The Public Sector Strike Curtailment Act (Voting on Amendment)

[Cranberry]

I do not like this bill. Even if it does not completely prohibit striking for public employees, it does make it considerably hard, and puts quite a few obstacles for people that want to exercise their rights to strike. It takes considerable bargaining power from the workers, and I don't like that. Yes, public sector strikes are always bad, but nevertheless, they should be able to exercise their rights like every other worker, too.

As for the amendment, Nay of course. 

[Cranberry]

Sorry for interrupting,
But, the idea that 20% of the work-force shouldn't be able to go on strike is uncommonly silly. That would simply KILL the public sector unions. Do you realize that???

I shall think Cassius would not be the saddest person if that happened

Anyway, this version I like far better than the first version. I would like to see the one week in 1c possibly reduced to three days; and I really don't like the 20% rule.. As Windjammer said, what would be the point of striking in the first place, and secondly, how would these people be determined?

I really like the new clause 3. Such a board is a great idea, as appropiate measures of talking are very succesfull in lowering the number of strikes. In Austria we have an institution called the "social partnership", which is basically like a union of employers in one sector talking with/against a union of employees in one sector. We never have strikes, I cannot remember a single strike in Austria in my lifetime, but one teachers and students protest march on the afternoon last year (which I proudly participated in )

[Cranberry]

I still have problems with 1d, and with the week long duration in 1c. I very much like 3 however, and this version of the bill is a great improvement in my opinion.

Aye

[Cranberry]

Sorry for interrupting,
But, the idea that 20% of the work-force shouldn't be able to go on strike is uncommonly silly. That would simply KILL the public sector unions. Do you realize that???

I shall think Cassius would not be the saddest person if that happened

Anyway, this version I like far better than the first version. I would like to see the one week in 1c possibly reduced to three days; and I really don't like the 20% rule.. As Windjammer said, what would be the point of striking in the first place, and secondly, how would these people be determined?

I really like the new clause 3. Such a board is a great idea, as appropiate measures of talking are very succesfull in lowering the number of strikes. In Austria we have an institution called the "social partnership", which is basically like a union of employers in one sector talking with/against a union of employees in one sector. We never have strikes, I cannot remember a single strike in Austria in my lifetime, but one teachers and students protest march on the afternoon last year (which I proudly participated in )

My issue is that I don't believe that public sector employees should be excluded from their rights as workers. But at the same time, balance the need for those public sector employees who are essential front-line workers to respond in times of crisis.

The 20% number was just thrown up to see if there's a way to cover both concerns.

Surely public sector employees strikes will have a greater impact in our lifes, to say so, but still, we should not prohibit them what is allowed to every other worker. Possibly the board Cassius proposed helps with keeping strikes limited to the worst cases? Then there should be no need for the 20% "rule", as then the strikes would have no impact, I guess. If everything runs, not smoothly, but it runs, then public sector employees practically loose their bargaining power. Additionally, the 20% of workforce "rule" wouldn't work everywhere, best example schools...

I guess I won't vote for this unless we scratch that as well.

[Cranberry]

We could possibly expand the board in 3) to all sectors? That would cover soldiers, doctors, nurses and so too?

[Cranberry]

Aye

[Cranberry]

This reminds me a bit of JCL's amendments, just from the other side this time...

[Cranberry]

Nay

[Cranberry]

Motion for a final vote.

I second Senator Bore's motion.

I third the motion.

[Cranberry]

Aye

[Cranberry]

AYE