We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Defense of the Employee
Details
Submitted by[?]: Protectorate Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: March 2088
Description[?]:
Since it is common practice for large organizations to prohibit the formation of unions within the company, often through less then proper means, we propose: --All companies containing more then 100 employees must have a union representing the employees. --The union leadership is elected by the employees directly every two yrs and can be recalled should the majority request it. --The dues for membership are set by the leadership with a vote by the membership annually. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards labor unions.
Old value:: Trade unions may exist and worker membership is voluntary.
Current: Trade unions may exist and worker membership is voluntary.
Proposed: Trade unions may exist and all workers must have membership in one.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 05:59:45, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | Note that for organizations which treat their employees in a proper and compassionate manner as one should treat a fellow human, these unions will be reduced to a token organization, since they will not be funded by the employees. Thus no harm is done. |
Date | 18:35:42, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | You are assuming every employee in every company would WANT to belong to a union. Many employees would rather not pay the huge premiums demanded by union organizers to "belong". And, many employees live in fear that if they disagree with the union leadership, they will be severely punished or, as you stated above, "through less than proper means." Unions create as much evil within themselves as they solve within a company. Membership should remain voluntary. |
Date | 20:25:10, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | it should be optional. nuf said |
Date | 20:30:45, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | We are not in the slightest. As stated where a union is not needed the employees will form one without power with zero dues. Employees who work in a place with a union typically must pay dues whether or not they wish to join. By forcing the dues to be set every yr by popular vote it prevents the huge premiums. Thirdly how can a union punish a individual, they cannot fire them, they cannot prevent them from recieving the same benifits other employees receive, thus they are powerless to punish their members. We suppose they can take them of the christmas card list. It is far easier for an employer to fire a union organizer due to some imaginary reason then for a union to punish one who votes against the majority. Problems with unions occur when the leadership is seperated from the body of the union. The same with any organization, when the leadership works for their own good the system fails. Thus, frequent elections and changable dues will keep the leadership close to the members. |
Date | 20:39:49, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | We would not object to the optional status of the union if companies did not fire employees for trying to form one. Though it can be determined that this is the most likely reason it becomes impossible to provie it in court. The papers are littered with instances ofthis sort of behavior. We support the freedom of choice for the employee, unfortunately some companies do not. Thus our proposal, which allows the freedom of the employees to create a union of the strength they desire. If its not wanted then it becomes an excuse to get together one a month for drinks or whatever they set it up as. However employers are no longer able to prevent the formation of one. |
Date | 00:44:18, July 28, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | Another benefit of this bill is that it would prevent abuse of union membership by workers. It's not unheard of for a worker to join a union temporarily when they have a dispute with management, and then immediately leaving once it's resolved - effectively freeloading at the expense of long-term members. |
Date | 04:05:26, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | PP - How can a union punish an individual???? Ever hear of Jimmy Hoffa???? Most union resisters end up beaten up or at the bottom of a river wearing concrete Nikes. |
Date | 07:17:59, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | never heard of this Hoffa fellow but it sounds like he was involved in highly illegal activity. This happens everywhere, but again it comes from the leadership not being held accountable to the people they represent. |
Date | 04:03:21, July 29, 2005 CET | From | LibCom Party | To | Debating the Defense of the Employee |
Message | Quite. We must ensure that the rank and file retain control of their unions. The union leadership should be not only directly elected, but also recallable. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||
yes |
Total Seats: 72 | ||||
no | Total Seats: 26 | ||||
abstain | Total Seats: 2 |
Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocols. |
Random quote: "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." - Voltaire |