NationStates

The World Assembly,

Recognising not only that industry is critical to the economic development of many member states, but that high standards of health and safety are critical to the development of many industries,

Concerned that some members and employers might not have adequate laws and policies in effect to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, not only in factories and other centres of heavy industry but also - for example - in restaurants (where measures to prevent cross-contamination of foodstuffs, such as the use of different-coloured chopping boards and regular handwashing, are of great importance),

Believing that employers in member states with strong health and safety standards should not be entitled to outsource jobs to members with lax or nonexistent health and safety standards in order to make a quick buck, and

Supporting the right of workers everywhere to face as small a risk of physical harm and deterioration as possible while they are working,

Hereby enacts as follows.

1. In this resolution, a "worker" in any given member state means a hypothetical worker of average physical dimensions whose species is the predominant sapient species in that member.
2. Each member must:
   
   1. publish a first, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of mechanical, temperature, chemical, and ergonomic stresses which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   2. publish a second, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of various industrial chemical substances, with reference to levels in both the factory workplace environment and a worker's blood sample, which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   3. publish a third, qualitative manual of guidelines explaining the steps that their workers can take to reduce their risk of injury in the workplace (both in general and at the particular type of business where they work), regardless of where they work or what their job entails, and the steps that employers in each sector of the economy must take to reduce these risks,
   4. update the three manuals of guidelines, hereinafter "the Manuals," on an annual basis to incorporate the latest research findings and relevant statistical data, and
   5. distribute the Manuals to all of their businesses, and
   6. sanction those businesses who expose their workers to levels of stress and exposure to chemical substances (pursuant to Articles 2a and 2b respectively) beyond those stipulated in the Manuals, or who fail to report injuries sustained by their workers at the workplace to their member's government (to ensure its compliance with Article 3c).
3. The Health and Safety Board (HSB) is established. It is responsible for receiving the following data from each member on an annual basis:
   
   1. legal measures enacted by that member and its political subdivisions to protect the health and safety of workers,
   2. how frequently and effectively the measures described in Articles 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3a are being enforced by the government, and
   3. how often per year, on average, workplace injuries occur (which shall be disaggregated according to whether they were caused by mechanical hazards, temperature hazards, chemical hazards, or ergonomic hazards).
4. The HSB shall report all members and political subdivisions of members whose governments fail to enforce those measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers, including by failing to enforce compliance with Articles 2 and 5 of this Act, to the WACC.
5. Each member must disseminate accurate and informative publications to all of their businesses (including state-owned businesses) which describe the legal measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers and explain how businesses can comply with these legal measures.

Co-authored with Tinhampton.

OOC: Note the committee rule. A committee cannot be the only thing a proposal does. Either an independent requirement or recommendation to member states or some interaction by member states with the committee more onerous than merely filing paperwork is necessary.

IC: "This is better than the sterilisation of needles bureaucracy but we're still opposed. It's hard to see how the whole thing wouldn't end up being fitted to suit the average Jo who would do everything in their power to avoid work. Sturdy Bananamen socialists are able to do more and withstand more than your typical soft liberal/conservative that our so-called liberal democratic fellow member states are full of. We should not be held back their moaning and complaints."

OOC: You have already read this, right?

________________________________________________________________

1. Publishing a manual of guidelines, henceforth known as WA-OSIH Manual A, for standard levels of mechanical, temperature, and ergonomic stresses which may be endured on a daily basis by a hypothetical worker without incurring adverse side effects over time.

"A hypothetical worker of what species? And, for species where this makes a difference (as it even does, to some extent, for humans) of which sex and in what age-range?"

2. Publishing a manual of guidelines, henceforth known as WA-OSIH Manual B, for standard quantities or concentrations of various industrial chemical substances, with reference to levels in both the factory workplace environment and a human blood sample, which may be endured on a daily basis by a hypothetical worker without incurring adverse side effects over time.

"Humanocentric."

Artorrios O SouthWoods,
ChairBear,
Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

Bananaistan wrote:OOC: Note the committee rule. A committee cannot be the only thing a proposal does. Either an independent requirement or recommendation to member states or some interaction by member states with the committee more onerous than merely filing paperwork is necessary.

IC: "This is better than the sterilisation of needles bureaucracy but we're still opposed. It's hard to see how the whole thing wouldn't end up being fitted to suit the average Jo who would do everything in their power to avoid work. Sturdy Bananamen socialists are able to do more and withstand more than your typical soft liberal/conservative that our so-called liberal democratic fellow member states are full of. We should not be held back their moaning and complaints."

OOC: Thanks for the feedback, I have added two new lines (9 and 10) which I believe should solve the 'must do more then establish a committee' issue.

Bears Armed wrote:OOC: You have already read this, right?

OOC: Yes I have read that, however I believe that this resolution is different enough to deserve a submission due to the fact that it actually quantifies limits of acceptable exposure to potentially hazardous workplace conditions, standardizes those quantified limits internationally, categorically breaks them down along a rational basis of hazard type or class, and requires not only that national governments have an entity to regulate these matters but convenes an agency of the WA to regulate these national government agencies to guarantee a minimum of efficacy.

1. Publishing a manual of guidelines, henceforth known as WA-OSIH Manual A, for standard levels of mechanical, temperature, and ergonomic stresses which may be endured on a daily basis by a hypothetical worker without incurring adverse side effects over time.

"A hypothetical worker of what species? And, for species where this makes a difference (as it even does, to some extent, for humans) of which sex and in what age-range?"

"This goal of this resolution is not to establish protections for only one particular species, rather we in the Alistian delegation seek for it to protect all workers to whom these regulations would apply to, regardless of their age or sex."

Lydia Anderson, Assistant to the Delegate-Ambassador: Ambassador, I do not believe that one big, unwieldy piece of WA can adequately produce strict hazard reduction guidelines for 19,000 member states and their diversity of species. To that, I suggest that you consider my proposed rewrite, tentatively entitled the "Health and Safety Act":

The World Assembly,

Recognising not only that industry is critical to the economic development of many member states, but that high standards of health and safety are critical to the development of many industries,

Concerned that some members and employers might not have adequate laws and policies in effect to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, not only in factories and other centres of heavy industry but also - for example - in restaurants (where measures to prevent cross-contamination of foodstuffs, such as the use of different-coloured chopping boards and regular handwashing, are of great importance),

Believing that employers in member states with strong health and safety standards should not be entitled to outsource jobs to members with lax or nonexistent health and safety standards in order to make a quick buck, and

Supporting the right of workers everywhere to face as small a risk of physical harm and deterioration as possible while they are working,

Hereby enacts as follows.

1. In this resolution, a "worker" in any given member state means a hypothetical worker of average physical dimensions whose species is the predominant sapient species in that member.
2. Each member must:
   
   1. publish a first, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of mechanical, temperature, chemical, and ergonomic stresses which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   2. publish a second, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of various industrial chemical substances, with reference to levels in both the factory workplace environment and a worker's blood sample, which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   3. publish a third, qualitative manual of guidelines explaining the steps that their workers can take to reduce their risk of injury in the workplace (both in general and at the particular type of business where they work), regardless of where they work or what their job entails, and the steps that employers in each sector of the economy must take to reduce these risks,
   4. update the three manuals of guidelines, hereinafter "the Manuals," on an annual basis to incorporate the latest research findings and relevant statistical data, and
   5. distribute the Manuals to all of their businesses, and
   6. sanction those businesses who expose their workers to levels of stress and exposure to chemical substances (pursuant to Articles 2a and 2b respectively) beyond those stipulated in the Manuals, or who fail to report injuries sustained by their workers at the workplace to their member's government (to ensure its compliance with Article 3c).
3. The Health and Safety Board (HSB) is established. It is responsible for receiving the following data from each member on an annual basis:
   
   1. legal measures enacted by that member and its political subdivisions to protect the health and safety of workers,
   2. how frequently and effectively the measures described in Articles 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3a are being enforced by the government, and
   3. how often per year, on average, workplace injuries occur (which shall be disaggregated according to whether they were caused by mechanical hazards, temperature hazards, chemical hazards, or ergonomic hazards).
4. The HSB shall report all members and political subdivisions of members whose governments fail to enforce those measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers, including by failing to enforce compliance with Articles 2 and 5 of this Act, to the WACC.
5. Each member must disseminate accurate and informative publications to all of their businesses (including state-owned businesses) which describe the legal measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers and explain how businesses can comply with these legal measures.

Co-authored with Tinhampton.

Tinhampton wrote:Lydia Anderson, Assistant to the Delegate-Ambassador: Ambassador, I do not believe that one big, unwieldy piece of WA can adequately produce strict hazard reduction guidelines for 19,000 member states and their diversity of species. To that, I suggest that you consider my proposed rewrite, tentatively entitled the "Health and Safety Act":

The World Assembly,

Recognising not only that industry is critical to the economic development of many member states, but that high standards of health and safety are critical to the development of many industries,

Concerned that some members and employers might not have adequate laws and policies in effect to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, not only in factories and other centres of heavy industry but also - for example - in restaurants (where measures to prevent cross-contamination of foodstuffs, such as the use of different-coloured chopping boards and regular handwashing, are of great importance),

Believing that employers in member states with strong health and safety standards should not be entitled to outsource jobs to members with lax or nonexistent health and safety standards in order to make a quick buck, and

Supporting the right of workers everywhere to face as small a risk of physical harm and deterioration as possible while they are working,

Hereby enacts as follows.

1. In this resolution, a "worker" in any given member state means a hypothetical worker of average physical dimensions whose species is the predominant sapient species in that member.
2. Each member must:
   
   1. publish a first, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of mechanical, temperature, chemical, and ergonomic stresses which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   2. publish a second, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of various industrial chemical substances, with reference to levels in both the factory workplace environment and a worker's blood sample, which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   3. publish a third, qualitative manual of guidelines explaining the steps that their workers can take to reduce their risk of injury in the workplace (both in general and at the particular type of business where they work), regardless of where they work or what their job entails, and the steps that employers in each sector of the economy must take to reduce these risks,
   4. update the three manuals of guidelines, hereinafter "the Manuals," on an annual basis to incorporate the latest research findings and relevant statistical data, and
   5. distribute the Manuals to all of their businesses, and
   6. sanction those businesses who expose their workers to levels of stress and exposure to chemical substances (pursuant to Articles 2a and 2b respectively) beyond those stipulated in the Manuals, or who fail to report injuries sustained by their workers at the workplace to their member's government (to ensure its compliance with Article 3c).
3. The Health and Safety Board (HSB) is established. It is responsible for receiving the following data from each member on an annual basis:
   
   1. legal measures enacted by that member and its political subdivisions to protect the health and safety of workers,
   2. how frequently and effectively the measures described in Articles 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3a are being enforced by the government, and
   3. how often per year, on average, workplace injuries occur (which shall be disaggregated according to whether they were caused by mechanical hazards, temperature hazards, chemical hazards, or ergonomic hazards).
4. The HSB shall report all members and political subdivisions of members whose governments fail to enforce those measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers, including by failing to enforce compliance with Articles 2 and 5 of this Act, to the WACC.
5. Each member must disseminate accurate and informative publications to all of their businesses (including state-owned businesses) which describe the legal measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers and explain how businesses can comply with these legal measures.

Co-authored with Tinhampton.

"Thank you for response and contribution, Ambassador. Your suggestion for a leaner and more condensed proposal has been discussed and found to be a most astute idea. The suggested revisions to the proposal have now been implemented."

The Health and Safety Act has now been submitted, it may be approved here.

The Goobergunchian ambassador looks at the papers on his desk again, scratches his head, and then rises to speak.

We are confused as to the extent of clause 1 due to its recursive nature. Does anything in this proposal relate to actual flesh-and-blood workers?

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

A large, green, python slithers into the halls of the GA. The snake says...

"While the Delegation from The Python would support this premise, the definition of a "worker" is filled with loopholes. For example, in The Python there are many different predominant species of sapient, intelligent pythons, but only the one most common species of python (the reticulated python) would not be considered as a "worker", meaning that rights guaranteed would not need to cater to other species or sizes. Even I would exempt as I am a green tree python!"

(OOC: Yeah, I agree with Goobergunch that the definition of "worker" is terrible, although this is a good premise. Also yay I think? this is my first roleplay post! I really need to make a GA ambassador at some point...)

EDIT: I cannot read, but I updated this post and my point mostly stands

The definition of a "worker" is too broad and must be refined further. For example, people who are not of typical build, yet still perform some sort of service for payment, would not be classified as workers, neither would be minority species. We do need such a type of act, however, the definition, as of now, is rife with loopholes and will not adequately defend the rights of the global proletarian.

1. The fact is that the bill is not terrible in intent, but the definition of worker is so embarrassing bad that it is inherently exclusively to many people.

2. As a staunchly pro-worker and pro-regulation country, the demands of the act when brought up to scale of even my relatively tiny nation is overwhelming to industry.

3. Outlining a simple list of regulations and regular inspections to uphold those would be a significantly more realistic way to go about it. This excessive level of data collection is simply something that we cannot get on board with.

OOC: Woah woah woah. So a member state that has, say, 10 different sapient species only has to issue guidelines for whichever is the most numerous? That's a pretty common thing in, say, FT and FanT nations. Huge flaw right there. An against vote from me.

Alistia wrote:The World Assembly,

Recognising not only that industry is critical to the economic development of many member states, but that high standards of health and safety are critical to the development of many industries,

Concerned that some members and employers might not have adequate laws and policies in effect to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, not only in factories and other centres of heavy industry but also - for example - in restaurants (where measures to prevent cross-contamination of foodstuffs, such as the use of different-coloured chopping boards and regular handwashing, are of great importance),

Believing that employers in member states with strong health and safety standards should not be entitled to outsource jobs to members with lax or nonexistent health and safety standards in order to make a quick buck, and

Supporting the right of workers everywhere to face as small a risk of physical harm and deterioration as possible while they are working,

Hereby enacts as follows.

1. In this resolution, a "worker" in any given member state means a hypothetical worker of average physical dimensions whose species is the predominant sapient species in that member.
2. Each member must:
   
   1. publish a first, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of mechanical, temperature, chemical, and ergonomic stresses which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   2. publish a second, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of various industrial chemical substances, with reference to levels in both the factory workplace environment and a worker's blood sample, which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   3. publish a third, qualitative manual of guidelines explaining the steps that their workers can take to reduce their risk of injury in the workplace (both in general and at the particular type of business where they work), regardless of where they work or what their job entails, and the steps that employers in each sector of the economy must take to reduce these risks,
   4. update the three manuals of guidelines, hereinafter "the Manuals," on an annual basis to incorporate the latest research findings and relevant statistical data, and
   5. distribute the Manuals to all of their businesses, and
   6. sanction those businesses who expose their workers to levels of stress and exposure to chemical substances (pursuant to Articles 2a and 2b respectively) beyond those stipulated in the Manuals, or who fail to report injuries sustained by their workers at the workplace to their member's government (to ensure its compliance with Article 3c).
3. The Health and Safety Board (HSB) is established. It is responsible for receiving the following data from each member on an annual basis:
   
   1. legal measures enacted by that member and its political subdivisions to protect the health and safety of workers,
   2. how frequently and effectively the measures described in Articles 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3a are being enforced by the government, and
   3. how often per year, on average, workplace injuries occur (which shall be disaggregated according to whether they were caused by mechanical hazards, temperature hazards, chemical hazards, or ergonomic hazards).
4. The HSB shall report all members and political subdivisions of members whose governments fail to enforce those measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers, including by failing to enforce compliance with Articles 2 and 5 of this Act, to the WACC.
5. Each member must disseminate accurate and informative publications to all of their businesses (including state-owned businesses) which describe the legal measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers and explain how businesses can comply with these legal measures.

Co-authored with Tinhampton.

[OOC] besides the use of "make a quick buck" which I don't think is very appropriate language to use in this formal I don't think this solution is air-tight enough, for example, if I were to start a company and only hire people with dwarfism then I'd be completely exempt to this mandate, not to mention other potential loopholes and the sheer amount of bureaucracy that would be needed for such a resolution, and as such I don't believe this resolution is fit for passage.

Alistia wrote:The World Assembly,

Recognising not only that industry is critical to the economic development of many member states, but that high standards of health and safety are critical to the development of many industries,

Concerned that some members and employers might not have adequate laws and policies in effect to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, not only in factories and other centres of heavy industry but also - for example - in restaurants (where measures to prevent cross-contamination of foodstuffs, such as the use of different-coloured chopping boards and regular handwashing, are of great importance),

Believing that employers in member states with strong health and safety standards should not be entitled to outsource jobs to members with lax or nonexistent health and safety standards in order to make a quick buck, and

Supporting the right of workers everywhere to face as small a risk of physical harm and deterioration as possible while they are working,

Hereby enacts as follows.

1. In this resolution, a "worker" in any given member state means a hypothetical worker of average physical dimensions whose species is the predominant sapient species in that member.
2. Each member must:
   
   1. publish a first, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of mechanical, temperature, chemical, and ergonomic stresses which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   2. publish a second, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of various industrial chemical substances, with reference to levels in both the factory workplace environment and a worker's blood sample, which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   3. publish a third, qualitative manual of guidelines explaining the steps that their workers can take to reduce their risk of injury in the workplace (both in general and at the particular type of business where they work), regardless of where they work or what their job entails, and the steps that employers in each sector of the economy must take to reduce these risks,
   4. update the three manuals of guidelines, hereinafter "the Manuals," on an annual basis to incorporate the latest research findings and relevant statistical data, and
   5. distribute the Manuals to all of their businesses, and
   6. sanction those businesses who expose their workers to levels of stress and exposure to chemical substances (pursuant to Articles 2a and 2b respectively) beyond those stipulated in the Manuals, or who fail to report injuries sustained by their workers at the workplace to their member's government (to ensure its compliance with Article 3c).
3. The Health and Safety Board (HSB) is established. It is responsible for receiving the following data from each member on an annual basis:
   
   1. legal measures enacted by that member and its political subdivisions to protect the health and safety of workers,
   2. how frequently and effectively the measures described in Articles 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3a are being enforced by the government, and
   3. how often per year, on average, workplace injuries occur (which shall be disaggregated according to whether they were caused by mechanical hazards, temperature hazards, chemical hazards, or ergonomic hazards).
4. The HSB shall report all members and political subdivisions of members whose governments fail to enforce those measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers, including by failing to enforce compliance with Articles 2 and 5 of this Act, to the WACC.
5. Each member must disseminate accurate and informative publications to all of their businesses (including state-owned businesses) which describe the legal measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers and explain how businesses can comply with these legal measures.

Co-authored with Tinhampton.

The Secular Republic, noting and concurring with previous objections to the clause on applying this resolution only to the "predominant sapient species", also takes particular issue with the statement "worker of average physical dimensions".

With regard to this clause, it seems particularly reductive and unnecessary - especially when physical dimensions are so variable across all peoples of Gudicia. While above nations have already noted potential issues with the clause defining workers as of the predominant sapient species, we also take issue with the physical dimensions clause - which is ill-defined. The people of our nation and our struggle are of all backgrounds - and while we stand for worker's rights, the implication of average physical dimensions may exclude a swath of Gudician citizens, in stark contrast to our objectives in building Inclusiveness.

What defines average physical dimensions? Where does one draw the line? There is no need for this clause, as regardless of a citizen's stature or standing, there are still many skills they have to offer to our glorious people's cause. Also, what is the threshold for people dictated as average physical dimensions? That much is unclear, and left up to interpretation by member nations - who could easily define their populace's average physical dimensions so precisely that only one person is considered "average". If the average height of our people are 5' 7", would someone standing at 5' 8" or 6' 4" be considered of "average physical dimensions"? Is it up to member nations to determine what range of heights and sizes are considered "average physical dimensions"?

In the majority opinion of the Advisory Council of Gudicia: the definition of average physical dimensions is left so up to interpretation by member nations, that the "average physical dimensions" clause can be refined so precisely as to exclude most - if not all of the population. This could be used by member nations to easily undermine the entire purpose of the legislation. Very few people are truly, entirely average - and it is our view that the reliance on majority and average to define a worker in this act makes the material utterly unenforceable.

Therefore, on the recommendation of the Advisory Council, Gudicia will cast its vote against this policy - in the hopes that a broader labour safety act is developed, and that such a labour safety act would provide expansive support for all peoples in our nation: rather than specifically the most statistically average of individuals.

(OOC: Also my first IC post, giving this a right shot!)

Alistia wrote:The World Assembly,

Recognising not only that industry is critical to the economic development of many member states, but that high standards of health and safety are critical to the development of many industries,

Concerned that some members and employers might not have adequate laws and policies in effect to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, not only in factories and other centres of heavy industry but also - for example - in restaurants (where measures to prevent cross-contamination of foodstuffs, such as the use of different-coloured chopping boards and regular handwashing, are of great importance),

Believing that employers in member states with strong health and safety standards should not be entitled to outsource jobs to members with lax or nonexistent health and safety standards in order to make a quick buck, and

Supporting the right of workers everywhere to face as small a risk of physical harm and deterioration as possible while they are working,

Hereby enacts as follows.

1. In this resolution, a "worker" in any given member state means a hypothetical worker of average physical dimensions whose species is the predominant sapient species in that member.
2. Each member must:
   
   1. publish a first, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of mechanical, temperature, chemical, and ergonomic stresses which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   2. publish a second, quantitative manual of guidelines listing those levels of various industrial chemical substances, with reference to levels in both the factory workplace environment and a worker's blood sample, which a worker in that member may endure on a daily basis without incurring adverse side effects over time,
   3. publish a third, qualitative manual of guidelines explaining the steps that their workers can take to reduce their risk of injury in the workplace (both in general and at the particular type of business where they work), regardless of where they work or what their job entails, and the steps that employers in each sector of the economy must take to reduce these risks,
   4. update the three manuals of guidelines, hereinafter "the Manuals," on an annual basis to incorporate the latest research findings and relevant statistical data, and
   5. distribute the Manuals to all of their businesses, and
   6. sanction those businesses who expose their workers to levels of stress and exposure to chemical substances (pursuant to Articles 2a and 2b respectively) beyond those stipulated in the Manuals, or who fail to report injuries sustained by their workers at the workplace to their member's government (to ensure its compliance with Article 3c).
3. The Health and Safety Board (HSB) is established. It is responsible for receiving the following data from each member on an annual basis:
   
   1. legal measures enacted by that member and its political subdivisions to protect the health and safety of workers,
   2. how frequently and effectively the measures described in Articles 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3a are being enforced by the government, and
   3. how often per year, on average, workplace injuries occur (which shall be disaggregated according to whether they were caused by mechanical hazards, temperature hazards, chemical hazards, or ergonomic hazards).
4. The HSB shall report all members and political subdivisions of members whose governments fail to enforce those measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers, including by failing to enforce compliance with Articles 2 and 5 of this Act, to the WACC.
5. Each member must disseminate accurate and informative publications to all of their businesses (including state-owned businesses) which describe the legal measures they have enacted to protect the health and safety of workers and explain how businesses can comply with these legal measures.

Co-authored with Tinhampton.

Kerime Gómez, the General Assembly ambassador for Allinburg, takes her turn to speak before the chamber.

Honourable members, I understand the motive of this resolution being to protect the occupational safety of workers and employees worldwide, but I would consider the choice of words in Clause 1 to be gravely questionable, in agreement with some of our fellow members here.

By "a 'worker' in any given member state means a hypothetical worker of average physical dimensions whose species is the predominant sapient species in that member", did you, right honourable member, even consider — that first, the "average physical dimensions" could be interpreted as a mean, median or mode, and that the thresholds specified under this clause are basically unclear and are thus left to states and governments to define what standards must be met, if this act is passed; not to mention that this could affect the occupational status of an individual residing in a particular state, if say they are below the mandated height, weight or body mass index, if there is any, and if all this could be dependent on age, sex, gender or other variables — and second, the term "predominant sapient species" notably ignores the dilemmas faced by states where not one species is predominant or sapient, or to what level of predomination or sapience a species is required to be eligible for the benefits provided by this act. Once again, this is left to governments to interpret, and as you should know by now, some will leverage this loophole to only accept the most average — or more realistically, the fittest cyborg, or those with a specific height: imagine getting fired for being a Homo saipens and not being 6 feet 9 inches tall. This act legitimises the tyrannical power of governments to restrict guaranteed safety* for the workforce to only a set amount of people, or even none at all — or worse, the overall restriction of the workforce to a select few*, which defeats the motive of this act, which is to provide adequate occupational safety and health provisions to the general workforce.

In summary, fellow members of the Assembly, I think this act not only fails to clarify the all-important definition of what a worker is, but it, in my own words as well, endangers the many industrious and well-capable species around the world, who could face discrimination and more risks in the workplace*, reduced safety standards compared to other "ideal" species, and even unemployment — simply because they are too short? And what about those marginalised classes who cannot afford private workplace insurance in place of state-given equivalents?* As much as I agree on the rest of the provisions which are valid and acceptable, the looseness of the first clause breaks the strict flow of the document — and, as this resolution is now put into vote, and is unfortunately no longer available for revision, I call this act as discriminatory, against socioeconomic progress, and against the principles of the World Assembly.

I, on behalf of the Federal Republic of Allinburg, therefore exercise my voting rights to veto this resolution. The occupational safety and health of our workers remains of utmost concern, and I believe, in agreement with fellow members, that a future resolution will be drafted and revised, with fairness and diversity in mind, and not just the literal average Joe, well before it is put up to public vote. Numbers are important, but justice is just as important too.

Kerime Gómez
Permanent Representative to the World Assembly (General Assembly)
Federal Republic of Allinburg

* This speech was edited to clarify some statements.

On behalf of the Queendom of Dragonfluxx, a nation that has three majority species on equal terms, with wildly different means, modes, medians and indeed a constantly fluctating population... we concur with the sentiment stated by the representative from Allinburg, and will be voting AGAINST this proposal. Clause 1 is indeed gravely questionable and while in good intent, is once again a shameful display of the WA's humanocentric knowledge and power base, and let's not forget that there exist extreme examples of intraspecies physical dimensions, even discouting extreme sexual dimorphism. As such, we vote against mainly due to that clause destroying what is otherwise a well intentioned piece of safety legislation.

Lespreya Virokan Marteha
Elected Representative to the General Assembly of the WA
Queendom of Dragonfluxx

(OOC: Once again, I echo the sense of exclusion of FanT and FT nations such as mine in this proposal. I doubt that the WA would not have the capability to do the sort of number crunching needed to generate common sense OSHA requirements of all species. Clause 1 here really does tank what could have been great legislation... I do hope it gets a rewrite before it's submitted once more.)

There were no comments on this thread at all in the week-and-a-half between Alistia accepting my rewrite and submitting it.

As far as I know, Alistia will likely redraft this proposal with a different definition of a "worker" - or none at all. I am, for no apparent reason whatsoever, becoming increasingly confident that this hypothetical new version will receive support from all major regions other than TWP (which votes against virtually all non-repeals).

I voted in favor of this act as it has something near and dear to my heart; The taking of samples of blood from all workers on a weekly basis;

It is like a smorgasbord of culinary delight for my species. Nobody will notice a few million samples that never make it to the lab.

I wanted to voice my support for this proposal amongst the negative ones. The Dignity of the Worker is of course a central tenet of Catholic Social Teaching, and so any movement the WA makes towards a safer and more respectful work environment is a win in my book. Given that nations get to set their own parameters best suited for their citizens, I think this rightly addresses the issue without dealing with the overwhelming burden of international standardization of regulations.

'Kanoshu fully supports the standardisation and promotion of worker rights across all nations. However the loose definition of 'worker' - as others have pointed out - could be used to exclude minority species from the rights and protections that this act nobly attempts to uphold. Therefore the Kanoshuan delegation has no choice but to vote against this act, though we hope a suitable alternative is proposed soon, which would receive our full support'

Tinhampton wrote:There were no comments on this thread at all in the week-and-a-half between Alistia accepting my rewrite and submitting it.

I noted the issue with clause 1 an hour after submission, when it would have been completely reasonable to pull the proposal and revise it. Sorry for not catching it sooner? (I likely just quickly skimmed the thread on the 8th, given that it was in my post-Labor Day forum catchup and there was nothing suggesting that the author was preparing to submit.)