4 ms·

> Each and every employee law that we enjoy now came as a direct response to some of the abuse that happened in the past. This is an incredibly strong statemen

by vkreso 9y ago

> Each and every employee law that we enjoy now came as a direct response to some of the abuse that happened in the past. This is an incredibly strong statement. Back it up please. Law making is anything but an efficient and optimal, noiseless process. There is quite a lot of legislation constructed simply because of the government responding to pressure groups (worker unions, crony businessmen.....) and legislating their narrow interests for everyone.

graphitezepp 9y ago
I agree that saying ALL employee laws are begat from a direct response to abuse is too strong and probably not literal. Some majority sure, almost definitely, but it would be shocking if there are not any counter examples.
- vkreso 9y ago
  Exactly! Legislation is an extremely noisy process. On a side note, I guess there is also some security against "retrospectively irrational" decision making in that noise as well.. I wonder though if there is any research made on such "externalised legislational costs". I believe it would be an interesting subject! Also a fun fact: a large part of the corpus of modern coomercial law arised "organically" from old fragmented europe using derivated roman law in its interactions. P.s sorry for lot of these " "
privateprofile 9y ago
> This is an incredibly strong statement. Back it up please. "The eight-hour day movement or 40-hour week movement, also known as the short-time movement, was started by James Deb and had its origins in the Industrial Revolution in Britain, where industrial production in large factories transformed working life. The use of child labour was common. The working day could range from 10 to 16 hours for six days a week." in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day A gentle introduction enough to solve basic ignorance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_rights#Labor_Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_rights#Labor_Background You can also look up the fact (and wonder why) that the USA is one of the very few countries in the world that doesn't assure paid vacation time and, right up there with Papua New Guinea and Suriname, is one of the three countries where there's no assured right to parental leave. It appears that societies at large have a "narrow interest" in not working (for breadcrumbs, mostly) from cradle to grave.
- vkreso 9y ago
  I'm not from the USA as I see you've probably presumed, also labour markets and internal politics are vast and different form country to country. You stated very explicitly "Each and every employee law" which I contrasted with a very simple observation of the legislation process. It was my intention to stress that the law making process is anything but direct and is full of noise, corruption and, yes, interest groups with narrow interests. In many countries of the former eastern bloc in Europe, bloated public sector with the backing of public worker unions are efficiently blocking any reform incentive of the governement and the labour market. Qouting a few examples is barking at the wrong tree since I never contrasted that employee law may arise from horrible working conditions. I only gently contrasted the "Each and every" part which is a very strong and, dare I say, ignorant statement.

by vkreso 9y ago

graphitezepp 9y ago

I agree that saying ALL employee laws are begat from a direct response to abuse is too strong and probably not literal. Some majority sure, almost definitely, but it would be shocking if there are not any counter examples.

vkreso 9y ago
Exactly! Legislation is an extremely noisy process. On a side note, I guess there is also some security against "retrospectively irrational" decision making in that noise as well.. I wonder though if there is any research made on such "externalised legislational costs". I believe it would be an interesting subject! Also a fun fact: a large part of the corpus of modern coomercial law arised "organically" from old fragmented europe using derivated roman law in its interactions. P.s sorry for lot of these " "

privateprofile 9y ago

> This is an incredibly strong statement. Back it up please. "The eight-hour day movement or 40-hour week movement, also known as the short-time movement, was started by James Deb and had its origins in the Industrial Revolution in Britain, where industrial production in large factories transformed working life. The use of child labour was common. The working day could range from 10 to 16 hours for six days a week." in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day A gentle introduction enough to solve basic ignorance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_rights#Labor_Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_rights#Labor_Background You can also look up the fact (and wonder why) that the USA is one of the very few countries in the world that doesn't assure paid vacation time and, right up there with Papua New Guinea and Suriname, is one of the three countries where there's no assured right to parental leave. It appears that societies at large have a "narrow interest" in not working (for breadcrumbs, mostly) from cradle to grave.

vkreso 9y ago
I'm not from the USA as I see you've probably presumed, also labour markets and internal politics are vast and different form country to country. You stated very explicitly "Each and every employee law" which I contrasted with a very simple observation of the legislation process. It was my intention to stress that the law making process is anything but direct and is full of noise, corruption and, yes, interest groups with narrow interests. In many countries of the former eastern bloc in Europe, bloated public sector with the backing of public worker unions are efficiently blocking any reform incentive of the governement and the labour market. Qouting a few examples is barking at the wrong tree since I never contrasted that employee law may arise from horrible working conditions. I only gently contrasted the "Each and every" part which is a very strong and, dare I say, ignorant statement.