NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay everyone...Here I go again with a new proposal...but this one I dont think is a dead horse like my last one. This is the draft...And im pretty sure it wont need much changing as we pretty much nutted the whole thing out in Reclamation.

But before I begin with the debate on the actual proposal, I want to warn everyone, Ive not found a proposal quite like this one....and well to be honest I dont know if it belongs in Social Justice or Human Rights Category. Thats what I need the real help with right now at the moment. Currently I think it belongs in Human Rights, but also debate is welcome. Also I dont know if its allowable to be both categories...the rules i read wernt sufficently clear if one could have a main category and a subcategory...but whatever the majority here, or a mod if I have to have this mod tested says it is will be what I go with.

Also before I begin I would like to give special thanks to Ausserland who is a tremendous help, Ceorana, who while we dont agree on everything can point out flaws I dont see, and all the other fine people at Reclamation. I really couldnt have done this without you.

The Draft as of 12 November 2006 1am est:

Universal Minimum Vacation Act

Category: (open)
Strength: Significant

The United Nations,

DESIRING to promote the general welfare of the working peoples of the UN member states;

CONVINCED that uninterrupted periods of rest and recuperation away from the workplace contribute significantly to the psychological health of workers;

BELIEVING that these opportunities can substantially contribute to the productivity of the workforce, and

FURTHER BELIEVING that the opportunity for families to spend time together in recreational pursuits cam contribute to the stabilization of the family, with the resulting benefits to the community, such as a reduced juvenile crime rate,

THE UNITED NATIONS

1. DEFINES, for the purposes of this resolution, “employee” as any person who works for another person, persons or organization--public or private-- for financial or other compensation;

2. MANDATES that all employees be entitled to a universal minimum standard of fourteen paid vacation days per year that can be taken without loss of compensation;

3. PERMITS and ENCOURAGES UN member nations to legislate a minimum paid vacation standard that is greater than established in Article 2;

4. ALLOWS employees to voluntarily cash in their vacation time for financial or other compensation;

5. MANDATES that vacation pay shall be the equivalent of the wage or salary the employee would otherwise receive for the time spent working.

....and well to be honest I dont know if it belongs in Social Justice or Human Rights Category.
I'm going to say it's "Human Rights", but wait for a second (or third or fourth) opinion on that. It isn't SJ. There's nothing in there that reduces income inequality or increases basic welfare.

You only get one category.

As for the proposal, the Hack is opposed. We don't like meddling in internal affairs like this. However, you at least allowed people to cash in vacation time, so it's not utterly odious.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/UN/doctor.jpg
Doctor Denis Leary
Ambassador to the UN
The Federated Technocratic Oligarchy of the Most Glorious Hack

Okay, one category only...got it (makes note to double check so its the right one...)

Well Hack, I did expect several people to be opposed to it...but its not submitted just yet...however I will make a note not to tg you asking you for your support as i highly doubt this will be recieving many changes as it is. However, my main question is whats the category...I trust Felix in it not being SJ.

Eh, you wouldn't anyway as I'm not in the UN. Doctor Leary just likes to make his opinions known.

I guess this would fall under HR, even though I don't consider vacations to be a right, per se.

well to be honest, I dont think of them to be rights (like the right to freedom of speech or the right to a fair trial) either...but i do think for the other reason that I mentioned in the preambltory clauses they are benefical to every society.

That is the reason for the resolution really. Although, one could aruge that they are a social right rather than a political one. Like say the "right to healthcare", or "the right to an education".

Screw this bit of absurd meddling.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

Uh, yeah, no.

If you want vacation time, work for a company that gives you a vacation time. If they don't, deny them your labor. It's your right as a worker.

Vacation is for wimps. Anyone who doesn't put in their requisite 14 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, with no days off should be taken out back and shot. All this "sickness" and "mental health" and "my parents died" is just an excuse to get out of what you're here to do, and that's work, work, and work some more. We ought to repeal all the working rights resolutions and put my plan into action.

No, seriously. My workers are generally allowed paid vacation, but it's ludicrous for the UN to require it. Sick time? I'd be all for it. Time off for funerals? Why the hell not. But this? I don't think so.

I would Like to remind everyone that The point of posting this is to come to a consensus on if it is a Human Rights Resoultion or not. That is to find out what the category of this topic is.

We can debate all we want to after its submitted but without a category (i.e. as it is written now) it cant come to the floor and would be deleted if submitted anyway.

Further, on the debate side, the point of mandating vacation time is to provide a international floor. Workers can cash in their vacation time if they want to.

Oh and incidently I have a Family Medical Leave act on the backburner just to let Ice hockey players know.

We think this proposal is balanced, as written as such it may include national holidays. Love and esterel support it.

We would like to suggest 2 clauses:

CONVINCED that reasonable paid vacations, don’t undermine economic growth, as they decrease stress put on workers and sustain many economic activities, such as culture, tourism, sports, entertainment and humanitarian and benevolent actions,

ALLOWS needing members to phase changes progressively and smoothly, in order to comply with this document, for a period not exceeding 3 years.

We think this proposal is balanced, as written as such it may include national holidays. Love and esterel support it.

We would like to suggest 2 clauses:

CONVINCED that reasonable paid vacations, don’t undermine economic growth, as they decrease stress put on workers and sustain many economic activities, such as culture, tourism, sports, entertainment and humanitarian and benevolent actions,

ALLOWS needing members to phase changes progressively and smoothly, in order to comply with this document, for a period not exceeding 3 “years”.

Would those be perambulatory clauses, or legislative clauses? The first one I can see in the preamble...no problem. (note, I've not said i would add it yet) However, the second one....might pose a problem. That being it could potentially give those who oppose this legislation a weapon to keep it from being passed. Also, however, i have made a note of that suggestion and may consider inserting it at a later date if that insertion doesn't cause too many problems.

Oh and incidently I have a Family Medical Leave act on the backburner just to let Ice hockey players know.

I just posted a Sick Time Act. Perhaps a collaborative act would work best.

It's Human Rights. And micromanagement by the UN. Unnecessary dabbling into National Affairs.

It's Human Rights. And micromanagement by the UN. Unnecessary dabbling into National Affairs.

Not even national affairs.

Absolutely No.
On the other hand Yes.
On the other other hand No.
On the other other other hand ...

Yes there are a whole lot of on the other hands here. That's how I feel about this resolution. First there is the question of category and strength, then there is the question about whether this is ... well big enough for a UN resolution to take on. I mean this is just vacation (holiday in UK) time and that's about it. The number 14 is a tad higher than the typical US standard and massively lower than the typical European standard.

It's hard to create a standard when the RW doesn't even have one.

Personally you can't talk about time off without looking at the whole picture. National paid "holidays" have to be taken into consideration. A nation that has 20 national paid holidays but only 10 days paid vacation as a standard policy is more or less equivalent to a nation that has 15 national paid holidays but allows 15 days paid vacation.

Then you have to consider sick time policies, and everything else.

Is this then a matter for the UN consideration? That's questionable. I think many people will flatly state it is not. I'm more open; it's a matter of standards - standards help keep free trade fair trade - and standards need to be applied universally in order to be effective. Of course UN resolutions can't be applied universally; only to UN members, so the effect of the standard compared to nations that don't have the standard should be considered.

But if this was a consideration, the US would be kicking the EU's bottom because of the massive difference in vacation policy. It is not.

In the end, Tzorsland will abstain for now. It's got potential. I think.

We usually ask three questions when considering whether a proposal is a suitable matter for NSUN legislation. In this case...

Is this a matter of international import and impact? No.
Is this a issue of fundamental human rights? No.
Is this a matter that cannot be properly handled at the national or lower level? No.

We find no justification for the NSUN to meddle in this matter.

Patrick T. Olembe
Minister for Foreign Affairs

Whilst we'll no doubt oppose it, I suggest making this Mild, not Significant. It's of negligible impact.

We Respect the Ambassador from Greunberg's advice and will consider changing the strenght at a later time. As I said before...this thread is to consider its legality, category, and now also streanth.

In response to the Ambassaor from Tzorsland: National Holidays are just that, national. I dont expect the Greunbergers to celebrate Comrade Serpov's Birthday, nor do I expect the Ausslanders to celebrate Revolution Day or May Day. So those dont really apply I think. The number of days selected was because that was half of the number I really wanted to stipulate, and I figured that requiring 28 days paid vacation (holiday) would be flat out rejected.

There is a Sick Leave Act already submitted. I am helping the author of that proposal campaign.

Im not saying there wont be rewrites but this will probably be edited a few more times before being submitted just simply because I'm a "bloody perfectionist".

Vladimir Khernynko
UN Ambassador from Ellelt UN Clone
USSE.

The Palentine will be opposing this one on grounds that the UN has no business legislating vacations to my nation's industies. That is a function best done by local, state, and national governments...not big brother.

We heartedly concur with Minister Olembe on this one.
excelsior,
Mick Noir
UN Ambassador

With regard to Individual Working Freedom, in specific article 2 of such, Vacation Time would be one of the terms of employment that would open to negotiation. This would inhibit that negotiation. In addition, article 4 of IWF reserves the right of nations to set specific regulations on working time.

While what you've got would not come into direct contravention with IWF, it comes hazardously close, as this area could be readily covered by what already exists in IWF.

While we agree that this is a legitimate oncern for the welfare of our workers, we also state that this is not a concern to be addressed by NSUN, as workdays vary by nation, as do work hours. This is not a NSUN issue.









Camryn O. LangdonAmbassador
The Most Serene Republic of Drae Nei
Ambassador-At-Large
United Community Builders

The Rogue Nation of Flibbleites doesn't legislate this on a national level and as such sees no need for this to be decided upon on an international level.

Timothy Schmidt
Bob Flibble's PA

OOC: Human Rights? You're kidding right? Restricting economic freedoms = increasing civil rights? No this is clearly one that regulates buisness, not expands civil rights(i.e. restricts the government from interfering in citizens' personal lives). Social Justice fits it most closely.

OOC: Human Rights? You're kidding right? Restricting economic freedoms = increasing civil rights? No this is clearly one that regulates buisness, not expands civil rights(i.e. restricts the government from interfering in citizens' personal lives). Social Justice fits it most closely.
No, it doesn't. Social Justice isn't only about business regulation: it's also about income equality and wealth redistribution. Which this doesn't do.

OOC: Does it really have to do all of that to fit the category? By contrast, restricting elections wouldn't necessarily bring law and order, but it would be political stability, no?

As I understand it: yes, it does have to do all that to fit the category.

Please take out Clause 4, this is open to abuse. The objective of this legislation is not to create better financial opportunities for workers, but to make them rest. It is very much like mandatory holidays. A chance to relax and recuperate. Also there should be a clause that workers cannot take secondary employment during planned vacations.

Please take out Clause 4, this is open to abuse. The objective of this legislation is not to create better financial opportunities for workers, but to make them rest. It is very much like mandatory holidays. A chance to relax and recuperate. Also there should be a clause that workers cannot take secondary employment during planned vacations.

Clause 4 leaves it up to the worker to take his vacation time or to take cash in lieu of vacation time. As for taking secondary employment during paid vacations that would also be up to the worker. However, I highly doubt that any worker would willingly take his vacation time to work, except maybe around his abode (all Elleltians own their house and so home maintenance would not be considered employment unless one did it for compensation).

The main point is to provide a mandatory amount for workers to have off for psychological recuperation, rather than physical recuperation which is more easily obtained by sleeping. Psychological recuperation, as I understand it, requires time away from the stresses which are commonly associated with the workplace.

Vladimir Khernynko
Ambassador from Ellelt UN Clone (USSE)