NSG Senate Chamber: I came, I saw, I cleaned up after myself

[The New World Oceania]

"And, in a move to gain more than fifteen members, the FCP this week softened their whip system to try and attract more liberal ideologies. Which is like trying to attract women to your sex dungeon by playing Adele in the background."

"ORDER

That is not appropriate for the chamber."

"ORDER

The speaker cannot determine what is OOC."

[The Nihilistic view]

"Look at the idiots I have to put up with" Thought Boris "It would be nice if they paid attention once in a while."

"ORDER ORDER

If one does not have anything to say regarding debate then pipe down."

[The Nihilistic view]

"ORDER

That is not appropriate for the chamber."

"ORDER

The speaker cannot determine what is OOC."

"ORDER

Mr Njil please silence yourself. This is a debate not a blog for you to ramble on about whatever it is you think about when at home. What do you even mean by OOC? And before you open your mouth to answer that don't. If you have nothing to say about the bill at debate don't say anything at all."

OOC: In the chamber it's only OOC when it is tagged OOC. And it's definitely not OOC when tagged with speech marks.

[The New World Oceania]

"ORDER

The speaker cannot determine what is OOC."

"ORDER

Mr Njil please silence yourself. This is a debate not a blog for you to ramble on about whatever it is you think about when at home. What do you even mean by OOC? And before you open your mouth to answer that don't. If you have nothing to say about the bill at debate don't say anything at all."

OOC: In the chamber it's only OOC when it is tagged OOC. And it's definitely not OOC when tagged with speech marks.

Perhaps if the Honorable Gentleman His Highness recognized blatant references and a setting quite overtly out of character, and perhaps if the Honorable Gentleman His Highness did not feel inclined to respond to every damn thing said in the thread, and perhaps, under the extenuating circumstances that He could avoid responding to something vaguely provocative, He would be able to avert the Honorable Gentlewoman making further remarks. So, perhaps, the Honorable Gentleman His Highness will recognize that Mr. Njil is, so it goes, out of character, and will accept the situation as finished, and in that regard have no response.

[The Nihilistic view]

"ORDER

Mr Njil please silence yourself. This is a debate not a blog for you to ramble on about whatever it is you think about when at home. What do you even mean by OOC? And before you open your mouth to answer that don't. If you have nothing to say about the bill at debate don't say anything at all."

OOC: In the chamber it's only OOC when it is tagged OOC. And it's definitely not OOC when tagged with speech marks.

Perhaps if the Honorable Gentleman His Highness recognized blatant references and a setting quite overtly out of character, and perhaps if the Honorable Gentleman His Highness did not feel inclined to respond to every damn thing said in the thread, and perhaps, under the extenuating circumstances that He could avoid responding to something vaguely provocative, He would be able to avert the Honorable Gentlewoman making further remarks. So, perhaps, the Honorable Gentleman His Highness will recognize that Mr. Njil is, so it goes, out of character, and will accept the situation as finished, and in that regard have no response.

"ORDER

You are being disorderly. I have asked once and I will ask again, no more shall be said by you unless it is to do with the bill at hand. Is that clear?"

[The Nihilistic view]

"Just so we are clear debate is on the Labor Mediation Act at the moment. "

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p23444787

[Ainin]

Point of parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. In what order are bills being tabled?

[Alyekra]

Nay. There is no reason negotiating parties can't find their own mediator.

[Calimera II]

Point of parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. In what order are bills being tabled?

"Yeah, what about my bills, Boris?"

[Ainin]

Nay. There is no reason negotiating parties can't find their own mediator.

This is the debate phase.

[Alyekra]

Nay. There is no reason negotiating parties can't find their own mediator.

This is the debate phase.

And now you know my position.

[The Nihilistic view]

Point of parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. In what order are bills being tabled?

"Order of perceived necessity."

[Patria Magna]

This bill is completely unnecessary. If two parties can't resolve their dispute amicably than having a figurehead talk nicely and encourage them to be nice won't do anything. This would be a complete waste of money.

[Bleckonia]

This bill is completely unnecessary. If two parties can't resolve their dispute amicably than having a figurehead talk nicely and encourage them to be nice won't do anything. This would be a complete waste of money.

"Not to mention that there is a potential for pro-union bias, since the NMB has complete discretion over who the mediators are, and leftists are in government.

[The Nihilistic view]

This bill is completely unnecessary. If two parties can't resolve their dispute amicably than having a figurehead talk nicely and encourage them to be nice won't do anything. This would be a complete waste of money.

"Not to mention that there is a potential for pro-union bias, since the NMB has complete discretion over who the mediators are, and leftists are in government.

"Either side can pull out at anytime. There are no mandatory decisions that are made by them. The aim is to bring both sides to the table instead of having strikes or other actions grind the economy to a standstill."

[Alyekra]

"Not to mention that there is a potential for pro-union bias, since the NMB has complete discretion over who the mediators are, and leftists are in government.

"Either side can pull out at anytime. There are no mandatory decisions that are made by them. The aim is to bring both sides to the table instead of having strikes or other actions grind the economy to a standstill."

"Except the legislation in question does not prevent strikes from carrying on. It only wastes taxpayer money on a mediator which the negotiators could provide, if they wanted, anyway."

[The Nihilistic view]

"Either side can pull out at anytime. There are no mandatory decisions that are made by them. The aim is to bring both sides to the table instead of having strikes or other actions grind the economy to a standstill."

"Except the legislation in question does not prevent strikes from carrying on. It only wastes taxpayer money on a mediator which the negotiators could provide, if they wanted, anyway."

"Nobody with any real sense is going to strike whilst talks are going on as that is almost always a condition of the employer to enter talks in the first place."

[Alyekra]

"Except the legislation in question does not prevent strikes from carrying on. It only wastes taxpayer money on a mediator which the negotiators could provide, if they wanted, anyway."

"Nobody with any real sense is going to strike whilst talks are going on as that is almost always a condition of the employer to enter talks in the first place."

"That has no bearing on my previous statement. My argument stands. This legislation does not make strikes shorter, as you claimed, and the board will not provide any resource to the negotiating parties that they can't acquire themselves. It is entirely a useless proposition."

[The Nihilistic view]

"Nobody with any real sense is going to strike whilst talks are going on as that is almost always a condition of the employer to enter talks in the first place."

"That has no bearing on my previous statement. My argument stands. This legislation does not make strikes shorter, as you claimed, and the board will not provide any resource to the negotiating parties that they can't acquire themselves. It is entirely a useless proposition."

"If you want to mandate a maximum length to strikes you came to the wrong country. Secondly I never once claimed that strikes would be shorter, I said the aim is to make them less disruptive and provide a first step that might cause industrial action to be avoided. Maybe you don't own a business but for those that do if some strike action can be avoided then the tax cost of providing a single mediator will be much less than the loss of productivity from strikes that could have been avoided was a neutral forum provided to facilitate talks."

[Great Nepal]

I have no objections with bills as it stands, although I am not seeing any real advantage here - there are no obligations on either party to enter into negotiations or continue negotiations... if they want negotiations they can just hire a conference room in a hotel and hammer their disagreements there with no intervention from state.
I will probably abstain here.

[Alyekra]

"That has no bearing on my previous statement. My argument stands. This legislation does not make strikes shorter, as you claimed, and the board will not provide any resource to the negotiating parties that they can't acquire themselves. It is entirely a useless proposition."

"If you want to mandate a maximum length to strikes you came to the wrong country. Secondly I never once claimed that strikes would be shorter, I said the aim is to make them less disruptive and provide a first step that might cause industrial action to be avoided. Maybe you don't own a business but for those that do if some strike action can be avoided then the tax cost of providing a single mediator will be much less than the loss of productivity from strikes that could have been avoided was a neutral forum provided to facilitate talks."

"I deeply admire your rejection of maximum strike lengths. Such a proposition would make the legislation evil rather than merely useless.

Strikes are already not the first step. You said this yourself. A labor union that opens negotiations with a strike is foolish to the point of corporate suicide.

I also fail to see why a state-provided mediator would be any more neutral than one decided upon by the negotiating parties."

[Atlanticatia]

"Providing a neutral, mediated forum with an equal voice for labour and management will ensure that agreements and resolutions can be made quickly, and in good faith, before the situation becomes disruptive and bad for both labour and management. I believe in consensus between the social partners whenever possible.

Perhaps we could establish a mandate on the parties involved to act throughout the negotiation period 'in good faith' with the intention to reach an agreement? This would further make consensus a priority for labour relations and improve the outcomes of these processes."

[Alyekra]

"Providing a neutral, mediated forum with an equal voice for labour and management will ensure that agreements and resolutions can be made quickly, and in good faith, before the situation becomes disruptive and bad for both labour and management. I believe in consensus between the social partners whenever possible."

"I completely agree, and this legislation provides no useful tools to that end."

[Blorbs]

"I come to see that this bill is useless. The negotiating parties themselves can find their own medieator that, as previously stated, will almost certainly be more neutral than a state provided one. Anyways, it simply clogs up the system and delays the strikes, and could be easily exploited by the employer to keep the entire strike from ever happening."

[New Werpland]

"I come to see that this bill is useless. The negotiating parties themselves can find their own medieator that, as previously stated, will almost certainly be more neutral than a state provided one. Anyways, it simply clogs up the system and delays the strikes, and could be easily exploited by the employer to keep the entire strike from ever happening."

"more neutral?"