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: Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation
Details
Submitted by[?]: We Say So! Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 2055
Description[?]:
| # The general principle regulating the working hours is a maximum of either 8h per day or 48 hours per week. But with shift work for example the maxima may be increased to eleven per day and fifty per week. In cases where work cannot be interrupted, the limit rises to 12 hours per day. # Night work is defined as work performed between 20.00 and 06.00 hours. Night work is, in principle, prohibited but there are many exceptions to this: hotels, events firms, health care, etc. Except when the law makes provision to the contrary, working on public holidays is prohibited. # Flexible working hours permit to adapt working hours to the actual needs of a company (e.g. annualisation of working hours). Overtime is defined as time spent working over and above normal hours. # Overtime must be compensated by time off allocated during the same quarter in which the overtime was performed. In addition, working time that exceeds nine hours per day or 40 hours per week entitles the employee to a payment on top of his normal wage of 50 %, or 100% in case of overtime on holidays. # Shift work does not entitle employees to additional payments, unless the time worked is overtime as defined above. Full employment throughout the whole year confers entitlement to 28 days holiday the following year. If the employee has not worked the full year, the number of days leave is reduced proportionately. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:31:21, May 16, 2005 CET | From | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | Why not 40 hours or 35 hours per week? The smaller the better, to allow for maximize employment and allow people to fully contribute to society in other aspects. |
| Date | 18:05:41, May 16, 2005 CET | From | United Blobs | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | If you are going to do rounding how about making it 2500hrs/year? Also the problem with doing an annual system is that if a person is unemployed or works less than the 48hrs/week for a period of time they could be forced to work longer hours for the reast of the year. We would support the proposal as it is better than nothing but we would prefer the limit to be applied weekly. |
| Date | 19:17:00, May 16, 2005 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | We support. Is this going to be added eventually to the game engine? |
| Date | 19:20:25, May 16, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | The problem inherant with making it exactly 48 hrs per week is that there are some industries (bakeries for example) where many workers are required to operate outside of the 48hr week, however when rounded to a yearly system, the overall number of hours works out the same but still maintains the ability of flexability for the the employers and employees. The hours would not effect those who are unemployed then gain work, as there would be protection within the charter (we will modify the proposal as such) so as to make sure that it only includes such time as from whence they were employed (e.g. If they were employed in September, they could only work a maximum of approx.768 hrs). @RP. This law is being introduced to help prevent exploitation of workers, however limiting hours to greatly would only add more problems to employers as they increase the number of staff, or would you prefer that all employers employ staff at minimum wage levels to keep costs down? |
| Date | 19:21:28, May 16, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | @ CSP, we hope so. We have put up a suggestion as such in the forum. |
| Date | 23:44:01, May 16, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | We demand a 32hours week with standard, high wages. (32 hours, a typical demand of some groups in Belgium, I could settle with 30 or 35 too) A 48 hours work week is WAY too long, as that is longer than any standard workweek I know in Europe. About flexibility: we will not have people be forced to work flexible to keep industries running 24 hours a day 7 days a week. We can allow such work in these situations that it is absolutly necessairy for maintenance etc., but not anything else. As the proposal stands now, we will vote it down. |
| Date | 15:27:53, May 17, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | A 48 hour working week is the Mamimum, not recommended. And, though I do not like using the Real World, the European Working Time Directive states 48 hours as the maximum with opt outs. As to hours worked within Europe Countries such as Greece, UK, Poland, Spain, Hungary, France and Denmark all work for 40+ hrs each week. This Bill is to limit to a maximum, and at no point does it state that businesses are expected to operate for 24hrs a day (though that would be the perogative of the business owners). Working hours themselves are not flexible (e.g. if you are employed to work 8hrs, then you work 8hrs) however, it take into account industries (like bakaries or butchers) that often work 10+ hrs a day. This law allows them to do so, but they cannot work more than the stipulated amount by years end. |
| Date | 16:49:03, May 17, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | In Belgium there is now a standard working week of 38 hours officialy (unofficialy many work a bit more) yet Belgium is about the most productive country per workers throughtout the world and Europe. Within the EU, only Luxemburg is higher, Norway is very high too I thought. I would rather have a vote for the standard working week first, than a vote for the maximum hours week, cause otherwise buiseness will try to understand as an 'allowance' to make 48hours the standard week in practice. |
| Date | 22:46:08, May 18, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | We support some ideas in it - espcially that nightwork is forbidden with exceptions (I can except the exceptions). However, I do not agree with flexibility and the annualisation of working hours. We believe there should be bonuses for working in shifts too, if these shifts are unregular hours (not 9am till 5 pm). As it stands now it is likely we will vote it down (though not sure), as in the seventies there was no need for annualisation, and workers just had busy times and more relaxed times; which gave less stress (and with it less money need spending on health care) and more people actually having a job. |
| Date | 01:23:51, May 19, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | The flexible working hours and annualisation requires a permit before any business can use this (as stated above). I do not understand your requirement for shift workers to receive bonuses if they are working outside of the 9 - 5 hours. They would not be working any longer hours than any other worker, and could attract people to working these hours purely due to the increase in wages. This would mean that these hours then become standard working hours. Also, it creates an unfair position within the working environment. i.e. Person A works 9am - 5pm. Person B works 5pm - 3am. Both do the same work, but Person B gets paid more, why? |
| Date | 19:12:53, May 19, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | Person B works illegally, as his wokr nighttime. They work the very same amount - a very good thing because different people get different wage sfor exactly the same (immigrants vs non-immigrants, women usually get paid less than men, ...) And I believe there should a clause making this officially. Although we do not regard working from 9am - 5pm as being the same as 5 pm - 3am, or the same as 3am - 9am. One who works 9am 5pm has a normal work day, however, a person working 5pm - 3am would be working when the people working a normal workday would be off, when their children would be off, ... This evening work ruins ones family life, and I believe it should be prevented to the absolute necessairy jobs only, and for those that do work it have some kind of bonus. |
| Date | 19:14:15, May 19, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | About flexible times: I dislike the idea of a permit, as I distrust the capitalist state. It is, off course, better than not needing any permit at all. |
| Date | 22:53:17, May 19, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | Person B is not necesarily working illegally, nurses for example. Also, have you not read the Second part of the workers charter? This clearly states that workers cannot be paid differently in regard to sex, race et al, the clause is in place. Also, a "normal work day" has different connotations to different people. If someone can't work a "normal work day" are you saying they should not be allowed to work? Though we are not fully commited to capitalism, we do accept that in order to provide all the wants of the people, capitalism is advantageous, if regulated properly. You are making links to the Real World, which is fair enough but as we have not had our economy instituted yet, these links are not required. We have no idea what our economy will be like when first introduced, and we have to be ready for whatever it should be. Evening work does not "ruin family life" and can be advantageous for some. There is also a clause (within the Basic Rights At Work section) that allow employees to request flexible hours, not to be pressed on by employers. |
| Date | 02:26:36, May 20, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party | To | Debating the Employees Charter: Working Hours Limitation |
| Message | For some it van be advantegeous, but not for most, as it are also children That just are home in the evening but not during the day. And yes, as you claim you want a "regulated capitalism", that makes to me you do want to keep capitalism, and thus are capitalistic in that way of the meaning. Yes, during special circumstances, person B is not illegally working (and I consider necessairy). And as flexibable hours are requested by the workers, not vice versa, I can live with it. I have mentioned before I'll likely vote for the other thing, and from now on I'll likely vote for this too - after all, right now there is no such thing as a regulation at all !!!! |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 324 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 46 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 28 |
| Random fact: Particracy allows you to establish an unelected head of state like a monarch or a president-for-life, but doing this is a bit of a process. First elect a candidate with the name "." to the Head of State position. Then change your law on the "Structure of the executive branch" to "The head of state is hereditary and symbolic; the head of government chairs the cabinet" and change the "formal title of the head of state" to how you want the new head of state's title and name to appear (eg. King Percy XVI). |
| Random quote: "Socialism failed because it couldn't tell the economic truth; capitalism may fail because it couldn't tell the ecological truth." Lester Brown, Fortune Brainstorm Conference, 2006 |