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: Workers Rights Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: EcoSocialist 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: June 2115
Description[?]:
| The withdrawal of your labour is a fundamental right |
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, except certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society, have the right to strike.
Proposed: All workers have the right to strike.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:47:55, September 18, 2005 CET |
From | Tudeh Party of Quanzar | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | I am not too sure about this measure. Whilst I agree with your declaration that it is a fundamental right to withdraw one's labour, I also feel that in certain cases to do so acts against society. Paramedics or nurses or doctors, for example, should not be allowed to desert their posts and refuse to treat patients. On the other hand, the conditions of medical (and all) workers should be the best at which they could possibly ever be. |
| Date | 21:14:56, September 18, 2005 CET |
From | EcoSocialist Party | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | What kind of socialist are you? the best way to prevent strikes is to provide decent working conditions, We would consider breaking from the popular front if this bill is not passed |
| Date | 12:17:37, September 19, 2005 CET |
From | Tudeh Party of Quanzar | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | The type of socialist that proposed more rights for strikers in the first place. Our economy is geared towards the worker as the vast majority of it is controlled by the worker through democratic soviets or through this worker-controlled state. Through shunning profit in favour of empowering people we have provided the conditions under which strikes are almost completely unneccesary. In the cases where strikes are called, then workers should have to ensure a minimum service. This does not entail them not setting up picket lines or protesting to let the public know of their quarrels with management or employees. Certain categories of workers should not be encouraged to provide absolutely no service where their service is absolutely essential to others. Paramedics, for example, should be able to strike so long as that strike does not include not responding to life-threatening emergencies. Firefighters should be able to strike but should still respond to fires where human life is at stake (OOC: a situation like that in which British firefighters striked quite effectively but still answered emergency calls to save lives). |
| Date | 23:26:29, September 19, 2005 CET |
From | EcoSocialist Party | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | No state that legally stops workers from striking can be called a socialist one, the workers should have this power to prevent US from abusing our power in anyway |
| Date | 11:30:06, September 20, 2005 CET |
From | Tudeh Party of Quanzar | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | I counter that no state that allows patients to remain untreated and families to burn in their homes can be called socialist. The workers in this country are the most powerful force - through the democratic workers' councils which control the vast majority of the economy and also through universal suffrage. |
| Date | 19:45:22, September 20, 2005 CET |
From | EcoSocialist Party | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | Then it is unlikely that the situations you describe will happen, however I refuse to set a precedent for the state being able to limit workers power |
| Date | 02:04:51, September 21, 2005 CET |
From | Revival Party | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | We are appalled by this bill. When a person chooses a job of responsability such as fireman, doctor or nurse they are assuming that responsablity. To abandon that is a breach of the trust the people placed in them. We are not talking about busboys and coal miners but those who's work is essential to save lives. |
| Date | 04:09:47, September 21, 2005 CET |
From | Free Thought Federation | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | This is fantastic. Not the bill, that's irrelevant, but the fact that there's DISCUSSION! Marvelous. For that alone, i'm going to help out the Ecosocialists here. Good job by all, even the Tudeh puppets. I guess the Neosocialists let you off your leash for yourself today, eh? |
| Date | 11:29:44, September 21, 2005 CET |
From | Tudeh Party of Quanzar | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | No, I had a genuine disagreement with another party based on practical grounds rather than sheer idiocy. |
| Date | 12:21:42, September 21, 2005 CET |
From | Tudeh Party of Quanzar | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | Aha, I am glad that this vote has gone back to debate.
Although the Ecos can probably pass this without Tudeh support, I think that if the bill description included some sort of clause saying something along the lines of "the government makes preparations for emergencies during strikes involving essential areas of the workforce", and maybe even that "strikers may respond, in good faith, to emergencies without implying any intention to call off a strike and without the fear of management reprisal". Not only will that guarantee Tudeh support but I think it makes the bill a little more rounded and practical. |
| Date | 03:08:22, September 22, 2005 CET |
From | Unionist Party | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | The Unionists feel like the right of the society outweighs the right of the individual. If the individual (ie the Police Man) is allowewd to freely leave his post, this hurts the society (ie The Community he Polices). We shall vote No. |
| Date | 03:06:34, September 23, 2005 CET |
From | NeoSocialist Party | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill | | Message | I have to vote no. We already gave them the opportunity to strike, but they have to ensure a minimal service. Why should we jeopardize the enire society to give them a right they already have? |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 145 |
| no | Total Seats: 55 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 51 |
| Random fact: Players must never be asked for their Particracy password. This includes Moderation; a genuine Moderator will never ask for your password. |
| Random quote: "He who controls the past, commands the future. He who commands the future, conquers the past." - Kane; Command and Conquer: Red Alert |