[DEFEATED] On the Health and Financial Well-being of Workers

[Cosmosplosion]

The Vaping General Assemblyman is back and better than ever with a new proposal, centered on the health and financial well-being of workers (could you guess by the title?). All feedback is appreciated and proposals to expand this to cover more topics in the area would be considered.

On the Health and Financial Well-being of Workers

Category: Regulation - Area: Labour Rights

Acknowledging the importance of workers throughout the universes and the success of worker-related resolutions in the past,

Assessing the situation and understanding that while we have made great progress on the area of workers’ rights, there is still more to be done,

Furthermore, while this Assembly has done a great deal of work in relation to contagious disease, workers are often neglected when discussing health,

Recognizing that in some instances, workers who have contracted an infectious disease will return to their workplace, due to financial needs and societal expectations,

Also supporting workers in their life experiences, such as the arrival of offspring or death of family members and believing workers should be allowed to celebrate, grieve, and grow closer to others,

Hereby,

Defines “reasonable work leave”, for the purposes of this resolution, as a specified time period that an individual is not required to attend work in the event they are at risk of spreading a contagious disease knowingly, a family member experiences a medical or life-ending event, or they or their significant other produces offspring, while receiving compensation equal to their expected wage during this time period,

Mandates that all workers receive reasonable work leave in the amount of one-eigth of all expected work periods within the typical fiscal period,

Further mandates that employers, including government agencies, may not retaliate against workers for use of reasonable work leave.

[Mon Civia]

Defines “reasonable work leave”, for the purposes of this resolution, as a specified time period that an individual is not required to attend work in the event they are at risk of spreading a contagious disease knowingly, a family member experiences a medical or life-ending event, or they produce offspring or their significant other does the same, while receiving compensation equal to their expected wage during this time period,

Mandates that all workers receive reasonable work leave in the amount of twelve percent of all expected work periods within a reasonable timeframe,

Further mandates that employers, including government agencies, may not take retribution on workers who use their reasonable work leave, in any form,

Encourages hygiene and sanitation in work environments, as needed by each species.

This hasn't really defined "reasonable".

Also, why 12%?

[Cosmosplosion]

This hasn't really defined "reasonable".

Also, why 12%?

OOC: 12% is roughly equivalent to 6 weeks of a 52 week year, which is a common (and reasonable) amount of time proposed (and in some places, implemented) that a person may need off for standard life events.

As for "reasonable", this is a first draft and ultimately everything is able to be changed.

[Cosmosplosion]

Also, the usage of the phrase "reasonable timeframe" in active clause two is going to be changed, but I am unsure of what that change should be to, as each planet/society/civilization is likely to follow a different calendar year.

[Algradon]

I imagine this was inspired by a particular ongoing world event?

Anyhow, I'll throw a little softball before I start reading into things too much.

Right to Adequate Sanitation Resolution, § 2.

The WHA may already be enforcing the terms of your proposal in areas of high disease rates, making this draft a potential duplicate.

[Mon Civia]

I imagine this was inspired by a particular ongoing world event?

Anyhow, I'll throw a little softball before I start reading into things too much.

Right to Adequate Sanitation Resolution, § 2.

The WHA may already be enforcing the terms of your proposal in areas of high disease rates, making this draft a potential duplicate.

While the resolution quoted deals with Sanitation, the proposal here primarily is aimed at protecting worker's sick leave pay.

[Algradon]

I imagine this was inspired by a particular ongoing world event?

Anyhow, I'll throw a little softball before I start reading into things too much.

Right to Adequate Sanitation Resolution, § 2.

The WHA may already be enforcing the terms of your proposal in areas of high disease rates, making this draft a potential duplicate.

While the resolution quoted deals with Sanitation, the proposal here primarily is aimed at protecting worker's sick leave pay.

§ 3 of Minimum Standard of Living Act ?

[Cosmosplosion]

I imagine this was inspired by a particular ongoing world event?

Sure, in part, but sick leave and the like is an important right of workers regardless.

Anyhow, I'll throw a little softball before I start reading into things too much.

Right to Adequate Sanitation Resolution, § 2.

The WHA may already be enforcing the terms of your proposal in areas of high disease rates, making this draft a potential duplicate.

Not entirely sure what you would be referring to in that resolution.

[Algradon]

I imagine this was inspired by a particular ongoing world event?

Sure, in part, but sick leave and the like is an important right of workers regardless.

Anyhow, I'll throw a little softball before I start reading into things too much.

Right to Adequate Sanitation Resolution, § 2.

The WHA may already be enforcing the terms of your proposal in areas of high disease rates, making this draft a potential duplicate.

Not entirely sure what you would be referring to in that resolution.

REQUIRES that member nations shall take all measures practical, reasonable and necessary in providing a safe level of sanitation for their inhabitants, including but not limited to, constructing adequate solid waste management systems and ensuring access to public sanitation facilities;

Allowing work leave for contagious spread would be well within these guidelines. In lieu with the other act mentioned, even non-disease related conditions are guaranteed internationally by a minimum assured income.

Unless I misinterpret what paid work leave is.

[Cosmosplosion]

REQUIRES that member nations shall take all measures practical, reasonable and necessary in providing a safe level of sanitation for their inhabitants, including but not limited to, constructing adequate solid waste management systems and ensuring access to public sanitation facilities;

Allowing work leave for contagious spread would be well within these guidelines. In lieu with the other act mentioned, even non-disease related conditions are guaranteed internationally by a minimum assured income.

No, it isn't.

Specifies that member states are permitted to facilitate the provision of a minimum standard of living through public or private sector initiatives, including but not limited to a minimum wage, a living wage, a guaranteed minimum income, social security, unemployment insurance, subsidized housing, food stamps, or any combination thereof;

It is not explicitly listed nor are all of the above required to begin with.

[Mon Civia]

While the resolution quoted deals with Sanitation, the proposal here primarily is aimed at protecting worker's sick leave pay.

§ 3 of Minimum Standard of Living Act ?

That brings up a discussion about legality actually, since this proposal would certainly contradict Minimum Standard of Living Act, 5(a), should a national health emergency occur.

It could be argued that this proposal is just a duplication of the Minimum Standard of Living Act as well, considering clause 3... However, that resolution does not specifically name events in life such as maternity leave or sickness leave.

[Algradon]

Specifies that member states are permitted to facilitate the provision of a minimum standard of living through public or private sector initiatives, including but not limited to a minimum wage, a living wage, a guaranteed minimum income, social security, unemployment insurance, subsidized housing, food stamps, or any combination thereof;

It is not explicitly listed nor are all of the above required to begin with.[/quote]

In accordance with section 2?

[Algradon]

§ 3 of Minimum Standard of Living Act ?

That brings up a discussion about legality actually, since this proposal would certainly contradict Minimum Standard of Living Act, 5(a), should a national health emergency occur.

It could be argued that this proposal is just a duplication of the Minimum Standard of Living Act as well, considering clause 3... However, that resolution does not specifically name events in life such as maternity leave or sickness leave.

And would excluding those from application maintain a minimal quality of life to a person in life?

[Mon Civia]

That brings up a discussion about legality actually, since this proposal would certainly contradict Minimum Standard of Living Act, 5(a), should a national health emergency occur.

It could be argued that this proposal is just a duplication of the Minimum Standard of Living Act as well, considering clause 3... However, that resolution does not specifically name events in life such as maternity leave or sickness leave.

And would excluding those from application maintain a minimal quality of life to a person in life?

I suppose that depends on a Nation's definition of "minimal quality of life".

[Algradon]

And would excluding those from application maintain a minimal quality of life to a person in life?

I suppose that depends on a Nation's definition of "minimal quality of life".

Section 1 of this specific law actually defines it for us. It includes a definition from sanitation to the basic goods of housing, water, and food (among other things). Ultimately, the definition summarizes what is necessary for one to be healthy and productive in society.

Maternity leave and work leave seem fitting to these. Without being paid during those absences, though, the definition of a minimal quality of life would not likely be met.

[Cosmosplosion]

Updated;

Mandates that all workers receive reasonable work leave in the amount of twelve percent of all expected work periods within a reasonable timeframe,

To

Mandates that all workers receive reasonable work leave in the amount of twelve percent of all expected work periods within the typical fiscal period,

[Tinhampton]

SUPPORT

Extremely minor aesthetic suggestion #1: Change the title to simply "On Worker Well-being"?
Minor suggestion #2: "they produce offspring or their significant other does the same" ---> "they or their significant other produces offspring"
Minor suggestion #3: "twelve percent" ---> "one eighth"
(You don't have to take any of the above suggestions on, you really don't - aesthetic as mentioned above)

[Cosmosplosion]

SUPPORT

Extremely minor aesthetic suggestion #1: Change the title to simply "On Worker Well-being"?
Minor suggestion #2: "they produce offspring or their significant other does the same" ---> "they or their significant other produces offspring"
Minor suggestion #3: "twelve percent" ---> "one eighth"
(You don't have to take any of the above suggestions on, you really don't)

I like all of these actually, thank you.

[Mon Civia]

I suppose that depends on a Nation's definition of "minimal quality of life".

Section 1 of this specific law actually defines it for us. It includes a definition from sanitation to the basic goods of housing, water, and food (among other things). Ultimately, the definition summarizes what is necessary for one to be healthy and productive in society.

Maternity leave and work leave seem fitting to these. Without being paid during those absences, though, the definition of a minimal quality of life would not likely be met.

I kindly disagree. The definition for the Act includes:

access to food and water;
clothing;
housing;
sanitation;
appropriate utilities; and
transportation

to remain "reasonably healthy, safe and productive in a given member state". Excellent stuff. It is reasonable to expect certain nations not to provide protected time off from employment for these life events as they do not fall under any of the definitions in the Minimum Standard of Living Act, nor are they specifically named as part of the income benefits required of a nation. While this proposal certainly needs work, it definitely could be a stand-alone and legal resolution with editing.

[Algradon]

REQUIRES that member nations shall take all measures practical, reasonable and necessary in providing a safe level of sanitation for their inhabitants, including but not limited to, constructing adequate solid waste management systems and ensuring access to public sanitation facilities;

Allowing work leave for contagious spread would be well within these guidelines. In lieu with the other act mentioned, even non-disease related conditions are guaranteed internationally by a minimum assured income.

No, it isn't.
________________
It is.

You could repeal the laws if you don't like them.

(Also: Some people believe in multiple universes, or consider their nation to be in an alternate universe from others. You might want to change it to be more inclusive to everyone in the WA.)

[Algradon]

Section 1 of this specific law actually defines it for us. It includes a definition from sanitation to the basic goods of housing, water, and food (among other things). Ultimately, the definition summarizes what is necessary for one to be healthy and productive in society.

Maternity leave and work leave seem fitting to these. Without being paid during those absences, though, the definition of a minimal quality of life would not likely be met.

I kindly disagree. The definition for the Act includes:

access to food and water;
clothing;
housing;
sanitation;
appropriate utilities; and
transportation

to remain "reasonably healthy, safe and productive in a given member state". Excellent stuff. It is reasonable to expect certain nations not to provide protected time off from employment for these life events as they do not fall under any of the definitions in the Minimum Standard of Living Act, nor are they specifically named as part of the income benefits required of a nation. While this proposal certainly needs work, it definitely could be a stand-alone and legal resolution with editing.

If I must go to referencing the real world in these matters, then the right to bear arms does not explicitly state the right to bear arms as an individual by your reasoning. The act of a minimal standard of living is not maintainable without pay by definition, henceforth precluding a directly literal interpretation, especially when approaching things the author may have not considered when proposing, drafting, and submitting.

But in any case, I stand by my verdict on the matter in that this proposal is currently illegal. It is good-hearted, though, and can be re-worked with some simple changes here and there. I would rather not challenge it later on for something reversible.

Also, can someone explain how a paid work leave is not an assured minimum income?

[Cosmosplosion]

If I must go to referencing the real world in these matters, then the right to bear arms does not explicitly state the right to bear arms as an individual by your reasoning. The act of a minimal standard of living is not maintainable without pay by definition, henceforth precluding a directly literal interpretation, especially when approaching things the author may have not considered when proposing, drafting, and submitting.

But in any case, I stand by my verdict on the matter in that this proposal is currently illegal. It is good-hearted, though, and can be re-worked with some simple changes here and there. I would rather not challenge it later on for something reversible.

Thank you for your ruling, General-Secretary.

[Algradon]

If I must go to referencing the real world in these matters, then the right to bear arms does not explicitly state the right to bear arms as an individual by your reasoning. The act of a minimal standard of living is not maintainable without pay by definition, henceforth precluding a directly literal interpretation, especially when approaching things the author may have not considered when proposing, drafting, and submitting.

But in any case, I stand by my verdict on the matter in that this proposal is currently illegal. It is good-hearted, though, and can be re-worked with some simple changes here and there. I would rather not challenge it later on for something reversible.

Thank you for your ruling, Secretary-General.

Do you have anything more than bereavements to make? If you see it legal, explain it so like a civilized individual who isn't blinded by the fanaticism of misguided political squabbling.

I am willing to be shown I am mistaken. I support this endeavor as much as you do.

[Algradon]

In fact, I'm open to any and all wishing or willing to set things straight should they just be on the side-lines right now.

Heck, I'd prefer if an actual Secretary-General could weigh in on this if they happen to pass by.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Re below. I would write 'may not retaliate against workers for use of reasonable work leave' or something of that sort. Also I would consider shortening the preamble substantially; it's broadly clear as to what is meant and as to why it is important.

may not take retribution on workers who use their reasonable work leave

As to the claims of contradiction or duplication, I would ignore them.