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: Right to strike 4
Details
Submitted by[?]: Justice League of Cildania
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 2603
Description[?]:
| The job belongs to the job giver, not the job taker. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Employer's rights in regards to firing striking workers.
Old value:: Employers can fire workers who are deemed to have gone on strike without reasonable reasons.
Current: Employers cannot fire workers who have gone on strike.
Proposed: Employers are free to fire workers who go on strike.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:45:56, July 07, 2008 CET | From |  Communist Party (marxist-deleonist) | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | Well, it seems that the JLC couldnīt make a name of their own, so they copied our "Right to strike" bills. |
| Date | 23:54:34, July 07, 2008 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | You should love it, imitation is the highest form of flattery... unless this is a parody... A job is the property of the business! There is no such thing as your right to keep their job while you strike, just like there is no such thing as my right to your home or car. Calling it a right doesn't make it become one. |
| Date | 00:07:52, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | We're pro-employers rights but this is going too far _as it is currently worded_. We need safeguards in the law so that these firings require a major damages pay to the workers IF the strike was within the law (i.e. non-violent and respecting non-striking employees' right to work). |
| Date | 01:40:55, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | So to follow my analogy, I have no right to your home or car, but you can only keep them if you pay me not to take them. You know you're a totalitarian when allowing people to settle their own contract disputes without government usurping and interfering is considered "going too far." |
| Date | 02:12:08, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | The problem in the employee-employer relationships is that there is an asymmetry, a power unbalance, particularly if the workers would get into severe trouble if they lost their jobs. Besides, such relationships have historically been thorny and have affected the whole of society even in sectorial strikes (workers blocking roads, being violent, etc.) Thus, the government must have a attentive overlooking of such relationships, refraining from interventionism as much as possible but ensuring that the rights of both parts are respected. That's why we need a good "strike limits" law and then swiftly punish those who break it, be it the employer of the employee. Take this as the State being the witness and warrant of the "private" job contract (quoted private because job is one of the core structures of our civilization). We believe this is quite far from the totalitarianism you accuse us of. |
| Date | 04:44:00, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | All such things as unbalance, job loss or strike limits can all be included in the individual job contract. Forcing such rules when neither party often does not want them is not overlooking; it is meddling, it is infantilizing, and it is wrong. Totalitarianism starts when you believe you can somehow make better or wiser decisions than the individuals involved. Hayek called it the fatal conceit. |
| Date | 04:56:53, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Christian Action | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | This is too far the other extreme, Neither the employer or the employee should have undue power over the over, as long as strikes are legal those who partake union action over practical and reasonable grievances must be protected. |
| Date | 07:21:19, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | Power is force. The employer must not force the employee to work or work differently from the job agreement. Conversely, the employee must not force the employer to not replace him at his job should he choose not to work. There. Nobody has any power over anybody else. If somebody does use force, the government should only then step in to stop it. "Too far", "too extreme". Why are you people so convinced that there is some magic middle way between right and wrong? |
| Date | 11:00:14, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | Because there's no middle way between right and wrong, there's some middle way between wrong (as in exploitation) and wrong (as in dictatorship of the proletariat). |
| Date | 17:31:27, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | And so the right course becomes whatever you decide. Sic semper tyrannus It's not exploitation if everybody agrees. Of course the employee wants better conditions or higher wages, just like the employer wants to charge higher prices for the product. The employer does not "exploit" the worker any more than the market exploits the businessman. He can't, or else another employer will attract the workers away. Employers don't arbitrarily decide employee working terms based on their greed or desire to "exploit the working class". They have to go by the same laws of reality as everybody else. Every time you think you can flout reality and make up your own rules like force employers to keep striking workers, you make everyone worse off. Reality doesn't care about your made-up rules, it won't let you get away with them. |
| Date | 22:37:57, July 08, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | As anyone that has studied even elementary economy knows, the "perfect market" (obeying the offer/demand rules) is an utopy for most markets, and particularly the job market is one of them: you seem to be entertaining the thought that there is a worker _deficit_ ("He can't, or else another employer will attract the workers away"), while the most common situation in countries around the world is the very opposite. It's usually the workers who compete in order to get a job, so the position of force rests partially with the employer. WRT to the right to strike, we advocate the elimination of "strike" as a "justified firing" reason, so employers can still fire striking workers; they just have to pay them the damages the law sets. However, only pacific strike should be subject to such regulations; and workers coercing others intro striking should be immediately fired without additional payments and be barred from re-entering the company as a result of strike negotiations. |
| Date | 03:10:15, July 10, 2008 CET | From | Christian Action | To | Debating the Right to strike 4 |
| Message | the FASCIST answer is democratic co-operatives that is to the Corporations, for the socialists think Unions that stand for the rights of all the sections of society rather than just the employees and for history buffs think along of the lines of Democratic Guilds. If a Thrid Way solution existed in the game Action would argue for it but sadly only the extremes are catered for. The Market has never and will never be a good system of which the base society and undoubtedly in the future it will be looked upon as the greatest atrocity every carried out by people against themselves but here and now to those of us raised in it an alternative is inconceivable as we are surrounded by it utterly. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 137 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 66 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: It is the collective responsibility of the players in a nation to ensure all currently binding RP laws are clearly outlined in an OOC reference bill in the "Bills under debate" section of the nation page. Confusion should not be created by displaying only some of the current RP laws or displaying RP laws which are no longer current. |
| Random quote: "When we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, 'Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!'" - Martin Luther King Jr. |