investment and good governance plays in sustainable prosperity." My italics

He then reminds us that a healthy, well functioning society is supported by a variety of public investments. The myth of the self made man conveniently ignores the important underlying role which public infrastructure plays. He couldn't have "made it" without access to the infrastructure which government borrowing and our collective taxes paid for. 

In my goose analogy, the golden goose is tended by a variety of skilled workers including vets, researchers into diseases such as bird flu and the people who designed and built its pond. The incubators for the golden eggs are heated by energy from a grid built by public utilities, and the eggs are nurtured in other ways, for instance by people using our public transport infrastructure to get to work at the golden goose egg farm. In other words, the golden goose owner relies on public investments even though they aren’t acknowledged or directly paid for by him.

This unacknowledged infrastructure is called INVESTment for a reason – they’re positive for the whole country, this is where governments borrow in a very different way to families. These are long term investments from which we all benefit, not just the privileged and powerful.

In addition he writes, “Australia has one of the lowest levels of public debt of any country in the OECD." That’s impressive! It’s also a bit of a furphy to also say that Australians are highly taxed, we aren’t.

The third factor where Dr Parris is quite scathing is “seeking a return to surplus on the backs of the poor, the sick and the marginalised.” Basically, "people cost too much" More here.

He discusses the massive cuts to foreign aid, our local social safety net being eroded, seesawing income support the unemployed under 30s, and cutting benefits for poor families which “is surely a recipe for increased depression and other mental health problems, family violence, alcohol abuse, suicide and crime”.

Allied health workers are expressing concern that they’re already seeing an increase in depression and anxiety. They expect this to only get worse as the hidden costs of the budget are implemented, and the flow-on from state and local government takes effect.

It’s also important to note here that the vilification of groups by the use of divisive or derogatory words isn’t going to make jobs magically appear. Imagine being a rural job seeker on unemployment benefits or a uni graduate with a strong work/study history, continually hearing yourself referred to as a dole-bludger who isn't trying to get work.

After tailoring your resume to specific jobs, attending interviews and not being employed through no fault of your own, you’re trying to remain positive in the face of derogatory, uninformed, cruel comments that don’t acknowledge or reflect the reality that there simply aren't enough jobs for the number of people actively job hunting.

According to the ABS March data there were

140K vacancies

724K unemployed.

These figures don't account for the many thousands of under-employed well qualified people, or those who have become so disillusioned, beaten and demoralised that they've given up hope. The hidden unemployed. 

How do we want our youth (and other job seekers) to see themselves BEFORE they attend stressful interviews? As failures? bludgers? As the guilty party who have somehow manipulated the country so there aren't enough jobs to go around? Do we want our graduates to see themselves as not worthy of a career after a long, challenging and expensive education? How do we want employers to view candidates who may have been unemployed for some time? As losers and bludgers? This kind of vilification is hardly a recipe for success. 

We know the negative, undermining effect of name calling, and how it erodes confidence and self esteem, yet not only the media, but government ministers are encouraging this sadistic, divisive pastime. In addition the government is doing nothing to address the complex underlying causes of unemployment, (here) and are persistently negative about supporting jobs growth in areas such as renewable energy.

It’s lazy to vilify people and call them names. It takes maturity to openly discuss and address the complex local, national and international causes of un and under-employment. It's shameful that with this Coalition government we see the former, complete with unfair blame, not the latter.

4: The abolition of the mining tax
5. Higher education will be less affordable
Continued here ...

.

Budget grumbles - 2. Education and unemployment.

This is a continuation of the previous post: Budget grumbles 1.

Those protesting at the recent marches could have been apprentices, child care workers, nurses, firefighters, or people training to be paramedics. These are all valued and respected careers where course fees are likely to increase significantly. Protesters could be anyone deeply and negatively affected by the budget. Are they all ferals as the front page of the Daily Telegraph would like us to believe?  I seriously doubt it.

University degrees will cost up to three times as much under a deregulated fee system, leaving graduates with $120,000-plus debts, according to the architect of the HECS student loan scheme.

This is significantly more than the fees paid by current MP's. Many of whom enjoyed a free education! 

ThIs loud, demanding headline, and indeed most of the page, blithely disregards the actual facts about getting a job. But you wouldn't want to let a fact get in the way of an eye-catching smokescreen of headline.

Such inconvenient things facts. 

"GET A JOB" 

 
In February, there were a total of 140,800 job vacancies in Australia, and more than 700,000 people out of work. Here and here. 

They are the official figures and don't account for those who are chronically underemployed, those on short term contracts who have no idea where there next job will come from, or the people barely able to make ends meet working a few shifts per week with no job security.

University students who are the target in the article above, study in a wide variety of areas. Most will work extremely hard to earn their degrees.  When they graduate they're understandably excited to have achieved a goal, and naturally would like to work in a career related to their field of study.  Instead, far too many are under-employed in unfulfilling, un-challenging jobs, not related to those years of study. 

Under-employment and unemployment is devastating for them, their parents and others who understand the challenges and difficulties of finding a permanent job in this climate, particularly one drawing on their specific training and skills. Is it any wonder they might be protesting at the budget? 

To nastily and falsely imply that all students are lazy spongers is disgusting. To encourage others to deride and vilify them is shameful. If anger is to be expressed, it should to be directed at those who manufactured this unfair budget, not those most affected by its consequences.

Some of the protesters could well be science graduates who've watched formerly respected and valued jobs in the sciences disappear with whirlwind speed before their eyes.

Until the current government gained power, science was generally respected in Australia. We have a long and proud tradition of innovation and inventions which have been celebrated the world over. Only recently has that changed dramatically.

Science graduates, particularly those with specialties in environment, climate, climate change adaptation, sustainability, oceanography and a range of other areas are unlikely to get a job in their chosen career in the near future in Australia. The jobs aren’t there any more. 

Our young people haven’t chosen these difficult courses on a whim, for status or for the money. They've chosen them because they want to contribute. They want to be involved in a positive and proactive way, to help Australia adapt responsibly and resourcefully to the significant and ongoing challenges we all face with our changing climate. 

When the current Minister for the Environment was writing passionately about saving Port Phillip Bay from dredging, (but doesn't apply the same logic or respect to the Great Barrier Reef), these students could have been choosing their demanding senior year maths and science subjects to enable them to get into high scoring, and extremely challenging courses.

They’ve been working towards their degrees for many years and are now seeing jobs that they would have aspired to in science gone, and whole departments and organisations disappearing. They've seen highly regarded world class scientists treated with derision and contempt by the Abbott government.  

And yet the headlines shout a very different message. Unpleasant headlines structured carefully to discredit and vilify students, the same students who are being lumbered with a budget and debt, designed to make their lives significantly harder. And if they can't find a job? Let's blame them, rather than looking honestly at the source of the problem or think creatively about solutions.

The unemployed go job hunting 

In Hobart this morning, Mr Abbott was unsympathetic about the prospect of people going interstate in their search for a job.

Really?! Is the PM so out of touch that he has no idea that without a reasonable job, or more than a few hours work per week, or without the luxury of a huge amount of savings, it’s a bit of a challenge to get a lease on an apartment? Where are unemployed people, moving interstate to find a job, meant to live? On the streets? Not to mention eating, transport, dressing suitably for interviews and paying for internet so you can actually apply for a job IF there's one advertised. The expenses of day to day living are high, as most normal people can attest to, and they go on, and on, and on …. and on. Living interstate to search for work is simply not feasible for many unemployed people. 

This ability for the PM to live so far removed from the reality of the lives of our students, the disabled, retirees, single parents, indigenous Australians and so many others, is astounding. This parallel universe reminds me of the much loved Enid Blyton book, The Magic Faraway Tree with the amazing revolving lands at the top of the tree. You never knew which land you'd end up in when you climbed the tree.

Unfortunately for everyday Australians it seems that the current government enjoys Fantasy Land where “everything is awesome” but they also regularly visit Topsy Turvy Land where lies are presented as truth, where integrity is passe, where less is more, and where it's good and proper for the weakest to support the strongest. 

Mere mortals, the bulk of everyday Australians, are stuck in Nightmare Land experiencing a callous, dismissive indifference to their concerns. Fearful about how they'll manage once the budget takes effect, their questions are flippantly avoided. Everyday Australians, my clients, my neighbours, my community, live in a very real world where wealthy parents may not exist to support you, and generous scholarships (and here) are the stuff of dreams.

But as a number of commentators are saying, what did people really expect ,when they voted for the coalition - kindness, compassion and tolerance?

Labor’s values 

We are all in this together. Where this means a community where everyone works towards the health and security of the whole community. The collective wealth of the economy serves this community. Not the other way around. 

Liberal’s values 

We are all in this together. Where this means a free-market economy where a person’s wealth determines their status, and in turn their status determines their privilege and their privilege determines their access to health and security. If someone can’t access health and security, this is their own fault and it’s not the free-market economy’s role to help them. So in fact, we’re not all in anything together. We’re all on our own. 

These values can be found in the true narratives of both parties, intertwined in every policy they produce, and every statement they make. To find them, you don’t have to look very hard. In fact, you don’t have to look for them at all. All you have to do is open your eyes. Australian voters have had our eyes opened for us. But I just hope that those who feel most let down, the ones who are suffering in silence now because they were the dopes who voted for Abbott, I hope they save some of their resentment for the mainstream media (see below) for so blatantly letting them down by feeding them to the wolves. (my bold)

http://theaimn.com/2014/05/17/a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/

.

Budget grumbles -1. Media

It's Interesting that after the disastrous budget, the Murdoch media is currently working overtime to vilify students and disability pensioners, and whilst it makes a welcome change from the prejudice directed towards asylum seekers and the lies surrounding their issues, it's no less repugnant. They are however providing a wonderfully rich resource for teachers, particularly those working with English, clear thinking, logic, media and even maths students. 

The ferals are revolting! 

There is no room for misunderstanding the reaction expected of the reader, who is now primed to agree and demonise those who are protesting, without having any idea who they are or what they're protesting about.

The Daily Telegraph directs us to focus on a small group of presumably angry protesters and a prominent policeman. Did the photographer or some other person encourage the people to point dramatically? Is the policeman placed there to remind us that ferals need to be kept in their place? A quiet, orderly protest isn't nearly as dramatic as one with "action". 

One wonders how the picture has been cropped. Who was to the right of the person in purple? Was it someone older who’d benefitted from the free education enjoyed by many of the Prime Ministers generation and who believes that a well resourced and equitable education system, available to the whole population, makes for a strong and vibrant society? Was it a man under 30 living in an area of high unemployment, wondering how he'll support his family if he's laid off. 6 months without unemployment benefits is a long time. What has been cropped is just as important as what has been highlighted.

The huge headline LIVING ON EASY STREET is dramatically placed under the action shot of people pointing.  A cursory glance would imply that living on easy street refers to those vile and scary 'ferals' - it doesn't, and is completely unrelated. Nothing about the disastrous poll, nothing prominent about the diverse and valid reasons for the protests. No insight provided for curious readers.

In contrast, note the almost sombre tone of the Sydney Morning Herald where poll results are placed prominently, reflecting the strong and angry reaction by ordinary, everyday Australians to the budget. Further information is provided for those choosing to delve further. 

Everyday Australians targeted
For some details about how ordinary, everyday Australians, our neighbours, and others in our communities will be affected by this unfair budget look here. There you'll find some of the figures that which are usually shared openly on budget night. 

More than one third of the budget cuts - $6 billion - fall on the middle quintile of households, earning $45,000 to $63,000. 

■ Families with school-age children are the hardest hit. Across all income groups, they will lose $15.9 billion over four years, more than 90 per cent of the total. 

■ Low and middle-income sole parents suffer worst of all, losing between 10 and 15 per cent of their annual income - $4000 to $6250 - on family earnings of less than $60,000 by the time the changes to welfare take full effect in 2017-18. 

■ The burden rises sharply for families with children over the four years of the budget. For example, a sole parent earning $60,000 with children aged eight and 12 will lose $1808 in annual income in 2014-15 and $6278 in 2017-18. 

Low- and middle-income earners, especially those with school-age children, are hit hardest as the family tax benefit for single-income families is abolished and indexation is curbed. 

And that's fair? To target low and middle income earners yet not the wealthy?

...

The Daily Telegraph ran a front-page story about there being more people on disability in NSW than died during the World Wars. 

In what way is this relevant? In what sad world is encouraging readers to further marginalise and sneer at disability pensioners, rather than show compassion and understanding  considered acceptable?

Apart from them apparently running the same divisive line a few years ago, they chose a picture of a long queue of people appearing to line up to receive their disability payments. Placed carefully next to a picture of diggers we're encouraged to agree - Diggers did it tough. They suffered. Disability pensioners aren't as worthy as them. 

It turns out this photo is a fairly common piece of royalty-free stock imagery. A Google image search finds this and this and this. It's not related to real Australians on pensions.

But it's too easy to just cruelly vilify those on disability support, and imply that they're bludgers rather than give accurate, reasoned and intelligent insight into the real issues. There's a more thorough assessment here.

This kind of manipulation appears designed to influence and deflect the anger so many feel against the cruel budget. It's a blatant attempt to discredit our fellow citizens who have genuine concerns about how they'll manage with a variety of cuts and persistently increasing costs. These tactics target those least able to respond, and look like a smelly smokescreen to take people's minds off the real issues of inequity, unfairness and a wider gap between the have's and have not's that will be the outcome of the budget . 

AXE THE TAX

Is everybody really being asked to help with the heavy lifting?

Who isn't being supported by this budget? What happened to the end of the age of entitlement?

Is the government able to maturely handle the anger directed at them in response to their unfair budget? Do they need the Murdoch press to shield them by pointing the manipulative finger of outrage towards those negatively affected? (rhetorical question) 

When mining companies were threatened with a fair tax, they used their extraordinary financial resources and complained loud and long. Why is it ok for exceptionally profitable, multinational mining companies to protest, yet not ordinary Australian citizens? Is anyone in government able to explain, without resorting to predetermined cliches, why those least able to pay are being hit hardest, while those most able are barely touched? (another rhetorical question)

to be continued... here Budget Grumbles 2. Education and unemployment.

.