Have Jehovah`s Witnesses Really Complied With The Law In The State Of Victoria Aust.?With Regard to "Working With Children Checks."? (page 2)

smiddy

I still havent had a reply from the govt.website regarding wwcc in the state of vict.

smiddy

I asked a mate Melbourne what was up with the Working With Children card. He said that a letter was read out some time ago (maybe about a year) and all elders and MSs had to get a check / card. He couldn't remember but thought it strongly recommended that pioneers get one too, and for everyone else it was voluntary. Either in that letter or around the same time in another one it was made clear that people were engaged in a volunteer personal ministry and were not in anyway representatives of the WTS when doing the work.

Sounds to me like they got the wind up them, perhaps as a result of Unthank's case (I think the timing lines up), and the upper echelon were directed to get them. Saying that they don't represent the WTS could be for liability reasons.

My mate also mentioned that around the same time the sign at the front of the hall was changed so that Ministry School was removed. Now it just has 'Meeting Times' rather than the names of the meetings. He thought it might have something to do with distancing themselves from being an actual school and coming under scrutiny.

smiddy

Today I received a reply to my e-mail from the Govt.Dept. of victoria regarding my enquiry of people calling at my door whether they be hawkers or religous people and whether they needed to have working with children checks ,because my concern was they may call when mum and dad are not home and children answer the door. And according to the talkback radio program I referred to earlier a carpet cleaner had to obtain one for this very reason.

So here is the reply I received today.

To help determine if you or your staff require a wwcc please refer to .......and it just goes to the web page blah blah blah.

Interestingly it was not signed by anybody , just links to various depts.

Though more importantly it completely ignored my concern ,or question .

I was specifically asking if people who called at my door unannounced needed a WWCC such as religous people or hawkers .

They simply evaded my question .

Comments please ?

smiddy

And no it was not an automated response to my e-mail , it was answered by a real person ,even though they didnt identify themself?

smiddy

WinstonSmith

Hello Smiddy,

I wonder if they are cagey because one of the angles being taken in the legal cases is that the state governement has been slack in ensuring compliance? They might think you're fishing for a statement that might come back to bite them later.

Could it also be a classic case of bored and uninterested government departments relying on a lazy catch-all copy and paste type reply?

Listener

This is the way that many Government Departments work these days.

With call centres they have a computer in front of them and employees are required to give the scripted answer, it is okay for them to put it in their own words but they must not provide anything more than what their outline provides. If they feel they have not answered the question then they can forward the call onto another Department to officers of a higher ranking and who are generally more knowledgeable. If they can't answer the question they usually have some procedure that can be followed so that the individual can get the information they need but it requires some firmness by the enquirer to motivate them to find someone who can answer the question.

Often when someone writes in to a Department with a question a similar process is followed. There is a pool of employees who have been given the authority to attempt to respond to the letters and again they can only provide answers within a scripted response, again they can put the answer in their own words. The more thoughtful employees will recognize that they can't answer a question and will not do so, this means that the letter must be passed on to more senior officers to answer them. Unfortunately, the initial employee doesn't want to pass on too many letters as it makes them look useless, not appreciating that a basic reply to a person is just as useless anyway. Generally all the letters they recieve have to be responded to and are logged onto a system and a turn around time for response has to be adhered to, according to their procedures.

These days I do not accept a superficial answer and I will rewrite to the Department. I will include my first letter and the response recieved. In my new letter I then explain what specifically was not addressed in the initial letter and ask for a more detailed and specific response. They must respond to the new letter and by providing the previous response they understand that they cannot get away with a superficial response again. This normally provides me with a much more detailed answer, if not I would continue the same process, advising in the new letter exactly what I was still seeking the answer to.

doofdaddy

Raise it with your local Member of Parliament (State and Federal). They have to, by law, follow it up.

steve2

Raise it with your local Member of Parliament (State and Federal). They have to, by law, follow it up.

Um, this is exactly what former witness, Mr Stephen Unthank did at great personal cost. He got something of an unfavorable reputation with local Victorian politicians for being very persistent with seeking answers. Good luck with another round of raising the matter with the local Member of Parliament. I also got impression they viewed Mr Unthank as a bit of a religious nutter - an idea that is hard to dismiss once you read his florid treatises to the Court. Mr Unthank made the egregious mistake of simply assuming that his exposure work would lead to the complete humiliation of the Watchtower Society. It didn't.

smiddy

I received a second reply to my e-mail,out lining they avoided answering my question , and again they avoided answering it refering me back to their web page which deals with my obtaining a wwc check. Talk about a run around .

smiddy

Aussie Oz

and you will continue to get the runaround smiddy

the victorian state government likes to put its head in the sand when it comes to hot potatoes.

(I can assure that when it comes to bullying in the workplace for example, a major case was kept out of the papers and the magistrate pretty much slam dunked it the same as unthanks case.)

These sorts of cases, if actually allowed to proceed would clog up the court system so bad that they WILL NOT proceed.

The best that can happen is that private citizens keep on banging on the door of anyone that will give ear, until public outcry becomes to loud and goverments are embarressed into change.

In that way, they are not unlike the watchtower or any other corporation...government is about bu$ine$$ and nothing will change unless it hurts the pocket.

Oz

Have Jehovah`s Witnesses Really Complied With The Law In The State Of Victoria Aust.?With Regard to "Working With Children Checks."?

Share this