<![CDATA[Union Protection Act]]>Union Protection Act

Preamble

An act to protect the integrity, functioning, and power of labor unions.

I. Definitions

I. Labor union - an organization of workers who have come together to further and/or defend their interests.

II. Cartel - a group of independent participants in the economy who collude as to improve profits and/or establish a monopoly

III. Strike - a mass refusal of employees to work, most often a result of grievances.

II. Rights

I. Workers have the right to freely form and join labor unions, excluding cartels which may fall under the provided definition of a labor union.

II. Workers have the right to be able to maintain their employment, their working conditions, and their compensation at the level they were beforehand in the event that they choose to join or form a labor union.

III. Workers have the right to strike without fear of physical reprisal from state actors, employers, or individuals or bodies employed or acting on the behalf of an employer.

IV. Labor unions shall be free of acts of interference by outside actors. Attempts to subjugate labor unions to an employer, employers, or employers' organization(s) in any way, whether direct or indirect and through any means, are considered acts of interference and are thus prohibited, although acts of interference are not limited to these.

V. Workers, within or outside a labor union, have the right to negotiate terms of employment, working conditions, or other aspects of compensation or workers' rights, on an equal basis with their employer or employers within their industry.

VI. The extent to which this applies to the armed forces and to the police is determined by member-states.

VII. In the negotiation described by clause V, workers and employers have the right to recourse to a neutral arbitrator, which must be provided by a member-state if requested.

VIII. Agreements that are a result of negotiation as described in clauses V, VI, and VII must be enforced. If an employer or employers refuses to enforce them, then it is the responsibility of the member-state to enforce them.

IX. Agreements that are a result of negotiation as described in clauses V, VI, and VII may not be changed without the consent of all parties involved.

X. Member-states shall also be compelled to develop institutions as to facilitate voluntary negotiation between workers, both within and outside of labor unions, and employers, both within and outside of their organizations, in general.

XI. Member-states are recommended, but not compelled, to include labor unions or other organizations generally representative of workers, as well as employers and their organizations, in legislative processes involving labor rights and/or conditions.

III. On the Functioning of Labor Unions

I. Workers within a labor union have the right to draw up a constitution or constitution for said unions and rules and regulations governing it without interference.

II. Workers within a labor union have the right to elect representatives within said union without interference.

III. A labor union has the right to go about its activities without interference.

IV. Labor unions have the right to join and establish greater federations and confederations, which themselves shall be recognized as labor unions in their own right.

V. The incorporation of labor unions, and their legal personality in general, shall not be regulated or made subject to regulations that prevent the exercise of the rights given to them or to their members.

VI. Labor unions must respect national law, in such cases where national law does not conflict with the rights given to them, to their members, or to workers in general.

VII. The extent to which this applies to the armed forces and to the police is determined by member-states.

IV. Prohibitions

I. Employers, workers, as well as any state actor, may not prevent or discourage workers from joining or forming a labor union or labor unions in any way.

II. Employers, workers, as well as any state actor, may not take action as to make the negotiation described in article II, clauses V, VI, VII, and X overly difficult to initiate.

This act has the aim to strengthen the labor union, inspired by other existing laws, (OOC: ILO Conventions) which as of present has few protections.

I feel, however, as though it is still in very rudimentary form, and thus invite amendments. If necessary, it will be withdrawn.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/topic/1052/union-protection-actRSS for NodeWed, 08 Apr 2026 12:32:49 GMTThu, 12 Aug 2021 03:37:56 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:03:13 GMT]]>This bill has been withdrawn from consideration.

Donald Tusk
Deputy Speaker and Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11599http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11599Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:03:13 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:59:34 GMT]]>I had planned to introduce some amendments in response to private criticism; without them, it is unlikely that this act will pass. I thus ask that it been withdrawn so that it may be proposed in better form.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11598http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11598Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:59:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:52:56 GMT]]>On behalf of the Six Unions of Gadalland and Aspern, I vote for Amendments I, II, and III.

Edutitalle Dina
European Councillor
Gadalland and Aspern

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11594http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11594Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:52:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:13:07 GMT]]>I vote for ammendments I, II and III
James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11592http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11592Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:13:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:44:27 GMT]]>I think, Councillor Tilkanas, that your explanations have been enough to make Councillors understand what this is about. So, I don't think a second debate extension is needed, addind that we have been discussing over this for nearly a month.

Debate is now over. It is time to vote on amendments. There are FOUR amendments, three of them proposed by Cllr. Tilkanas and the other, proposed by Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe. The amendments are thus:

Amendment I - Proposed by Cllr. Tilkanas

V. Workers, within or outside a labor union, Labor unions have the right to negotiate may not be prohibited from negotiating terms of employment, working conditions, or other aspects of compensation or workers' rights, on an equal basis with their employer or employers within their industry.

Amendment II - Proposed by Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe

*III. On the Functioning of Labor Unions

XII. Any member state shall be able to require a 51%+ vote in favour over a whole company, organisation , department or locations workforce in favour of any strike.

Amendment III - Proposed by Cllr. Tilkanas

III. On the Functioning of Labor Unions

III. A labor union has the right to go about its activities without interference, unless if said activities contradict the law of member states, so long as said laws do not themselves contradict with the rights enumerated in Section I.

Amendment IV - Proposed by Cllr. Tilkanas

II. Rights

XII. Member-states may impose the requirement that strikes must be approved by a simple majority of union membership who would in such a scenario be compelled to strike.

Voting on amendments will commence NOW and will last until 08:35 GMT on September 20th, 2021.

I vote FOR Amendments I, III and IV and AGAINST Amendment II.

Donald Tusk
Deputy Speaker and Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11589http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11589Fri, 17 Sep 2021 07:44:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:52:14 GMT]]>If it were a workplace strike, by my proposed amendment, all unionized workers in the workplace where a strike would be planned would have to be consulted, or could be in a country which mandates it, but none else. A company strike, all workers in that company, and so on and so forth until a general strike. I have tried to keep my wording as precise as possible as to avoid instances where, for example, unions are required to consult an entire organization's membership for a simple workplace strike.

I'm not exactly what this act has to do with crossing strike lines; I have left this up to individual member-states.

I hope that answers your concerns; if it doesn't, I am happy to propose another amendment or explain those I have proposed further.

I would also like to request a second debate extension.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11571http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11571Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:52:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Wed, 15 Sep 2021 17:41:07 GMT]]>I would ask it be of the workplace if they seek it to be a workplace strike since all involved should be consulted . Furthermore I believe that there shouldn't be penalties or threats for crossing strike lines as ones ability to work and cross the strike line should be their personal choice

James Mizrachi-Roscoe , Councillour for United Duchies

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11569http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11569Wed, 15 Sep 2021 17:41:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:36:00 GMT]]>In response to this criticism, let me propose two amendments. I do not see why either of these issues cannot be rectified through amendment. Yes, one has been proposed, but requiring a 51% majority, rather than a simple majority, makes little sense to me.

AMENDMENT III

III. On the Functioning of Labor Unions

I. Workers within a labor union have the right to draw up a constitution or constitution for said unions and rules and regulations governing it without interference.

II. Workers within a labor union have the right to elect representatives within said union without interference.

III. A labor union has the right to go about its activities without interference, unless if said activities contradict the law of member states, so long as said laws do not themselves contradict with the rights enumerated in Section I.

AMENDMENT IV

II. Rights

I. Workers have the right to freely form and join labor unions, excluding cartels which may fall under the provided definition of a labor union.

II. Workers have the right to be able to maintain their employment, their working conditions, and their compensation at the level they were beforehand in the event that they choose to join or form a labor union.

III. Workers have the right to strike without fear of physical reprisal from state actors, employers, or individuals or bodies employed or acting on the behalf of an employer.

IV. Labor unions shall be free of acts of interference by outside actors. Attempts to subjugate labor unions to an employer, employers, or employers' organization(s) in any way, whether direct or indirect and through any means, are considered acts of interference and are thus prohibited, although acts of interference are not limited to these.

V. Workers, within or outside a labor union, have the right to negotiate terms of employment, working conditions, or other aspects of compensation or workers' rights, on an equal basis with their employer or employers within their industry.

VI. The extent to which this applies to the armed forces and to the police is determined by member-states.

VII. In the negotiation described by clause V, workers and employers have the right to recourse to a neutral arbitrator, which must be provided by a member-state if requested.

VIII. Agreements that are a result of negotiation as described in clauses V, VI, and VII must be enforced. If an employer or employers refuses to enforce them, then it is the responsibility of the member-state to enforce them.

IX. Agreements that are a result of negotiation as described in clauses V, VI, and VII may not be changed without the consent of all parties involved.

X. Member-states shall also be compelled to develop institutions as to facilitate voluntary negotiation between workers, both within and outside of labor unions, and employers, both within and outside of their organizations, in general.

XI. Member-states are recommended, but not compelled, to include labor unions or other organizations generally representative of workers, as well as employers and their organizations, in legislative processes involving labor rights and/or conditions.
XII. Member-states may impose the requirement that strikes must be approved by a simple majority of union membership who would in such a scenario be compelled to strike
Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11568http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11568Wed, 15 Sep 2021 16:36:00 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:33:09 GMT]]>I would like to announce, before criticising the proposal Councillor Tilkanas has brought to the chamber, that I will be voting against this act, as I think Labor Unions shouldn't have full freedom to do many things that are actually wrong.

First of all, this act contradicts a Spanish law, which is the appearance of picketers in several situations and that is a criminal offense by saying: "III. A labor union has the right to go about its activities without interference." I can understand that the Councillor proposing this is Party of the European Left aligned, and so they believe all of these things are good for their rights and whatsoever but it is not. Labour Unions should be legal in all countries, that is something we all agree on; but giving them full freedom to do what they want respecting the law unless it conflicts with their rights it's simply building an indestructible shelter for them and leaving enough room for unions and demonstrators to do what they want and not being able to be judged for criminal offenses like picketers.

Apart from that, I agree on what Cllr. Mizrachi-Roscoe said about the vote on strikes, as many times labour unions just go on strike without hearing what their members have to say, which makes their members go on strike but at the same time, losing money because of social pressure. And that, Councillor Tilkanas, happens even if you and your certainties don't think so.

Thank you very much.

Donald Tusk
Deputy Speaker and Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11567http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11567Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:33:09 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Wed, 15 Sep 2021 07:09:21 GMT]]>On rights for balance between power and responsibility may I suggest the following addition:
XII:Any member state shall be able to require a 51%+ vote in favour over a whole company, organisation , department or locations workforce in favour of any strike.

I support the right to strike but it must be democratically decided and supported by a majority.

James Mizrachi-Roscoe, Councillour for United Duchies

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11565http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11565Wed, 15 Sep 2021 07:09:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Tue, 14 Sep 2021 08:07:41 GMT]]>As this debate is not getting the attention it deserves, and after the request from Councillor Tilkanas, I shall extend the debate.

Debate will be extended for 48 hours, until 08:59 GMT on September 16th, 2021.

Donald Tusk
Deputy Speaker and Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11559http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11559Tue, 14 Sep 2021 08:07:41 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Thu, 09 Sep 2021 03:18:57 GMT]]>I would like to request a debate extension, ahead of time, of course, as I myself am unable to adequately address concerns in the time allotted, as well as because debate on what appears to be a very controversial act appears to be nonexistent.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11536http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11536Thu, 09 Sep 2021 03:18:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Tue, 07 Sep 2021 17:26:45 GMT]]>Debate on this shall CONTINUE until 18:18 GMT on September 10th, 2021.

Donald Tusk
Deputy Speaker and Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11532http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11532Tue, 07 Sep 2021 17:26:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Tue, 07 Sep 2021 13:00:04 GMT]]>Firstly: could we see the Council Speaker actually beginning proceedings?

Secondly: does anyone have continued objections? I'm sure they do, and again, I am completely open to amendments.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11531http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11531Tue, 07 Sep 2021 13:00:04 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Mon, 30 Aug 2021 03:05:15 GMT]]>Councillor Mizrachi-Roscoe, I would first like to say that I am a woman. I am not insulted by your mistake, and I understand it; but in the future, please address me as Ms, if it is possible.

Moving on to more important matters, however, Councillor Mizrachi-Roscoe, this act would not prohibit company or state-owned unions. It would not, in fact, in any way, how unions are owned; merely how they are controlled. They must be fully autonomous, fully under the control of their members; that is all.

I do see a problem with the clause you have mentioned, however. It was meant to prohibit the prohibition of collective bargaining; but it is now obvious to me that it would not accomplish this. I thus propose the following amendment:

AMENDMENT I

V. Workers, within or outside a labor union, Labor unions have the right to negotiate may not be prohibited from negotiating terms of employment, working conditions, or other aspects of compensation or workers' rights, on an equal basis with their employer or employers within their industry.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11501http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11501Mon, 30 Aug 2021 03:05:15 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Union Protection Act on Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:51:37 GMT]]>I would like to ask the right honourable Mr Tilkanas a question. Where does this act stand on having company unions that are controlled by workers and sector specific unions mandated by the state that every person in the sector has to be a part of? This would affect United Duchies greatly as every person has to be a part of some union by law and the union the employer uses but that company cannot interfere with worker control of said union and welfare organisation , I fear this act may ban that and therefore be a problem. I certainly wouldn't want to affect the right for companies to organise company unions for their employees mandating all have to be a part as is the case in my own company Roscoes.

Also what does this mean "V. Workers, within or outside a labor union, have the right to negotiate terms of employment, working conditions, or other aspects of compensation or workers' rights, on an equal basis with their employer or employers within their industry." I believe the employer should be able to set compensation and basic terms via its job advertisement and spec , in terms of Roscoes there is no individual negotiation for example as we negotiate at national employee union level for most jobs.I am concerned this would prohibit sector wide or company to union bargaining agreements as it is written at the moment.

James Mizrachi-Roscoe , Councillour for United Duchies

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11481http://165.22.228.80:80/post/11481Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:51:37 GMT