NationStates Jolt Archive

I have tried in the past to write a bill making more definition of the proposal "The 40 Hour Work Week", allowing for more clear-cut labor laws. This both allows for more flexibility and more structure in labor laws, but since there seem to be sticking points, I wanted to run my ideas by the body before I created another bill, so at least we could get something done.

I will break my ideas down by group, and remember that the wording of any of them is not set in stone and can be altered. This is not submitted.

1. Clearer definitions of "hour" and "week" for the 40 hour work week, since nations can dodge compliance with the resolution by re-defining "hour" and "week." The idea is very simple:
"Day" is the time it takes for the Earth to rotate once completely on its axis.
"Hour" is one 24th of a day.
"Week" is seven days.
"Year" is the time it takes for the Earth to revolve once completely around the Sun.
Nations can make alternative measurements of time so long as they are prorated along the above definitions.

2. To work at any job, no employee should be required to join a union, nor should they be forbidden from doing so.

3. No employee should be required to appear at their worksite more than 10 consecutive days, nor shall they be required to work more than an average of six days a week over the course of a calendar year.

4. Employees may choose to work more than the time their employers require, but they cannot be forced to do so.

Just remember to include an article that refers to the 40 hour workweek itself - you appear to have missed it in your breakdown of the planned proposal.

Also, be sure you don't retread or contradict the existing Labor Unions resolution, which I seem to recall already means that no employee can be forbidden from joining a union.

I disagree with the following point:

3. No employee should be required to appear at their worksite more than 10 consecutive days, nor shall they be required to work more than an average of six days a week over the course of a calendar year.

For some jobs it is required to be in labor for over 10 days in a row. There should, however, be strict rules about working times on one day in such a period of time. Also, the period of time should be announced a long time in advance. I'm primarily targeting armies here, I'm in the army myself and exercises of three weeks or a month are not an exeption.

Any employee must be notified of the fact that situations like the ones stated above can occur and must agree with this. If the employee does not agree with with the multitude of working days the employee may be refused a job if the job requires a multitude of working days. If the job requires no multitude of working days an employee can not be refused a job should the employee refuse to work a multitude of days.

Each nation is to have a committee, wich will decide in conflicts between employee and the company he wishes to be empleyed. It will decide wether it is required for a specific function to work longer than ten days in a row.

^^ Good point. There does need to be a provision that would allow for an extended work period should the job require it. Not every job can be done in a day or even 5-10.

However, the proposal may be difficult to set. Since there are future-tech nations in the U.N., they may be on planets whose rotations/years are different than Earth's, so setting the standards to Earth time would not be a good idea. I think the proposal should set planet-based standards instead of a constant Earth-standard, because every planet- and society- is different.

simple solution:

Make the earth based definitions of time effective for earth only.

A couple of things:

--For these future-tech and space nations, they would still be bound by the same rules as Earth nations; HOWEVER, if they have weeks or days that are of different lengths, they are allowed to prorate those times to fit their own homeworlds. That was a provision of my previous bill. For example, Ice Hockey Players, despite being an Earth-based nation, uses a different calendar in which a "week" is 10 days, not 7. Therefore, by prorating this extended "week", the work week is 56 hours, not 40.

--I don't know of any job off-hand where one would need to be on active duty for more than 10 consecutive days. Things such as business trips, military tours, etc. I can understand needing to be present at a specific location for, but not necessarily on active duty all the time. That provision would give people the option to take days off on these trips as needed...even if they don't get the chance to go home. Also, if a person is offered a day off after 10 straight days of working and refuses it, opting to work the 11th day, that is also their choice. Employers are free to offer overtime pay for such things, or whatever they choose, but they would nto be able to force employees to work 11+ consecutive days.

I think the U.N. should set the proration as opposed to the nation. As it stands, nations could "prorate" as they please and would negate the bill entirely.

I think it's necessary to enforce one single definition of terms like "week", "day" and "hour" here.

I think it's necessary to enforce one single definition of terms like "week", "day" and "hour" here.

Then you'd run into the difficulties of future-tech nations who have different physical lengths for those time periods. Things DO need to be adjusted for those nations.

That is a matter for the future. This should be based on the current situation, and be correct concerning the current situation. If in the future situations require changes, we can change them when the time is there, with the current situation as basis for that.

Future tech nations with different physical lengths of time is fine, but it's speculation since you can't see into the future. The proposal is here to serve the people who live now, if the people who live 200 years from now don't agree let them change it. We can't make laws for times we're not in, nor for people who live in those times.