‘Patronising’ investigator promoted to manager
A Work and Income employee heavily criticised for ‘‘patronising’’ conduct and incompetence while working as an investigator has been appointed branch manager.
Canterbury man James Reid, 38, was criticised by the Social Security Appeal Authority in October 2017 for his actions during an investigation. As a result, a woman wrongfully faced repaying more than $68,000 to the Ministry of Social Development (MSD). The woman appealed to the authority and the decision was reversed.
In July, Reid was promoted via secondment to the branch manager role at Work and Income’s Riccarton office, in Christchurch.
The promotion has been criticised by the woman’s lawyer but defended by Work and Income which said Reid had been following ‘‘standard process and procedures’’, some of which had since changed. Work and Income added Reid had taken part in a leadership coaching programme and received positive feedback from clients.
In her decision, authority chairwoman Susan Pezaro criticised Reid for selective evidence – where he used only text messages that supported his position.
He also contacted the woman’s ex-partner, who she had a protection order against, which meant she was ‘‘having to deal with him again’’.
‘‘[When she told him that], Reid said she should contact the police or his manager if she had an issue with his actions,’’ Pezaro said.
‘‘It was immediately after this that Mr Reid told [the woman] that her benefit would be stopped. Such disregard for the safety of the appellant and her children is of great concern.’’
When interviewing witnesses, Reid asked leading questions – used to prompt the answer an interviewer wants and which has been considered poor practice for at least 20 years.
Reid also decided the woman was not spending enough money on groceries, and inferred she was receiving alternative support. Pezaro said Reid’s conclusion was reached ‘‘without reference to any recognised standard for measuring food costs’’ and there was no reason to view ‘‘Reid’s opinion on household budgets as that of an expert’’.
Under cross-examination by the woman’s lawyer, Simonette Boele, Reid defended predetermining the outcome of his investigation and telling the woman, in the middle of an interview, that her benefit would be cut.
When Boele asked Reid why he continued interviewing witnesses after he made his decision, he told her it ‘‘would do the person a disservice if their benefit continued’’.
‘‘His explanation is patronising, the benefit should not have been discontinued for the reasons discussed,’’ Pezaro said.
When contacted for comment, Boele told Stuff it was ‘‘quite hard to see how you can do a beneficiary a disservice by not giving them a benefit’’.
‘‘It doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me, and that’s not the point. The point is natural justice and fairness means that there’s an investigation,’’ she said. ‘‘It should be independent. It should be with courtesy, like any public service.’’
Pezaro said Government ministries’ standard practice was to ‘‘conclude such interviews on the basis they will be considered’’.
It was ‘‘most concerning’’ that Reid either predetermined the outcome or decided his interview was enough to suspend the benefit and establish an overpayment by MSD.
Reid’s appointment came about a month after Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni announced new expectations ‘‘in terms of the values Work and Income will live by’’. In the three weeks after new guidelines were introduced, benefit suspensions had reduced by 23 per cent, she said.