Le_MythJoin Date: 2010-12-10
Post Count: 290 |
UNITED STATES
CONGRESS
PREAMBLE; For far too long, employers have had the ability to fire the employee at will, if they had a argument or dispute, or if the director generally dislikes them. This act, shall remove the terms’ meaning of “At will Employment” and give employees rights, that of which they should receive.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SENATE UNITED IN CONGRESS;
SECTION I. This Act shall be cited as the “Employees Rights Act”
SECTION II. No employee, shall be fired unless he or she, breaks either U.S. Law, or breaks the rules of the agency.
SECTION III. Each agency, shall inform their employees of any updates to the agencies rules, and give three days notice to all employees on the update before the update takes effect.
SECTION IV. If the agent, informs the director that they are going to be on vacation for an extended amount of time, then they can’t be fired for inactivity. However, if it's longer than a term of vacation, they employee may receive a suspended employment within the agency.
SECTION V. If an agent is ill, and has validation on why they can’t keep their activity up to the agency, then that said agent, shall be granted a vacation till the employee is fit to resume their normal activities, and shall not be fired for inactivity.
SECTION VI. All agents are permitted, two weeks each term, for study/rest bite, for exams. During this period, they may not be fired for inactivity.
__________________________________________________
Written By:
Hon. Mythbusters2000,
Federal Judge. |
|
WhazziJoin Date: 2013-08-12
Post Count: 1078 |
Supported by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Signed,
Director of National Intelligence, Whazzi
|
|
bob561Join Date: 2008-07-30
Post Count: 625 |
Support |
|
|
yas. wish it was here 4 months ago before i got fired from my job for no reason. ;-; |
|
|
|
Abstain until I hear arguments for both sides
|
|
InflyJoin Date: 2014-07-02
Post Count: 5434 |
AYE
|
|
Jeremi_hJoin Date: 2012-10-28
Post Count: 92 |
Aye |
|
SigmaHDJoin Date: 2011-05-06
Post Count: 3328 |
make labor unions1111 |
|
|
soviet510Join Date: 2012-09-17
Post Count: 2705 |
Nay |
|
Disn_IzeJoin Date: 2012-02-12
Post Count: 1700 |
Aye.
This has been a major issue since the creation of NUSA, and it needs to be fixed. I know that the majority of citizens would like this as a law.
Signed,
Disn1245
Speaker Pro Tempore |
|
|
Unless this also applies to directors of sub agencies (Such as POTUS can't do this to directors and Secretaries can't do this to directors, and vice versa) I don't really support this
|
|
|
^ you can't possibly tell the president that he can't fire whoever he wants in the EB; he has total control over the branch
this is for directors/secretaries firing regular citizens
ᗩᘉᓰᗰᗩ☂ᕮↁᗪᗩᘉᘉϒ〇 |
|
|
FluxoidJoin Date: 2012-03-21
Post Count: 19049 |
Nice to see your still around myth. |
|
|
|
Nay some things are common sense I don't feel it is necessary for a director to make a 10 page report on what will get you fired. Needs to be revised
-FBI COS and United States House of Reps |
|
iSightUJoin Date: 2015-03-31
Post Count: 59 |
Aye. |
|
|
"SECTION II. No employee, shall be fired unless he or she, breaks either U.S. Law, or breaks the rules of the agency."
I am going to Nay.
This would allow employers the inability to fire someone if they are completely acting immature, or misrepresenting their agency. Agency rules dont state anything about maturity at all. So they wouldn't be able to do anything about immaturity.
If this section changes, then I'll support. |
|
|
nay until you fix section II
so edgy it fell off the edge |
|
|
umm it says if they break the rules, so if they want to fire you for immaturity then they should have "Do not be immature" written in the guidelines, and then they can legally fire them for immaturity
Section II is fine, you just need to make sure that if you don't want someone to do it then put it in your guidelines
ᗩᘉᓰᗰᗩ☂ᕮↁᗪᗩᘉᘉϒ〇 |
|
|
Aye.
I feel like the fact numerous of employees are fired unlawfully is becoming somewhat of an issue, and that we need to take action. As far as I'm concerned most agencies mention in their guidelines problems such as immaturity, with this said I'm confident this bill will be effective. |
|
BakerleyJoin Date: 2009-10-12
Post Count: 12011 |
"This would allow employers the inability to fire someone if they are completely acting immature, or misrepresenting their agency"
Firing somebody for being "immature" sounds rather draconian to begin with, don't you think? Suspensions are a far more productive and effective way of dealing with problems such as immaturity.
One potential problem I see with this bill is that you haven't defined whether breaking this law is a crime or not. You need to add the maximum sentence length if someone were to commit this action. I recommend a week.
I also don't support section VI. That should be up to the executive branch as a whole to decide. Directors aren't demons - they'll likely allow for somebody to have more than two weeks of safe leave for real life purposes.
One last thing. In section IV, you said "if it's longer than a term of vacation", but you didn't define how long a term of vacation is.
But hey, it's a wonderful idea and if you implement the changes I mentioned, it will really help a lot of people. Good on you for serving the public instead of swindling them. |
|
|
Aye!
We must protect our workers who work to help our country daily.
Jacqueline A. Sharp |
|