General Assembly Resolution #527 “Protected Working Leave” (Category: Regulation; Area of Effect: Labour Rights) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.
The General Assembly,
Applauding the intent of GAR #527 "Protected Working Leave" to provide economic and social security to the working classes of member nations; yet
Convinced that the current implementation of these social securities and economic protections in GAR #527 thwarts the resolution's intent;
Hereby finds the following:
GAR #527 speaks of "a reasonable duration of paid leave" in Clause 2, and creates the possibility for workers to remain on paid leave for disproportionately extended periods of time, because of the imprecise and vague terminology in the list of conditions that it provides. For instance, care for "a seriously ill or physically or mentally disabled spouse, child below the age of majority, parent, grandparent, or dependent" as per Clause 2b, who due to the nature of their illness would be incapable of fulfilling their basic needs independently, will necessarily, and thus reasonably, envelop that patient's entire lifespan, especially when the nature of their illness continues to decrease that patient's ability to survive on their own.
The vague and imprecise terminology, as noted under Clause 1 of this resolution, is present throughout the entirety of GAR #527, with examples being: "reasonably be able to provide such" in Article 1.b.iii, "serious illness" in Article 2c, "reasonable notice" in Article 4a, "serious health conditions" in Article 4b, "unnecessarily onerous conditions" in Article 5a, and "without significant financial strain" in Article 5c. This imprecise and vague terminology creates large vacuums wherein subjective interpretations can thrive, and undermines the security and protection the target resolution seeks to establish. As such, GAR #527 is too unwieldy a tool because of its imprecision and ambiguity to appropriately cover the technical details of 'paid leave' as an aspect of employment law.
The definition of 'worker' in the target resolution includes employees on time-limited contracts, as it merely speaks of "bound by a contract" without differentiating between the perpetuity or non-perpetuity of such a contract. Workers on time-limited contracts are employed for a brief, limited duration to either fill-in for a worker who is on leave, or for specific employment contracts regarding one-time events such as a census count. This lack of differentiation in GAR #527 regarding the timely nature of contracts would allow an employee on a time-limited contract to file for paid leave on the first day of their employment, and remain on paid leave for the entire duration of their employment, which would create a significant hardship for employers in turn.
Under GAR #527's Clause 5c, member states can pass the costs of paid leave onto employers "capable of providing such without significant financial strain". However, the imprecise and vague nature of the phrasing of that condition creates too much room for subjective interpretation, and could force smaller businesses to shoulder the same burdens as large corporations, if an analysis would deem the former to be able to do so on paper, while in reality circumstances would be different. This would lead to a greater risk of bankruptcy of smaller businesses, which in turn creates social and economic instability for both the business owners in question, as well as the other workers in their employ.
And therefore, the General Assembly repeals GAR #527 "Protected Working Leave".
