auwustories

Open full view…

KrisztianTorok - AMP Campbelltown - The fastest initial interview

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Sun, 02 Aug 2020 06:04:23 GMT

*28th July* JobActive says I'm connected with AMP Campbelltown. *29th July 10:07* Krisztian Torok calls, says who they are. I respond can't talk I'm driving to interview. Asked for email as forms are needed. Give email. Good day speak to you in fortnight. Call total time 1 minute 19 seconds. Spend the day doing the interview and a work trial 11:00 - 17:45ish. Get home go to bed. *30th July early* Check email, two from Krisztian (one sent 29th July 10:12, the other 10:14). Both have subject as *_FW: Response Required: Consent Forms within 24hrs_* Content of first :- >Thank you for taking my call today, and good luck with your interview. >Please find enclosed the consent forms, you will need to fill out and send back within 24 hours. >*Thank you for undertaking initial interview and welcome to APM.* (emphasis added) >As discussed due to the current circumstances of precautions in place for COVID-19 we have had to conduct your Initial Appointment with APM via phone. Please see below 3 consent forms which require your review and approval, These are: > jobactive Priva cy Notification & Consent Form > jobactive Service Provision Consent Form > jobactive Third Party Consent Form > Job plan > Please read the below documents carefully and email your response back with ‘APPROVED’ or ‘APPROVE’ confirming that you have read, understood and you are consenting to the below documents. Please note due to current circumstances by responding ‘APPROVED’ or ‘APPROVE’ you are consenting to these forms in lieu of a signature given our current Remote Servicing Arrangements. >Regards, >Krisztian Second was similar but as the personal message had > Sorry ????? you just need to email back that you have read and approve it. No need to fill in form. 30th July 08:09 respond with (not included the Senate quotes): >Krisztian, > considering that there is no legal requirement for me to provide payslips (as per answers provided by the Senate below), and that the privacy conset form is clearly voluntary and that you have said that approving these forms is required, when at least two of them are in fact not required, then I cannot approve the consent forms. I also suspect that the third form, "Third party contact form", is also not a requirement, especially as provided, that it names no actual parties and is therefore basically giving you the right to access anything and to provide that information to anybody. I also strongly suspect that there is in fact no 24 hour limitation/requirement. > Considering this attempt to persaude me to sign, as a requirement, what is not a requirement, I would need conclusive proof that the legislation does in fact require me to sign any form that you say is required to be signed and additionally proof that there is a legislated requirement in respect to the time limitations imposed. > I suggest that you take heed of the response to questions raised as EMSQ17-004216 and additionally EMSQ17-004339 (refers to EMSQ17-004216) raised in the Senate and the responses given, as provided:- 30th July 08:48 response from Krisztian :- >Thank you for your email, >I have forwarded this onto the manager to sort this out for you. >Kind Regards >Krisztian 31st July 09:20 [email protected] send email :- >Your Job Plan is pending your review and agreement. It can be accessed when you log into 'My Dashboard' on the JobSearch website or if you use the Job Seeker App. The requirements included in your Job Plan were negotiated between you and APM Employment Services, your Employment Services Provider on 31/07/2020. Accepting your Job Plan online or through the App is the same as signing a paper-copy. Once you accept your Job Plan, it will be available for you to view, at any time, on your JobSearch Dashboard. >Your Job Plan is tailored to your individual circumstances and outlines activities to improve your employment prospects. Your Job Plan may include requirements that are voluntary, not undertaking these requirements will not impact your payment. Please call APM Employment Services CAMPBELLTOWN on 1300276456 if you do not agree with a requirement in your Job Plan or if you are unable to log in to accept it online. Uhhm so a 1 minute 19s phone call is my *initial interview*, so either they have some tool that can insert all the information I am required to be given into my brain and additionally extract all the details that should be sought by a provider from my brain or they have not conducted the interview as required. In short, I have complained, about the requirements for the initial interview not being undertaken to their complaints email. I have also complained to DESE (Dept Employment, Skills and Education). I have also mentioned and reported the fraud. Not that I communicated as such, I have put together a document as the basis for contacting Services Australia in regard to have any suspensions overruled due to the fact that I cannot agree to a JobPlan. Currently the initial wording is along the lines of:- >*The issues are that APM Campbelltown, via Krisztian Torok and perhaps Krisztian’s manager have failed to correctly apply a JobPlan to the state that my entitlements may be suspended, and that to agree with the JobPlan could be tantamount to me being complicit in fraud against the CommonWealth.* > >*In moving to the stage of applying the JobPlan, they have been dishonest, disrespectful and unfair to me, Services Australia, the Department of Employment, Skills and Education and to the Commonwealth of Australia.* > >*If gaining payment from the CommonWealth for the reported state then that payment has been gained through deception and or dishonesty, which I believe constitutes fraud. Specifically, APM Campbelltown have reported to the DESE (exactly how I’m unsure) and triggered the DESE to issue an email that includes the following untruthful statements:-* > _The requirements included in your Job Plan were negotiated between you and APM Employment Services, your Employment Services Provider on 31/07/2020._ > >*and* > _Your Job Plan is tailored to your individual circumstances and outlines activities to improve your employment prospects._ >l l > *i.e. APM Campbelltown did not identify my strengths and any issues I may have relating to finding Employment even though they are required to do so, and therefore they cannot say that the plan is in fact tailored accordingly.* >*The “initial interview” itself was not conducted according to the Job Active Deed and underlying guidelines.* >*There were at least 8 actions required of AMP Campbelltown that were not undertaken and the resultant JobPlan fails to take into consideration aspects that must be considered.* After listing the events, the document continues with a more detailed description of the contraventions of the Job Active Deed/guidelines etc as per:- The Issues in detail 1. As is evidenced by the 2 emails sent, there has been a dishonesty and or deception that I need to complete the 3 forms and to only approve them as the instructed responses. a. The first form, in that it includes access to payslips, as per the Senate Questions EMSQ17-004216 and EMSQ17-004339, is, according to the DESE, not a requirement in the form supplied. b. The second form clearly states that it is voluntary and does so in red ink emphasising the fact that form is voluntary. c. The third form, according to the, inactions of AMP Campbelltown to act without receiving the form, is obviously not a requirement. If so, then AMP Campbelltown proceeding as they have is yet another contravention. d. Of course if the forms were in fact mandatory consent would not be required. 2. My understanding is that the first interview is an appointment and that an appointment is arranged between the parties as per the common definition of the term. As such to consider the first impromptu call as an appointment being held is incorrect. 3. Irrespective of any rules in regard to the “initial interview” being required to be an appointment and thus arranged, I believe it is unfair and disrespectful for the first interview to be conducted without taking into account the situation of the participant. I understand that a Job Provider is obliged to treat participants fairly and respectfully and that this fact is set out in the Employment Services Code of Practice, which includes :- a. Treating every job seeker fairly and with respect. 4. According to the emails, as sent by Krisztian Torok representing APM Campbelltown, the phone call was the “initial interview”. It is my understanding, according to the latest Job Active Deed, that the “initial interview” must be conducted according to section 85 and therefore that interview must, a. confirm the participant’s identity; i. I believe that my identity was only assumed and was not correctly identified. b. explain the Employment Provider Services that the Provider will provide to them; i. No such explanation was provided. c. identify their strengths and any issues they may have relating to finding Employment; i. Identification/discussion of such matters was not undertaken. d. for Fully Eligible Participants (Mutual Obligation), explain their rights and obligations under the Social Security Law and the consequences of not meeting their Mutual Obligation Requirements; i. My rights nor my obligations were explained at all, nor was any attempt made to ascertain if I knew them already. e. prepare or update a Job Plan for them; i. I am unaware that this was undertaken. Furthermore, I believe that it could not have been undertaken during the course of the 1 minute and 19 seconds that the “initial interview” lasted. f. provide them with details of the current National Minimum Wage, the Fair Work Ombudsman website (including the Pay and Conditions Tool) and contact details for the Fair Work Ombudsman; and i. These details were not provided. g. canvass with them the jobs that Employers have available in the local labour market; i. This was not undertaken. h. explains the Job Plan to the Stream Participant, (section 87.4) i. No explanation was given.

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Tue, 04 Aug 2020 05:21:30 GMT

Manager phoned virtually after every sentence if I ....... the JobPlan. Me what Job Plan? I believe I have a right to an initial interview. Can we do it now? No it has to be via an appointent. If I update your Job Plan ....... not sure was hte dizziest :) At one point had tp clarify my rights. Asked can you state that you know I have 2 arms? Yes, she replied. So are you confirming that you are spying on me and have seen me? :) The she started going on about chasing up Job Searches and tried telling me it's an obligation. Anway, she got nowehere other than I have an appointment on Thursday. She will talk to Krisztian in regard to me believing I deserve and apology from Krisztian. Might change provider before, not sure. Trying to suss out exactly what "other approved activities such as training, paid or voluntary work." are.

iamagirl1969
Fri, 07 Aug 2020 13:03:23 GMT

Anymore on the K-BOY saga?

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Fri, 07 Aug 2020 23:44:39 GMT

Yes in that no. They didn't phone for the arranged appointment. They did phone later was in the car parking it, they asked if they could phone back in a while. I said give me 10 minutes. They never phoned back.

iamagirl1969
Sat, 08 Aug 2020 02:25:14 GMT

You realize that this may have pushed K-Boy and or his manager over the edge?

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Sat, 08 Aug 2020 03:39:05 GMT

iamagirl1969 Not really sure what you mean. However, if they are over the edge (had enough?) that is entirely of their own doing. If you mean to do harm/be vindictive then I think I have plenty of evidence to support myself (times/length of phone calls, including a call made to question the location of the initial interview appointment (i.e. they recorded it as in the office, phoned them and I was told no appointments in the office, so was awaiting phone-call)). Not really bothered as I have a JobPlan, the default.

iamagirl1969
Sat, 08 Aug 2020 08:01:46 GMT

I didn't mean as in vindictive, but as in, they are now having to justify their own standards (and or lack thereof) and I most certainly agree with you, that whatever becomes of this saga, is entirely of their own doing/fault. In practically every other industry, there is a requirement that any task carried out by a worker has to be transparent and acknowledge the needs, goals and or desired outcome of the client and or sub-group. I have worked in child protection, corrections, disability, security, hospitality, group homes, the NDIA and vocational colleges and transparency and adherence to rules and requirements was paramount. That is until you get to the Job Network Australia. It seems that each JSA does whatever it damn well pleases (including persistent and ongoing fraud) and their practices and processes are about as transparent as a mud puddle or as intelligent, as a Brittany Spears Song! They don't employ qualified case managers/ and or other people with similar human services or front line experience (not that anyone with decent qualifications would want to work in this industry anyway) they employ uni dropouts who think they are entrepreneurial material (aka K-Boy) ex fast food employees (my last consultant) used car and or door to door salespeople, (the current manager of a well known and notoriously badly run JSA here in Adelaide) used to sell Vacuum cleaners for a living on commission, before he paid his way into the JSA franchise, he currently manages, alongside several other extended members of his own family- who display equally ghastly behavior and apparent skills deficits) former child care workers (the current manager of Madec Kadina has no other qualifications, besides a cert 3 in Child Care and a surly attitude) Bottle shop attendants (that's another JSA consultant at Kadina Madec last occupation) and so forth and so forth. None of these industries teach any of the prerequisite skills needed to deal with disadvantage and or conflict, nor do they bring any qualifications with them to understand what it means to having barriers to engaging in the the labor market. Most don't have any qualifications above a cert IV level (this was clearly evident in the last Government led Inquiry into the JSA) and at the base level, the pay and conditions of the average JSA consultant is so crap, that few stay beyond twelve months and many quit at the six months mark. (Which is their own fault, because they choose to work in a non-unionized/collectivized and highly unregulated industry) which as far as i am concerned, means they deserve whatever shitty salary and conditions they are currently getting. I haven't shed any tears for them before, and i am certainly not going to now! I hope you now better understand, where I sit on this subject matter. Keep up the good fight!

iamagirl1969
Sun, 16 Aug 2020 21:28:39 GMT

Any updates on K-Boy and the one minute meeting saga?

iamagirl1969
Sun, 16 Aug 2020 21:29:36 GMT

p.s. my job plan is 11 and half months old now and still has me put down as needing to attend a first aid course i completed in April last year.

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Mon, 17 Aug 2020 00:02:45 GMT

Yep K-Boy has been acknowledged as being a newbie by the manager, as an excuse for the numerous Deed contraventions and I've agreed to a Job Plan with 4 searches. I believe that I made it clear that I have an idea of my rights and that no changes to the Job Plan (especially including specifics) without agreement and appropriate scheduling and that to agree it must be via a scheduled appointment that has to be agreed upon and be in the Job Plan for it to be a requirement. i.e. don't phone try to contact unless it is planned. I'd guess that K-Boy will get some form of dressing down as the manager, the one who held the initial appointment, seemed to not be aware of K-Boy passing the issue on, so if comes to it either or both could need to do some explaining. In short I quoted, a number of times, section 1 of the *Job Plan and Scheduling Mutual Obligation Requirements Guideline*, especially _*Participants should know exactly what is required of them on each day; there should be no doubt or confusion of what is expected. *_. That conversation and others have been recorded, not for publication, BUT FOR potential legal ramifications, as I believe is allowed under the NSW Surveillance Devices Act Section, section 7(3)(b)(i) and (ii). I would advise any person having to deal with a JSP to look at protecting their legally provided rights. I use *Audactity* on the PC and additionally an App called *Auto Call Recorder* (note use the speaker phone) to record (not intercept via the phone so as to rule out the tele communications legislation).

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Mon, 17 Aug 2020 00:19:16 GMT

NSW Surveillance Act goes like :- > 7 Prohibition on installation, use and maintenance of listening devices > (1) A person must not knowingly install, use or cause to be used or maintain a listening device— > (a) to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation to which the person is not a party, or > (b) to record a private conversation to which the person is a party. > Maximum penalty—500 penalty units (in the case of a corporation) or 100 penalty units or 5 years imprisonment, or both (in any other case). So not allowed according to Section 7(1) *BUT* 7(3) has some overrides of 7(1) as per :- > (3) *Subsection (1)(b) does not apply to the use of a listening device by a party to a private conversation if—* > (a) all of the principal parties to the conversation consent, expressly or impliedly, to the listening device being so used, or > (b) a principal party to the conversation consents to the listening device being so used and the recording of the conversation— > (i) is reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of that principal party, or > (ii) is not made for the purpose of communicating or publishing the conversation, or a report of the conversation, to persons who are not parties to the conversation. _ii is a bit ifffy, i.e. you can record but not communicate, but ii does not override i_ so communicate for legal protection should be ok. If it comes to it then I believe you just state that you assert that x was said, if this is contested with prove it, then you say you have the proof.

iamagirl1969
Mon, 17 Aug 2020 09:32:21 GMT

I have had two zoom interviews today for further online trainer/assessor work plus a phone call today about possibly, teaching some classes online in the evening and I have started getting more online assessor work, from my current employer (Tafe NSW) so hopefully, if all goes well and i get enough work to sustain me, i can start "ghosting" Madec Kadina". As far as i am concerned, the less I have to do with them, the better. Oh, by the way Madec Kadina is looking for another employment consultant, so fingers crossed my (current one) has decided it is all too hard and quit. That would be excellent news and make my day, because she was starting to become irksome and as with all JSA's was about as helpful as laxatives at an eating disorders convention!

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 04:26:02 GMT

Well, I had Krisztian call me the other day for an appointment (thought it was to be with someone else). Started of a little rough. One classic was only Lawyers can give legal advice. I asked about the Police as I believe that they aren't Lawyers :) Wanted me to delete the stuff on here that I had written. However, it turned out to be OK and she appeared to be quite a nice person. Insistent that she had not added the 20 job searches. She was however, understanding and sympathetic in regards to my age. However, today I've had to, yet again remind them of their commitments as in addition to the appointment on Wednesday. I've had an appointment added for Tuesday, so 2 appointments in as many days and without due notice. So I'm demanding that the new appointment is removed. My guess is that it's meant to be a re-schedule of the Wednesday appointment but that removing the Wednesday appointment wasn't done. However, less than 2 days, I believe, is not enough notification.

iamagirl1969
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 05:50:15 GMT

At least you don't have to drive 74km one way to your JNP, like i do, if i have a face to face appointment with them. (And my appointments have been cancelled more than once, as soon as i got through the door)

iamagirl1969
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:20:57 GMT

I am confused? Is k-boy a girl and or a girl and or transgender/pansexual (not that this bothers me, i am all for equality and diversity) i am just a bit confused. Is K-boy gender neutral (that's okay as well)

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 19:48:33 GMT

> @iamagirl1969 > I am confused? Is k-boy a girl I have, other than using the term K-Boy in response, said that I believe Krisztian to be female. Considering the rather lengthy conversation we had I am very sure that Krisztian is female.

iamagirl1969
Tue, 22 Sep 2020 00:13:36 GMT

okay more confusion. I am half polish and Kriztian is a Polish boys name?

iamagirl1969
Tue, 22 Sep 2020 00:13:54 GMT

(It is Polish for Christopher)

iamagirl1969
Sat, 26 Sep 2020 01:36:48 GMT

Anymore on the K-Girl saga?

iamagirl1969
Sat, 26 Sep 2020 01:39:03 GMT

I am still confused. you can look up K-Girl on facebook and on Linked in (it comes up as currently being employed with a APM as a job network consultant, so i think i am on track here) and the photo is of a guy? Do it yourself and see what comes up?

“soundslikearudeself-satifyingdumbarse”
Sat, 26 Sep 2020 08:45:26 GMT

I've not a Linked In account, not do I want one. However, I believe that the Term Mump was used. Asking what a MUMP is, the term Mother was part of the response. Doing a search and following the Linked In link, as opposed to the link you posted, shows a partial profile and some sort of medal/badge as the photo. The photos of males on the right are of other people not from Sydney (top to from Hungary, the third from London). Facebook comes up with 16 but none, without trawling through them, that indicates Sydney.

next