HR 21-16: Labor Rights Amendment

[thumb21]

AN AMENDMENT
to the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives, in Congress assembled:

Section 1 (Title)
i. The title of this Amendment shall be, the “Labor Rights Amendment.” It may be cited by its ordinal number in order of ratification.

Section 2 (Labor Rights Amendment)
i. The following shall be appended to Article I of the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia as the next section thereof:

A full-enfranchised proletariat being necessary for the prosperity of a free people, the right of the working people to organize and bargain collectively shall not be infringed.

This amendment to the Bill of Rights would protect the right of wage-earners to unionize free from the subversive influence of employers or the state.

Sponsor: Elcaspar
House Designation: HR 21-16

[fhtagn]

What effect does this have on bills that repeal right to work and force people to pay into unions?


For example, our rights grant us the ability to arm ourselves and practice our religion, but we also have the right to not arm ourselves and cannot be forced to practice a religion. Using that logic, would it make it illegal to require union membership as a condition of employment? Just as our rights allow us to not arm ourselves or allow us to practice no religion, it would make sense that under this we should be allowed to not unionize if that is what an individual wants. Making any laws that allow requirements of union membership unconstitutional if this should pass.

[JGibson]

This bill will have my full support.

[YE]

Technically this is suppose to be HR 21-16.

[fhtagn]

Since the sponsor doesn't seem willing to address the concerns listed above, nor have they bothered speaking for their bill since being introduced, motion to table.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I second the motion to table.

[Elcaspar]

I object to the tabling of this bill.

[Elcaspar]

What effect does this have on bills that repeal right to work and force people to pay into unions?

For example, our rights grant us the ability to arm ourselves and practice our religion, but we also have the right to not arm ourselves and cannot be forced to practice a religion. Using that logic, would it make it illegal to require union membership as a condition of employment? Just as our rights allow us to not arm ourselves or allow us to practice no religion, it would make sense that under this we should be allowed to not unionize if that is what an individual wants. Making any laws that allow requirements of union membership unconstitutional if this should pass.

Since this amendment explicitly says that right of the working people to organize and bargain collectively shall not be infringed, it would likely imply that right-to-work laws are no longer valid, as they infringe upon the right to organize and bargain collectively.

No matter how much you say that people are forced to pay into unions, this just rings hollow.
And while i hate to reiterate what i have said in the past, in this case it is necessary to do so:

Nobody is being forced to join a union. Sure at some workplaces, where a union has been designated by the employees to bargain collectively on their behalf, you must either be part of the union, or allow them to bargain for you in many areas. If you object, seek employment elsewhere: it's part of the terms of working there.
Imagine that it's like having to report to a manager or supervisor you dislike, or comply with work rules you find objectionable: you're not 'forced', but if you want to work there, that's what you're going to have to deal with.

[YE]

48(?) hour tabling vote is open.

[YE]

Nay

[fhtagn]

What effect does this have on bills that repeal right to work and force people to pay into unions?

For example, our rights grant us the ability to arm ourselves and practice our religion, but we also have the right to not arm ourselves and cannot be forced to practice a religion. Using that logic, would it make it illegal to require union membership as a condition of employment? Just as our rights allow us to not arm ourselves or allow us to practice no religion, it would make sense that under this we should be allowed to not unionize if that is what an individual wants. Making any laws that allow requirements of union membership unconstitutional if this should pass.

Since this amendment explicitly says that right of the working people to organize and bargain collectively shall not be infringed, it would likely imply that right-to-work laws are no longer valid, as they infringe upon the right to organize and bargain collectively.

No matter how much you say that people are forced to pay into unions, this just rings hollow.
And while i hate to reiterate what i have said in the past, in this case it is necessary to do so:

Nobody is being forced to join a union. Sure at some workplaces, where a union has been designated by the employees to bargain collectively on their behalf, you must either be part of the union, or allow them to bargain for you in many areas. If you object, seek employment elsewhere: it's part of the terms of working there.
Imagine that it's like having to report to a manager or supervisor you dislike, or comply with work rules you find objectionable: you're not 'forced', but if you want to work there, that's what you're going to have to deal with.

Right to work simply prohibits an employer forcing someone to join an union as a condition of employment. If someone is forcing you to unionize, that infringes on your rights. Just as it would infringe on your rights if I forced you to obtain a gun. If someone wants to join a union in a right to work area, there is absolutely nothing that stops them from doing so. In fact, there are tons of unions that still exist in right to work states IRL.

Federal law in Atlasia already ensures that unions do not bargain on behalf of employees who haven't paid into it. There is no valid reason to take the choice on whether or not to join a union away from an employee. People have tons of valid reasons not to join one, and to silence those people is very blatantly anti-worker.

[fhtagn]

Aye on tabling.

[RC]

Aye, needs to be amended otherwise, but would still like to table

[Blair]

Nay

[thumb21]

Nay

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Nay lol

[Blair]

FWIW I'm giving the speech I want to make during this fun time voting.

I fully support the amendment for the simple reason that we know that strong Labour unions make a strong economy, a healthy society and a balanced workforce. It's a funny debate because when I joined Atlasia (expect a Yankee lesson if this is seen) Taft-Hartley had been repealed; and there was very few who wanted to open it back on.

Onto the subject of 'right to work'; it's another awful word that is everything I dislike about the discussion around work, and unions. The 'right to work' law somehow implies that before it (aka before Taft-Hartley) people couldn't work; unions are extremely effective for both highly skilled workers in manufacturing jobs, and also for workers in fast food restaurants, cafes and farm work who face bad bosses, poor pay and unfair working conditions.

We can look at the history of unions across the world; Walter Reuther & the UAW fought for civil rights, the farm workers under Cesar Chavez and the UFW opposed the awful treatment of Hispanic farm workers in the 1960s & in the UK we saw the trade unions stand up for LGBT rights decades before many others (including the corporate world)

As my username implies I'm hardly a devout scargill esque 'solidarity forever' singing flag waving union member, but from my own fathers job, and my own I've seen how trade unions work extremely well.

He's in a public sector job where there are at least 4-5 different unions; they vary in terms of their support for strikes, and their support for different policies; I always support vary of choice in trade union membership; I'm in the lucky position where I can pick a different trade union from that of my colleagues because I don't like their unions political leadership; but I still get the benefits when that union collectively bargain on the rights of the entire workforce.

I'm proud to stand for a stronger, more prosperous and more fair society where we value all working people; and I hope my colleagues will support this amendment. 

[JGibson]

NAY

[Elcaspar]

Nay

[Blair]

As I understand that both the 48 hour deadline has passed & it does not have the votes to table I hereby motion for a final vote.

[thumb21]

Tabling fails

2-6-0-1

[fhtagn]

Objecting to the final vote motuon.

[thumb21]

Cloture vote

48 hours

[Blair]

aye

[JGibson]

AYE