[PASSED] Protected Working Leave

[Frisbeeteria]

"A proposal to ensure that workers need not compromise their economic security to care for their dependants. As always, any feedback is appreciated. We do understand that this proposal shares similarities with "Rights of the employed," but it is inherently more specific than the latter, and offers greater leave and protections. If this is insufficient to avoid issues with duplication or contradiction of prior legislation, we will modify the proposal accordingly."

Draft 2: Removed specific mention of 12 weeks, removed the requirement to provide the worker's full financial compensation, and shifted the burden of providing financial compensation to national governments unless the employer is able to afford it.

Protected Working Leave

Category: Regulation
Area of Effect: Labour Rights

---

The World Assembly,

Understanding the importance of an economically and socially secure working class to long-term economic growth,

Believing that said security does not need to be mutually exclusive with the decision to raise a family or the need to maintain good health, and

Wishing to ensure that working people in all member nations have access to paid leave and job security in order to care for themselves and their loved ones, without unduly disrupting the operations of their employers, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. a "worker" as any individual bound by a contract to perform work or services for an employer, whose employment contract mandates the work or services be performed specifically by that worker, involves an obligation for the worker to perform work and the employer to provide it, and implies the employer having some degree of control over the manner in which the work is performed; and
   2. "paid leave" as time during which a worker is not required to perform the work or services specified in their employment contract and receives:
      1. compensation sufficient to financially support themselves and their dependents, to be provided by the government of a member nation;
      2. all employment-related benefits which would otherwise be provided to that worker, to be provided by their employer; and
      3. the guaranteed ability to return to the same or a comparable job after the conclusion of paid leave, should their employer reasonably be able to provide such;
2. Declares that member nations must provide workers who request such with a reasonable duration of paid leave to the extent necessary to adequately service any of the following conditions:
   1. to care for a new child due to childbirth, adoption, or placement of said child in foster care should the child require such care;
   2. to care for a seriously ill or physically or mentally disabled spouse, child below the age of majority, parent, grandparent, or dependent should they require such care; or
   3. to recover from their own serious illness;
3. Forbids employers from discriminating or retaliating against workers for requesting or taking paid leave pursuant to section 2 of this resolution; such retaliation including:
   1. not returning said workers to the same or a comparable job;
   2. terminating employment;
   3. reducing compensation or benefits; or
   4. disciplining said workers;
4. Requires that workers:
   1. give their employer reasonable notice in the event of a foreseeable birth or adoption; and
   2. alert their employer of serious health conditions that are the reason for their requesting paid leave if practicable;
5. Clarifies that:
   1. employers may not impose unnecessarily onerous conditions on the granting of paid leave;
   2. any additional conditions by an employer on the granting of paid leave are to be implemented and enforced at the employer's expense;
   3. member nations may place the burden of providing financial compensation to workers over the duration of paid leave on said workers' employer should the employer be capable of providing such without significant financial strain; and
   4. employers, member nations, and World Assembly resolutions may implement policies granting workers more expansive paid leave than provided for by this resolution.

[Cretox State]

Protected Working Leave

Category: Social Justice
Strength: Strong

---

The World Assembly,

Understanding the importance of an economically and socially secure working class to long-term economic growth,

Believing that said security does not need to be mutually exclusive with the decision to raise a family or the need to maintain good health,

Wishing to ensure that working people in all member nations have access to paid leave and job security in order to care for themselves and their loved ones, without unduly disrupting the operations of their employers, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. a "worker" as any individual bound by a contract to perform work or services for an employer, whose employment contract mandates the work or services be performed specifically by that worker, involves an obligation for the worker to perform work and the employer to provide it, and implies the employer having some degree of control over the manner in which the work is performed;
   2. an "employer" as any private employer of at least 50 workers, and all public employers;
   3. "paid leave" as time during which a worker is not required to perform the work or services specified in their employment contract and receives:
      1. compensation comparable to that which would be expected had the worker been performing their normal work or services as specified in their employment contract;
      2. all employment-related benefits which would otherwise be provided to that worker; and
      3. the guaranteed ability to return to the same or a comparable job after the conclusion of paid leave;
2. Declares that member nations must provide workers with up to twelve weeks of total paid leave per year in service of any of the following conditions:
   1. to care for a new child due to childbirth, adoption, or placement of said child in foster care;
   2. to care for a seriously ill spouse, child below the age of majority, parent, grandparent, dependent, or physically or mentally disabled family member; or
   3. to recover from their own serious illness;
3. Forbids employers from discriminating or retaliating against workers for requesting or taking paid leave; such retaliation including:
   1. not returning said workers to the same or a comparable job;
   2. terminating employment;
   3. reducing compensation or benefits; or
   4. disciplining said workers;
4. Requires that workers:
   1. give their employers reasonable notice in the event of a foreseeable birth or adoption;
   2. alert their employers of serious health conditions if practicable; and
   3. arrange treatments according to medical advice, so as to not unnecessarily disrupt the operations of their employers;
5. Clarifies that:
   1. employers may not impose unnecessarily onerous conditions on the granting of paid leave;
   2. any additional conditions by an employer on the granting of paid leave are to be implemented and enforced at the employer's expense; and
   3. employers, member nations, and World Assembly resolutions may implement policies granting workers more expansive paid leave than provided for by this resolution.

[Comfed]

Social Justice, strong, I think.

EDIT: why is the definition of “employer” not include private employers of under 50 workers?

[Grays Harbor]

Social Justice, strong, I think.

EDIT: why is the definition of “employer” not include private employers of under 50 workers?

Probably because 12 weeks of paid leave would bankrupt most small businesses

[Cretox State]

Social Justice, strong, I think.

EDIT: why is the definition of “employer” not include private employers of under 50 workers?

Probably because 12 weeks of paid leave would bankrupt most small businesses

OOC: Precisely.

[Comfed]

Probably because 12 weeks of paid leave would bankrupt most small businesses

OOC: Precisely.

Not necessarily true. Some companies, such as social media companies, have very few employees and are very rich.

[Kenmoria]

“Why does clause 2d prioritise employees of the armed forces? Why not doctors, firefighters, police officers or horrendously underpaid GA diplomats?”

[Cretox State]

“Why does clause 2d prioritise employees of the armed forces? Why not doctors, firefighters, police officers or horrendously underpaid GA diplomats?”

"Because GA diplomats do not tend to suffer horrific injuries in the line of duty. We could change the clause to cover all disabled family members, or simply remove it altogether."

Not necessarily true. Some companies, such as social media companies, have very few employees and are very rich.

"Very well, let's go with that. An immensely wealthy social media company has a grand total ten tight-knit employees. If one of those employees requests paid time off, are they going to get the boot? Do they even need paid time off if they are in such a financial position? Additionally, this proposal specifically allows member nations to implement more expansive leave policies."

[Kenmoria]

“Why does clause 2d prioritise employees of the armed forces? Why not doctors, firefighters, police officers or horrendously underpaid GA diplomats?”

"Because GA diplomats do not tend to suffer horrific injuries in the line of duty. We could change the clause to cover disabled family members, or simply remove it altogether."

“Speak for yourself, I’ve been thrown out of a window in this snakepit. Anyway, I think extending this to cover all disabled family members would be better.”

[Cretox State]

“Speak for yourself, I’ve been thrown out of a window in this snakepit. Anyway, I think extending this to cover all disabled family members would be better.”

"Done."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Protected Working Leave?

[Grays Harbor]

OOC: Precisely.

Not necessarily true. Some companies, such as social media companies, have very few employees and are very rich.

So because of a very small minority of companies exist all small businesses can be thrown under the bus. Got it.

"Because GA diplomats do not tend to suffer horrific injuries in the line of duty. We could change the clause to cover disabled family members, or simply remove it altogether."

“Speak for yourself, I’ve been thrown out of a window in this snakepit. Anyway, I think extending this to cover all disabled family members would be better.”

And if I recall correctly, deservedly so.

[Cretox State]

Protected Working Leave?

OOC: That definitely sounds like a better title.

[Kenmoria]

“Clauses 1ciii and 3a don’t take into account that some jobs might not exist after a period of twelve weeks. It’s possible for a company to refocus and cut entire departments in that time, in which case the exact same job might not exist anymore.”

“Speak for yourself, I’ve been thrown out of a window in this snakepit. Anyway, I think extending this to cover all disabled family members would be better.”

And if I recall correctly, deservedly so.

(OOC: It definitely was. )

[The New Nordic Union]

“Speak for yourself, I’ve been thrown out of a window in this snakepit. Anyway, I think extending this to cover all disabled family members would be better.”

"Done."

'Now you could just incorporate 2d into 2b, by changing 'child with [...] disability to 'family member with [...] disability'.'

[Bananaistan]

"Broad strokes international resolutions trying to make specific regulations leads to bad law. Especially with arbitrary numbers and simplistic nonsense like this.

"Specific issues here are that employees could be AWOL from their jobs for 48 weeks in a year. How is any employer supposed to manage this? Who pays? Why full pay - there would be instances of incredibly high paid workers getting this benefit.

"Regarding section 3, it is entirely possible that a role can cease to exist. Merely being on some form of leave should not a factor to protect an employee from redundancy etc. In an economic downturn, wages across the business might be reduced etc.

"This proposal would tank businesses left, right and centre all over the WA and is discriminatory to employees of small employers. Completely and utterly opposed."

[Madison and Wisconsin]

"Could workers and employers end up bending the rules? For example, 'reasonable' is not defined, and so a worker could try to avoid Article 4A by claiming that a very short time period such as one hour could be considered as 'reasonable.' Could there also be a problem if, for example, a company loses money and has to cut everyone's salary by some amount, but is legally prohibited from cutting the salary of the person who was on paid leave?"

[Kenmoria]

"Could workers and employers end up bending the rules? For example, 'reasonable' is not defined, and so a worker could try to avoid Article 4A by claiming that a very short time period such as one hour could be considered as 'reasonable.'"

“The first point doesn’t really hold water, because 1 hour clearly isn’t reasonable notice. With such words as ‘reasonable’ there is some leeway, but no so much that the regulations can be totally ignored.”

[Cretox State]

Now you could just incorporate 2d into 2b, by changing 'child with [...] disability to 'family member with [...] disability'.'[/i]

"Also done."

"Going forward, I feel that a lot of the concerns elucidated here can be addressed by:

1. Removing the specific mention of 12 weeks, to be replaced by reasonable period of time in service of the listed conditions, or something to that effect, and
2. Removing the mandate that workers be paid their full salary; instead mandating that benefits be preserved, and monetary compensation be in accordance with what the workers need to financially support themselves during the paid leave (alternatively the top 10% or whatever of workers by financial compensation could simply be exempted).

Another possibility is shifting the burden for supporting paid leave to national governments rather than individual employers, thereby creating a form of social safety net that allows for employees of small businesses to enjoy the benefits of this proposal without financially straining companies."

[Cretox State]

OOC: Implemented the above.

[Tinfect]

OOC:
4c is concerning, I don't really see any purpose for the clause, and indeed it may be completely impossible in Member-States where healthcare is not accessible; moreover in many cases there are good reasons for disregarding medical advice beyond cost. For an anecdotal point from myself and several friends of mine, 'advice' given by doctors who don't know what they're doing or are otherwise operating with ulterior motives,

[Cretox State]

OOC:
4c is concerning, I don't really see any purpose for the clause, and indeed it may be completely impossible in Member-States where healthcare is not accessible; moreover in many cases there are good reasons for disregarding medical advice beyond cost. For an anecdotal point from myself and several friends of mine, 'advice' given by doctors who don't know what they're doing or are otherwise operating with ulterior motives,

OOC: Removed.

[Honeydewistania]

"Against, this will kill small businesses and lead to the global domination of giant corporations and conglomerates, which is what we call a ‘No-No’."

[Cretox State]

"Against, this will kill small businesses and lead to the global domination of giant corporations and conglomerates, which is what we call a ‘No-No’."

"Ambassador, the actual effect of the proposal would be virtually the exact opposite of what you described."

Defines "paid leave" as time during which a worker is not required to perform the work or services specified in their employment contract and receives compensation sufficient to financially support themselves and their dependents, to be provided by the government of a member nation;

Small businesses' leave would be subsidized by the government. Large corporations who can afford it can be required to cover the costs themselves:

Clarifies that member nations may place the burden of providing financial compensation to workers over the duration of paid leave on said workers' employer should the employer be capable of providing such without significant financial strain;

[Honeydewistania]

"May is not a requirement."