[GA - WITHDRAWN] Providing Paid Leave

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hulldom

Winter Kingdom
-
Pronouns
He/Him/His
TNP Nation
Boston Castle
Discord
seathestarlesssky
ga.jpg

Providing Paid Leave
Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Labour Rights
Proposed by: Minskiev | Onsite Topic


The World Assembly,

Understanding that the secure introduction of paid leave and job security for workers everywhere allows those workers to care better for themselves and their loved ones, however remaining cautious against excessively interfering with employers' operations, hereby:
  1. Defines, for this resolution:
    1. a “worker” as any individual bound by a contract of employment who works for another party as a part of said contract;
    2. a “worker-in-waiting” as an individual who is actively looking for a job but does not have one and has held a job before;
    3. ”paid leave” as a period of time that a worker must not be required to work for their employer or any other party as a part of their employment contract but during which:
      1. that worker still receives from the same non-income employment benefits as they would usually receive according to their contract; however
      2. that worker receives at least the lower of the average wage of all workers in that member state and that worker's usual wages from their member state's government.
  2. Mandates that member states provide their workers upon their workers' requests a minimum of the following durations of paid leave (or any higher minimums that the World Assembly may subsequently set for their respective conditions):
    1. the duration of the worker's, the worker’s family member’s, or the worker’s dependent’s illness or injury for recovery or care, but only up to 26 weeks per injury or illness, and if:
      1. no one of closer familial relations can and will care for the affected family member; and
      2. the illness or injury directly compromises that worker's, their co-workers', their affected family member’s, or their affected dependent’s health or ability to work.
    2. 52 weeks shared between each parent raising the child and divided by how the parents see fit, or 78 weeks if the worker is a single parent, to care for a worker's new child (whether through childbirth, adoption, or foster care) should that child require care, regardless of whether other individuals are available to provide this care, though:
      1. the leave must be used before that worker’s child is twice as old as the duration of the leave; however
      2. individuals on this paid leave lose the remainder of this paid leave if they lose custody of the particular child.
    3. 4 weeks per year for general purposes, and any days unused by the end of the year carry over into the next, though:
      1. employers pay this paid leave;
      2. the payment is 100% of a worker's income; and
      3. a worker must be returned to the exact same job after this paid leave, but workers returning from this paid leave to a job that no longer exists shall return to a new job with 7b’s parameters instead (if possible).
  3. Forbids member states and employers from retaliating against any worker or worker-in-waiting:
    1. because they filed for paid leave;
    2. because they notified their member state or employer of events that may induce them to file for paid leave;
    3. because of any of the paid leave's effects on that employer or member state; or
    4. because they are on paid leave.
  4. Declares that a worker must give sufficient notice to their employer if they foresee any future events, or an event has occurred where giving advance notice was implausible, that may induce that worker to obtain paid leave,
  5. Requires member states' governments to provide their non-incarcerated workers-in-waiting a minimum of 26 weeks of unemployment benefits, though:
    1. the duration increases to 39 weeks if the worker-in-waiting’s previous wage was below the median wage;
    2. the payment is half of that worker's usual wages before becoming unemployed;
    3. the duration is subject to any higher minimums the World Assembly may subsequently set; and
    4. the unemployment benefits end when the worker-in-waiting finds a job.
  6. Compels member states to instate social insurance or social security programs to fund the paid leave, and
  7. Clarifies that:
    1. only 2a paid leave must be consecutive;
    2. a worker must (if possible) be returned to a job with the same salary, field of work, necessary skill set, set of employment benefits, work schedule, and relative work location for 2a and 2c paid leave, and this new job cannot be a demotion;
    3. workers returning from paid leave shall receive Section 5 unemployment benefits if a new job with 7b’s parameters is impossible;
    4. individuals who bear that worker's child for 2b paid leave but are not raising that child (such as surrogate mothers) receive a week of paid leave after the child is born (which must be used as soon as the child is born);
    5. employers and member states may increase the duration of paid leave beyond the minimums listed in this resolution.
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!


ForAgainstAbstainPresent
01201
 
Last edited:
Against. Anything other than a blocker on this subject is a non-starter for me now.
 
Last edited:
This proposal has received the requisite approvals to enter the formal queue. Barring it being withdrawn or marked illegal, it will proceed to a vote at Major Update on Sunday, April 10.
 
Present (Non-WA)

I'm pleasantly surprised with this proposal. Aside from poor phrasing in spots, and a tautology or two, it rectifies most of the complaints raised with its predecessors. That being said, I'm receptive to calls for a blocker rather than yet another clunky resolution on the topic. I agree that prioritizing flexibility here could do a lot of good, and as such, I'll acquiesce to the majority opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top