Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: January 5461
Next month in: 03:42:48
Server time: 16:17:11, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): Caoimhean | HopesFor | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies

Details

Submitted by[?]: Progressive 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: October 2176

Description[?]:

We believe that there are certain industries where hiring based on "positive discrimination" makes perfect sense when dealing with the ability to perform the task at hand.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date04:41:26, January 25, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageAxis Mundi Anakrousite will not support. 'Positive' discrimination is still discrimination, and we shall not easily allow ANY industry to practise it.

Date05:28:42, January 25, 2006 CET
FromProletariat Revolution Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageWe echo AMA's sentiments.

Date05:28:47, January 25, 2006 CET
FromProletariat Revolution Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageWe echo AMA's sentiments.

Date14:29:12, January 25, 2006 CET
FromAM Radical Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageWe support, but doubt that this logical extension of an employer's right to select employees will pass,

Date14:45:18, January 25, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageHow is allowing racial discrimination 'logical'?

Date14:52:02, January 25, 2006 CET
FromAM Radical Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageIf I wish to hire only left handed redheads, that should be my right. I am providing the job, I get to pick who gets it. Personally, I find any form of discrimination except hiring the person best able to do the job to be illogical, but I am willing to grant someone else the right to act in a different fashion.

Date15:07:44, January 25, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOkay - let us take it to extremes. EVERY employer in Likatonia decides the will only hire white workers.

How does the RLP suggest we deal with the millions of 'non-white' people who are willing to work, but not being given the option.

Date17:05:04, January 25, 2006 CET
FromAM Radical Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageThe ensuing labor shortage would quickly change the minds of the employers. We are legislating for real world possibilities, not mass insanity on the part of our businessmen.

Date19:20:17, January 25, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageWhy would there be a labour shortage? On the subject of realism, the RLP seems to be ignoring the fact that a large percentage of the Likatonian population is 'white'... and that we have some unemployment.

It is entirely possible that some elements of the 'non-white' community COULD, in entirety, be obstructed from working in this nation.

What is the RLP solution? Send them overseas?

Perhaps the RLP has not noticed we have HAD ocassional bouts of 'racially tense' politics over the past few decades? We are not talking about the impossible.

Date21:19:25, January 25, 2006 CET
FromAM Radical Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageThere are also non-white employeers who would, if such a trend started, be likely to hire only non-white employees. However, this does not answer the question of why we have the right to set the standards by which an employeer selects his employees. Obviously, in the public sector such a rule make perfect sense; but in the private sector, a job at a particular employer is not a right, it is granted by the employeer because he wants to hire the individual person.

If I want to hire only Deltarians to staff my Deltarian resturant, that should be my right. If I thik that left handed redheads make the best tuba players, that's who I should have a right to hire as well.

Date21:52:24, January 25, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageHow can it be appropriate in the public sector, but not in the private?

It is appropriate to disallow discrimination in the public sector, because it is unfair. It is still unfair, even in the private sector

Extending the RLP logic a little further, could we not argue that 'private business' is "not a right"... it is granted by the government.

So - we can deal with this problem quite seriously. Those individuals who will not agree to hire based on ability, will not be granted the required materials to start a business.

Date22:07:33, January 25, 2006 CET
FromAM Radical Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageIt is appropiate in the public sector because the owners there are all the people. It is not appropiate in the private sector because the owners there are individuals who have invested their owm time, talents, and resources into a business and should have the right to decide who will work for them.

It is unfair in both sectors, we agree. But it is not the job of the government to enforce 'fairness' in all aspects of private life, only in public life. It is unfair that a handsome man is more likely to marry a pretty woman than an ugly man is. But we do not intend to force marriage to be based on non-discriminatory practices either.

Date22:17:52, January 25, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageActually, the marriage may be a bad example... since the 'pretty' woman is actually very likely to 'recruit' based on 'ability' or 'suitablity'.

We are not quite sure where the RLP perceives the disconnect... yes, public servants work directly (theoretically) for the public... but private employers didn't print their own money, and do not exist in a vacuum. Indeed, they even need to staff their positions with the 'common people'.

Businesses are answerable to government in a number of ways... not least being tax, of course. So - in many ways, the 'private' business is a 'public' entity, too.

Another thought occurs... AMA feels that, perhaps, 'left-handed people' are not all that likely to be affected by 'positive discrimination' rules, anyway... since they are not noticably an oppressed minority, or have an established history of unfair business treatment.

Date22:36:19, January 25, 2006 CET
FromAM Radical Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageYes, she may do so, just as the employer may recruit on the same basis. But, should we be forcing her to do so?

The disconnect, as we see it, lies in who owns the business which provides the job. The public sector is owned by the public, so its policies must be acceptable to the majority of the public owners. A private sector business, while subject to some government regulations, is owned by one or more private individuals and should be allowed policies agreeable to them.

It is now, and always has been, our policy that these regulations should be as few as possible, as the government is no more capable of running a business than the business is capable of running the country.(We also look back with fond memories and not a little sadness to the original AAP which shared our Libertarian policies.)

Date22:55:24, January 25, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOOC: The 'old' AAP also, (after an initial burst of success) consistently scored bottom, or near bottom in every election. We had no votes, we couldn't push any of our agenda, we couldn't even offer worthwhile support to an agenda like our own. I'd always built the 'factional' idea into the party... so I decided to explore it. You may recall, we've been a lot of things (from religious nazis, to pacifist reds).

I'm quite enjoying the roleplay, and strategy elements of my party at the moment... but, already I have some ideas about where it is likely to go next (a specific form of restrictive that might amuse me for a while)... but there are STILL a few areas (like Eminent Domain), where we have made no attempt to overthrow what we achieved as a libertarian movement. (By the way, you should try being a red party... or a fundamentalist religious party. It's interesting to jump the fence, and play 'the other side').

IC: But, private companies basically require government approval, if not in EXACTLY so many words. So - if the government wants ALL businesses (we aren't talking about victimising individual outfits) to dispense with "Positive Discrimination", it seems fairly reasonable for that to become the 'official version', no?

Date00:36:03, January 26, 2006 CET
FromLikaton Fascist Front
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOOC: Operating on the lunatic fringe is quite fun, and in some ways it is character building when operating outside of your comfort zone.

Date15:08:46, January 26, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOOC: Indeed. As an individual, I am an Atheist... the common or garden "I just don't believe" variety... but in Likatonia, I have played an extremist religious order, and a Militant Atheist faction... for both of which, I have had to create legislation, and make arguments to support.

Date15:15:33, January 26, 2006 CET
FromAM Radical Libertarian Party
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOCC: I quite understand and agree - in another game I am running Illinois and Iowa as a combination mob boss/party hack. My comment was just an IC dig to remind the libertarian voters that the RLP has remained consistant to their interests, unlike those who have turned traitor to pander to other interests :)

Date15:31:53, January 26, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOOC: oooh harsh... the AAP/AAS/AMA actually HAS remained true to the ideals that we consider central: healthcare, education, anti-corruption, and the environment. We have remained true to those issues, no matter which constituents we have courted. If that means that our 'libertarian' stance was less than 'pure libertarianism, or our 'socialist' stance was less than 'pure socialism', then so much the better... we have remained true to our beliefs, no matter which way the climate of a particular 'model' might suggest we SHOULD vote.

Date05:59:50, January 27, 2006 CET
FromLikaton Fascist Front
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOOC: Just for the record, in real life I am also an athiest :)

Date06:20:33, January 27, 2006 CET
FromCommonwealth Workers Army
ToDebating the Progressive Reform Bill - Hiring Policies
MessageOOC: I think maybe that's what makes the extremist religious party so intriguing.... trying to work out what the 'appeal' of fundamentalist thinking really IS... maybe?

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
      

Total Seats: 307

no
   

Total Seats: 155

abstain
 

Total Seats: 38


Random fact: Cultural Protocol bills must provide a real-life equivalent or short description for the ethnic groups, languages and religions contained in them, such that it would be easy for an unfamiliar player to understand (e.g. "Dundorfian = German"). Where appropriate, they should also provide guidance to players on where to find help with translations and character names. This might include, for example, links to Google Translate, Behind the Name's Random Name Generator and Fantasy Name Generators.

Random quote: "Someone who wields power in name only can never compete with those who wield it through action." - Franz Reichert, former Luthorian politician

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 77