Changing Democracy at Work
Who’s a lawyer? Could a law passed in Florida be made forcefully recognized in Kansas?
Seems like that would be the decision of the Kansas citizens to adopt that law, right? Then it wouldn’t be consider a forced recognition.
I’ve read the reactions to President Bush’s June 3rd radio address on several blogs and I can’t believe this is/was an issue in the U.S. I then read the white house’s transcripts to Bush’s address and yep, it’s religiously charged and probably motivated by party promise, but that’s what the majority voted for.
Even though I believe our government should have more pressing events and issues to consider, these arguments signal a change in our social chemistry. This change should be acknowledged and if all possible nurtured. Just like in 1948, California’s state Supreme Court’s struck down California’s law against interracial marriage. What’s wrong with redefining our laws to fit the needs of our current-day culture? Maybe same-sex marriages could be the next step to “stabilizing our society” by defusing prejudices between our citizens.
According to Bush:
“The Defense of Marriage Act declares that no state is required to accept another state’s definition of marriage.”
Under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, all governmental powers not granted to the United States Federal Government by the Constitution are reserved for the states. But not one state government has power over another state government so why is this proposed amendment even legislatively necessary?
I can appreciate Bush’s appeal to promote the welfare of children and the stability of society. But the definition of a family unit has so greatly changed over the last 50 years that sometimes we can’t always refer to the “Ages of Experience” for guidance in protecting the interests of all.
Strikes across Germany & working hours
I don’t understand anything about trade or labor unions. But they seem to be making waves in Germany. So guess what? time to hit the books, papers, and internet…
Doctors & garbage men are striking across the country. Our garbage wasn’t picked up last week b/c of snow but I’m not sure if we’ll have to store our garbage on the balcony in the coming weeks. Apparently, the German blue collar workers are not fighting for more money; they’re against plans to require some state/city employees to work 40 hrs/week instead of the current 38.5 hrs. As ‘Der Spiegel’ magazine puts it: “it’s a labor battle over a mere 18 minutes extra a day — or two extra weeks of work a year without pay, depending on which side you’re on, of course.”
The history is, around 1998, a 35-hour work week as implemented across Europe in order to avoid mass lay-offs. And now, b/c of falling profits from high labor costs, employers want workers to put in 7 hrs more a week — without extra compensation.
Labor unions say the “established rights” of employees are being challenged. But that’s just it. It’s extremely difficult to fire people who have become both complacent over the years and still enjoy a reasonable pay increase every year without increasing their responsibility or contributions to the job. Therefore, it’s impossible to hire the go-getters. Should there be “established rights” in a world driving by an ever-changing economy?
So, is it fair to increase the work hours?
The goverment-run public services are desperate. They have no money to pay their employees b/c they can’t collect enough taxes. People are unwilling to work for less money or loose vacation time. They spend less & save more. Although this seems to be a good idea individually, it seems suicide for a country.
I am not sure that increasing work hours will save the government money b/c they won’t get more from their workers in that time. According to this study, an avg US worker needs to work a mere 11 hrs/wk to produce as much as one working 40 hrs/wk in 1950. By today’s standards, the number of hours needed to produce the 1990 worker’s output has gone from 32 to 29. Companies are not just paying for the labor; but also the energy (electricity, gasoline) cost to keep people in these jobs and the higher risk over people getting injured while at work.
On another note, another study in 1998 found that those who work fewer than 7 hrs/day are 3x more likely to suffer a heart attack compared to people who work an average of 7 to 9 hrs/day. However, the risk is 2.5x greater for those who work more than 11 hrs/day.
I wouldn’t mind working 4 hrs/day and working the other 4 on something else 
