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: Striking Law of 2088
Details
Submitted by[?]: Patriot Party
Status[?]: defeated
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: October 2092
Description[?]:
| This bill will ensure the right to strike but those that work for the Government DOES NOT have the right to strike due to the fact that the government can't afford to shut down. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The workers' right to strike.
Old value:: All workers have the right to strike but certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society have to ensure a minimal service.
Current: All workers have the right to strike but certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society have to ensure a minimal service.
Proposed: All workers, except public employees, have the right to strike.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:25:25, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Oppose. Why should public employees have fewer rights than others? |
| Date | 21:35:53, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Because if public employees strike, it'll cause havic. Believe me. I've been on the receiving end of it when the government decided to shut down. Didn't last long but long enough to but us at financial risk. That is why I am going to support this bill. The public sector (most notably the government) shouldn't have the right to strike. |
| Date | 21:45:18, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Hey, we've had firefighter strikes in the UK and we coped alright. Anyway, the truly essential employees (eg. police, medical staff, military) are prevented from striking in the current bill. Public employees need fair wages and they need fair employment rights. |
| Date | 21:59:30, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Government employees should never be allowed to strike DSP. That is just asking for trouble. If you do not believe me, I can tell you precisely how much financial trouble that my family was in when the US Government shut itself down for about a month. It was not pretty and we barely, and I do mean barely, had enough to survive but if it was down for any longer, I don't know what would've happened. That is why government employees should never be allowed to strike. |
| Date | 22:08:35, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | So government employees must live on just enough to "barely survive" for their lives because they lack proper wage bargaining, but minor inconvenience to others cannot be tolerated. And public opinion during the firefighter strike was overwhelmingly against the government, so why nobody likes strikes, most people appreciate why they are sometimes needed. |
| Date | 22:33:33, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Look at America's ATC Strike. They had a no strike clause and the struck anyway. Know what happened? They got canned by Reagan himself. He gave them 72 hours to return or they're gone. They didn't and they got fired. I'm sorry but I will not support Government work strikes. It isn't pretty when the government strikes. We have to prevent that from happening. |
| Date | 22:38:16, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Whereas in our country, we privatise our air traffic control. Our air is for sale! Anyway, it wasn't clever to sack thousands of highly qualified staff, but then Reagan wasn't. I'm not defending striking when there's a no-strike clause (unless it's unfair), or saying that I like strikes, but the public was not endangered. |
| Date | 22:44:01, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Your right. Why? Because the USAF Traffic Controllers took over. They kept the skies safe till things settled down and then they turned it back over to those that decided to return to work instead of getting fired. Besides that, Reagan could've canned them all the second they walked out. He didn't. He gave them a deadline to return and if those that didn't, would be canned. The government should not ever be allowed to strike. Period. |
| Date | 22:48:40, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | You're showing an unwillingness to negotiate on this. Air traffic control would never have been prepared to risk public safety. To return to the firefighters strike, the army took over, but firemen still unofficially helped despite their strike. There was no danger to the public. |
| Date | 22:54:12, July 30, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | And when the Government shuts down entirely? What then? How many people will be left in a financial crisis? I know several people that were in the same boat as my family when the whole government shut itself down. |
| Date | 13:23:43, July 31, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Would you like to read the existing bill or my replacement? "All workers, except those regarded as CRITICAL TO SOCIETY, are allowed to strike" Whereas I say that the minimum necessary service should be maintained. What are you attacking? |
| Date | 15:26:06, July 31, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Would you like to see that I don't care? I'm opposed to that bill because they still have the right to strike. In this bill, public sector can't strike and, according to the discription, is for the GOVERNMENT ONLY! Nothing is said about police, fire, medical, atc, what have you. |
| Date | 19:08:49, July 31, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | So you're saying government officials shouldn't be able to strike, even if the trike did not cause danger to the public? |
| Date | 21:22:01, July 31, 2005 CET | From | Republican Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | We will support. |
| Date | 03:09:25, August 01, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Define the word danger! The rightist party is right in regards to the dangers of the Government striking. We've been on the receiving end of a total government shut down that put us as close to bankruptcy as I can remember. How many people will suffer if the government shuts down? Unknown numbers will suffer! Who'll get the unemployment checks? Welfare checks? Etc if the government shuts down? No. That is unacceptable and that is why I proposed this bill. To keep that from happening. |
| Date | 21:01:24, August 01, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | "Would you like to see that I don't care?" Oh, it's quite clear, thankyou. We oppose. |
| Date | 21:13:19, August 10, 2005 CET | From | Republican Party | To | Debating the Striking Law of 2088 |
| Message | Sorry I was late. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 98 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 109 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 92 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow official national flags of real-life nations or flags which are very prominent and recognisable (eg. the flags of the European Union, the United Nations, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Confederate States of America). |
| Random quote: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." - H. L. Mencken |