[CONCEPT] Reducing Compulsory Retirement

[Parti Ouvrier]

Of course, because you do fine job with that yourself, with the 100% tax rate.

Not germane to the debate. Please stick to the topic, ambassador. If you can, that is.

*Yawn* Sure, if I wasn't so bored with this dull debate.

[Eireann Fae]

That may be your opinion, but you fail to ask yourself why 11.9 % do not work in your nation? Did they seek early retirement?

Episky bows her head, recognising the human voice that has addressed her as that of the Ambassador from the radical communist state of Parti Ouvrier. She looks up and sees that Rowan shares a similar opinion of the Ambassador. Still, in the interest of diplomacy, the Faerie Emissary whispers a response to her child translator, who relays the message to the Ouvrierian Ambassador.

"Unemployment is indeed something our Nation contends with, and we are taking steps to make sure that everybody has a chance to earn a living in Eireann Fae. However, seeing as you apparently have our Nation's factbook before you, you should be aware of the fact that a quarter of our budget is spent on Social Welfare, making sure that everybody, even the unemployed, has a chance at a decent life."

(OOC: You should also know that a lot of players don't actually use the statistics posted on their Nation Page or the numbers reported by such tools as NSEconomy. It just so happens that I do, but don't expect a similar RP response from everybody.)

[Charlotte Ryberg]

There is really no way to eradicate unemployment completely but I hope that this resolution can help reduce the side effect of unemployment as a result of compulsory retirement, which isn't terribly helpful to those who love their jobs and can do it or those who want a second income.

[Meekinos]

That may be your opinion, but you fail to ask yourself why 11.9 % do not work in your nation? Did they seek early retirement?

What does that prove? Nothing really. All it shows is that there is a larger percentage of the population actively seeking employment. It does not indicate that they sought early retirement. In fact, the unemployment number is typically reflective of individuals who are actually seeking work and not just those without a job. If that number account for everyone with out a job, it would certainly be much higher than it is. Before you spout nonsense about their unemployment, learn more about their situation. Perhaps they count their unemployed differently than other nations do. Meekinos for example discounts volunteers, students (including minors), homemakers and retirees from our unemployment statistics; the Eireann Fae may use a different formula.

[Philimbesi]

I must confess that I'm having a tough time coming to terms that this is something that needs to be mandated on a national level. Further I'm wondering if Resolution #35 doesn't in some way already extend to the elderly the right to work. Again I'm wondering and I could (and suspect that I am) missing something.

~NSY

[Meekinos]

I must confess that I'm having a tough time coming to terms that this is something that needs to be mandated on a national level. Further I'm wondering if Resolution #35 doesn't in some way already extend to the elderly the right to work. Again I'm wondering and I could (and suspect that I am) missing something.

~NSY

From what I know, it may extend the right in implicit terms, allowing for future legislation to flesh out the concept, since in theory, it would not be an amendment.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I must confess that I'm having a tough time coming to terms that this is something that needs to be mandated on a national level. Further I'm wondering if Resolution #35 doesn't in some way already extend to the elderly the right to work. Again I'm wondering and I could (and suspect that I am) missing something.

~NSY

Pessimistically it might well be:

Article 2.

a ) Unfair and unreasonable discrimination, on the grounds outlined in clause c) of article 1 of this resolution, in private employment, housing, education, employment benefits, compensations and access to services provided to the general public shall be prohibited by all member states.

Which is a real shame because we have been looking forward to plan a series of Free trade and Furtherment of Democracy resolutions to improve the world's image and output, without conflicting too much with ideology.

Ms. S. Harper.

[Philimbesi]

Not arguing legality just redundancy. Still see no overriding reason not to support it as stands, however as Ms Harper tends to wear her erasers down to nubs during drafting, I can't commit to full support at this time.

~NSY

[Philimbesi]

The only thing casting doubt on the subject is the fact that age is not specifically is not listed in the Article one Section C, however it might fall under the "or any other arbitrarily assigned and reductive categorisation " language.

[Intellect and the Arts]

I'm not done reading, here, but I have a statement I'd like to make as someone who has suffered at the hands of someone being too old to do their job.

What about including allowances for compulsory retirement for, say, college professors who have decided to politicize from the lectern rather than actually teaching the class but have tenure so the university can't actually fire them, but the only students actually learning anything and therefore passing their classes are the ones who happen to sit next to someone who already knows the material and to be honest could teach the class better than the prof has done in the last thirty years?

In other words, what about protection from crotchety old people who just stop DOING their jobs but for some reason can't be conventionally fired?


Now I'll go back to actually reading. Just had to get that out there... >.<

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I'm not done reading, here, but I have a statement I'd like to make as someone who has suffered at the hands of someone being too old to do their job.

What about including allowances for compulsory retirement for, say, college professors who have decided to politicize from the lectern rather than actually teaching the class but have tenure so the university can't actually fire them, but the only students actually learning anything and therefore passing their classes are the ones who happen to sit next to someone who already knows the material and to be honest could teach the class better than the prof has done in the last thirty years?

In other words, what about protection from crotchety old people who just stop DOING their jobs but for some reason can't be conventionally fired?


Now I'll go back to actually reading. Just had to get that out there... >.<

Let's try not to make things too complicated unless it is absolutely necessary, honoured ambassador. It's still on the lines of management of compulsory retirement if we do things correctly.

[Intellect and the Arts]

Yeah, I know. Also, I like the draft as it stands, by and large. I think I've just had a long half-semester at University and may have needed to gripe. Apologies.

Yeah, this is OOC for those who don't know enough about my character to be able to tell. Not sure why I'm specifying, but I am.

[Eireann Fae]

"Wouldn't such a belligerent professor be clearly mentally unfit to do his jo--"

Rowan gasped and covered her mouth, shocked that she had spoken out of turn. She glanced to the Faerie on her shoulder, who seemed bemused by the child's outburst and reaction to it. Episky playfully admonished the girl, but made a gesture for her to finish her thought. Nervously, Rowan turned back to the Assembly and addressed it using her own words (a rarity for the translator).

"I mean, it seems there's already a provision in the text for such a situation. If the instructor can't get over himself and do his job right, maybe he oughta be considered mentally unfit for the job..."

The girl looked sheepishly around the room, unsure of how the other Ambassadors would react to a mere translator speaking her mind to the Assembly. Episky seemed to take it well enough, but Rowan knew she'd hear more about it later, and this was not something she should repeat.

[Intellect and the Arts]

I appreciate the sentiment, Rowan, and on behalf of fellow sufferers, I thank you for your astute comment. By the by, the professor in question is female, not that it matters, and even her coworkers are vocal that she really ought to retire. Such, however, is the trouble of tenure.

In any event, I set aside my light derailment.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

A few format revisions:

3. Member countries will at least:
• Respect the right of their inhabitants to choose when to retire after the Threshold of Retirement;
• Allow inhabitants with mental or physical disabilities to retire beforehand where such action would be in their best interests;

4. In addition to clause 3, member countries may opt-in to allow their inhabitants to retire before the Threshold of Retirement for a legitimate reason;

Yes, I am indeed writing to the category but there are some exceptions that are totally unavoidable. Free trade resolutions can have "rights" too. I may want to add a recommendation on a sensible retirement age because if member states set it too low that would be a barrier to workforce capability. I'll probably add it if there is a positive consensus on this.

After all, it's all part of experimenting with new things!

[Tarnell]

The nation of Tarnell supports this concept fully! We are willing to provide any aid or services you need to make this concept a successful proposal!

Signed,
Chando L. Zee
President of Tarnell

[Grand Europic States]

The Grand Europic States very much supports this concept, we believe that a resolution protecting the right of citizens to work is a very worthy use of the General Assembly's time and attention.

One thing though, I'm not sure about the wording here:

3. Member countries will at least:
• Respect the right of their inhabitants to choose when to retire after the Threshold of Retirement;

It could just be me, but the wording appears to imply that citizens *will* choose to entire, this is not necessarily the case. I would be grateful if Ms Harper would consider adding "if at all" to that clause so it reads: "Respect the right of their inhabitants to choose when to retire, if at all, after the Threshold of Retirement;"

[Charlotte Ryberg]

As requested, clause tweaked to read:

3. Member countries will at least:
• Respect the right of their inhabitants to choose whether and/or when to retire after the Threshold of Retirement;

[Grays Harbor]

We can offer our tentative support of this as reducing mandatory anything is very much within our view. Unless significant alterations are made which negate this, we shall more than likely vote to approve.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

The topic has pretty much been settled for this concept, honoured ambassador. Any more significant alterations would have made it worse.

[Grays Harbor]

The topic has pretty much been settled for this concept, honoured ambassador. Any more significant alterations would have made it worse.

good. Then you may count on our endorsement when submitted.

[Darenjo]

our only questions regarding this are:
1. Would those that retire who have not reached the 'Threshold of Retirement' be able to utilize things such as medicare or social security (or equivalents)?
2. What if a nation in under duress (such as invasion) and needs people who may be over retirement age to work?

[Charlotte Ryberg]

our only questions regarding this are:
1. Would those that retire who have not reached the 'Threshold of Retirement' be able to utilize things such as medicare or social security (or equivalents)?

To clarify, we meant care homes, pensions and other services that are normally intended for retired people. There are many types of them and there is no exhaustive list of such. Should we clarify affected clauses to mean "health and welfare programmes tailored for retired persons"?

our only questions regarding this are:
2. What if a nation in under duress (such as invasion) and needs people who may be over retirement age to work?

Gosh, I honestly forgot that. We could clarify clause 5 to include compulsory military or alternative service if you wish.

Submitted for feedback,

[Darenjo]

our only questions regarding this are:
1. Would those that retire who have not reached the 'Threshold of Retirement' be able to utilize things such as medicare or social security (or equivalents)?

To clarify, we meant care homes, pensions and other services that are normally intended for retired people. There are many types of them and there is no exhaustive list of such. Should we clarify affected clauses to mean "health and welfare programmes tailored for retired persons"?

our only questions regarding this are:
2. What if a nation in under duress (such as invasion) and needs people who may be over retirement age to work?

Gosh, I honestly forgot that. We could clarify clause 5 to include compulsory military or alternative service if you wish.

Submitted for feedback,

We would like clarification on clause 5, just a phrase exempting military or alternative services. The other one we feel is fine, we just wanted personal clarification.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

It's mainly the formatting and loophole closing that we are focused on. Clause five now looks like this:

5. Member countries will not force any of their inhabitants to work against their wishes after the Threshold of Retirement, except for:
• Compulsory military or alternative service;
• Work mandated as part of a criminal sentence;

"Criminal sentence" seems to be a better word than "correctional measure" in our opinion. I suppose things like "community service" and other unpaid work as a punishment is what a criminal sentence is.