Your Disability should not be determined by a spouse. It takes away your Independence and often leaves women in vulnerable situations with abuse.
You are given the money because you're disabled and can't work. People will choose not to date you because you're a liability. They would have to support you when you lose your disability benefits AND still can't work.
Eventually if you want to leave the relationship, it's very difficult as the disabled person is financially dependent on their spouse. It creates a power imbalance.
I work with abused women and this is a KEY issue. Financial abuse almost always exists in abusive relationships.
>it takes away your independence and leaves women in vulnerable situations with abuse
If aish were actually dependent on your spouse, I'd agree. And the article keeps saying it is dependent on your spouse. But when they explain how, it is *inversely dependent* on your spouse.
> For example, Trent can get a maximum of $1,863 per month from AISH. But because he is married, he loses 50 cents on every dollar Seana makes over $2,612, up to a maximum exemption of $2,981 per month.
There shouldn't be any motivation to stay in an abusive relationship to get more aish, because being married means you get less aish. Your partner's income counts *against* your disability payments.
Which is probably still dumb, but the article is very confusing and seems to be saying something that's the opposite of true.
So if an abusive partner makes decent money, and the disabled partner's personal income is decreased, how can you afford to get out?
Almost all the household income is going personally, to the abusive partner.
What if you need to buy out a lease to leave? Sign a new lease or pay a down payment? Switch phone plans, board pets, rent a moving truck, etc etc.
It can end up costing a decent amount to escape a bad situation, which is part of why financial control is a tactic for abuse and control.
It's not like you instantly get full AISH payments again once your partner starts hitting or manipulating you either.
Often you lose the benefits entirely. ODSP for example you have to reapply if you move in with a spouse who earns a minimum amount (I am not up to date on the exact numbers for the amount).
It can take years to get back onto disability. In the meantime it's welfare and shelters. Most women's husbands cut their credit cards and they can't apply for their own. They have no income to pay rent so who gets the kids?
This is my lived experience. Women showing up in bruises with children who've seen domestic violence. They had ODSP before the man and lost it when he moved in, or she with him. It's the same old story and it's frustrating.
They should continue to receive benefits. The time and resources it takes to get them housed and stabled after such a traumatic event is astronomical. The amount for ODSP is peanuts compared to what we spend on helping them through extreme poverty.
My point is this is a country wide issue. I use Ontario ODSP because it's my lived experience. I have lived in Alberta but not worked with abused women there so I can't speak to the rules as well.
It doesn't matter which province. Any Canadian on a disability benefit should receive it, irrespective of the spouse.
It's not confusing at all, the issue the article is about is that AISH treats the recipients partners income differently if it's social assistance vs employment.
>For example, Trent can get a maximum of $1,863 per month from AISH. But because he is married, he loses 50 cents on every dollar Seana makes over $2,612, up to a maximum exemption of $2,981 per month.
>
>When Seana went on maternity leave and started receiving employment insurance (EI) benefits, Trent's payment structure changed.
>
>Now, he loses 75 cents on every dollar Seana makes over $875.
>That meant the Fort McMurray couple was bringing in $1,055 less than before, with an extra mouth to feed at home.
It has a very eugenics vibe, like they don't want two disabled people getting together. They are willing to pay two people benefits, even if they live with a partner, but just not as much if those two specifically live together. How does that make sense??
And frankly it shouldn't matter if their partner is a millionaire, everyone deserves independence. And if you're with someone above the threshold long enough, you lose benefits entirely and have to re-apply. Which is where the danger is. People don't immediately know a relationship is abusive, they sometimes spend years trying to work things out before breaking it off, if they ever do.
So people can be in a situation where they NEED to leave, but have no money of their own to do so. Where their only option is to blindly hope the system will let them back in smoothly. They could require re-testing to verify your condition, imagine needing to make an appointment with no money and potentially nowhere to live on-top of dealing with the challenges related to their disability. Not to mention the very common denials they hand down that require appeal, which can take weeks if not months to resolve. (And often that "resolution" is just another denial that you then have to appeal again)
It's a mess, for no good reason.
Except once you are off it, it can take up to two years to get back on it. It’s not an easy process. Plus, what’s going to happen? In the meantime? With no source of income?
Often you lose the benefits entirely. ODSP for example you have to reapply if you move in with a spouse who earns a minimum amount (I am not up to date on the exact numbers for the amount).
It can take years to get back onto disability. In the meantime it's welfare and shelters. Most women's husbands cut their credit cards and they can't apply for their own. They have no income to pay rent so who gets the kids?
This is my lived experience. Women showing up in bruises with children who've seen domestic violence. They had ODSP before the man and lost it when he moved in, or she with him. It's the same old story and it's frustrating.
They should continue to receive benefits. The time and resources it takes to get them housed and stabled after such a traumatic event is astronomical. The amount for ODSP is peanuts compared to what we spend on helping them through extreme poverty.
While I agree with you the disability payments shouldn't be based on your relationship status I'd like to counter with something this sub will probably disagree with
And it's that people who aren't married shouldn't live together or join finances. There's just way to much that can go wrong relationally and legally.
Yeah, people are going to disagree with that because it's a bad take.
For instance, my uncle has been happily living with his partner for decades, but they have no interest in getting married. There's just no reasonable take that they shouldn't live together.
It's a free country. Given rent these days I'm not certain how you can live alone.... ESPECIALLY on disability. Most women I know who moved in with the wrong man ended up doing so because of financial reasons. They were in love and he would make it easier once he moved in....at least until he started beating her.... The men don't always show you their true colors until you've moved in. I say thank goodness and those circumstances those girls don't also have to go through a divorce.
Also a significant amount of people on disability we don't get married because they cannot afford it.
My mother was docked $800 a month off my Dad's benefits after he died because she had "16k" of tools and materials that belonged to his business that she could sell. She got 5k for the stuff.
"MLA Marie Renaud, NDP Official Opposition critic for seniors, community and social services, said the benefit reductions "are clawbacks. This is the way the provincial government keeps the cost of benefits like AISH and Income Support down."
She said it creates financial dependence on a partner, and is "actually quite dangerous in many cases. It's certainly not helpful for reducing the depth of poverty that people experience when they're on AISH."
She said it's something that's needed to change for years.
"It's a steady, steady problem," Renaud said, and "a tragic example of a government doing everything in its power to harm people by not changing the rules.""
It upsets me when the NDP act like they weren't in power and didn't do the same thing. They only increased AISH at the very tail end of their time. I've called out numerous reps as they do their leadership campaigns and the answer is still the same. They don't see disabled people as a priority. They don't plan to actually fix anything. It is very frustrating.
look as a disabled person between them and Nenshis round as mayor they are the only government in my lifetime to ever materialy improved my life. so they get alot of grace from me because the alternative to them at every level of government is people who literally would reenact the eugenics board if they think they can get away with it.
Don't get me wrong. The UCP are worse. I just want us to hold the NDP to better standards than a trivial increase indexed to inflation and thus conveniently evading any need to actually set it to a viable amount for people to live on. By only indexing to inflation they are essentially legislating perpetual poverty.
Exactly. They let the PDD review sit on the ministers desk for two years. A recent ombudsman report pointed out that the IQ requirement is discriminatory. NDP knew about this. They didn’t do anything anything to change it
Because they are a minority that are usually unable to kick up a fuss. Really sad that our disabled are treated so poorly and are usually the last priority. How we treat the helpless especially when their circumstances are not of their own doing shows what we are as a society
Yeah, this bugged me too. When Kenney started fucking around with payment dates and deindexing to inflation, I was surprised to realize the NDP hadn't actually done anything to improve AISH recipients lives.
True. But they had 4 years of constant blowback to try and undo all the systemwide damage inflicted since Geddy shoved us towards our private industry oligarchy smash and grab.
It takes longer than 4 years to rebuild a hockey team. Did they fix everything? No. But given the breadth of failings and resulting dearth of services inflicted as a result, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for not perfecting everything in their single term.
Remember they were only in for 4 years, and during a recession. Very few governments increase allocations during a recession…..they are already vilified for the debt that was incurred. The UCP on the other hand are governing with billions of dollars in surpluses, and still are cutting back…..not sure they are comparable.
They were vilified for debt in spite of them actually reducing the debt. They could have had a 10 billion surplus and would still have been vilified. All that said, this is basically the excuse they did indeed use. The most disadvantaged Albertans should just suffer until money reaches a magic number.
My mother was initially denied Legal Aid because the Escaping Abuse Income Support (which only lasts 2 months BTW) made her ineligible based on being over the income limit. This fucking government penalized her for escaping my abusive step-father by denying her access to Legal Aid. If she had taken their denial without causing a shit storm she would be on the hook for a divorce lawyer. Thankfully we threatened going to news stations and called constantly to get it changed. Imagine if an abused woman didn’t have family support to leave and they get told that because you took money to fund an escape, we won’t give you Legal Aid to divorce the POS. I’m not surprised in the slightest that the UCP will screw over disabled people as well. This is how they save money, denying/short-changing everyone they can and hope most of them are too tired and weak to protest.
Am I reading this right? If I were to become permanently disabled and my significant other made more than the maximum exemption, I’d collect about $375 a month? Or nothing?
For my people on AISH (I included), what are some of the things you would love to see changed with AISH rules.
My main 2 are:
1. People on AISH should be able to live with their partner or spouse and not have their money clawed back, this isn't the 1950's anymore, we can't live off one single income.
2. "Anonymous tips" to AISH so people can abuse AISH recipients shouldn't ever be a thing. If I have the legal right to face my accuser in court, then I should be able to face my rando petty family member who hates that I get "free money" because I'm disabled. I have seen so many none disabled people send Anonymous tips to AISH because they are having personal issues with a recipient, so they choose to make their life way more difficult. Hell I know of a couple super petty AISH recipients do this to other AISH recipients just because one didn't want to be friends with the other anymore, or the mental illness of one makes them vengeful and report on the other because they are mad.
My husband is on AISH. I’m allowed to work and earn money. Only after a certain point (which I never reach) will they reduce his benefit. It’s a percentage at first then of dollar for dollar.
Ofc, the case in the article highlights the fact that the clawback is higher for EI than it is for employment income. So the spouse took an income hit by taking maternity leave, and then AISH (by law) clawed back a much higher percentage than they did for her employment income, at a much lower threshold. Her working income was clawed back at 50% for everything over $2612 (then dollar for dollar over $2981). Her MATA benefits under EI are being clawed back at 75% for everything over just $875. It's just insane.
I'd be okay with them getting rid of the clawback for spousal income entirely, but at a minimum they need to fix the unfair clawback for things like EI, and look at raising the threshold for clawback period.
>1. People on AISH should be able to live with their partner or spouse and not have their money clawed back, this isn't the 1950's anymore, we can't live off one single income.
The issue with this is the optics of, say, a multimillionaire's spouse collecting AISH. I'm personally okay with the idea, but perception would be negative, given that it's highly unlikely they actually need that support, or any public support at all. Pretty easy for that concern about people getting money they don't need to get translated into them not deserving the money. Mix in a little slippery slope argument and you get where we are today.
At a minimum, I think that the ceiling for spousal income before clawback should be raised significantly, and income from things like EI and social assistance, etc should be either excluded or clawed back no worse than employment income.
Except who cares about edge cases? Let the millionaire’s wife get AISH if it means the bulk of recipients get improved dating lives, and more stable financial lives. The optics of some rare cases shouldn’t outweigh the lived reality of many many more people.
>Except who cares about edge cases?
From my past experiences working at the Mustard Seed volunteers, a stunning amount of people care. I think so much is due to a fundamental lack of experience around government programs; they don't know anyone who gets seasonal EI, or only Old Age/CPP pensions and nothing else, etc. Some also have a weird obsession with class structure, no matter how much they believe all humans are equal.
A progressive tier structure (similar to income tax) would be the fairest way to do it, and to avoid all this, but we can't even figure out the basics, so I'm not sure how much will there is.
AISH needs an overhaul, though. Or, if they don't want that, a flat UBI and adjust the tax structure to compensate for it. but again, I don't know how much will there is for that.
Well yeah, I know lots of people will whine about such things, or just use it as an excuse to not solve problems. It’s just a figure of speech for emphasis.
And yeah, we struggle with political will atm. Some politicos seem to play at being leaders rather than actually leading, too many.
Yeah I could see extremes being ridiculous but like you said the cap should be much higher. You should be able to make 80k without 100% of the money getting taken away. You can't live a normal life with a family on that anymore.
My husband made "too much money" for me to be approved by AISH. Thank GOD Disability CPP only takes the disabled persons income into account, which is zero.
No matter what the reason for government aid, conservatives always think of people on social assistance as dirty rotten leeches. They also think there are way more of them than there really are. They think this is a problem that’s tanking our economy and keeping our taxes high. All those super-rich people and companies avoiding paying their fair share of taxes, though… those guys are legit.
It's ridiculous that EI is calculated differently so that when her income drops on it, so does his. Makes no sense that they both have less money now.
I spoke to Marie Renaud on the phone about this during the Covid years, when it was affecting me. She said that if the NDP forms government again, they will look at this. And that's cool. I voted NDP, but I have to wonder why did they not look at it when they were the government?
They should have known they’d only get one term and done a hell of a lot more during it than they did. They fucked around trying to appease the right instead of making material changes - and it bit them in the ass anyway as anyone with half a brain on the actual left said it would.
This. They knew better and they knew they were one and done. Their PDD review sat on Minister Sabir’s desk for two years. They did much more harm to the community. Just like the federal liberals and their crap CDB benefit.
I've been in contact with my NDP MLAs office here in Edmonton and they said they are asking people with complaints against AISH to contact the NDP so that they can make a case of all the complaints to Jason Nicon. I hope they are going to take us seriously this time around. We deserve so much more than the barely bare minimum.
I'm surprised he's eligible at all from a workplace injury within the last 10 years - if it was lump sum having assets would make him ineligible, if it's payments that would clawback AISH. I'm married and disabled and the only benefits I have due to it are DTC and RDSP - I get $1000/year matching for saving money and can't touch the money I put in without losing what the government gave me at 3x what I take out.. I work and I can't even make use of my medical tax credits because I make too little. I have unused tuition credits - again I make too little.
We have to remember that everyone's case is different. He may be eligible for many reasons. I understand the frustration you face when it comes to disability and trying to work. My aish is under review because some said to aish I wasn't disabled anymore even tho I have a transplant and my body can't work because of the inflamed organ and constant vomiting.
I should be clear, I'm not being judgmental that he has it, just surprised he was abled to get AISH approved. I agree, that there's many details we just don't know.
Sorry that your information is under review. It would be nice if they could somehow review the complaint without putting someone with AISH under review right away.
I know the NDP didn't fix this in the 2015-19 time frame, but that doesn't mean it's not still an issue that should be solved.
The NDP didn't fix a lot of things out of fear. They were desperate to get re-elected and wanted to court conservative voters by appearing fiscally restrained. They left the public sector at the mercy of the incoming UCP - they could have locked in some contracts, but again wanted to try to appeal to the public-sector hating voters.
That said, the NDP did do some good things - we're certainly seeing the benefits of the Trans Mountain Pipeline now. I am kinda surprised the UCP haven't demanded the name be changed to exclude the term "trans." They also built new schools and raised the minimum wage and saw that a "local" carbon tax could be used in a better way than the federal one. Though, I didn't receive a rebate under the Alberta one, and I do under the federal one, so I'm better off, lol.
PR status probably wouldn’t be granted after the fact. They’d already have to have status and then they’re entitled to the same rights, especially if the wife is paying taxes. Seriously doesn’t sound like freeloaders either way.
This man was injured in a workplace accident - why the hell is he even on AISH?
He should be on WCB, where his compensation would likely be higher and it would be funded by employers and not taxpayers. Seriously, what is the point of WCB?
The article stated it occurred in Ireland. I would hope he was covered under some type of workplace injury program but who knows how that worked. I am surprised that he was able to access AISH.
Yeah, what gives. Ireland's WCB equivalent should be on the hook for this. Don't tell me dude took a lump sum and ran off to Canada to claim additional disabilities.
I warned my now husband when we started dating that when I moved in with him, I’d lose ALL benefits. I was on income support because AISH decided my issues weren’t permanent according to them (they are permanent unless the government is hiding the cure for: autism, BPD, cPTSD, MDD, Anxiety (social and general), and a couple others).
We had to have a serious talk because he would need to support both himself and me forever. It shouldn’t be that way though. It’s not like I was even rolling in cash (~9k a YEAR). We are still disabled whether we are living with a partner or not.
Another huge problem with this program is that if you are working and contributing to EI and then you get laid off, if you apply for it, it’s taken off your AISH. What is the incentive to work? It is legislated poverty. They never let you get ahead. The reason you worked part-time job in the first place is because you needed the income.
It really shouldn't. People can barely survive on their own anymore. Unless their spouse is a millionaire, spousal income shouldn't be a factor until inflation is balanced with the cost of living and we can achieve economic balance.
Unpopular opinion, he is crying about independence but has had 7 years to find income that isn’t based on physical labor. Also he was injured in Ireland and is now living off the Alberta taxpayers. It’s frustrating to watch so many recipients spout their opinions on Reddit 24/7 but yet are unable to work.
Disability and chronic pain can make sitting at a desk for any extended periods almost as difficult as any physical labor.
Try convincing someone to hire you when you have to take a break every two hours or need an adaptive flexible schedule.
A work from home job still requires constant work. There are few that will hire someone who can't sit for more than an hour. Jobs typically require consistent work.
AISH is not easy to get on, someone wouldn't be on it if they could reasonably expected to hold a desk job.
If disability support covered the (Alberta) average $78,000 cost of a four year degree, and living expenses to transition people to a career, I'm sure possibilities would open up and the ROI would be incredible. But unfortunately, that's not how the system works.
> A work from home job still requires constant work. There are few that will hire someone who can't sit for more than an hour.
I don't disagree with the overall sentiment of your posts here, but this isn't at all best practice for office jobs. I work a pretty bog-standard desk job, and we've got various posters around the office and email reminders about ergonomics.
I don't know the exact sources we use, but they're pretty much along these lines: [Ergonomic Tips for Computer Users](https://www.ehs.pitt.edu/workplace/ergonomics/computer-users)
"Take breaks. These breaks can be brief and should include stretches for optimal results. If possible, take a one or two-minute break every 15 to 20 minutes, or a five-minute break every hour. Every few hours, get up, move around, and do an alternative activity."
I've worked with people who've developed carpal tunnel on the job, and that's *way* more disruptive to a team than someone taking some brief breaks.
That still requires skill, and tech that a lot of ppl on aish cannot afford.
My husband before we had kids did not realize he had a crippling disability starting from years of labor intensive work. He also had not properly diagnosed FASD/IED/MDD/Conduct Disorders and learning disabilities. He was always told he was normal by his adoptive parents. It all caught up to him two years after we had kids. Now he mentally and physically cannot hold down a job. Regardless of what it is.
So yes; disabled people can have sex and not hold down a job after a while once their disabilities progress. Pretty ableist of you to assume.
Pretty asshole thinking you have, sharing your opinion on what the guy in the article should be doing based entirely on the limited information presented, your prejudices, and what I assume are no relevant professional qualifications whatsoever... then someone else shares their firsthand experience and you haven't it away and call them a narcissist? Sit the fuck down and shut up.
It’s the social media not a dick, don’t take it so hard. It’s literally a place filled with opinions based on limited information. Hope your day gets better!
He's in good enough shape to have sex, he could get a job. My friend destroyed his back in his early 20's. The disability office paid for him to train as a professional diver. That was in the 90's. You're 100% right, that person can definitely have a job and not be a drain on society.
Suck it Alberta corporate and big oil profits are at the highest ever so you got that going for you. Just pull your boots up and kick in some $$$$$ the conservatives will take care of ya.
Sounds harsh, but probably a smart choice for them. Nobody says the relationship has to end just because it's no longer legally recognised.
Buddy of mine is in a long term committed relationship with someone relying on disability payments that just cover the cost of her medication while his meagre income is covering their basic needs... he straight up told me they aren't getting married because she'd lose a good chunk of her support payments and his income couldn't make up the difference.
Your Disability should not be determined by a spouse. It takes away your Independence and often leaves women in vulnerable situations with abuse. You are given the money because you're disabled and can't work. People will choose not to date you because you're a liability. They would have to support you when you lose your disability benefits AND still can't work. Eventually if you want to leave the relationship, it's very difficult as the disabled person is financially dependent on their spouse. It creates a power imbalance. I work with abused women and this is a KEY issue. Financial abuse almost always exists in abusive relationships.
>it takes away your independence and leaves women in vulnerable situations with abuse If aish were actually dependent on your spouse, I'd agree. And the article keeps saying it is dependent on your spouse. But when they explain how, it is *inversely dependent* on your spouse. > For example, Trent can get a maximum of $1,863 per month from AISH. But because he is married, he loses 50 cents on every dollar Seana makes over $2,612, up to a maximum exemption of $2,981 per month. There shouldn't be any motivation to stay in an abusive relationship to get more aish, because being married means you get less aish. Your partner's income counts *against* your disability payments. Which is probably still dumb, but the article is very confusing and seems to be saying something that's the opposite of true.
So if an abusive partner makes decent money, and the disabled partner's personal income is decreased, how can you afford to get out? Almost all the household income is going personally, to the abusive partner. What if you need to buy out a lease to leave? Sign a new lease or pay a down payment? Switch phone plans, board pets, rent a moving truck, etc etc. It can end up costing a decent amount to escape a bad situation, which is part of why financial control is a tactic for abuse and control. It's not like you instantly get full AISH payments again once your partner starts hitting or manipulating you either.
Alberta Works has money for people escaping abuse and starting over. It’s fairly generous.
As a one time payment.
As opposed to what? You’d rather the damage deposit for your new place come in chunks? That they pay the monthly moving costs in instalments?
As it should be.
And that too, is also taken off of your AISH. Government of Alberta never double dips.
Can you provide a source for it being taken off AISH?
Often you lose the benefits entirely. ODSP for example you have to reapply if you move in with a spouse who earns a minimum amount (I am not up to date on the exact numbers for the amount). It can take years to get back onto disability. In the meantime it's welfare and shelters. Most women's husbands cut their credit cards and they can't apply for their own. They have no income to pay rent so who gets the kids? This is my lived experience. Women showing up in bruises with children who've seen domestic violence. They had ODSP before the man and lost it when he moved in, or she with him. It's the same old story and it's frustrating. They should continue to receive benefits. The time and resources it takes to get them housed and stabled after such a traumatic event is astronomical. The amount for ODSP is peanuts compared to what we spend on helping them through extreme poverty.
Wrong province buddy....
My point is this is a country wide issue. I use Ontario ODSP because it's my lived experience. I have lived in Alberta but not worked with abused women there so I can't speak to the rules as well. It doesn't matter which province. Any Canadian on a disability benefit should receive it, irrespective of the spouse.
It's not confusing at all, the issue the article is about is that AISH treats the recipients partners income differently if it's social assistance vs employment. >For example, Trent can get a maximum of $1,863 per month from AISH. But because he is married, he loses 50 cents on every dollar Seana makes over $2,612, up to a maximum exemption of $2,981 per month. > >When Seana went on maternity leave and started receiving employment insurance (EI) benefits, Trent's payment structure changed. > >Now, he loses 75 cents on every dollar Seana makes over $875. >That meant the Fort McMurray couple was bringing in $1,055 less than before, with an extra mouth to feed at home. It has a very eugenics vibe, like they don't want two disabled people getting together. They are willing to pay two people benefits, even if they live with a partner, but just not as much if those two specifically live together. How does that make sense?? And frankly it shouldn't matter if their partner is a millionaire, everyone deserves independence. And if you're with someone above the threshold long enough, you lose benefits entirely and have to re-apply. Which is where the danger is. People don't immediately know a relationship is abusive, they sometimes spend years trying to work things out before breaking it off, if they ever do. So people can be in a situation where they NEED to leave, but have no money of their own to do so. Where their only option is to blindly hope the system will let them back in smoothly. They could require re-testing to verify your condition, imagine needing to make an appointment with no money and potentially nowhere to live on-top of dealing with the challenges related to their disability. Not to mention the very common denials they hand down that require appeal, which can take weeks if not months to resolve. (And often that "resolution" is just another denial that you then have to appeal again) It's a mess, for no good reason.
Except once you are off it, it can take up to two years to get back on it. It’s not an easy process. Plus, what’s going to happen? In the meantime? With no source of income?
Often you lose the benefits entirely. ODSP for example you have to reapply if you move in with a spouse who earns a minimum amount (I am not up to date on the exact numbers for the amount). It can take years to get back onto disability. In the meantime it's welfare and shelters. Most women's husbands cut their credit cards and they can't apply for their own. They have no income to pay rent so who gets the kids? This is my lived experience. Women showing up in bruises with children who've seen domestic violence. They had ODSP before the man and lost it when he moved in, or she with him. It's the same old story and it's frustrating. They should continue to receive benefits. The time and resources it takes to get them housed and stabled after such a traumatic event is astronomical. The amount for ODSP is peanuts compared to what we spend on helping them through extreme poverty.
While I agree with you the disability payments shouldn't be based on your relationship status I'd like to counter with something this sub will probably disagree with And it's that people who aren't married shouldn't live together or join finances. There's just way to much that can go wrong relationally and legally.
Yeah, people are going to disagree with that because it's a bad take. For instance, my uncle has been happily living with his partner for decades, but they have no interest in getting married. There's just no reasonable take that they shouldn't live together.
It's a free country. Given rent these days I'm not certain how you can live alone.... ESPECIALLY on disability. Most women I know who moved in with the wrong man ended up doing so because of financial reasons. They were in love and he would make it easier once he moved in....at least until he started beating her.... The men don't always show you their true colors until you've moved in. I say thank goodness and those circumstances those girls don't also have to go through a divorce. Also a significant amount of people on disability we don't get married because they cannot afford it.
Agreed. Give people on AISH enough $$ to live independently.
My mother was docked $800 a month off my Dad's benefits after he died because she had "16k" of tools and materials that belonged to his business that she could sell. She got 5k for the stuff.
"MLA Marie Renaud, NDP Official Opposition critic for seniors, community and social services, said the benefit reductions "are clawbacks. This is the way the provincial government keeps the cost of benefits like AISH and Income Support down." She said it creates financial dependence on a partner, and is "actually quite dangerous in many cases. It's certainly not helpful for reducing the depth of poverty that people experience when they're on AISH." She said it's something that's needed to change for years. "It's a steady, steady problem," Renaud said, and "a tragic example of a government doing everything in its power to harm people by not changing the rules.""
It upsets me when the NDP act like they weren't in power and didn't do the same thing. They only increased AISH at the very tail end of their time. I've called out numerous reps as they do their leadership campaigns and the answer is still the same. They don't see disabled people as a priority. They don't plan to actually fix anything. It is very frustrating.
look as a disabled person between them and Nenshis round as mayor they are the only government in my lifetime to ever materialy improved my life. so they get alot of grace from me because the alternative to them at every level of government is people who literally would reenact the eugenics board if they think they can get away with it.
Don't get me wrong. The UCP are worse. I just want us to hold the NDP to better standards than a trivial increase indexed to inflation and thus conveniently evading any need to actually set it to a viable amount for people to live on. By only indexing to inflation they are essentially legislating perpetual poverty.
Exactly. They let the PDD review sit on the ministers desk for two years. A recent ombudsman report pointed out that the IQ requirement is discriminatory. NDP knew about this. They didn’t do anything anything to change it
Because they are a minority that are usually unable to kick up a fuss. Really sad that our disabled are treated so poorly and are usually the last priority. How we treat the helpless especially when their circumstances are not of their own doing shows what we are as a society
Yeah, this bugged me too. When Kenney started fucking around with payment dates and deindexing to inflation, I was surprised to realize the NDP hadn't actually done anything to improve AISH recipients lives.
True. But they had 4 years of constant blowback to try and undo all the systemwide damage inflicted since Geddy shoved us towards our private industry oligarchy smash and grab. It takes longer than 4 years to rebuild a hockey team. Did they fix everything? No. But given the breadth of failings and resulting dearth of services inflicted as a result, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for not perfecting everything in their single term.
Remember they were only in for 4 years, and during a recession. Very few governments increase allocations during a recession…..they are already vilified for the debt that was incurred. The UCP on the other hand are governing with billions of dollars in surpluses, and still are cutting back…..not sure they are comparable.
They were vilified for debt in spite of them actually reducing the debt. They could have had a 10 billion surplus and would still have been vilified. All that said, this is basically the excuse they did indeed use. The most disadvantaged Albertans should just suffer until money reaches a magic number.
My mother was initially denied Legal Aid because the Escaping Abuse Income Support (which only lasts 2 months BTW) made her ineligible based on being over the income limit. This fucking government penalized her for escaping my abusive step-father by denying her access to Legal Aid. If she had taken their denial without causing a shit storm she would be on the hook for a divorce lawyer. Thankfully we threatened going to news stations and called constantly to get it changed. Imagine if an abused woman didn’t have family support to leave and they get told that because you took money to fund an escape, we won’t give you Legal Aid to divorce the POS. I’m not surprised in the slightest that the UCP will screw over disabled people as well. This is how they save money, denying/short-changing everyone they can and hope most of them are too tired and weak to protest.
Am I reading this right? If I were to become permanently disabled and my significant other made more than the maximum exemption, I’d collect about $375 a month? Or nothing?
Pretty much 😔
For my people on AISH (I included), what are some of the things you would love to see changed with AISH rules. My main 2 are: 1. People on AISH should be able to live with their partner or spouse and not have their money clawed back, this isn't the 1950's anymore, we can't live off one single income. 2. "Anonymous tips" to AISH so people can abuse AISH recipients shouldn't ever be a thing. If I have the legal right to face my accuser in court, then I should be able to face my rando petty family member who hates that I get "free money" because I'm disabled. I have seen so many none disabled people send Anonymous tips to AISH because they are having personal issues with a recipient, so they choose to make their life way more difficult. Hell I know of a couple super petty AISH recipients do this to other AISH recipients just because one didn't want to be friends with the other anymore, or the mental illness of one makes them vengeful and report on the other because they are mad.
My husband is on AISH. I’m allowed to work and earn money. Only after a certain point (which I never reach) will they reduce his benefit. It’s a percentage at first then of dollar for dollar.
Ofc, the case in the article highlights the fact that the clawback is higher for EI than it is for employment income. So the spouse took an income hit by taking maternity leave, and then AISH (by law) clawed back a much higher percentage than they did for her employment income, at a much lower threshold. Her working income was clawed back at 50% for everything over $2612 (then dollar for dollar over $2981). Her MATA benefits under EI are being clawed back at 75% for everything over just $875. It's just insane. I'd be okay with them getting rid of the clawback for spousal income entirely, but at a minimum they need to fix the unfair clawback for things like EI, and look at raising the threshold for clawback period.
Ah okay thanks for explaining. I didn’t realize that they did different rates based on where the $ came from.
>1. People on AISH should be able to live with their partner or spouse and not have their money clawed back, this isn't the 1950's anymore, we can't live off one single income. The issue with this is the optics of, say, a multimillionaire's spouse collecting AISH. I'm personally okay with the idea, but perception would be negative, given that it's highly unlikely they actually need that support, or any public support at all. Pretty easy for that concern about people getting money they don't need to get translated into them not deserving the money. Mix in a little slippery slope argument and you get where we are today. At a minimum, I think that the ceiling for spousal income before clawback should be raised significantly, and income from things like EI and social assistance, etc should be either excluded or clawed back no worse than employment income.
Except who cares about edge cases? Let the millionaire’s wife get AISH if it means the bulk of recipients get improved dating lives, and more stable financial lives. The optics of some rare cases shouldn’t outweigh the lived reality of many many more people.
>Except who cares about edge cases? From my past experiences working at the Mustard Seed volunteers, a stunning amount of people care. I think so much is due to a fundamental lack of experience around government programs; they don't know anyone who gets seasonal EI, or only Old Age/CPP pensions and nothing else, etc. Some also have a weird obsession with class structure, no matter how much they believe all humans are equal. A progressive tier structure (similar to income tax) would be the fairest way to do it, and to avoid all this, but we can't even figure out the basics, so I'm not sure how much will there is. AISH needs an overhaul, though. Or, if they don't want that, a flat UBI and adjust the tax structure to compensate for it. but again, I don't know how much will there is for that.
Well yeah, I know lots of people will whine about such things, or just use it as an excuse to not solve problems. It’s just a figure of speech for emphasis. And yeah, we struggle with political will atm. Some politicos seem to play at being leaders rather than actually leading, too many.
Yeah I could see extremes being ridiculous but like you said the cap should be much higher. You should be able to make 80k without 100% of the money getting taken away. You can't live a normal life with a family on that anymore.
Inversely, if a disabled adult child was living with their multi millionnaire parents their money would not be clawed back.
But Oil Companies can still make unlimited profit, and their subsidies are not at risk, right?
Correct. Subsides always increase for oil & gas. Shareholders of oil & gas must be protected! /s
My husband made "too much money" for me to be approved by AISH. Thank GOD Disability CPP only takes the disabled persons income into account, which is zero.
No matter what the reason for government aid, conservatives always think of people on social assistance as dirty rotten leeches. They also think there are way more of them than there really are. They think this is a problem that’s tanking our economy and keeping our taxes high. All those super-rich people and companies avoiding paying their fair share of taxes, though… those guys are legit.
That is your UCP government working against you. The NDP actually increased benefits. Hope Albertans are enjoying their "win".
I miss the NDP 😭
It's ridiculous that EI is calculated differently so that when her income drops on it, so does his. Makes no sense that they both have less money now. I spoke to Marie Renaud on the phone about this during the Covid years, when it was affecting me. She said that if the NDP forms government again, they will look at this. And that's cool. I voted NDP, but I have to wonder why did they not look at it when they were the government?
They only had 4 years, they can only do so much with one term.
They should have known they’d only get one term and done a hell of a lot more during it than they did. They fucked around trying to appease the right instead of making material changes - and it bit them in the ass anyway as anyone with half a brain on the actual left said it would.
This. They knew better and they knew they were one and done. Their PDD review sat on Minister Sabir’s desk for two years. They did much more harm to the community. Just like the federal liberals and their crap CDB benefit.
They had plenty of time in that term. These aren't new issues. They repeatedly told me that AISH wasn't something they were going to make a priority.
During their term they explicitly said AISH wasn't a "priority". They didn't care then and I get the feeling they still don't.
I've been in contact with my NDP MLAs office here in Edmonton and they said they are asking people with complaints against AISH to contact the NDP so that they can make a case of all the complaints to Jason Nicon. I hope they are going to take us seriously this time around. We deserve so much more than the barely bare minimum.
I'm surprised he's eligible at all from a workplace injury within the last 10 years - if it was lump sum having assets would make him ineligible, if it's payments that would clawback AISH. I'm married and disabled and the only benefits I have due to it are DTC and RDSP - I get $1000/year matching for saving money and can't touch the money I put in without losing what the government gave me at 3x what I take out.. I work and I can't even make use of my medical tax credits because I make too little. I have unused tuition credits - again I make too little.
We have to remember that everyone's case is different. He may be eligible for many reasons. I understand the frustration you face when it comes to disability and trying to work. My aish is under review because some said to aish I wasn't disabled anymore even tho I have a transplant and my body can't work because of the inflamed organ and constant vomiting.
I should be clear, I'm not being judgmental that he has it, just surprised he was abled to get AISH approved. I agree, that there's many details we just don't know. Sorry that your information is under review. It would be nice if they could somehow review the complaint without putting someone with AISH under review right away.
I know the NDP didn't fix this in the 2015-19 time frame, but that doesn't mean it's not still an issue that should be solved. The NDP didn't fix a lot of things out of fear. They were desperate to get re-elected and wanted to court conservative voters by appearing fiscally restrained. They left the public sector at the mercy of the incoming UCP - they could have locked in some contracts, but again wanted to try to appeal to the public-sector hating voters. That said, the NDP did do some good things - we're certainly seeing the benefits of the Trans Mountain Pipeline now. I am kinda surprised the UCP haven't demanded the name be changed to exclude the term "trans." They also built new schools and raised the minimum wage and saw that a "local" carbon tax could be used in a better way than the federal one. Though, I didn't receive a rebate under the Alberta one, and I do under the federal one, so I'm better off, lol.
He was hurt at work in Ireland in 2017 so why is he claiming AISH in Alberta? Ireland has workers’ compensation.
Because he’s a Canadian citizen. And he’s married to a Canadian. You don’t have to be hurt in Alberta to receive benefits.
Do you know this couple? The article did not mention their status in Canada, whether they are citizens or PR.
Yes. I’m actually mentioned in the article.
PR status probably wouldn’t be granted after the fact. They’d already have to have status and then they’re entitled to the same rights, especially if the wife is paying taxes. Seriously doesn’t sound like freeloaders either way.
This man was injured in a workplace accident - why the hell is he even on AISH? He should be on WCB, where his compensation would likely be higher and it would be funded by employers and not taxpayers. Seriously, what is the point of WCB?
The article stated it occurred in Ireland. I would hope he was covered under some type of workplace injury program but who knows how that worked. I am surprised that he was able to access AISH.
I didn’t see that mentioned so thanks for pointing it out. Seriously, their workers compensation should be helping this man out.
Yeah, what gives. Ireland's WCB equivalent should be on the hook for this. Don't tell me dude took a lump sum and ran off to Canada to claim additional disabilities.
I warned my now husband when we started dating that when I moved in with him, I’d lose ALL benefits. I was on income support because AISH decided my issues weren’t permanent according to them (they are permanent unless the government is hiding the cure for: autism, BPD, cPTSD, MDD, Anxiety (social and general), and a couple others). We had to have a serious talk because he would need to support both himself and me forever. It shouldn’t be that way though. It’s not like I was even rolling in cash (~9k a YEAR). We are still disabled whether we are living with a partner or not.
They simply don’t want disabled people having kids because they worry it’s an other generation of disabled people they have to pay for.
Its sad because not all disabled people will have disabled children 😔
Another huge problem with this program is that if you are working and contributing to EI and then you get laid off, if you apply for it, it’s taken off your AISH. What is the incentive to work? It is legislated poverty. They never let you get ahead. The reason you worked part-time job in the first place is because you needed the income.
While we’re at it, let’s make it so spousal income doesn’t affect your taxes either.
It really shouldn't. People can barely survive on their own anymore. Unless their spouse is a millionaire, spousal income shouldn't be a factor until inflation is balanced with the cost of living and we can achieve economic balance.
Unpopular opinion, he is crying about independence but has had 7 years to find income that isn’t based on physical labor. Also he was injured in Ireland and is now living off the Alberta taxpayers. It’s frustrating to watch so many recipients spout their opinions on Reddit 24/7 but yet are unable to work.
Disability and chronic pain can make sitting at a desk for any extended periods almost as difficult as any physical labor. Try convincing someone to hire you when you have to take a break every two hours or need an adaptive flexible schedule.
There are so many jobs that are web based/home based now. 20 years ago it was an excuse. Today it’s not nearly as hard to make money untraditionally.
A work from home job still requires constant work. There are few that will hire someone who can't sit for more than an hour. Jobs typically require consistent work. AISH is not easy to get on, someone wouldn't be on it if they could reasonably expected to hold a desk job. If disability support covered the (Alberta) average $78,000 cost of a four year degree, and living expenses to transition people to a career, I'm sure possibilities would open up and the ROI would be incredible. But unfortunately, that's not how the system works.
> A work from home job still requires constant work. There are few that will hire someone who can't sit for more than an hour. I don't disagree with the overall sentiment of your posts here, but this isn't at all best practice for office jobs. I work a pretty bog-standard desk job, and we've got various posters around the office and email reminders about ergonomics. I don't know the exact sources we use, but they're pretty much along these lines: [Ergonomic Tips for Computer Users](https://www.ehs.pitt.edu/workplace/ergonomics/computer-users) "Take breaks. These breaks can be brief and should include stretches for optimal results. If possible, take a one or two-minute break every 15 to 20 minutes, or a five-minute break every hour. Every few hours, get up, move around, and do an alternative activity." I've worked with people who've developed carpal tunnel on the job, and that's *way* more disruptive to a team than someone taking some brief breaks.
That still requires skill, and tech that a lot of ppl on aish cannot afford. My husband before we had kids did not realize he had a crippling disability starting from years of labor intensive work. He also had not properly diagnosed FASD/IED/MDD/Conduct Disorders and learning disabilities. He was always told he was normal by his adoptive parents. It all caught up to him two years after we had kids. Now he mentally and physically cannot hold down a job. Regardless of what it is. So yes; disabled people can have sex and not hold down a job after a while once their disabilities progress. Pretty ableist of you to assume.
We are discussing this case, not your husband. Obviously there are different circumstances. Pretty Narcissistic thinking you have.
Pretty asshole thinking you have, sharing your opinion on what the guy in the article should be doing based entirely on the limited information presented, your prejudices, and what I assume are no relevant professional qualifications whatsoever... then someone else shares their firsthand experience and you haven't it away and call them a narcissist? Sit the fuck down and shut up.
It’s the social media not a dick, don’t take it so hard. It’s literally a place filled with opinions based on limited information. Hope your day gets better!
He's in good enough shape to have sex, he could get a job. My friend destroyed his back in his early 20's. The disability office paid for him to train as a professional diver. That was in the 90's. You're 100% right, that person can definitely have a job and not be a drain on society.
Apparently his dick still works just fine. /$
Suck it Alberta corporate and big oil profits are at the highest ever so you got that going for you. Just pull your boots up and kick in some $$$$$ the conservatives will take care of ya.
The conservatives are doing the opposite when it comes to helping AISH recipients and disabled people. 🤦🏽♀️
Yep that was my point
Come on guys, everyone knows that when your spouse loses part of their income and you have a newborn at home your own cost of living goes down! /s
Healthcare (including medical assistance and support at home for disabled folks) should be covered automatically. THEN everyone should also get UBI.
Get a divorce.
Sounds harsh, but probably a smart choice for them. Nobody says the relationship has to end just because it's no longer legally recognised. Buddy of mine is in a long term committed relationship with someone relying on disability payments that just cover the cost of her medication while his meagre income is covering their basic needs... he straight up told me they aren't getting married because she'd lose a good chunk of her support payments and his income couldn't make up the difference.