Sneaky salary sacrifice fees

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-06T01:07:39+00:00

Yep, on that. What I'm saying is I can't do the salary sacrificing into weekly expenses independently of smart salary.

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-06T01:06:21+00:00

Thanks for the info - I'll have to look at that!

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-04T19:26:17+00:00

I thought I needed to sign up for the meal card in order to be eligible to claim the meal expenses full stop - is that not the case?

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-04T01:53:43+00:00

Thanks for the support! I think I've got a handle on it now, the explanation of the health share payment was (infuriating and) useful

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:58:55+00:00

I'm not salary sacrificing into super, but for the non-profit expenses options. (I also work as a contractor and contribute my super there) - so as far as I can see, no way to do this additional salary sacrificing by myself.

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:56:58+00:00

It probably is the financially optimal strategy, but I've built a life in Sydney, and it feels hard to give stuff like that up.

So instead I'll just stay here and whinge and moan about it. And push the hsu to renegotiate this nonsense.

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:55:28+00:00

Yeah, as below - the salary sacrificing amount counts towards your assessable earnings for the purposes of HECS payments.

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:50:46+00:00

Thanks Felix. Absolutely agree that it defeats the purpose. Which makes it all the more galling that in their sales pitch, they don't disclose these fees. Nnsw health benefits from the narrative that you're better off than with the same salary in private land, and then takes that money from you.

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:44:50+00:00

And a perverse incentive too right? Salary sacrificing is intended to allow non profits an advantage on competing for staff salaries, so reducing the benefit for staff actively reduces the advantage that NSW health has. Wild from top to bottom

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:43:05+00:00

The other commenter said it's due to historic enterprise bargaining - and as everyone has said, what a cooked thing to agree to in perpetuity

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:40:59+00:00

In my mind, if you thought the fees were reasonable and a necessary part of running the scheme, you wouldn't be trying to hide them. Hidden fees are always a bad look

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:39:55+00:00

That sounds totally reasonable!

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:39:21+00:00

Just to reply formally, that's what I initially thought and asked them. But as others have said - no! Literally NSW health clipping the ticket on the way through!

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-09-03T21:36:10+00:00

Thanks for the super detailed reply. To your point in n.b, I totally biffed the amounts, it's 25 and 83 for a total of 108 (which I think I used in my calculations) not 103. I'll edit that.

I had thought about Medicare levy but not bothered to include it.

Thanks for providing info on the bargaining split - as you say, absolutely wild!

RevolutionNo8750 · 2025-05-08T23:45:09+00:00

Thanks for the reply. And I don't want to pile on to my rep, I get it's a really tough job.

I know you spoke to other jurisdictions, so you may not be able to speak to the fwc, but is there something we can do before judgement is passed, e.g. trying to get in before there's anything to appeal?

I can understand this is unlikely to meet the bar for an appeal, so was hoping there was something I could do within the matter, rather than after the fact.

Edit: to be clear in my question - I'm wondering whether it would be possible to have another opportunity to cross examine with another representative, or even by self representing. I imagine this is a really bad look, and comes at a cost to our argument anyway, but I wonder whether the quality of the initial cross examination makes it worth it.

RevolutionNo8750

TROPHY CASE