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: Secondary Strike Reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Conservative 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: June 2131
Description[?]:
| The NCP believes that secondary strikes are harmful to the economy. We accept the role of strikes in resolving disputes between employees and employers. However, for another set of workers to support a striking group of workers is unfair to their employers and to their customers. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Secondary strike action.
Old value:: Any trade union can go on a sympathy strike in support of other striking workers.
Current: Secondary strike action is illegal. Workers and unions can only go on strike for their own pay and conditions.
Proposed: Secondary strike action is illegal. Workers and unions can only go on strike for their own pay and conditions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:44:58, October 23, 2005 CET | From | Neoretropostmodernist Party | To | Debating the Secondary Strike Reform |
| Message | As 50% of union members have to approve a strike, secondary strikes will most likely take place in related industries that would be affect regardless. I do not believe that the government should limit the actions of an organization that is not deliberately setting out to harm people. Do strikes hurt the economy, maybe, but attempting to silence the critics of the current labor situation probably does more harm. |
| Date | 23:09:35, October 23, 2005 CET | From | National Conservative Party | To | Debating the Secondary Strike Reform |
| Message | We are not attempting to silence critics of the current labour situation. Any and everyone is allowed to speak out against or for both sides of a labour dispute. However, we see no reason why an employer should suffer for the actions of another employers. They cannot solve the dispute or have any bearing upon. They are simply being punished for daring to employ people. If we continue to punish people for that then we will soon discover that employers will be reluctant to take on additional employees, leading inevitably to higher unemployment. |
| Date | 09:43:14, October 24, 2005 CET | From | Ikradonian Faith Party | To | Debating the Secondary Strike Reform |
| Message | We could support limiting the right to a secondary strike to closely related unions, but not an outright abolishment. |
| Date | 11:30:11, October 24, 2005 CET | From | Noel's House Party | To | Debating the Secondary Strike Reform |
| Message | Trade unions most definitely need to be brought under tighter control. Companies must be assured that if they take care of their own employees, those employees will not resort to such actions as striking - even on behalf of someone else. Supported. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 267 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 332 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Don't put "the" as the first word in your party name, because when parties are referred to in news reports, their names are preceded with "the", e.g. the [Socialist Party] has lost. |
| Random quote: "The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it." - Ayn Rand |