Search

‘Behind every claim is a grieving family’. Death benefits inquiry update

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> When Lisa’s husband passed away unexpectedly, she assumed accessing his superannuation <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/super-for-individuals-and-families/super/withdrawing-and-using-your-super/superannuation-death-benefits">death benefit</a> would be straightforward. Instead, she spent months navigating a bureaucratic maze. She repeatedly sent documents, waited weeks for callbacks and struggled to get answers from his fund. Her experience is far from unique. A damning <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-806-taking-ownership-of-death-benefits-how-trustees-can-deliver-outcomes-australians-deserve/">new report</a> reveals systemic failure by Australia’s <a href="https://www.superannuation.asn.au/resources/super-stats/#:%7E:text=Total%20superannuation%20assets%20were%20%244.2,with%20more%20than%20six%20members.">A$4 trillion</a> superannuation industry in handling members’ death benefits. <h2>A system in disarray</h2> The Australian Security and Investments Commission’s landmark review of ten major super trustees, managing 38% of super assets, exposes an industry that is not serving its members. Grieving families routinely face excessive delays, insensitive treatment and unnecessary hurdles when trying to access death benefits. It found they sometimes waited over a year for payments to which they were legally entitled. The central problem was a fundamental breakdown in claims processing, with five critical failures exacerbating inefficiency and distress. 1. Poor oversight No trustee monitored end-to-end claims handling times, leaving boards unaware of how long families were waiting. While the fastest trustee resolved 48% of claims within 90 days, the slowest managed just 8%. In one case, a widow waited nearly a year despite her husband having a valid binding nomination. ASIC found 78% of delays stemmed from processing inefficiencies entirely within trustees’ control. 2. Misleading and inadequate information Many funds misled on processing times and masked extreme delays. Boards often received reports only on insured claims, despite most death benefits not involving insurance. This meant boards were unable to fix systemic problems. 3. Process over people Risk-averse procedures often overrode common sense. Many funds imposed claim-staking – delaying payments for objections – even for straightforward cases, adding a median 95 day delay. Communication failures further compounded delays, with claimants receiving inconsistent advice and few or no status updates. 4. Outsourcing without accountability Claims handled in-house were processed significantly faster than those managed by external administrators. Only 15% of outsourced claims were resolved within 90 days, compared to 36% of in-house claims. The securities commission is calling for stronger oversight. External administrators significantly slow down responses, so some funds may need to bring claims processing back in-house to ensure efficiency. 5. Lack of transparency Many funds failed to provide clear timelines or explanations for delays and had no accountability mechanisms. The ten funds investigated include the Australian Retirement Trust, Avanteos (Colonial First State), Brighter Super, Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation, HESTA, Hostplus, NM Super (AMP), Nulis (MLC), Rest and UniSuper. Two others, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-12/asic-sues-australian-super-death-processing-benefit-claims-delay/105040450">Australian Super and Cbus</a>, are being sued separately by ASIC for either failing to pay out or delaying payments to thousands of eligible beneficiaries. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A list of key findings from the ASIC Taking ownership of death benefits report" /></a><figcaption><a class="source" href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-806-taking-ownership-of-death-benefits-how-trustees-can-deliver-outcomes-australians-deserve/">Taking ownership of death benefits: How trustees can deliver outcomes Australians deserve, ASIC, March 2025</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></figcaption></figure> <h2>Will ASIC’s fixes work?</h2> ASIC has made 34 recommendations to improve death benefit processing. This will require real change, not box ticking. Changes should include setting performance objectives and empowering frontline staff to cut unnecessary steps. There should be consequences for failure. Unlike the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/browse/benefits/bereavement">United Kingdom</a>, which fines pension providers for missing statutory deadlines, ASIC’s recommendations lack penalties. Without consequences, some funds may continue prioritising administrative convenience over members receiving their entitlements. <h2>What needs to happen now?</h2> ASIC’s report is a wake-up call, but real reform requires strong action. Super funds must be held to clear, binding processing timelines, with meaningful penalties for non-compliance. Standardising requirements across the industry would eliminate unnecessary hurdles, ensuring all beneficiaries are treated fairly. Beyond regulation, funds must improve communication and accountability. Bereaved families deserve clear, plain language guidance on what to expect, not bureaucratic roadblocks or sudden document requests. Technological upgrades should focus on reducing delays, not just internal efficiencies. And to better support families, an independent claims advocate could help navigate the process, ensuring no one is left to struggle alone. <h2>Has ASIC gone far enough?</h2> While ASIC’s review is a step in the right direction, it does not fundamentally overhaul flawed claims-handling practices. The recommendations lack enforceability, relying on voluntary compliance. Also, the role of insurers within super remains largely unaddressed, despite death benefits being tied to life insurance policies. This often causes further complications and delays. Ensuring insurers adopt and apply ASIC’s recommendations will be critical for meaningful change. Most importantly, super funds must remember that behind every claim is a grieving family. No one should have to fight for what they are owed during one of the most stressful times in their life.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/253419/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/natalie-peng-1369555">Natalie Peng</a>, Lecturer in Accounting, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/behind-every-claim-is-a-grieving-family-death-benefits-inquiry-demands-change-but-lacks-penalties-253419">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Legal

Amid claims of abuse, neglect and poor standards, what is going wrong with childcare in Australia?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> On Monday, an ABC’s Four Corners <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-17/betrayal-of-trust/105063150">investigation</a> reported shocking cases of abuse and neglect in Australian childcare centres. This included examples of children being sexually abused, restrained for hours in high chairs, and fed nutritionally substandard meals such as pasta with ketchup. While acknowledging there are high-quality services operating in the community, the program also showed how centre-based childcare is big business, dominated by for-profit providers, who may not be meeting regulatory standards. What is going wrong with childcare in Australia? <h2>Differing levels of quality</h2> Data from Australia’s childcare regulator <a href="https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-02/NQF%20Snapshot%20Q4%202024%20FINAL.pdf">consistently shows</a> for-profit childcare services are, on average, rated as <a href="https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/NQFSnapshot_Q4_2020.pdf">lower quality</a> than not-for-profit services. Of those rated by regulators, 11% of for-profit long daycare centres are not meeting national minimum quality standards (they are just “working towards”). This compares with 7% of not-for-profit centres not meeting minimum standards. There are 13% of for-profit centres exceeding the standards, compared to 28% of not-for-profits. Inquiries suggest this divergence is due to staffing levels, qualifications and pay. In 2023, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/inquiries-and-consultations/childcare-inquiry-2023/december-2023-final-report">found</a> large for-profit providers spend significantly less on staffing than not-for-profit providers. Large for-profit providers <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/inquiries-and-consultations/childcare-inquiry-2023/september-2023-interim-report">have a higher proportion of part-time and casual staff</a> than not-for-profits. They also employ less experienced early childhood teachers. On top of this, they are more likely to use award rates of pay, which are typically lower than enterprise agreement rates. Lower pay and less job security is related to higher turnover of staff, which makes it <a href="https://theconversation.com/covid-chaos-has-shed-light-on-many-issues-in-the-australian-childcare-sector-here-are-4-of-them-174404">difficult for educators to establish and maintain</a> the trusting relationships with children and families that underpin high quality. Despite this, the federal government continues to support for-profit services through <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/early-childhood/providers/child-care-subsidy">childcare subsidies</a>. These subsidies are designed to help families with the costs of childcare. But they do not stop some providers increasing their fees. The ACCC <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/changes-proposed-to-make-childcare-affordable-and-accessible-for-all-families">found a consistent pattern</a> of increased government subsidies leading to higher out-of-pocket expenses for families, due to subsequent fee increases. <h2>It hasn’t always been like this</h2> Childcare subsidies haven’t always worked in this way. “Operational subsidies” were introduced in 1972 through the historic <a href="https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cca197275/">Child Care Act</a>, which set the precedent for Australian governments to fund childcare. This aimed to support women’s workforce participation through an expanded, high-quality childcare sector. Subsidies at the time were only available to not-for-profit services and required the employment of qualified staff, including teachers. In these ways, Commonwealth funding positioned childcare as a public good, like school education. Then, in 1991, federal government subsidies were extended to for-profit providers. This prompted dramatic changes in the childcare landscape, leading to a dominance of for-profit centres. Today, more than 70% of all long day-care centres are <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/childhood/report/childhood-volume1-report.pdf">operated by private providers</a>. Between <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/childhood/report/childhood-volume2-supporting.pdf">2013 and 2023</a>, the number of for-profit long daycare services jumped by 60%, while not-for-profits only grew by 4%. <h2>Quality concerns</h2> There are <a href="https://www.startingblocks.gov.au/large-providers">25 large long daycare providers</a> in Australia and of these, 21 are run for profit. Large for-profit providers impact sector quality in several ways. Many have disproportionately high numbers of staffing waivers, granted by regulators, permitting them to operate centres without the required number of qualified staff. According to unpublished research by Gabrielle Meagher, as of October 2024, 11 large for-profit providers held waivers for a quarter or more of their services and five held waivers for more than a third. This compares to 15% of the sector overall. Large for-profit providers also serve investors as well as families. So there are extra <a href="https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/112/4/1127/1911721">incentives to cut costs</a> and maximise profits. The dominance of for-profit providers also makes them <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-politics/article/abs/institutional-sources-of-business-power/E9D9D945CB59843C4DF8CE4835350602">powerful players</a> in policy-making circles, as governments depend on them to provide an essential service. <h2>Why isn’t the system working?</h2> Given Australia has a <a href="https://www.acecqa.gov.au/national-quality-framework">regulatory and quality assurance system</a> for childcare services, why do we have these quality issues? As the Productivity Commission <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/childhood/report/childhood-volume2-supporting.pdf">found</a>, regulators are under-resourced, and inspections are infrequent. Services that repeatedly fail to meet the minimum standards are still allowed to operate, sometimes for more than a decade. Services are notified about upcoming inspections, potentially giving them time to give a false impression of their quality and safety standards. As Four Corners highlighted, poor-quality services, with bad pay and working conditions are driving good educators away from the sector. <h2>What next?</h2> The Albanese government recently passed legislation to “guarantee” eligible families <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/newsroom/articles/3day-guarantee-legislation-passed#:%7E:text=The%203-day%20guarantee%20will,each%20week%20for%20each%20child">three days of subsidised childcare</a> per week from January 2026. But families need more than access. They also require a guarantee this childcare will be high-quality and keep children safe. Even without the extra spending on the three-day guarantee, government spending on childcare subsidies <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20Childcare%20Inquiry-final%20report%20December%202023.pdf?ref=0&download=y">is due to reach nearly A$15 billion</a> by 2026–27. Thus there is also a corresponding duty to taxpayers to ensure these funds are going to high-quality providers. In the wake of the Four Corners report, the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/worldtoday/childcare-wrap/105066270">Greens are calling</a> for a royal commission into childcare. But we do not need this level of inquiry to tell us the current system needs fundamental change. Stronger regulatory powers, while important, will not be enough on their own. High-quality services need well-educated and well-supported staff. They also need governance and leadership that value educators’ expertise and enable consistently high standards.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/252493/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gabrielle-meagher-594155">Gabrielle Meagher</a>, Professor Emerita, School of Society, Communication and Culture, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marianne-fenech-228936">Marianne Fenech</a>, Professor, Early Childhood Governance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/amid-claims-of-abuse-neglect-and-poor-standards-what-is-going-wrong-with-childcare-in-australia-252493">original article</a>. Image: ABC </div>

Polish woman claiming to be Maddie McCann arrested

The young Polish woman who has long claimed to be Madeleine McCann has been arrested, just moments after arriving in the UK. Julie Wandelt, 23, was descended upon by police at Bristol Airport, with authorities holding her on suspicion of stalking and harassing Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry McCann. Wandelt, who had just flown in from Wroclaw in Poland, had been due to meet a friend, who lives in Cardiff, when she was surrounded by officers in front of shocked passengers. The friend, who is thought to be aged in her 60s, was also arrested and taken away by police. Wandelt's representative, Surjit Singh Clair, confirmed news of the arrest, saying, "I'm trying to find out what's happened but it appears Julia has been arrested at Bristol Airport this evening just after she got off the plane." "The police have reportedly arrested her on an allegation of stalking and harassing the McCanns." Wandelt has recently appeared back in the spotlight after a new DNA allegedly <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/polish-woman-doubles-down-on-maddie-mccann-claims" target="_blank" rel="noopener">proves</a> that she is Madeleine McCann. After disappearing from the public eye in 2024, Wandelt has resurfaced online to share the “results” of a fresh DNA test she claimed were submitted to a “world expert”, who compared them to the crime scene following Madeleine’s disappearance. In a series of posts in which she referred to Kate and Gerry McCann has “my parents”, Ms Wandelt said her “actual dna results show that I am part British, part Irish” and that genetic evidence “strongly supports that Gerry McCann could be Julia Wandelt’s biological father”. Ms Wandelt’s “source” claimed her DNA results were a “perfect match” to the samples taken from the scene of Madeleine’s disappearance. Madeleine vanished at the age of three after being snatched by an intruder who broke into her family's holiday villa in Praia de Luz in Portugal in 2007. Image credits: YouTube

Legal

Polish woman doubles down on Maddie McCann claims

Polish woman Julia Wandelt has doubled down on her belief that she is Madeleine McCann, claiming to have new DNA evidence that "strongly supports" her theory. Wandelt has long claimed to be the missing child, after first posting her theories on Instagram in February 2023. A DNA test at the time found Ms Wandelt to be of Polish, Lithuanian and Romanian heritage, proving she could not be Madeleine, who is of British descent. She went on to tell the <a title="www.bbc.com" href="https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-68139294" target="_blank" rel="noopener">BBC</a> in an interview last year that she “regretted” the ordeal, and had apologised to the McCanns for any pain she’d caused unintentionally by claiming to be their child who went missing in Portugal in 2007. After disappearing from the public eye, Wandelt has resurfaced online to share the “results” of a fresh DNA test she claimed were submitted to a “world expert”, who compared them to the crime scene following Madeleine’s disappearance. She also claimed they matched the toddler’s eyes, teeth and voice with her own. In a series of posts in which she referred to Kate and Gerry McCann has “my parents”, Ms Wandelt said her “actual dna results show that I am part British, part Irish” and that genetic evidence “strongly supports that Gerry McCann could be Julia Wandelt’s biological father”. Ms Wandelt’s “source” claimed her DNA results were a “perfect match” to the samples taken from the scene of Madeleine’s disappearance. The unnamed source allegedly analysed “hair obtained from the floor of the crime scene in Portugal” and “saliva obtained from the bed quilt at the scene”, resulting in a 69.23 per cent match which “suggests a biological connection between the two individuals”. “The genetic evidence strongly supports that (Gerry) McCann could be Julia Wandelt’s biological father, as the data aligns perfectly with a parent-child relationship,” they claimed. “If this analysis is accurate and properly derived from their DNA samples, the relationship between McCann and Julia Wandelt is biologically consistent with that of a father and daughter.” A spokesperson for Ms Wandelt told <a title="www.dailymail.co.uk" href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14405073/Woman-claiming-Madeleine-McCann-releases-bombshell-new-DNA-test-results-18-years-British-toddler-disappeared-Portugal.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Daily Mail</a> she remains determined for the McCanns and her Polish parents to take a DNA test, despite both parties’ repeated refusal to do so. Image credits: Instagram / Getty Images

Legal

Nine pulls reality TV series off the air over "staging" claims

Channel Nine's real estate reality show Find My Beach House has been pulled off air after producers were caught out "staging" scenes for the cameras. The show hosted by The Block's Shelley Craft, focuses on couples hunting to buy their "dream home". However, according to Media Watch, one couple featured on the show already owned the property that was showcased on a recent episode. According to the Media Watch report, couple Toneya and Lochie had owned the luxury pad for eight years. "In fact, days after the show was broadcast, Toneya and Lochie put the house on the market – asking price $3.8 to $4.15 million. Can’t buy advertising like that," Media Watch host Linton Besser said. Media Watch also claimed that another property featured on the show was owned by "home seeker" Kirsty, who had it listed on Airbnb for $4,000 a week. The show was pulled from 9Now after Media Watch made their enquiries In a statement shared with viewers of Media Watch, the producers admitted "reversed engineered the house-hunting process". "Abode Entertainment produces Find My Beach House, which is licensed to Channel 9,' the statement began. "The show is designed as light entertainment, offering viewers engaging tours of stunning homes. "At its core, the series follows a couple’s journey, adding a compelling narrative that keeps audiences invested," they continued. "To enhance storytelling and ensure a satisfying viewing experience, we sometimes reverse-engineer the house-hunting process." "Each episode is based on real property searches and purchases. In some cases, aspects of the home-buying journey have been reconstructed for storytelling purposes. "This means the buyers have already purchased their home before filming, and we then showcase additional properties to capture their reactions and insights authentically. "Moving forward we are making the change to include a disclaimer on each episode." Image: Nine

“What is wrong with people?”: Baggage claims photo reignites age-old debate

A single photo of an airport’s baggage claim area has kicked off a heated debate about travel etiquette. A frustrated traveller snapped the image of a crowded luggage carousel at Melbourne Airport and posted it to Reddit, reigniting the age-old debate about one of people’s most annoying habits when going on holiday. "I returned to Melbourne last night on an international full flight, and the lack of self-awareness from some people was astounding," the post read, accompanied by the photo of a crowded baggage claim carousel. "Despite the clear signs instructing passengers to stay behind the yellow line at baggage collection, many ignored them, standing right in front of it," she continued. "As someone who is on the shorter side, I already struggle to see over a 6ft grown man. After taking this photo, two more people stood directly in front of me.” "At that point, I firmly said in a loud voice, 'Stand behind the yellow line; it's there for a reason'. Thankfully, they moved." "Seriously, what is wrong with people? There's plenty of space around – why stand right in front of me? Rude AF!" The post quickly received hundreds of comments, with plenty of people equally baffled by the act and wondering why the selfish act takes over so many people in airports. "Those two are probably the first to stand up and get their carry-on bags out of the overhead compartments as soon as the wheels touch down," one person commented. "You really triggered them with this one. Imagine asking people to be considerate," another said. But others didn't see an issue at all, with one person writing, "I just say 'excuse me' and reach between people to grab my bag. Most people get out of your way." Image credits: Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

Wild claim about Hugh Jackman romance

Hugh Jackman and Sutton Foster have confirmed their relationship earlier this month, and as the couple ramp up their public appearances together, it has been reported that prior to getting together, they took their respective spouses on double dates. Jackman and Foster grew closer while starring together in the Broadway musical The Music Man from December 2021 until January 2023. Now, an insider has revealed to the Daily Mail that Jackman and his ex-wife, Deborra-lee Furness, would enjoy date nights together with Foster and her ex-husband, Ted Griffin. The source also said that after every performance of their show the pair would share an "uncomfortably" long embrace in front of everyone. “It was odd,” they continued. “In a way it was uncomfortable. As the entire cast is trying to get to their dressing rooms upstairs, we all had to pass the two of them hugging. They didn’t even hide it! It was a long embrace … and it was weird.” “I thought she was just a needy actress,” they added. “That’s the way it appeared to me - the needy actress needed the hug from the big superman.” This comes after the couple were <a href="https://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/hugh-jackman-and-sutton-foster-fans-notice-odd-detail-in-new-loved-up-pics-disappointing-004854401.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recently spotted holding hands</a> for a lowkey outing in new pap photos. In one snap, Jackman appeared to be looking at the cameras while laughing, leading some to believe the pair called the press on themselves. "They need to stop calling the press on themselves," one user wrote on Instagram. "Looking right at the camera lol," another said, while a third simply added, "Disappointing." "Please, stop calling the paparazzi. This is so ridiculous," someone else said. "This screams closeted PR stunt," another added. Others thought the pair looked happy, with one saying "they make a beautiful couple". Jackman and Deborra-Lee Furness announced their <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/lifestyle/relationships/hugh-jackman-devastated-after-marriage-split" target="_blank" rel="noopener">separation</a> after 27 years of marriage in September 2023, and a little over a year later, Sutton filed for divorce from husband Ted Griffin after 10 years of marriage. It was recently reported that the Wolverine actor and Furness are struggling to finalise their divorce, as they didn't have a prenup in place, with rumours that the <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/lifestyle/relationships/hugh-jackman-and-deborra-lee-furness-rumoured-to-face-messy-divorce" target="_blank" rel="noopener">split may get "messy"</a> as they attempt to divide their massive fortune. Image: SplashNews.com/ Shutterstock Editorial

Relationships

Passenger mistakes baggage conveyor belt for travelator

CCTV footage has captured the moment an elderly passenger in Russia mistook the baggage conveyor belt at a check-in desk for a travelator - walking onto it before disappearing into the baggage area. The incident occured at a state-owned airport in Vladikavkaz, in North Ossetia-Alania, Russia, on January 5. Video footage captures the airline desk staff talking to another passenger, failing to notice the 74-year-old pensioner approaching the weighing area and climbing onto the conveyor belt. As she approached the thick rubber curtain separating the check-in area from the baggage area, the woman toppled over onto her back and disappears from view. The elderly woman mistook the baggage conveyor belt at the busy airport for a travelator that she thought led to her departure gate. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> A family from Vladikavkaz, Russia, went to the airport to travel. While they were at the baggage area, their grandmother thought the conveyor belt for luggage was the way to the airplane. So, she got on it and went along for a 10-minute ride. They later found her with the bags… <a href="https://t.co/piE3JQi8K9">pic.twitter.com/piE3JQi8K9</a> — Ibra ❄️ (@IbraHasan_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IbraHasan_/status/1877305300203565404?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 9, 2025</a></blockquote> The other passenger at the check-in desk can be seen telling the check-in staff what just happened as the footage ends. Local media reported that the woman, who chose to remain anonymous, was rescued uninjured and escorted to the correct boarding gate. The video footage, which has been circulating online, drew in mixed reactions. While some people were amused at the incident, others were concerned about the safety protocols at the airport. It also raised a few questions on passenger awareness and staff attentiveness at busy airports. Images: X

International Travel

Deborra-Lee Furness' friend makes bombshell claim

A friend of Hugh Jackman’s ex-wife, Deborra-Lee Furness, has claimed that rumours of the actor's affair with co-star Sutton Foster are true. British actress and photographer Amanda de Cadenet hinted that the rumours were true in the comments section of an Instagram video that alleged Hugh Jackman left his wife for Foster, after the two fell in love while starring together in The Music Man on Broadway. “You are on point with this one,” de Cadenet claimed in response. “My beloved friend Deb is about to have her glow up any moment FYI !” Page Six reportedly reached out to reps for Jackman, Foster and Furness for comment. Jackman and Furness announced their separation after 27 years of marriage in September 2023. They share two adopted children together. At the time, a source told the publication that the Wolverine actor was "devastated" by the split. In October, another source told Page Six that Foster and Jackman are "in love" but keeping their romance under wraps. Another source previously told news.co,.au they are “100 percent together and are in love and want to spend the rest of their lives together.” Image: Instagram

Relationships

Aussie rocker hits back at John Farnham's drugging claims

A legendary Australian rockstar has hit back at John Farnham's claims that he was <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/health/caring/so-ashamed-john-farnham-opens-up-about-years-of-abuse" target="_blank" rel="noopener">drugged</a> by a former manager. Peter Tilbrook, who was the guitarist for iconic Aussie rock band The Masters Apprentices in the 1960s, has taken to social media to share his own stories about Darryl Sambell, after Farnham wrote in his memoir that Samuel drugged him in the early days of his career. As Farnham wrote in The Voice Inside, he recalled that Sambell “drugged me for years and I had no f**king idea,” until he found a half-dissolved pill at the bottom of a cup of coffee. Asked what it was, Sambell told Farnham: “That’s just something to keep you awake.” However, Tilbrook took aim at the comments saying he also worked with Sambell and only had good experiences. "Sambell was a brilliant and skilful manager to us, and from what we saw and heard, definitely to Farnham as well," Tilbrook said online. "I find it very hard to believe that any another manager at the time could have done any more to further Johnny's incredible career." Sambell, who managed Farnham's early career from 1967 to 1976, also managed The Masters around the same time, and Tilbrook asserted his experience with the late manager was nothing like Farnham's. "He was an amazing, caring and resourceful manager," Tilbrook said. Image credits: petertilbrookentertainment.com/news.com.au

Legal

Baggage handler calls out crucial mistake at bag-drop

A ramp agent for a major airline has revealed one crucial mistake that many people make when checking their luggage before they fly. Sharing all the details of the little-known trick on a lengthy Reddit thread, the baggage handler, who has years of experience working with American Airlines, noted an extra step that many people miss to ensure the safe arrival of their bags. "Your bag tag has three 'bingo' stickers with your itinerary on them. Take one off and stick it on your suitcase," the airline worker shared. "This way, even if the bag tag gets torn off at some point, we can still get it to its destination." The stickers look like small barcodes at the very end of the long luggage tag and can simply be pulled off and placed anywhere else on the suitcase. It can also be a good idea to keep one of these small tickets with you, whether on your boarding pass (in an area that doesn’t restrict important information), or simply on an old receipt. That way if your luggage unfortunately goes missing, you have the right barcode and number for your bags to be easily located, wherever they may be. Another thing the baggage handler mentions is the location of the luggage tag. While many signs indicate it should be placed around the side handle (if your case has one), the staff member suggests the top handle is better. "Having the tag on the top handle, which is the one that faces outward on the cart, makes it more likely for mistakes to be caught," he points out. Image credits: Shutterstock

Travel Tips

Aussies urged to claim share of $241 million in unpaid Medicare benefits

More than 930,000 Australians are owed their share of $241 million in unclaimed Medicare benefits. The unpaid Medicare benefits have been withheld from recipients who have not updated their bank details, the Department of Social Services said on Thursday. The average Australian is owed about $260 each, but 200 Australians are owed more than $10,000. Young people seem to be owed the most, with more than $52m owed to more than 224,000 Aussies aged between 18 and 24. “Once you update your details, Services Australia will pay your unpaid benefits within three days,” National Disability Insurance Scheme and Government Services minister Bill Shorten said. He added that it takes less than a minute for the average person with a myGov account linked to Medicare to check and update their bank details. Those owed money are being notified directly through their myGov inbox. “Services Australia is in the process of sending over half a million notifications to people’s myGov inbox asking them to update their details,” Shorten said. He added that in the last financial year, Services Australia paid nearly $30bn in Medicare benefits, and since December 2023, they have reunited over half a million Australians with $117 million in unpaid benefits. “We know a bit of extra money is always welcome in the lead up to the holidays – so there’s no better time than now to check if your bank details with Medicare are current, and if you have any unpaid benefits," Shorten said. “With everyone doing it tough due to cost of living, this is good news for nearly a million Aussies from all walks of life all over Australia.” Image: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Baggage handler reveals the best kind of luggage to travel with

A baggage handler has revealed the best kind of suitcase you should travel with when travelling by plane. With years of experience loading planes with thousands of kinds of suitcases, a ramp agent for American Airlines has spilled the secrets on why some kinds of luggage are better than others. The worker said that while many people may gravitate towards hard-shell suitcases for extra protection, they are not the best for air travel. "Avoid plastic hard shell suitcases," the airline worker revealed on Reddit. "These are incredibly slick and prone to sliding off the bag cart while turning - taking everything on top of it with it." Instead, cloth suitcases have more friction and are "more likely to stay where we put them." He also said these days, four wheels on a suitcase is an absolute must as opposed to ones that glide on just two wheels. "If your bag has four wheels, it can simply be rolled along the floor. If it does not, it will be thrown. We don't try to slam it into anything, but it's still going to drop about 2ft (6m) over the course of its 'flight'," the crew member shared. Another thing to consider when buying your next suitcase is finding one that has handles on the side as it gives baggage handlers "far more control" over the luggage. "It's easier to get a grip with an actual handle than by grabbing a wheel," he added. The worker also said using a big bag for no reason is only going to cause the bag to collapse once it is stacked and cause a "baggage avalanche", with the same going for bags that are not "normally shaped" suitcases. Image credits: Shutterstock

Travel Tips

What to claim for lost, delayed or damaged bags on overseas flights

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rebecca-johnston-123333">Rebecca Johnston</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-notre-dame-australia-852">University of Notre Dame Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-hodgkinson-6574">David Hodgkinson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-western-australia-1067">The University of Western Australia</a> If you get on a plane and your baggage ends up being delayed, damaged or lost, who’s responsible: you or the airline? And what rules apply when you’re flying between different countries – even if you don’t have travel insurance? Airlines (otherwise known as carriers) generally include baggage requirements in their terms and conditions of carriage, which are set out or referred to on your ticket. These are the rules that apply to the journey that you have booked. But for international flights, a carrier’s liability for damage, loss or delay of baggage is governed by a number of overarching international treaties, which many passengers aren’t aware of. <h2>International agreements</h2> The <a href="http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/air.carriage.warsaw.convention.1929/doc.html">Warsaw Convention</a> of 1929 was the first of these treaties, and the latest is the passenger-friendly 1999 <a href="http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/air.carriage.unification.convention.montreal.1999/">Montreal Convention</a>. In order for one of these treaties to apply to a particular journey, the same treaty must be in place at the point of departure and the passenger’s final destination. For many trips, the agreement that will apply will be the Montreal Convention, which has to date <a href="http://www.icao.int/secretariat/legal/List%20of%20Parties/Mtl99_EN.pdf">108 state parties</a>, covering everywhere from Albania and Australia to Zambia. In time, the Montreal Convention is expected to apply to almost all air travel. The Warsaw Convention (as amended by the <a href="http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/air.carriage.warsaw.convention.hague.protocol.1955/doc.html">Hague Protocol</a> and <a href="http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/air.carriage.warsaw.convention.montreal.protocol.4.1975/doc.html">Montreal Protocol No. 4</a>) will generally apply where the Montreal Convention does not. It is less favourable to passengers. All these treaties have similar provisions to deal with baggage claims – but very different limits to what you might get if you need to make a claim. <h2>What the airline is responsible for</h2> A carrier is liable if your checked baggage is lost, delayed or damaged regardless of fault. This is so unless the damage resulted from the inherent defect or quality of the baggage or, in terms of delay, if it proves that it took all reasonable measures to avoid the damage occasioned by that delay. As for unchecked baggage (that is, carry-on baggage), the carrier is only liable if the damage is due to the fault of the carrier or its agents. Unless otherwise specified, reference to “baggage” includes both checked and unchecked baggage. <h2>Calculating baggage compensation</h2> Under the Warsaw Convention (as amended by the <a href="http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/air.carriage.warsaw.convention.hague.protocol.1955/doc.html">Hague Protocol</a> and <a href="http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/air.carriage.warsaw.convention.montreal.protocol.4.1975/doc.html">Montreal Protocol No. 4</a>) and the Montreal Convention, liability limits are expressed in <a href="http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/sdr.HTM">special drawing rights</a> (SDRs). An SDR is a type of foreign exchange reserve asset created by the International Monetary Fund. Its value is based on an artificial basket of currencies consisting of the US dollar, the euro, the pound and the Japanese yen. The liability limits are reviewed every five years. As of October 16, 2014, the <a href="http://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/data/param_rms_mth.aspx">value of an SDR</a> is about US$1.49, £0.93 or A$1.70. Current SDR values for other currencies are also listed <a href="http://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/data/param_rms_mth.aspx">here</a>. <h2>So what is your baggage worth?</h2> In terms of baggage liability limits, the Warsaw Convention is of relatively little assistance to passengers. If your international travel is subject to Warsaw (for example, if you flew out of the United States on a one way ticket to Guatemala), liability for delayed, damaged or lost baggage is limited to 17 SDRs (about US$25.33, £15.81 or A$28.90) per kilogram per passenger for checked baggage and 332 SDRs (about US$494.68, £308.76 or A$564.40) per passenger for unchecked baggage. In contrast, a carrier is liable to pay far greater damages if the Montreal Convention applies. For any travel covered by Montreal, the carrier’s liability for baggage is limited to 1131 SDRs per passenger (US$1685.19, £1051.83 or A$1922.70), unless otherwise declared. The carrier is not liable for damages caused by delay if the carrier took all reasonable measures, or if it was impossible for it to take such measures. <h2>Time limits on baggage claims</h2> Time limits are imposed on making a claim for delayed, damaged or lost baggage. Any potential claims should be made to a carrier in writing within these specified limits. Article 26 of Warsaw provides that any complaint as to delay of baggage must be made at the latest within 21 days from the date the baggage was placed at the passenger’s disposal. <figure class="align-right zoomable"></figure> Similarly, under Article 31 of Montreal, a complaint must be made within 21 days of a passenger receiving their baggage. With respect to damaged baggage, under Warsaw, any claim must be made “forthwith” after the discovery of the damage and at most seven days from the date of receipt of the baggage. Montreal also gives passengers seven days from receipt of checked bags to report a damage claim. Neither convention imposes a time limit for reporting lost baggage claims. But it is advisable that you make your complaint as soon as possible. Warsaw does not state when baggage is considered “lost”, leaving it up to carriers to make that ruling. Under Montreal, baggage is only considered lost after 21 days or if the carrier admits that they have lost it. If a passenger fails to make a complaint within the specified times, the carrier will not be liable unless there has been fraud on the carrier’s part. <h2>Insurance alternatives</h2> If you are concerned that the contents of your baggage exceed the liability limits outlined above, you can make a special declaration of the value of your baggage prior to check-in and pay any additional fee (if required). In this case, the carrier will be liable to pay a higher amount, unless it is proved that the declared amount is greater than the actual value of your baggage. Alternatively, prior to travelling, check with your insurance company as to whether your travel insurance covers any excess from delayed, damaged or lost baggage. You might also want to <a href="http://www.icao.int/secretariat/legal/List%20of%20Parties/Mtl99_EN.pdf">check this list</a> to see whether the places you’re departing from and finally arriving at are parties to the Montreal Convention. If not, you might just find yourself out of pocket.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/32111/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rebecca-johnston-123333">Rebecca Johnston</a>, Adjunct Lecturer, Law School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-notre-dame-australia-852">University of Notre Dame Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-hodgkinson-6574">David Hodgkinson</a>, Associate Professor, Law School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-western-australia-1067">The University of Western Australia</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-to-claim-for-lost-delayed-or-damaged-bags-on-overseas-flights-32111">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Trouble

Coles and Woolies shoppers could claim thousands over alleged deceptive pricing

Coles and Woolworths shoppers could claim up to $5,000 if the supermarket giants are found out for deceiving customers with dodgy pricing tactics, according to a leading lawyer. Carter Capner Law is one of two firms investigating whether a class action suit on behalf of shoppers is viable in conjunction with the ACCC's legal action against the two chains. Both Coles and Woolworths have bee accused of violating Australian consumer law by the consumer watchdog after allegedly intentionally misleading customers by driving up prices and then putting those items on sale for their original prices under the "Prices Dropped" and "Down Down" campaigns. “Early estimates suggest that households could claim between $2,000 and $5,000, depending on the amount spent and the impact of the deceptive pricing,” law director Peter Carter said, who began advocating for people after he received an "avalanche of calls from outraged customers". While Carter said the firm initially had no plans to commence a class action, he admitted that after speaking about it to the media, the company were inundated with Coles and Woolworths customers "demanding action and compensation". He believes Australians already doing it tough through the cost of living crisis felt "betrayed" by the supermarkets, while Flinders University research fellow in law Dr Joel Lisk said that the class action is "a positive" for shoppers. "The ACCC proceedings aren't about getting refunds for customers," he told Yahoo. "But if they are successful it would mean customers have, in theory, been misled and deceived and could be entitled to damages." When it comes to damages, it's something Dr Lisk said "starts to add up" for customers, although it's "hard to say" if financial penalties to businesses found guilty of wrongdoing would impact misleading and deceptive conduct in the future. "If [fines are] seen as just the cost of doing business it doesn't really dissuade businesses from engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct," he said. "Seeking damages from business for the losses that individuals like us have incurred is one way of doing that. But of course, we're talking probably about dollars and cents in transactions when businesses like Coles and Woolworths deal in the billions." Image credits: Shutterstock

Legal

Fresh claims about Queen Elizabeth's health in her final days

Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has shared a sad claim about Queen Elizabeth and her secret health battle that she was going through before her death in 2022. Johnson reflected on his relationship with the former monarch in his upcoming memoir, Unleashed, detailing his final meeting with the Queen at Balmoral Castle just days before she died. In the book, he explained that the Queen had been battling bone cancer and was worried about the deterioration of her condition. “I had known for a year or more that she had a form of bone cancer, and her doctors were worried that at any time she could enter a sharp decline,” Johnson wrote in an excerpt obtained by the <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13901877/BORIS-JOHNSON-meeting-Queen-inspirational-words-wisdom.html">Daily Mail</a>. Before their meeting, Johnson claimed the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, warned him that her health had “gone down quite a bit over the summer.” “She seemed pale and more stooped, and she had dark bruising on her hands and wrists, probably from drips or injections,” Johnson wrote. He continued, “But her mind – as Edward had also said – was completely unimpaired by her illness, and from time to time in our conversation she still flashed that great white smile in its sudden mood-lifting beauty.” Queen Elizabeth died just two days after their final meeting. According to Johnson, the Queen “had known all summer that she was going, but was determined to hang on and do her last duty” by overseeing the “peaceful and orderly transition” of power from him to his successor Liz Truss. Johnson isn’t the first person to have claimed the late monarch was diagnosed with cancer during her final years, as royal author Gyles Brandreth wrote about rumours Her Majesty had a rare form of myeloma, a bone marrow cancer, in his book, Elizabeth: An Intimate Portrait. He explained that the diagnosis “would explain her tiredness and weight loss and those ‘mobility issues’ we were often told about during the last year or so of her life.” However, the Queen’s official cause of death was listed as “old age” and the palace has never disclosed any other medical records. Image credits: Andrew Parsons/No 10 Downing Street/UPI/Shutterstock Editorial

Caring

Pay-by-weight airfares are an ethical minefield. We asked travellers what they actually think

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/denis-tolkach-11345">Denis Tolkach</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/stephen-pratt-335188">Stephen Pratt</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-central-florida-1925">University of Central Florida</a> Imagine checking in for a flight with your two teenage children. At the counter, you are told that your youngest teenager’s suitcase is two kilograms over the limit. You get slapped with a $75 penalty for their excess luggage. This penalty feels arbitrary and unfair. The youngest weighs about 45 kg, and their luggage weighs 25 kg, making their total payload on the flight 70 kg. Their older sibling, on the other hand, weighs 65 kg, and has brought 23 kg of luggage to check in. Their total weight is higher – 88 kg – yet they receive no penalty. Obviously, things aren’t that simple. Charging passengers based on their weight is highly controversial for many reasons. But that hasn’t stopped some airlines <a href="https://theweek.com/articles/466035/should-airlines-charge-passengers-by-weight">experimenting</a> with such policies. Imagine checking in for your flight only to have the staff tell you to <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/plus-size-travelers-slam-airline-seat-policies/index.html">purchase an extra seat</a> as you are a plus-size passenger. You feel discriminated against because you are using the same service as other passengers and your weight is beyond your control. But despite the lived experience of many and hot debate in the media, there has not been a formal study into what passengers themselves think about this matter. Our recently published <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2691">research</a> examined air passengers’ views on alternative airfare policies to understand whether the public finds them acceptable and what ethical considerations determine their views. Though we found a range of ethical contradictions, most travellers were guided by self-interest. <h2>A controversial but important topic</h2> The issue of whether airlines should weigh passengers is an ethical minefield with no easy answers. Despite its sensitivity, the aviation industry can’t ignore passenger weight. Airlines intermittently undertake <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarcia/2024/02/11/despite-backlash-heres-why-airlines-need-to-weigh-passengers/?sh=5f07623e1bfa">passenger weight surveys</a> as they need to accurately calculate payload to ensure flight safety and estimate fuel consumption. The evidence shows passengers are <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarcia/2024/02/11/despite-backlash-heres-why-airlines-need-to-weigh-passengers/?sh=5f07623e1bfa">getting heavier</a>. Airlines including the now-defunct <a href="https://theweek.com/articles/466035/should-airlines-charge-passengers-by-weight">Samoa Air</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/23/hawaiian-airlines-american-samoa-weight-passengers">Hawaiian Airlines</a> have taken things one step further and experimented with weighing passengers regularly. Samoa Air, for example, became the first airline to introduce a “pay-as-you-weigh” policy, where the cost of your ticket was directly proportional to the combined weight of you and your luggage. In contrast, Canada has now long had a “<a href="https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/publication/additional-seating-and-one-person-one-fare-requirement-domestic-travel-a-guide">one person, one fare</a>” policy. It is prohibited and deemed discriminatory to force passengers living with a disability to purchase a second seat for themselves if they require one, including those with functional disability due to obesity. To complicate matters further, the issue of passenger and luggage weight is not only ethical and financial, but also environmental. More weight on an aircraft leads to more jet fuel being burned and more carbon emissions. About <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24091-y">5%</a> of human-driven climate change can be attributed to aviation, and the industry faces enormous pressure to reduce fuel consumption while it waits for low carbon substitutes to become available. <h2>What do passengers actually think?</h2> To get a better sense of how the public actually feels about this issue, we surveyed 1,012 US travellers of different weights, presenting them with three alternatives: <ul> <li>standard policy – currently the most widely used policy with passengers paying a standard price, irrespective of their weight</li> <li>threshold policy – passengers are penalised if they are over a threshold weight</li> <li>unit of body weight policy – passengers pay a personalised price based on their own body weight, per each pound.</li> </ul> The standard policy was the most acceptable for participants of differing weight, although the heavier the passenger, the more they preferred the standard policy. This can be partially explained by status quo bias. Generally, people are likely to choose a familiar answer. The threshold policy was the least acceptable. This policy was seen to violate established social norms and be generally less fair. The unit of body weight policy was preferred to the threshold policy, although participants raised concerns about whether it would be accepted by society. Perhaps unsurprisingly, we found that self-interest played a clear role in determining whether respondents considered a policy acceptable. Younger, male, financially well-off travellers with lower personal weight generally found the alternative policies more acceptable. <h2>An ethical conflict</h2> Alternative airfare policies that are based on passenger weight bring environmental and ethical concerns into conflict. Obviously, the effect isn’t from any one traveller, in particular, but averages over the entire industry. Interestingly, respondents that were more concerned about the environment – “ecocentric” – preferred air fare policies that would reduce the carbon emissions. This made them more open to the controversial alternatives. While the threshold policy was clearly rejected by many respondents as discriminatory, environmental concern played a role in the level of acceptance of the unit of body weight policy. It’s important to apply a critical lens here. These ecocentric travellers were also generally younger and had lower personal weights, so many would benefit from the alternative policies financially. For policymakers overall, our study suggests when it comes to controversial ticketing policies, the public is more likely to be swayed by self-interest than anything else.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237856/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/denis-tolkach-11345">Denis Tolkach</a>, Senior Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/stephen-pratt-335188">Stephen Pratt</a>, Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-central-florida-1925">University of Central Florida</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/pay-by-weight-airfares-are-an-ethical-minefield-we-asked-travellers-what-they-actually-think-237856">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Trouble

Network Seven claps back after Robert Ovadia's claims of "evil" conduct

Channel Seven has clapped back at claims from former 7News presenter Robert Ovadia that they are engaging in "evil" conduct, claiming they have found more inappropriate emails from the veteran journalist. Robert Ovadia, who worked with Seven for 23 years, was fired in June and has taken the matter to court claiming he was unfairly dismissed, while also claiming the network is hellbent on destroying his reputation. However, the network has finally spoke out about the claims, saying they have recent complaints from more female staffers about inappropriate behaviour. “Mr Ovadia commenced Federal Court proceedings against Seven over his dismissal for serious misconduct following the sending of inappropriate emails to a 23-year-old news producer and other employees of Seven," a Seven spokesman said. “In doing so, Seven is discharging its obligations to prevent sexual harassment at work, including as more recently expanded under recent legislation. Mr Ovadia was trained about these new legislative obligations by Seven and failed to comply with them.” The statement from the network went on to suggest there are further revelations to come, as more women have come forward with allegations of inappropriate conduct. “At the first hearing of those proceedings on Thursday, 29 August 2024 about Orders for the filing of evidence and timetable steps, Justice Raper asked Seven whether any other conduct would be relied upon by Seven other than set out in the termination letter," the spokesman said. “In that context, Seven confirmed it has had complaints or allegations about Mr Ovadia from 13 other employees. Although Seven was not required to provide examples of the other conduct it intends to rely on at this stage, Seven has provided Mr Ovadia and his lawyers examples of some of the inappropriate emails by Mr Ovadia, which will be further detailed in Seven’s defence required to be filed on 12 September 2024." “Out of respect for their privacy, Seven has not chosen to make further even more inappropriate emails public at this stage. In response to this, Mr Ovadia has made outlandish complaints about Seven being an ‘evil company’ with a ‘propaganda unit’ that is setting out to destroy his reputation. Seven is confident its position on this matter will be upheld by the Courts." In response to the statement, Ovadia took to Instagram to take another swing at his former employer while also maintaining his innocence. “I can be crass, I can be blunt, I can be obnoxious, my humour is dark – 20 years surrounded by trauma and danger will do all of that to you – but I do NOT mistreat women,” Mr Ovadia said in a lengthy Instagram post. “I’ll expect more smear over the coming months as this evil company (in whose service I risked my life and safety many times) now seeks to destroy my reputation further,” Mr Ovadia said. “When this kicked off, the day Seven first leaked this story, my teenage daughter asked if people will think her dad is a rapist. At least Four Corners’ laboured hatchet job got one thing right – the Seven Network is diabolical.” The journalist went on to share screenshots of conversations he had with female staffers who shared their words of support for Ovadia, saying they believe the allegations are false. Image credits: Instagram

Legal

Bindi Irwin sparks controversy over photoshop claims

Bindi Irwin has responded to claims that she photoshopped a series of photos featuring a red panda named Teddy and her three-year-old-daughter Grace. Earlier this month, the wildlife warrior shared the images of the red panda sitting on Grace's lap on social media with the caption: “Meet Teddy. The sweetest red panda with a true love for snack time. I hope you can meet him on your next #AustraliaZoo adventure.” Fans were quick to speculate whether Teddy was real and if the image had been digitally manipulated. <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/C-gS9r-TWIP/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/C-gS9r-TWIP/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Bindi Irwin (@bindisueirwin)</a> </div> </blockquote> “Pretty sure that’s a Photoshop image," one wrote. “He looks Photoshopped into the second one!”, another added. "That guy looks wild! Almost looks fake," a third added. Bindi responded to their speculation in the comments saying: “I think it’s so funny how some people think that our sweet red panda was Photoshopped,” she said. “I can tell you with absolute certainty that these photos are 100 per cent real (thank you @kateberryphotography for taking such beautiful pictures) and Teddy is in no way Photoshopped.” She ended her message with: “Hope you have a wonderful day and just a note … I’ll always share real wildlife moments with you. That’s kinda my thing …” Other fans supported Bindi, responding to haters: “You’re literally commenting on an Irwin’s pic.” “Why would this page ever Photoshop themselves with an animal, it’s a ZOO,” another said. Images: Instagram

Family & Pets

$79 million in toll rebates yet to be claimed

Toll rebates worth $79 million are yet to be claimed by motorists in New South Wales, with some drivers eligible to receive thousands of dollars in refunds. Around 350,000 motorists across Sydney can claim back their toll spending according to new state government data, following the introduction of the toll cap scheme earlier this year. The scheme has reduced the amount motorists have to pay to a maximum of $60 on roads, and to date it has given back $39 million to motorists, largely from Sydney's west. Government figures show drivers in Auburn receiving the biggest average toll relief of $554, followed by motorists in Lakemba with $513. Motorists in Wiley Park had an average toll rebate of $461, while the average rebate for all NSW drivers is around $254. There remains $79 million to be claimed by motorists from tolled trips since the beginning of this year. Drivers who spend more than $60 and less than $400 per week can have their tolls refunded through the scheme. Toll costs over $400 can be partially refunded. Motorists can claim up to a maximum of $340 per week for each tag or licence plate. Claims can be made quarterly for drivers who have linked their e-tag to their Service NSW accounts and motorists have until the end of June 2025 to claim their rebates. Image: Nine News

Domestic Travel

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

‘Behind every claim is a grieving family’. Death benefits inquiry update

Amid claims of abuse, neglect and poor standards, what is going wrong with childcare in Australia?

Polish woman claiming to be Maddie McCann arrested

Polish woman doubles down on Maddie McCann claims

Nine pulls reality TV series off the air over "staging" claims

“What is wrong with people?”: Baggage claims photo reignites age-old debate

Wild claim about Hugh Jackman romance

Passenger mistakes baggage conveyor belt for travelator

Deborra-Lee Furness' friend makes bombshell claim

Aussie rocker hits back at John Farnham's drugging claims

Baggage handler calls out crucial mistake at bag-drop

Aussies urged to claim share of $241 million in unpaid Medicare benefits

Baggage handler reveals the best kind of luggage to travel with

What to claim for lost, delayed or damaged bags on overseas flights

Coles and Woolies shoppers could claim thousands over alleged deceptive pricing

Fresh claims about Queen Elizabeth's health in her final days

Pay-by-weight airfares are an ethical minefield. We asked travellers what they actually think

Network Seven claps back after Robert Ovadia's claims of "evil" conduct

Bindi Irwin sparks controversy over photoshop claims

$79 million in toll rebates yet to be claimed

Our Partners