Apparently, if someone is not on a full medical disability, if they just get hurt and are limited in their employment options for a few months due to a serious health matter that doesn't really require a full ongoing medical disability, just a set of limitations on what they can apply for like no heavy lifting or what not, they actually get $125 dollars less on their maximum rent allowance.
The maximum social services rent allowance is already pitiful, its about $450.
But if you are hurt, go see a doctor, and he gives you a form saying that you can't lift anything heavy for a few months while you are getting this health issue addressed, then suddenly "kazaam"
you now are only allowed $375 per month for rent.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.
Isn't the concept of discrimination that someone can't be given less because they have a disability? Temporary or not?
The idea is that a person who needs to get an operation and can't do a particular task without hurting themselves is still a person. They are still looking for work, but they have to limit their search to some constraint set by a medical professional. And when they get their operation they may be housebound or immobile for a month perhaps, depending on the issue involved.
But since it's the government, who can sue them for discriminating between someone who is healthy and someone with decreased job options.
I have a number of things to say about plain old disability, I know a number of people getting regularly harassed while they live with daily real pain in a backlogged and strained medical system.
BC's rental maximums for assistance haven't gone up since 2005, while rents have increased in vancouver almost double in that time frame.
No comments:
Post a Comment