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: Workers Rights Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Artanian Sozialistische Arbeiterpartei
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: March 2308
Description[?]:
| We propose that some protection is given to striking workers. Therefore we propose that employees should not be allowed to sack workers who have gone on strike for reasonable reasons. If this Bill passes, a committee shall be set up, bringing in members from all parties, who will be given the task of defining reasonable. However we in the Social Alternative believe that employees should not be able to fire a worker simply because that worker has gone on strike. We hope that this proposal will bring this law into line with other laws which are more favourable to workers. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Employer's rights in regards to firing striking workers.
Old value:: Employers are free to fire workers who go on strike.
Current: Employers are free to fire workers who go on strike.
Proposed: Employers can fire workers who are deemed to have gone on strike without reasonable reasons.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:29:25, October 31, 2006 CET | From | Noordelijk Bevrijding Front | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill |
| Message | Opposed |
| Date | 02:04:56, November 01, 2006 CET | From | Green Freedom Party | To | Debating the Workers Rights Bill |
| Message | Support, somewhat. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 40 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 135 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 24 |
| Random fact: Parties have the ability to endorse another party's candidate for the Head of State election (if there is one). This adds a strategic element to the elections. |
| Random quote: "Those who are responsible for the national security must be the sole judges of what the national security requires. It would be obviously undesirable that such matters should be made the subject of evidence in a court of law or otherwise discussed in public." - Unattributed member of the the House of Lords on the removal of trade union rights |