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: Strike Interests Recognition Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Solentian Socialist 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 2148
Description[?]:
| In modern societies, economies such as the Republic's are increasingly integrated. Even major industries are now often inter-dependent, and workplaces of different types rely on one another for their own well-being. While we understand the need for a social partnership between businesses and employees, we also recognise that current industrial laws discriminate against ordinary, hard-working Solentian people. SIRA holds that a trade union should be allowed to undertake secondary strike action, when said union's own economic interests are closely related to those of another group of striking workers. This will ensure a harmonious balance between the rights and responsibilities of working people, alleviate tensions between labour and capital, and help to create an atmosphere of trust and fairness in the workforce. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Secondary strike action.
Old value:: Secondary strike action is illegal. Workers and unions can only go on strike for their own pay and conditions.
Current: Secondary strike action is illegal. Workers and unions can only go on strike for their own pay and conditions.
Proposed: Only closely related trade unions can walk out on a sympathy strike in support of other striking workers.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The workers' right to strike.
Old value:: All workers, except certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society, have the right to strike.
Current: All strikes are illegal.
Proposed: All workers have the right to strike but certain categories of workers regarded as critical to society have to ensure a minimal service.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Trade union strike ballots.
Old value:: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, a majority of all members, regardless of if they vote or not must approve the strike action.
Current: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, a majority of all members, regardless of if they vote or not must approve the strike action.
Proposed: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, majority approval of those that vote is needed from its members.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:44:45, November 26, 2005 CET | From | Communist Fascist And Anarchial Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | we cannot support, as we believe sympathy strikes to be useless.... if the industry has something to complain about, ok.. but when theyre helping someone else complain, there is no point |
| Date | 03:00:47, November 26, 2005 CET | From | Solentian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | We feel you have failed to recognise our point - many industries are reliant on one another for their own productivity. Workplaces are not islands; they are part of a greater workforce, with connected interests. The SSP feels secondary action is most certainly not "useless". We feel it is an important and necessary protection against the excesses of those few unscrupulous businessmen, and that Parliament should introduce this right as a benefit to all hard-working Solentians. The SSP implores the CFAP to revise its decision. |
| Date | 22:13:24, November 26, 2005 CET | From | United Centrists | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | Though we understand that such a policy could help protect workers against abusive company owners, we also fear that it could be abused by the very workers it is meant to protect. Groups of trade unions could very well conspire together against a company in order to obtain benefits or wages far greater than what is acceptable. |
| Date | 01:26:55, November 27, 2005 CET | From | Communist Fascist And Anarchial Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | we agree with SSP that industries are reliant on one another, and therefore believe, that if one industry were to go on strike, in order to maintain the larger workforce, they should remain working. |
| Date | 13:35:45, November 27, 2005 CET | From | Solentian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | Allow us to address your very valid concerns. The SSP understands the United Centrists' viewpoint, and that is precisely why our Party chose not to propose the total legalisation of secondary action. Remember that, under the provisions of SIRA, "Only closely related trade unions" should undertake solidarity strikes. The phenomenon of contracting out services to external providers, and the rise of employment within the service sector, means that secondary action is necessary to provide the minimal protection workers have slowly lost with the decline of many traditional industries. Unfortunately, we do not quite understand the CFAAP's viewpoint on this issue, although if they would care to explain their reasoning we would be happy to discuss the matter further. If workers are affected by another industry or service, then they should be given the opportunity to withdraw their labour as well - because indirectly, under these laws, it WOULD be "their own pay and conditions" they were defending. We are not advocating the totally unrestrained power of trade unionism. The SSP does, however, feel that the current laws discriminate against workers, in favour of employers. We are not promoting militancy, we are asking for fairness. In fact, we have included two other proposals: the return of strike action to all employees (so long as minimal services are maintained in key sectors), and the real democratisation of union procedures. Article 3 especially is important - after all, if PARLIAMENT operates on the simple majority principle, that is good enough for the labour movement! The SSP understands many of you here are wary about trade unions. Indeed, we do not expect this Act to be passed. However, our Party would like to take this opportunity to explain our case for these reforms - reforms we believe are necessary to preserve a balance in the Republic's industrial relations. The globalisation of capital has given employers, especially large corporations, the ability to manipulate workforces and to profit from their comparative vulnerability. This is just part of the market; we understand this. SIRA would return only those powers necessary to ensure a balanced policy. Perhaps the number of reforms we are proposing in this bill is too daunting even for those who may otherwise have agreed with its original stipulations, but let us say this: Trade unions are not enemies to be fought. They are this country's working men and women, producing everything we own, and running our society. They deserve a better deal than they have at the current time, a new deal, and the SSP believes - hopes - people will realise that one day. We are not discussing foreign elements or conspiratorial sects. The State already ensures unions' internal affairs meet necessary standards of democracy. Therefore, the SSP believes we should TRUST our people with the RIGHTS they deserve. Thank you for listening. |
| Date | 01:05:44, November 28, 2005 CET | From | United Centrists | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | We can support articles 2 and 3, and now believe that we can agree with the proposal of article 1. |
| Date | 15:38:56, November 28, 2005 CET | From | Solentian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | The SSP thanks the United Centrists kindly for their decision. We will leave this bill open for the rest of the day [GMT], so that others may comment if they so wish, and then possibly reconsider moving it to a vote this evening, depending on the situation. |
| Date | 23:33:46, November 28, 2005 CET | From | Solentian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | There having been no additional comments, we have decided to move this bill to a vote. The SSP asks our fellow Parliamentarians to listen carefully to the argument our Party has presented, and to avoid succumbing to fear of industrial strife - remember that it is entirely more likely tensions will arise in the workforce WITHOUT the existence of these minimal and entirely reasonable protections. The SSP hopes you will support this bill, and support our working people. Once again, thank you all for considering the issue. |
| Date | 02:48:56, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Communist Fascist And Anarchial Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | after reading your detailed arguments, we have chosen to reconsider our stance on Article 1, and will support |
| Date | 03:03:50, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Solentian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | We are incredibly grateful at your decision. Indeed, the SSP thanks both the United Centrists and the Communist Fascist And Anarchial Party for their attentive and helpful contributions on this vital issue. We also petition the other parties of Solentia to vote in favour of this bill, so as to finally stabilise the employment and trade union legislation of our great Republic. |
| Date | 12:17:38, November 29, 2005 CET | From | National Socialists | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | Unfortunately, and after having read your arguments we must object to article I. If I'd have more time I would elaborate on this.. |
| Date | 14:47:32, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Solentian Socialist Party | To | Debating the Strike Interests Recognition Act |
| Message | We understand, and nevertheless appreciate your taking the time to listen. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 349 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 262 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 89 |
| Random fact: If there are no parties in your nation with seats, feel free to visit the forum and request an early election on the Early Election Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4362 |
| Random quote: "The one bonus of not lifting the ban on gays in the military is that the next time the government mandates a draft we can all declare homosexuality instead of running off to Canada." - Lorne Bloch |