On the pulpit on May 1, work and fellowship with slogans such as “Work for everyone” and “Everyone are going” are praised. At the same time, we know that Norway will lack people in working life. We are already missing them. Not least in the health and care sector. We constantly hear how important it is that everyone who can use their residual work ability. It sounds nice – on the paper. But people with impaired work ability face a system that in practice punishes those who try. For us who have health for something – but not everything – it can cost expensive to make an effort. I have experienced that myself. As a trained nurse, I am the potato in the health sector and can be used for so many. I have worked with school, with youth in the field, with intoxication in the specialist health service and in housing. There is a lot of experience I still burn after using. I became disabled in the middle of my life and am the father of two youths. Keeping up with the ever -increasing expenses is difficult even for families with ordinary income. In an attempt to keep the dam whole, I would try to work a little again. I shouldn’t do that. Expensive lesson I contacted my former employer, who kindly enabled me to get back to work. Many people with disabilities want to work what they can, not only because of the economy, but also for the collegiate and professional. Prior to start -up, I contacted NAV several times to clarify the interaction between NAV and the employer. For me, and certainly more people who are disabled for various reasons, it is to work a kind of fresh product. I don’t always know how much I am able to work. But the optimal for NAV is that before you started working years, you know exactly how much you will earn, and it is frequently referred to the income planner. When I started, I wasn’t sure how much and how long I could work. That’s why I followed so I did not exceed the basic amount, which is 0.4g or NOK 49,611. I worked with different additions, and it was difficult to calculate exactly. Therefore, I ended up over the minimum amount you can earn before performance is made in performance. In all my contact with NAV, I have never been warned that if you exceed the basic amount, you owe not only what you have earned, but also the entire basic amount. But it doesn’t stop there. Live unless as disabled and parent for two young people, I receive child allowance, an addition that helps me a lot. But it is also this supplement NAV draws most when you earn across the border. In short, you can quickly end up working and using the residual work ability politicians talk so hot about that it is important that more people use. The reduction in my payment from NAV was so powerful and disproportionate that I quit. I dare no longer. Now I have to manage significantly less to compensate for what I have earned too much. Or work full, something I can’t. Disability is not something you choose. You get disability after a long -term and thorough investigation. Becoming disabled is a pervasive experience of being linked by society that I think most would have been besides. Must be smarter the NAV system appears unnecessarily complicated. But all the honors to employees who are in contact with us users. The problem lies in the distance between what politicians say about inclusion – and how NAV actually talks to users and its own employees. There is a discrepancy between what users are expected to understand and how NAV explains the welfare system to us seeking knowledge. I think many are left with a guilt that they should understand. That the failure lies with you as a user. For anyone seeking help in a difficult everyday life, this is a heavy feeling to carry. If the politicians’ visions of inclusion and facilitation actually work, they must take important steps to make the system smarter. It’s about better communication and simpler legislation. Then inclusion and participation can be easier for us who stand outside and want to enter. Show that it should actually pay off to work and how. NAV has a tremendously important social mission at a time when the oil fades and the alternatives are still on the drawing table. Users must have confidence in NAV as a welfare actor. Impossible to understand language, communication and trust is crucial to users’ legal security. Here I mean NAV can get better. “Needs weighing”, “outcome”, “transport”, “removing”, “forefinnes”, “resistance”, “hanging agreement” and “right of appointment”. NAV has a word usage that floats high over both employees and users. It is wrong and it is misunderstood, and we as users who are punished. Even the OAG pointed out in its review of NAV’s decision letter on retirement pension and disabled people that they are “very difficult to understand”. I have several times experienced that the employees themselves do not understand the wording in the legislation. The explanatory models are then. The penalty for working was so great that I had to give up. I dare not try again. Now I live with reduced income and great uncertainty. So my prayer is simple: make it easier for us who are outside to participate. We make up a value. We create diversity. This is solidarity. Send us your utterance desire to write? Feel free to contact us in news Ytring with your post. The guidelines can be found here. Published 01.05.2025, at. 10.33
ttn-69
