NationStates Jolt Archive

Attention all UN delegates:

Please give your support on repealing UN resolution #59 - The 40 hour work week. This mandatory resolution is killing my country's production of weaved baskets, due to the fact that my country has small workforce and most are salaried employees.

Resolution #59 is in direct violation of Articles 1, 2 and 3 of UN Resolution #49 - Rights and Duties of UN States as well as Article 5 of UN Resolution #52 - Universal Freedom of Choice.

Please give your support! Thanks!

Also please give your support for the following UN proposals:
UN - Tariff Accords
UN - Mapping Convention

In case no one has noticed it, here's the text of the proposal by Prozac.
----

Repeal "The 40 Hour Workweek"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #59
Proposed by: Prozac Abusers

Description: UN Resolution #59: The 40 Hour Workweek (Category: Social Justice; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: While there is concern of the social injustices performed on the individual worker, the answer is not for UN members to sanction the maximum number of hours an individual is to work during a given work week.

I. Member nations should not be forced to have a 40 hour work week for all individuals.
(a) This limits the production capabilities of nations
with small populations(ie: workforce), thus giving
larger nations an economic advantage to produce more
goods and services.
(b) Also this resolution violates Articles 1, 2 and 3 of
UN Resolution #49 - Rights and Duties of UN States as
well as Article 5 of UN Resolution #52 - Universal
Freedom of Choice.

II. The current UN resolution of a 40 hour work week does not differentiate between a salary and non-salary employee. Salary employees are not governed by an hourly work week in most practises.

III. An "on call" employee's hours should not count against the 40 hour work week in cases where the employee is a salary employee.

IV. Overall it is up to each nation to set forth policy to deem the most suitable working standards as defined by Articles 1, 2 and 3 of UN Resolution #49 - Rights and Duties of UN States as well as Article 5 of UN Resolution #52 - Universal Freedom of Choice.

REPEALS "The 40 hour workweek", implemented May 23, 2004;

HONORS the following passed resolutions, in their efforts to bring self-determination of each Nation State: "Rights and Duties of UN States", implemented Feb 24 2004, and "Universal Freedom of Choice", implemented Mar 26 2004.

----

I hope delegates will give this initiative due consideration. Passing this will promote both freedom of choice and business by eliminating unnecessary economic barriers such as the 40 hour work week.

Minimum standards are necessary for the protection of workers, given that the power in a "free" employee-employer relationship is not balanced. What you propose is not true freedom for workers - whilst they might be free of intrusion from government, they are left at the mercy of employers, because without laws like these, there will always be a few people ready to work that little bit longer, thus forcing everyone into a race to the lowest standards to hold onto employment.

And the argument that small nations need to work their people longer and harder to keep up with the economic strength of big ones is not logical. Obviously, a nation of 5 million would be hard-pressed to match the GDP of a 2 billion nation, but its perfectly possible for them to match the GDP per capita. And even if it were necessary to work your population harder, it would be grossly unethical to have them work longer than the 80 hours allowed by this resolution.

As to the charge that this resolution violates Rights and Duties and UFC - untrue.

Rights and Duties' reference to type of government does not protect nations' rights over more minor issues. It is in place to stop the UN saying "there shall be no communist nations in the UN" or "every member must be a democracy".

Article 2 and 3 offer protections, but only "subject to the immunities recognised by international law", which basically means that if the UN passes a resolution (i.e. enacts some international law) then that overrides the nation's right to be free of interference.

As for the UFC, it says this:

5) Declares and enshrines in law the freedom of all people to make choices according to their own conscience, particularly with regard to their philosophy of life, social/cultural development and awareness of the world, without unreasonable interference from the State, subject to the following limitations:

a) The decisions taken do not directly inflict physical harm on the individual making them or physical or psychological harm on others; where this is the case, normal criminal law of the country in question applies,

The first bit I've bolded essentially means clause 5 is more of an encouragement to nations than a cast iron rule, since there is nothing defining what constitutes "reasonable". Anyway, we'd certainly consider a maximum workweek a reasonable restriction. There is also a good case for the 2nd bolded bit protecting work time restrictions, as working longer than the 80 hours allowed by the resolution can have serious health implications.

And even if it were necessary to work your population harder, it would be grossly unethical to have them work longer than the 80 hours allowed by this resolution.



There is also a good case for the 2nd bolded bit protecting work time restrictions, as working longer than the 80 hours allowed by the resolution can have serious health implications.

What about Nationstates whose planet/culture has a 29 day week? Or on Krypton where 90 hours a week is nothing? I say repeal the resolution, and replace it with one that mandates that each nation's citizens only be required to work as much as they want voluntarily until their health would be effected.

(b) Also this resolution violates Articles 1, 2 and 3 of UN Resolution #49 - Rights and Duties of UN States
People, please stop claiming that Rights and Duties Articles stand in isolation. There is a reason I included 11 articles, as ALL of them are necessary to the resolution. In this particular instance, this repeal fails to address Articles 10 and 11, which clearly state the overriding priority of international law.

http://img75.echo.cx/img75/4021/resolutionauthorcard6ir.jpg

Rights and Duties, in fact.

The nation of Vanhalenburgh feels that this steps out of the rights and role of the UN to dictate to member nations.

We feel that this issue would impede on a nations right to manage itself.

It also would put member nations industry at a disadvantage to non-member nations who would be capable to run these industries for longer periods and at a lower labor cost.

Perhaps a rewrite of the current resolution is needed. While the idea of the current resolution is sound we feel that it is not and should not be the role of the UN to determine this for member nations.

We would vote to repeal the 40 hour work week resolution.

Minister to the UN
Henry Peabody

I respect your argument, however by repealing this resolution is true freedom for workers. As you've stated yourself "there will always be a few people ready to work that little bit longer,". Well the same can be said that there will be workers who choose to work less. Thus it is up to each individual to choose how many hours to work. Thus there is freedom for workers to choose.

Some individuals like to work a 60 hour work week and for the compensation package that they've signed up for. Others like a 40 hour a work week and then there are others who like a 0 hour work week, they're called "bums". And these bums have the right to work maximum work week of 0 hours! If you are going to impose maximum hourly work week to protect the worker then impose a minimum hourly work week to protect the nation state and those individuals that are trying to compete for labor resources on a global scale!

UN Resolution #59 is also poorly worded and makes no reference to salary based employees. Yet the restrictions enforced by Resolution #59 cause salary based employees to fall under this law. Forcing "on call" employees to fall within this minimum work week also is unneeded and is detrimental to the tech sector of my nation. Paying someone 128 hours of overtime (168 hours in a 7 day week and yes people are on call 24/7) when they can be a salary based employee is not cost justified. Thus under resolution #59 I have to treat my salary employees the same as hourly employees and give them hourly compensation.

Maybe you feel that minimum standards are needed for the protection of workers. However this is not the UN's place to force this on each individual nation state. It is up to each individual nation state to enact the minimum/maximum standards as s/he sees fit. And by allowing the UN to do this does violate Article1 of the Rights and Duties of the UN States

Article 1
§ Every UN Member State has the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government.
Thus according to the Rights and Duties of UN states, my government can enact laws and repeal laws without any interference from any other Nation State. Resolution#59 is directly interfering with my Nation State.

As far as the UFC is concerned:
5) Declares and enshrines in law the freedom of all people to make choices according to their own conscience, particularly with regard to their philosophy of life, social/cultural development and awareness of the world, without unreasonable interference from the State, subject to the following limitations:

a) The decisions taken do not directly inflict physical harm on the individual making them or physical or psychological harm on others; where this is the case, normal criminal law of the country in question applies,
Thus Article 5 of the UFC allows people to make choices in regards to their sexual orientation, whether or not to grow moustaches or whether or not to work a 0, 42 or 60 hour work week. It is their choice to work a 42 hour work week without unreasonable interference from the State! Let's promote freedom!

How does enacting a 42 hour work week inflict physical harm? When the only harm inflicted is caused by the individual worker making the conscience decision to do so.

What I do propose is "true" freedom for workers and "true" freedom for each nation state! Please support the issue to "Repeal - The 40 hour work week"

Thanks!

President El Magnifico
The Republic of Prozac Abusers

I respect your argument, however by repealing this resolution is true freedom for workers. As you've stated yourself "there will always be a few people ready to work that little bit longer,". Well the same can be said that there will be workers who choose to work less. Thus it is up to each individual to choose how many hours to work. Thus there is freedom for workers to choose.

Wouldn't that be nice...
However, as much as you might like to "choose" to work 40 hours a week, if enough others are willing to sign a contract for 45 hours hours, you're out of a job. And so on, until everyone's working absurd hours and are very stressed, which is detrimental to health.

UN Resolution #59 is also poorly worded and makes no reference to salary based employees. Yet the restrictions enforced by Resolution #59 cause salary based employees to fall under this law. Forcing "on call" employees to fall within this minimum work week also is unneeded and is detrimental to the tech sector of my nation. Paying someone 128 hours of overtime (168 hours in a 7 day week and yes people are on call 24/7) when they can be a salary based employee is not cost justified. Thus under resolution #59 I have to treat my salary employees the same as hourly employees and give them hourly compensation.

We don't believe it right that a company be able to demand of its workers that they remain on call 24/7. It is to prevent precisely this take-over of workers' entire lives that we feel this kind of legislation is needed.

By the way, the most people can work or be on call is 80 hours per week, so its not a matter of paying 128 hours of overtime - they can only do 40 hours overtime.

Maybe you feel that minimum standards are needed for the protection of workers. However this is not the UN's place to force this on each individual nation state. It is up to each individual nation state to enact the minimum/maximum standards as s/he sees fit. And by allowing the UN to do this does violate Article1 of the Rights and Duties of the UN States

You've been told by the resolution author himself that you're wrong. And we believe that if nation states are unwilling to provide the protections and freedoms that citizens deserve, then those countries do not deserve their national sovereignty.

Thus Article 5 of the UFC allows people to make choices in regards to their sexual orientation, whether or not to grow moustaches or whether or not to work a 0, 42 or 60 hour work week. It is their choice to work a 42 hour work week without unreasonable interference from the State! Let's promote freedom!

It is a reasonable interference to place a limit of 80 hours per week.

How does enacting a 42 hour work week inflict physical harm? When the only harm inflicted is caused by the individual worker making the conscience decision to do so.

42 hours is allowed, you merely have to pay 2 hours overtime. The limit is 80, which can inflict serious harm.

I'm curious about how some of its supporters believe the 40 hour workweek is assumed to be applied. What happens to writers on assignment or similar jobs in which an employee works on projects at a time? What if an employee is required to complete a project by a certain, but the completion of that project would mean working greater than 40 hours a week? Would contractual obligation to complete a project which requires more than 40 hours a week ean contractual obligation of over 40 hours (which I believe is provisioned against by 40 Hour Workweek)?

And does 40 hour workweek stop people from voluntarily working for an employer for over 80 hours a week? If so, why?

I'm curious about how some of its supporters believe the 40 hour workweek is assumed to be applied. What happens to writers on assignment or similar jobs in which an employee works on projects at a time? What if an employee is required to complete a project by a certain, but the completion of that project would mean working greater than 40 hours a week? Would contractual obligation to complete a project which requires more than 40 hours a week ean contractual obligation of over 40 hours (which I believe is provisioned against by 40 Hour Workweek)?

I guess it would depend on the specific details of the contract. You might have to include in the contract something saying that the maximum work week obligation took priority. I suppose it would also depend on the specifics of your nation's laws. There's always some leeway for interpretation of resolutions.

And does 40 hour workweek stop people from voluntarily working for an employer for over 80 hours a week? If so, why?

Yes, because if an unofficial expectation arose that employees work overtime, they could be pressured into it. This protects people so they don't lose out on a promotion or whatever just because they weren't willing to give over their entire lives and sacrifice their health for their employer.

Ecopoeia is a member of the ACA, the region that sponsored the resolution targeted by this repeal. While we believe the 80-hr restriction is wholly unnecessary and over-regulatory, we fully support the remaining articles and, indeed, the spirit of the resolution.

Varia Yefremova
Speaker to the UN

OOC: Others may disagree, but I've always taken it as read that UN resolutions include - within reason - unseen appendices that clarify very specific points of detail (eg. uneven distributions of work). There simply isn't enough space to deal with such items.

However, I understand if you believe such provisions should have been included.

I think this resolution must be repealed.It must be absolutely voluntary for peaple to choose in work contracts how long continues their workweek.In many cases artificially set workweek will destroy the economy of the country.
The United Nations is an organ that must bring justice and prosperity to all nations and ,in my opinion ,should not discuss ideas,which can be harmful for MANY counties.