When working more hours might mean you lose your home

In Western Australia, residents like Trish Owen find themselves in a difficult bind: wanting to work more hours to navigate the surging cost-of-living crisis, but fearing that earning too much will mean losing their government-provided social housing. Owen, who has lived in social housing in Perth for two decades, describes feeling "stuck" due to Western Australia's income eligibility limit for social housing, which she claims is the strictest in the country.

“

There's this glass ceiling that I'm always bouncing against.

"There's this glass ceiling that I'm always bouncing against," Ms. Owen stated. The income cap, the maximum amount a person can earn before losing eligibility for public housing, is considerably lower in WA compared to other states. While WA's housing minister, John Carey, asserts that income limits ensure housing goes to those most in need and notes they have risen nine times since 2020, a new report commissioned by the advocacy group Shelter WA suggests these figures have been "effectively stagnant" for over a decade.

Ms. Owen, working as a housing consultant and advocate, revealed she limits her hours to stay below the $551 weekly earnings cap, a measure taken to avoid risking her home. Having experienced homelessness as a single mother facing mental health challenges, she is determined not to repeat that experience. "It's a dance," she explained, referring to the constant need to manage her income, housing, and Centrelink benefits.

“

It's a dance.

The "Eligibility Trap" report by Shelter WA surveyed 181 individuals in social housing or on the waitlist. It found that almost 90% of respondents manage their work hours because of income eligibility caps, and nearly half have turned down work or additional hours to remain under the threshold. Shelter WA chief executive Kath Snell called the situation "really frustrating," highlighting that many people are willing to work but are "petrified of losing their home should they take on extra hours."

“

Here we have an enormous amount of people that are ready and willing to work but are absolutely petrified of losing their home should they take on extra hours.

Snell also pointed out that these eligibility caps negatively impact those on the waitlist, which had 23,395 applications as of March. "If there's a chance of work while you're on that waitlist, people are having to say no because they will lose their place on that waitlist and there's already a huge wait," she said. Snell emphasized that there should be no disincentive for people to work, stating, "When you go into social housing, it doesn't mean that you should be penalised."

“

If there's a chance of work while you're on that waitlist, people are having to say no because they will lose their place on that waitlist and there's already a huge wait.