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: Anti-Ageism Discrimination III
Details
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: May 2057
Description[?]:
| A bill to modify the retirement age to 70 years of age. Articles. I The legal retirement age will now be 70 years of age. II Workers may stop working from 60 years of age, and must stop at 70. III Employers may not withold pensions if workers decide to stop working before 70. IV In workplaces where workers have not formed labour or trade unions, disputes, if present, shall be arbitrated by a government agency. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The professional retirement age.
Old value:: 62
Current: 60
Proposed: 70
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:10:29, May 22, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Anti-Ageism Discrimination III |
| Message | Suggestions welcome. |
| Date | 00:19:16, May 23, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Anti-Ageism Discrimination III |
| Message | How about a middle ground between 62 and 75 -- retirement age at 68, maybe? |
| Date | 04:38:28, May 23, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Anti-Ageism Discrimination III |
| Message | A nice round 70? |
| Date | 05:03:05, May 23, 2005 CET | From | Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition | To | Debating the Anti-Ageism Discrimination III |
| Message | 70 still seems a tad too old... |
| Date | 08:13:19, May 23, 2005 CET | From | Chorus of Amyst | To | Debating the Anti-Ageism Discrimination III |
| Message | The Council supports, much as it supported the original version proposed by the Shylock Party. |
| Date | 16:50:52, May 23, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Anti-Ageism Discrimination III |
| Message | Our preference is for 68, but we could go along with 70, given the protections for those choosing early-retirement stated in the bill. |
| Date | 00:35:54, May 24, 2005 CET | From | MLTP (The Resistance) | To | Debating the Anti-Ageism Discrimination III |
| Message | We would support either 68 or 70. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 87 | |||||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If your "Bills under debate" section is cluttered up with old bills created by inactive parties, report them for deletion on the Bill Clearouts Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363 |
| Random quote: "The best politics is right action." - Mahatma Gandhi |