Research Topics: New South Wales Funeral Industry

Australia Funeral Industry

In the recent decades, the costs of funeral had rocketed. Complaints constantly arise from the bereaved, which chiefly focus on the unacceptable high costs of funeral services. Other than the concerns from the families of the deceased, Combined Pensioners and Superannuants Association of NSW (CPSA), and the Council of Social Service of New South Wales (NCOSS) had pressurized the State government for a reform of funeral industry. Thus, the NSW parliament perceived that a public inquiry is crucial to gain different perspectives of the stakeholders. Fifty nine written submissions were received since 16 April, 2005. Six terms of reference were established by the NSW parliament on 23rd March. They are being publicized to the stakeholders to consider and comment on through their submission papers. The terms of reference are as follow: a)     changes in the funeral industry over the past decade including the cost of funerals, the degree of competition, vertical integration and ownership, b)     the availability and affordability of burial spaces and options for increasing the supply of spaces, c)      the adequacy of existing regulation of the funeral industry to protect consumers, public health and employees, d)     the role and structure of the Funeral Industry Council (FIC), e)     the adequacy of legislation in meeting community needs, and f)       any other relevant matter. [1]   Funeral Directors Association of NSW (FDA) had written a submission regarding to this issue, aim at explaining the causes of the rising costs of funeral services, and to communicate their opinions on the terms of reference. FDA is a organization which composed of a majority of funeral employers which are fully Australian owned. It is notified that FDA has no connection with Australian Funeral Directors Association. In FDA’s submission paper, it covered the issues of the unsatisfactory practices in the industry, the inexperienced new entrants, and the licensing and legislating matter.   Funeral Directors were accused as being the main cause of the rise of funeral services. People believed funeral directors manipulate the vulnerability of the bereaved to maximize their profit. Australian Democrats MP Arthur Chesterfield-Evans (2005) had once suggested that “one solution to the rising cost of funerals was to allow people to bypass funeral directors and bury a loved one themselves”.[2] In response, FDA executive secretary Ken Chapman did not object the idea of “Do it yourself” burials. However, “Do it yourself burials” will not be put in practice until it passes the health regulations. [3]   Regarding to the submission paper, FDA had explained the main causes of the increase in funeral industry. It investigated their members through a survey. Statistics showed that there were no evidences indicating the rise of funeral costs would help to increase the profit of the funeral directors. FDA had explained a several factors which lead to the rise of the funeral costs. FDA claimed that these factors are not under the control of its’ organization, which are the high level of Consumer Price Index, the increase of the burial costs, such as the price of the burial sites and the interment fees and the introduction of GST[4].   On the other hand, FDA suggested to implementing a licensing system and for all new entrants and present funeral companies. Code of conducts should also be established and complied by all undertakers. These two approaches could ensure the quality standard of the undertakers, as well as protecting the consumer from any excessive charges. The claim for a licensing system is being criticized that it is the interests of the big companies which aimed to eliminate the small operators in the industry. However, FDA revealed that they do not intend to obstruct new entrants and competitions are welcomed once the competitors have demonstrated they are professionally trained and are ethical. One compulsory requirement is they must have their own mortuary.[5]   The consequences of allowing inexperienced people to become undertakers are hard to imagine. For instance, a funeral centre in Brisbane was accused of handling bodies badly, “bodies sent to the centre for autopsies in body bags were returned to funeral directors naked on trolleys covered only with a sheet”.[6]   In concern with the role of the FIC, FDA fully support the current structure of the council and agreed that there is no substitutional authority could handle issues which would affect all stakeholders in the funeral industry. Considering that the State Government was unwilling to be the controlling body of the funeral industry, FDA perceived that the reform of the funeral industry should be administered by FIC.[7]    Another relevant matter of the funeral industry is the role of the Fair Trading Department. Unethical practices were being found, for instance, irregularities in use of the funds raised by pre-paid funerals. Evidences showed some of the funeral companies were not complying with the code of conduct. This indicated a further investigation and improvement has to be done by the Department of Fair Trading.[8]   In conclusion, FDA revealed the importance of licensing system and legislative changes should be carried out to protect the consumers and to ensure the standard of the funeral services. Moreover, FDA refuted that the responsibility of the increase of funeral costs was not related to the profit maximizing strategy of the funeral directors, however, was due to the increase of burial costs and the introduction of GST.     [1] Legislative Council Minutes, Minutes No 96, Item 5, page 4, 23 March 2005. [2]  J Peter 2005, “NSW: Inquiry launched into funeral industry”, Australian Associated Press General News, no. 38, 23 March 2005, p. 1. [3] J Peter 2005, “NSW: Inquiry launched into funeral industry”, p.1. [4] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, Inquiry into funeral industry, no. 30, 23rd May. [5] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, no.30. [6] M Corkill 2005, “Centre accused of handling bodies badly”, The Courier-Mail, 21 September 2005, p. 1. [7] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, no.30.   [8] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, no.30. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Australia Funeral Industry

In the recent decades, the costs of funeral had rocketed. Complaints constantly arise from the bereaved, which chiefly focus on the un...

Australia Funeral Industry

In the recent decades, the costs of funeral had rocketed. Complaints constantly arise from the bereaved, which chiefly focus on the unacceptable high costs of funeral services. Other than the concerns from the families of the deceased, Combined Pensioners and Superannuants Association of NSW (CPSA), and the Council of Social Service of New South Wales (NCOSS) had pressurized the State government for a reform of funeral industry. Thus, the NSW parliament perceived that a public inquiry is crucial to gain different perspectives of the stakeholders. Fifty nine written submissions were received since 16 April, 2005. Six terms of reference were established by the NSW parliament on 23rd March. They are being publicized to the stakeholders to consider and comment on through their submission papers. The terms of reference are as follow: a)     changes in the funeral industry over the past decade including the cost of funerals, the degree of competition, vertical integration and ownership, b)     the availability and affordability of burial spaces and options for increasing the supply of spaces, c)      the adequacy of existing regulation of the funeral industry to protect consumers, public health and employees, d)     the role and structure of the Funeral Industry Council (FIC), e)     the adequacy of legislation in meeting community needs, and f)       any other relevant matter. [1]   Funeral Directors Association of NSW (FDA) had written a submission regarding to this issue, aim at explaining the causes of the rising costs of funeral services, and to communicate their opinions on the terms of reference. FDA is a organization which composed of a majority of funeral employers which are fully Australian owned. It is notified that FDA has no connection with Australian Funeral Directors Association. In FDA’s submission paper, it covered the issues of the unsatisfactory practices in the industry, the inexperienced new entrants, and the licensing and legislating matter.   Funeral Directors were accused as being the main cause of the rise of funeral services. People believed funeral directors manipulate the vulnerability of the bereaved to maximize their profit. Australian Democrats MP Arthur Chesterfield-Evans (2005) had once suggested that “one solution to the rising cost of funerals was to allow people to bypass funeral directors and bury a loved one themselves”.[2] In response, FDA executive secretary Ken Chapman did not object the idea of “Do it yourself” burials. However, “Do it yourself burials” will not be put in practice until it passes the health regulations. [3]   Regarding to the submission paper, FDA had explained the main causes of the increase in funeral industry. It investigated their members through a survey. Statistics showed that there were no evidences indicating the rise of funeral costs would help to increase the profit of the funeral directors. FDA had explained a several factors which lead to the rise of the funeral costs. FDA claimed that these factors are not under the control of its’ organization, which are the high level of Consumer Price Index, the increase of the burial costs, such as the price of the burial sites and the interment fees and the introduction of GST[4].   On the other hand, FDA suggested to implementing a licensing system and for all new entrants and present funeral companies. Code of conducts should also be established and complied by all undertakers. These two approaches could ensure the quality standard of the undertakers, as well as protecting the consumer from any excessive charges. The claim for a licensing system is being criticized that it is the interests of the big companies which aimed to eliminate the small operators in the industry. However, FDA revealed that they do not intend to obstruct new entrants and competitions are welcomed once the competitors have demonstrated they are professionally trained and are ethical. One compulsory requirement is they must have their own mortuary.[5]   The consequences of allowing inexperienced people to become undertakers are hard to imagine. For instance, a funeral centre in Brisbane was accused of handling bodies badly, “bodies sent to the centre for autopsies in body bags were returned to funeral directors naked on trolleys covered only with a sheet”.[6]   In concern with the role of the FIC, FDA fully support the current structure of the council and agreed that there is no substitutional authority could handle issues which would affect all stakeholders in the funeral industry. Considering that the State Government was unwilling to be the controlling body of the funeral industry, FDA perceived that the reform of the funeral industry should be administered by FIC.[7]    Another relevant matter of the funeral industry is the role of the Fair Trading Department. Unethical practices were being found, for instance, irregularities in use of the funds raised by pre-paid funerals. Evidences showed some of the funeral companies were not complying with the code of conduct. This indicated a further investigation and improvement has to be done by the Department of Fair Trading.[8]   In conclusion, FDA revealed the importance of licensing system and legislative changes should be carried out to protect the consumers and to ensure the standard of the funeral services. Moreover, FDA refuted that the responsibility of the increase of funeral costs was not related to the profit maximizing strategy of the funeral directors, however, was due to the increase of burial costs and the introduction of GST.     [1] Legislative Council Minutes, Minutes No 96, Item 5, page 4, 23 March 2005. [2]  J Peter 2005, “NSW: Inquiry launched into funeral industry”, Australian Associated Press General News, no. 38, 23 March 2005, p. 1. [3] J Peter 2005, “NSW: Inquiry launched into funeral industry”, p.1. [4] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, Inquiry into funeral industry, no. 30, 23rd May. [5] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, no.30. [6] M Corkill 2005, “Centre accused of handling bodies badly”, The Courier-Mail, 21 September 2005, p. 1. [7] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, no.30.   [8] The Funeral Directors Association of New South Wales Ltd 2005, Submission to the standing committee on social issues inquiry into the funeral industry, no.30. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Australia Funeral Industry

In the recent decades, the costs of funeral had rocketed. Complaints constantly arise from the bereaved, which chiefly focus on the un...

Top