Yes, watching a disaster in making is always fun.......

Agreed. With a growing fine of 100% for every new affair.

[Party Chair]

Party Chair:

[ 1 ] DemPGH
[ 2 ] Superique

Presidential / Vice Presidential endorsement:

[ 1 ] Averroës Nix (Labor-NY) and DemPGH (Liberal-PA)
[ 2 ] Matt from VT (Federalist-NY) and Maxwell (Federalist-KS)
[ 3 ] Xahar (NMAM-CA) and Hashemite (NMAM-FL)

[AT-LARGE SENATE (1 vacancy to fill)]

AT-LARGE SENATE (1 vacancy to fill)

[2] Gass3268 of Wisconsin
^{Labor Party}

[3] Jerryarkansas of Arkansas
^{Federalist Party}

[1] Superique of Nevada
^{Liberal Party}

[  ] Write-in:

[  ] None of the above

X Earthling

You may be right, but it might also prove to serve as an example for the company and for other companies. Pay a million dollar fine and you will think twice about doing it again.

But the bigger fine could also be included in the damages awarded by the courts.

It could be by percentage of revenue of the previous year. For example 1% or 2% of the revenue. And it could be increased if companies do this more often.

I support this bill. But isn't 5000 dollars a bit low as penalty? For a small company it may be a lot, but bigger companies earn 5000 dollars in minutes, if not seconds.

What amount, in your expert opinion, would be most appropriate?

You could make the equation amount of penalty/company revenue. A bigger company will pay a higher fine.

I support this bill. But isn't 5000 dollars a bit low as penalty? For a small company it may be a lot, but bigger companies earn 5000 dollars in minutes, if not seconds.

I think most will wait and see what the mid terms will bring.

Some of the most serious contenders on the Republican side have the time to decide. Rubio, Paul, Martinez and even Christie can stay out of the race in 2016 if the situation is not positive for the Republicans (meaning: popular Obama, stronger economy, lower unemployment and significant Democratic gains in the House in 2014).

For the Democrats is different. Biden, Clinton, O'Malley, possible Schweitzer all have one last shot at the Presidency before they are too old or too long out of office. They might start early, like McCain did in 2008. Same goes for Bush if he jumps in.

I would like to thank the Representatives for their votes and for their support.

This is why people don't care about the big things like the IRS-'scandal'. Republicans and conservatives keep creating these so called scandals. It's pathetic.

I know that with Don't Ask, Don't Tell repealed you don't have to be straight, but the umbrella should be.

I may create a new law designated to deal with question of tenure. So scrap section 5 and lets vote on the bill.

I propose that we give employees and employers the right to make deals negating this, but unless the contract exempts tenure, the employee can demand it.

That could be made in a amendment, making it negotiable to give tenure or not. If the employee wants it and the employer is fine with it it could be in the contract.

But don't forget that in some areas, like the fast food world, employees switch on workplaces regularly anyway. How many people stay in those jobs for years?

Has Politico ever had gloves on when it came to Obama. Nothing new is no news, Torie.

The IRS is the only serious thing, but also the one that is fartest away from Obama for now. As it seems now some overeager junior employees looked into things they shouldn't have. That is bad but sadly those things happen. Not much Obama could really have done about that.
If they got approval from someone within the administration itself it would be far bigger.

Benghazi is not a scandal. Just a right-wing talking point on FoxNews. Nothing new. And Republicans should not overplay it. Otherwise it would look like they are dancing on the graves of four dead Americans.
The AP thing is bad but not illegal. It should be, but since it's not it can't really be a scandal. It's hard to see it go anywhere.

I don't support this amendment because I think it's important that employee keep up on education. Labor always changing, new thinks are being entered on the workplace on a daily basis. It's good for employees to keep up with the times. Otherwise it could become more and more difficult for them to get a job.

It's also not required for every employee. Some jobs hardly change, so education is less required. But other jobs change constantly or even disappear all together. Those workers can use the education options to help themselves.

No, if you don't get a new contract after two years you are technically not being fired.

Companies have the opportunity to give temporary contracts to new employees. After that contract is over the company can decide to renew the contract or just let the it expire. If the contract is expired the employee leaves the company. He does not have the right for any compensation because he was not dismissed.

But if the employee has been with the company for three years, he should be rewarded with a permanent contract, tenure. The employer by that time knows what the employee is capable of. Or at least, they should know.

Is it possible that companies start to end all contract after two years? Of course. But I believe a company likes to keep those workers who do a good job every day.

On point 4, does someone know if assisting workers is required by law in some European countries? I know some companies here help laid off workers find a new job but I think it's voluntary. 

I don't know if it's required by law in the Netherlands, I believe it is, but I am not sure. But it is done a lot here. But it is a positive thing to do. Every laid off worker that gets a new job immediately is one person less on benefits.

Why would the company do that, the employe is no longer working for you, and doing the research to find that is a lot harder than throwing 4 random offers at them.

A company knows it needs to lay of people weeks if not months before it happens. So they can use that time to start the search for potential jobs for your employees. And companies work with eachother, finding possible job offers shouldn't be so hard.

Yes, that is possible.

way to many loopholes in this bill, a company could give an employee 4 Sh[inks] job offers, then get out of that part. Also, define cutbacks, or reorganization, because a company could just slowly fire people to avoid getting any of these restrictions.

The company should help the employee find a new job. The job should be on the same level as with the old job and the employee should be able get the job.

That is right.

What happens if the court rules the dismissal was justified? Will it be additional compensation?

No, if the dismissal is justified than the compensation will be what has been agreed before.