Anyone on the Centrelink (Department of Social Security / Human Services) unemployment benefit named Newstart jobseeker benefit will know if you refuse to attend an interview arranged by a Job Services Provider your punished by having your poverty line income terminated.
This puts people at risk a health and safety personal risk because the JSP never investigate the people seeking interviews claiming to have jobs available. If you've read my book you know a bit about the daily threats to my safety by recalcitrant government public officers and their equally misguided friends and family members.
The JSP simply send people into very unsafe situations without a second thought for their safety, more controls need to be in place. In this day and age video interviewing in the JSP's office should be implemented.
Recently I was told to go to an interview at a place in Adelaide. I was told by the alleged potential employer, Tony at Wynns Automotive in Melrose Park SA, the interview would take place at 4pm on Monday 6 November 2017. He specifically stipulated the 4pm time. When I got there (via train and bicycle) I discovered the alleged potential employer was alone in the factory office. I felt very unsafe but was forced to participate.
He was my age. Despite that the office was clearly closed for business he took some time getting ready for the interview, which led me to believe I was being recorded, particularly as he had the heating turned up high on a warm day which made me visibly sweat forcing me to mop my brow, and he wanted to know about my personal life and more about me being a ‘single lady’ in an interview that seemed more a media interview than a job interview. He kept putting me down telling me he didn't think I was capable. Later when I emailed him an answer to a software problem he claimed to have he didn't even acknowledge the email.
This interview could easily be intended for use when I run for Federal election in 2019. As you should know there is no legal obligation whatsoever on any political party to air truthful claims in their election campaign. They can lie their face off and it’s legal.
Which reminds me of an interview Channel Nine's A Current Affair program criminally falsified in the 1990s when I was an elected politician in local government. My complaint about the false criminal defamations to the Australian media authority returned a response of:
Quote ' A current Affair is restricted by air time, therefore they don't have to tell the whole truth'
- (no comment)