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: Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Social Dynamist 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: February 2039
Description[?]:
| This bill would end the current government ban on trade unions, which infringes on some of the basic rights of our people. The SDP would like to note that this does not condone unions causing public disruption, merely their right to be represented to their employers. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards labor unions.
Old value:: Trade unions are illegal.
Current: Trade unions may exist and worker membership is voluntary.
Proposed: Trade unions may exist and worker membership is voluntary.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | not recorded | From | 3wide.com Antiparticulates | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | We feel that by doing this, while we say Membership is Voluntary, it will impress on workers in a way that they should not be impressed, and that these unions would be abused and non-member workers isolated |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | The current laws are such that the gathering of those who feel they have been unfairly treated is a punishable offence. Surely this is not fair? Additionally, I would like to ask what the Antiparticulates mean by abuse, and how you believe it may occur. |
| Date | not recorded | From | 3wide.com Antiparticulates | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | This too is unfair, but i also see, if the wording is changed as the Dynamist's propose, that the beliefs of the union would become too strong and force all workers to support the union, or fear losing their job, even if they are not in support of it's views. |
| Date | not recorded | From | 3wide.com Antiparticulates | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | In short, there are no good options to choose at this time. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | Trade Unions should still be illegal. If they are legalized then they should have a no strike clause. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | 3wide: "all workers to support the union, or fear losing their job, even if they are not in support of it's views" - This is currently the case for management: indeed more so, since unions can't sack you. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | Republicans: While I accept this is necessary for key services such as policing, why should government intervene to arrest people for failing to turn up to work? |
| Date | not recorded | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | We urge the partys with the power to vote to vote for this bill. Workers should have rights too. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | This is the docks. Docks=Shipping. Shipping=money. Money=revenue. If they don't show up for work, other people have to step in and fill in. This causes the company to lose money and makes good more expensive. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | This bill is moved to the voting stage in order that it may be passed before the prison reform bill of June. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Freedom of Association Bill (Trade Unions) |
| Message | While I suspect many of you have made up your minds, I would reiterate that, as well as criminalising workers for asking for representation, a basic democratic right, it also precludes any dialogue between the 'top' and 'bottom' of an organisation. Workers on a factory floor have no say and no influence on the company. Only the person at the pinnacle of the hierarchy has power, and this lack of communication, not identity of unions, is what frequently what frustrates and leads to strikes - organised or not. Nor is such a divide good for an organisation's efficiency, for those parties more interested in business than people. Unions ensure that management is more aware of what happens on ground level. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 56 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 15 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players consent to the reasonable and predictable consequences of the role-play they consent to. For example, players who role-play their characters as committing criminal offences should expect those characters to experience the predictable judicial consequences of that. |
| Random quote: "Communism is like prohibition, it's a good idea but it won't work." - Will Rogers |