[draft] Ban Profits on Workers’ Deaths

[Glen-Rhodes]

The esteemed Dr. Castro is correct, this is an ethical issue and it is the considered opinion of my government that the WA should not legislate ethics.

Does this apply to all areas of human rights, or just this single issue?

As previously stated, this is really a self regulating issue. If there is no profit to be gained, no company will look to insure its workforce in this manner. In addition, even if the company were to insure their rank and file workers there is nothing that could be done to force collection on those policies that is not already illegal.

You are assuming that (a) I am saying that all corporations everywhere can and do profit off of COLI policies and (b) that no corporation anywhere can ever profit off of COLI policies. Tax loopholes often account for the largest source of revenue from COLI policies. We cannot close those loopholes, but we can effectively deter their use through other means. And that is only addressing the monetary aspect of COLI policies and not the fundamental reason why secret rank-and-file COLI policies are unjust and repulsive: the loss of control a person has over who benefits from their death.

We must say we are gratefully impressed by the response this idea/draft generated, which only makes us want to pursue it more vigorously & precisely, soon.

I look forward the debate and extensive drafting.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Manticore Reborn]

The esteemed Dr. Castro is correct, this is an ethical issue and it is the considered opinion of my government that the WA should not legislate ethics.

Does this apply to all areas of human rights, or just this single issue?

Although I hesitate to make a blanket statement rather then comment on specific issues, I state that many human rights violations are more then ethical transgressions but crimes as well. This specific issue we do not see as a human rights issue, but a strictly economic ethic issue.

As previously stated, this is really a self regulating issue. If there is no profit to be gained, no company will look to insure its workforce in this manner. In addition, even if the company were to insure their rank and file workers there is nothing that could be done to force collection on those policies that is not already illegal.

You are assuming that (a) I am saying that all corporations everywhere can and do profit off of COLI policies and (b) that no corporation anywhere can ever profit off of COLI policies.

If corporations do not profit off of COLI policies, or at the very least cover the expenses of the policy itself and other financial obligations that result from the death of a worker, then what company would purchase such a policy? We are sure that sometime these COLI policies do result in a net gain for the company in question, but my government's research into the issue leads us to believe that is the not norm.

Tax loopholes often account for the largest source of revenue from COLI policies. We cannot close those loopholes, but we can effectively deter their use through other means.

I can assure you that my government is presently looking into our tax regulations and will be closing, or regulating, any loopholes that my exist in our present legislation.

And that is only addressing the monetary aspect of COLI policies and not the fundamental reason why secret rank-and-file COLI policies are unjust and repulsive: the loss of control a person has over who benefits from their death.

I believe I am on the record as stating these sort of policies should not be purchased in a clandestine manner. Just that my government is against an outright ban on these.

I look forward the debate and extensive drafting.
- Dr. B. Castro

A debate I can assure you, my government will watch closely.

The humble representative from the kingdom of Manticore Reborn yields the floor.

[Nullarni]

Thats my point. They do not take out such policies, except in cases of companies trying to cheat on taxes... Which is already illegal, in most countries.

You are developing a habit of making broad assertions without any sources. It is difficult to carry out a debate with you, when you argue like this. If you don't believe corporations take out COLI policies on rank-and-file employees, then vote against this when it reaches the floor. Otherwise, denying reality or opposing because your nation is perfect in the regard is not useful to this proposal during the drafting stage.

- Dr. B Castro

OOC: Yeah, I could provide you with plenty of examples that show that the only reason this is done in the US is as a way to cheat on taxes. Profitting of COLI policies on lower down employees only works if you bring US tax law into the mix. I'm sorry, but unless we bring RL examples into this all I can do is highlight the fact that based on very simple economic principles it simply doesn't work.

But you are right, debating the validity of this doesn't help when its only the draft stage.

[Glen-Rhodes]

I believe I am on the record as stating these sort of policies should not be purchased in a clandestine manner. Just that my government is against an outright ban on these.

Would your government support a clause stating that employees must consent to the purchase of a COLI policy on their life?

- Dr. B. Castro

But you are right, debating the validity of this doesn't help when its only the draft stage.

OOC: You're not 'debating the validity', you're flat-out denying that COLI policies exist for rank-and-file employees. You obviously understand when COLI policies can be profitable, by citing US tax loopholes. So, I don't know why you would assert that it's impossible for corporations in WA nations to make a buck or two off of them. We have been talking solely about those corporations that can and do profit, like those corporations in NationStates nations that have similar mechanism the United States has. Nobody has said that all corporations everywhere use life insurance as a form of revenue. If you need a nation in the game we can point at, we can use COLI Paradise...

[Manticore Reborn]

Would your government support a clause stating that employees must consent to the purchase of a COLI policy on their life?

My government is of the belief that this would not be productive. In fact, we feel that a clause requiring consent could be used by workforce unions as a negotiating tool during collective bargaining. The government of the Kingdom of Manticore Reborn believe the best way in which to regulate this practice to insure that it is to both the company's and the worker's benefit would be if, perhaps, it was mandated that a portion of any collected benefits would be distributed to the worker's next of kin.

[Nullarni]

OOC: You're not 'debating the validity', you're flat-out denying that COLI policies exist for rank-and-file employees. You obviously understand when COLI policies can be profitable, by citing US tax loopholes. So, I don't know why you would assert that it's impossible for corporations in WA nations to make a buck or two off of them. We have been talking solely about those corporations that can and do profit, like those corporations in NationStates nations that have similar mechanism the United States has. Nobody has said that all corporations everywhere use life insurance as a form of revenue. If you need a nation in the game we can point at, we can use COLI Paradise...

OOC: A few years back Arizona passed some laws to encourage people to convert to alternative fuel vehicles. People could get money from the government when they bought natural gas vehicles or they modified their vehicles to run on natural gas. Also, people could get money from the government when they sold natural gas vehicles. People were buying entire fleets of trucks, modifying them to run on natural gas, selling them to their own companies, and then their companies would sell them off to other people. Essentially one person with a small company in their name could collect government money 4 times. It was a mess that almost bankrupted the state.

This proposal is like me writing a proposal to ban making money off of selling green cars to yourself. It doesn't make sense to do it, the laws that make this a problem were very specific to the RL state of Arizona, and yet based on what you are saying you would argue that the situation could possibly be set up in some NS nations to where this is a problem. Do you see what I mean?

Anyway, I don't see this discussion we are having really going anywhere.

[Glen-Rhodes]

My government is of the belief that this would not be productive. In fact, we feel that a clause requiring consent could be used by workforce unions as a negotiating tool during collective bargaining. The government of the Kingdom of Manticore Reborn believe the best way in which to regulate this practice to insure that it is to both the company's and the worker's benefit would be if, perhaps, it was mandated that a portion of any collected benefits would be distributed to the worker's next of kin.

I think there would be greater corporate opposition to paying out benefits to family members than requiring consent of employees to take out a COLI policy in their name. It could likely be more costly. To me, and I would assume to author, the core problem here is that employees have lost their right to decide who benefits off of their death. I think there is a very good chance that the final product here will include a requirement of gaining consent. I would hope that Manticore Reborn could reconcile and still support the proposal, if it comes to that. There is still plenty of debate to be done, at the risk of sounding like I'm taking this over. As far as I know, extensive debate will resume after the current vote on Quality in Health Services.

- Dr. B. Castro

This proposal is like me writing a proposal to ban making money off of selling green cars to yourself. It doesn't make sense to do it, the laws that make this a problem were very specific to the RL state of Arizona, and yet based on what you are saying you would argue that the situation could possibly be set up in some NS nations to where this is a problem. Do you see what I mean?

OOC: It could be. The real world and NationStates are not mutually exclusive. If nothing worked in NationStates as it did in the real world, then we would have a very hard time functioning. Almost all World Assembly resolutions -- all except the first two -- have been precipitated by real world events and knowledge. Very rarely, if at all, are resolutions written to address a problem that only occurs within NationStates. If an argument could somehow be made that the scheme that happened in Arizona was a violation of some kind of right or international rule, then yes, the World Assembly could reasonably write a resolution about it.

Anyway, I don't see this discussion we are having really going anywhere.

I agree.

[Manticore Reborn]

As far as I know, extensive debate will resume after the current vote on Quality in Health Services.

- Dr. B. Castro

My government will look forward to reviewing the draft and the debate once it has been brought to the floor. My government may be willing to compromise on this issue with support for our Anti-Smuggling Act from Dr. Castro.

[Sionis Prioratus]

A new draft:

[Social Justice / Mild]

APPALLED there are corporations & other employers alike that have bought life-insurance on their employees’ names, basically being more interested in their employees’ deaths than their actual well-being;

DEPLORING such a practice;

IT IS ESTABLISHED:

1) Corporations & other employers are henceforth banned from:

a) Secretly buying life-insurance in the name of their employees, and designate themselves as beneficiaries;
b) Giving financial and/or other incentives to employees in order for them to be placed as beneficiaries;
c) Firing, burdening and/or harassing employees for the sole reason said employees refuse to consent to be placed as beneficiaries;

2) Any & all existing policies are henceforth annulled, and any employees, present or former, targeted by such policies, have the right to have any & all personal documentation pertaining to participation in said policies fully disclosed;

3) Only a person has the liberty to buy a life insurance policy for oneself, and to designate as a beneficiary whoever or whatever institution said person wants. An exception is open for Chief Executive Officers & other employees who on account of unique talents, earn at least half the salary of the Chief Executive Officer.

[Manticore Reborn]

The Star Kingdom of Manticore Reborn is delighted to see that the honorable ambassador from Sionis Prioratus has seen fit to bring this issue back to the floor for debate.

APPALLED there are corporations & other employers alike that have bought life-insurance on their employees’ names, basically being more interested in their employees’ deaths than their actual well-being;

My government is of the opinion that the language contained within this preamble is a bit strong. The Star Kingdom is of the belief that the crux of the matter is that these sort of policies are purchased in a clandestine manner. In addition, without verifiable evidence that "corporations & other employers" are "more interested in their employees’ deaths than their actual well-being" we could not accept this language.

1) Corporations & other employers are henceforth banned from:

a) Secretly buying life-insurance in the name of their employees, and designate themselves as beneficiaries;
b) Giving financial and/or other incentives to employees in order for them to be placed as beneficiaries;
c) Firing, burdening and/or harassing employees for the sole reason said employees refuse to consent to be placed as beneficiaries;

We find subclause a) to be sufficient to ban the practice that is of concern in the Star Kingdom. My government understands the need for sub-clauses b) and c) but feel they should be expanded to state the policies in question are ones paid for in any part by the employees themselves. No company should be the beneficiary of a policy in which they are not paying 100% of the policy cost.

3) Only a person has the liberty to buy a life insurance policy for oneself, and to designate as a beneficiary whoever or whatever institution said person wants. An exception is open for Chief Executive Officers & other employees who on account of unique talents, earn at least half the salary of the Chief Executive Officer.

This clause seems to be contradict clause 1 sub-clause a. In 1a, the resolution states that secretly buying the insurance is banned, but not outright banning the practice of purchasing said insurance. Clause c then states only a person has the "liberty" to be life insurance. We understand there is the exception indicated but do not believe this exception is sufficient to protect companies or individuals.

In the spirit of cooperation and debate, the Star Kingdom offers the following proposal for the noble ambassador from Sionis Prioratus to review and hopefully incorporate into their current proposal.

SADDENED that there are corporations & other employers that have bought life-insurance on their employees’ lives without the knowledge of the individual whose life is being insured;

The World Assembly therefore:

Outlaws employers from secretly buying life-insurance in the name of their employees;

Bans Giving financial and/or other incentives to employees to purchase life-insurance for the expressed reason to be named as beneficiary of said policy;

Further Bans the firing, burdening and/or harassing employees for the sole reason that said employees refused to name their employer as a beneficiary of a life-insurance policy the employee purchased

Any & all existing policies are henceforth annulled, and any employees, present or former, targeted by such policies, have the right to have any and all personal documentation pertaining to participation in said policies fully disclosed;

The humble ambassador from the Star Kingdom of Manticore Reborn yields the floor.

[Sionis Prioratus]

The Star Kingdom of Manticore Reborn is delighted to see that the honorable ambassador from Sionis Prioratus has seen fit to bring this issue back to the floor for debate.

The delight is also ours, to work with a Delegation that actually values conscious, constructive criticism & germane debate.

APPALLED there are corporations & other employers alike that have bought life-insurance on their employees’ names, basically being more interested in their employees’ deaths than their actual well-being;

My government is of the opinion that the language contained within this preamble is a bit strong. [...] without verifiable evidence that "corporations & other employers" are "more interested in their employees’ deaths than their actual well-being" we could not accept this language.

We can concede on this point. We want to denounce this abhorrent excess of Capitalism, not Capitalism itself.

The Star Kingdom is of the belief that the crux of the matter is that these sort of policies are purchased in a clandestine manner.

That is correct, as is this:

[one] problem here is that employees have lost their right to decide who benefits off of their death.

3) Only a person has the liberty to buy a life insurance policy for oneself, and to designate as a beneficiary whoever or whatever institution said person wants. An exception is open for Chief Executive Officers & other employees who on account of unique talents, earn at least half the salary of the Chief Executive Officer.

This clause seems to be contradict clause 1 sub-clause a. In 1a, the resolution states that secretly buying the insurance is banned, but not outright banning the practice of purchasing said insurance. Clause c then states only a person has the "liberty" to be life insurance. We understand there is the exception indicated but do not believe this exception is sufficient to protect companies or individuals.

We are brainstorming here. We are the first to admit we are still a long way from a submission-worthy solution.

In the spirit of cooperation and debate, the Star Kingdom offers the following proposal for the noble ambassador from Sionis Prioratus to review and hopefully incorporate into their current proposal.

*snip text*

We are quite grateful, Your Honour. We particularly like the preamble's wording. We are quite sure to use it with some modifications.

Feel free to make any further inquiries,

Yours truly,

[Sionis Prioratus]

Dearest Ambassadors:

The People and the Government of Sionis Prioratus wish to make it known, that if anyone - anyone at all - wishes to pursue any of our unfinished drafts, we shall no longer claim any copyrights. Everybody is free to do, or not to do, as pleased.

Thank you for the last time.

[Sionis Prioratus]

 
 
 
Dear NationStates: Farewell. It was very good, until it wasn't. I'm missed elsewhere - here, not so much. No further comments.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Dear NationStates: Farewell. It was very good, until it wasn't. I'm missed elsewhere - here, not so much. No further comments.

OOC: That's somewhat disappointing. Was this brought on by some RL responsibility, or just general loss of interest? I'm strongly thinking about taking up this proposal. Though, I really need to get my other two active proposals submitted. :\

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Dear NationStates: Farewell. It was very good, until it wasn't. I'm missed elsewhere - here, not so much. No further comments.

Aww... Adrian de Saint-Clair, you were one of the most remarkable resolution authors we've ever worked with. It was hard for us to strike a meditative agreement between Dr. Castro and your team, but your resolutions, together with Harper's, Hall's, Dr. Castro's and the rest of the member states' teams have help transformed the WA unlike our previous organization.

With best wishes for the future,

Ms. Sarah Harper.

[Sanctaria]

Dear NationStates: Farewell. It was very good, until it wasn't. I'm missed elsewhere - here, not so much. No further comments.

OOC: That's somewhat disappointing. Was this brought on by some RL responsibility, or just general loss of interest? I'm strongly thinking about taking up this proposal. Though, I really need to get my other two active proposals submitted. :\

OOC: I'd like to join with GR in expressing my disappointment. You're a very good and active participant in the WA, GA especially, and your presence will be missed. If it was something in the game itself that drove you away, I hope you reconsider. If it was, as GR said, some RL responsibility, I hope to see you back here soon.

[Toraston]

You're basically outlawing factory insurance through this proposal!

[The Eternal Kawaii]

Dearest Ambassadors:

The People and the Government of Sionis Prioratus wish to make it known, that if anyone - anyone at all - wishes to pursue any of our unfinished drafts, we shall no longer claim any copyrights. Everybody is free to do, or not to do, as pleased.

Thank you for the last time.

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

As we stated earlier, there is the kernal of a good proposal here. We would be interested in picking up where the esteemed representative left off.

[Karakcha]

To whomever picks up this cause, the Republic of Karakcha will wholeheartedly support you.

[Liberal TurtleShroom]

THE MOTHERLAND; HOLY REPUBLIC OF TURTLESHROOM
WORLD ASSEMBLY DELEGATE: DODGER JENKINS
AS FORWARDED THROUGH THE PUPPET GOVERNMENT OF THE LIBERAL TURTLESHROOM PENAL COLONY
FOR THE PURPOSES OF INFLUENCING THE WORLD ASSEMBLY

Fellow World Assembly Minions:

We in TurtleShroom are astonished that any company would DARE involve itself in such unholy corruption and fraud at the expense of its employees.
Our people had no idea that such an evil idea existed, and fully back you in all efforts to get this legislation on the floor.
We would reccomend a good definition of "insurance", though, so that the greedy evils wouldn't find a loophole.

Further, what if an employee willingly consents to make their employer a beneficiary? This should be allowed. Also, the exception clause in Option Three does not really make sense. Does this mean that creatures who earn half as much as a CEO can be unwillingly written as beneficiaries? This alsoneed clarification and expansion.

All in all, we wholeheartedly support this proposal furthering morality in all fields of life.


Regards,
Dodger Jenkins, World Assembly Delegate of the Holy Republic of TurtleShroom as Excercised through Liberal TurtleShroom

[The deported extreme leftists add: Fabulous! For once, we side with our capitalistic, oppressive motherland. Such a regulation on the wretched self-serving, money-hungry pigs in corporate power is neccesary to advance the eventual nationalization, worker revolutions, and then, communism.]