NationStates Jolt Archive

I've many ideas for proposals but, because I'm new and I've already done many mistakes in the proposals I've writte, i've decided to discuss them with you before actually posting them. Here's one:
Right to Strike
(Human Rights)
BELIEVING that striking is an elemntary right of every worker;
NOTING that in some Nations this right is violated and broken;
FURTHER BELIEVING that the trade uninos are the only organizations who can organize workers into protest and that they have their right to exist;
HEREBY
DECLARES that all Nations in the WA must protect the worker's right to strike and in no way that right can be broken;
STATES that no worker can be sacked without a strong and evident reason;
FURTHER STATES that all workers have the right to organize in Trade unions.
FURTHER DECLARES that all WA nations must preserve the democratic process in the Trade unions and the free creation of any number of them.

Any mistakes or further suggestions?

Yes there are numerous mistakes, firstly this is not a resolution it is an aspirational shopping list, which does little or nothing at all.

We recommend the honoured delegation of Kohlhassenbruck take a good look at the canon of laws of this organisation has already ratified and see the quality and nature of those laws, and then try to mould there own efforts on the pattern of the best of those laws.

Yours,

Can you give me more specific hints?

Can you give me more specific hints?



If the honoured Ambassador does as we suggest, look at the list of passed laws of this organisation, they will see the general expectation of length, the level of detail, the quality of language and the comprehensive nature which is common to the legislation of this organisation.

A few lines of generalised phrases cobbled together in a matter of moments would not meet this standard.

Drafting resolutions can be time consuming and challenging but is all the more rewarding for all that.


Yours,

Can you give me more specific hints?

Just take a look at the passed world assembly resolutions. Your resolution needs to state clearly what it wants to do.

BELIEVING that striking is an elemntary right of every worker;
NOTING that in some Nations this right is violated and broken;
FURTHER BELIEVING that the trade uninos are the only organizations who can organize workers into protest and that they have their right to exist;
HEREBY
DECLARES that all Nations in the WA must protect the worker's right to strike and in no way that right can be broken;
STATES that no worker can be sacked without a strong and evident reason;
FURTHER STATES that all workers have the right to organize in Trade unions.
FURTHER DECLARES that all WA nations must preserve the democratic process in the Trade unions and the free creation of any number of them.


This is what's considered a preamble to the resolution. You need sections in there. You should also go into what a 'strong and evident reason' is. Otherwise, this is a major loophole. Some nation could conceivably say 'you don't follow my political beliefs and that is, to me, a strong and evident reason to fire you'. There are other reasons. Trust me. That's just an example. Could be as silly as 'you keep wearing blue when I say red is the color that people should wear'.

Basically, everything after 'Hereby' should be in Article format. Again, take a look at previously passed resolutions in order to edit yours.

Paula Jenner

Take a look over this proposal (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14306361&postcount=29), some of what you're proposing is already in law.

We fear that the poor ambassador is being bombarded with rather definitively-given advice, and urge our colleagues to be a little less vigorous in their dismissal of the draft. While we concur that the approach here would need careful plugging of loopholes before it should be considered "ready for prime time," what the Ambassador of Kohlhaasenbruck has presented to us is not so far in structure from our illustrious predecessor organisation's final Labor Relations Act (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13132941&postcount=219) as he might be lead to believe. That document was arrived at after exhaustive discussion, and study of it should prove useful.

We fear that the poor ambassador is being bombarded with rather definitively-given advice, and urge our colleagues to be a little less vigorous in their dismissal of the draft. While we concur that the approach here would need careful plugging of loopholes before it should be considered "ready for prime time," what the Ambassador of Kohlhaasenbruck has presented to us is not so far in structure from our illustrious predecessor organisation's final Labor Relations Act (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13132941&postcount=219) as he might be lead to believe. That document was arrived at after exhaustive discussion, and study of it should prove useful.



While we are sure that the ancestral organisation of the w.a. produced excellent laws, it did so in an environment where the pool of talent for such endeavour was far larger and far more active.

It can hardly, therefore be poor advice to suggest to the honoured Ambassador for Kohlhaasenbruck that theirs should be a more substantial first draft than would have been possible in the organisation which preceded this one, would it not ?