[fosscomm] small step for ITEC; giant leap for IT employees

[Raj Mathur ( राज =?utf-8?b?IOCkruCkvuCkpeClgeCksA==?=)]

On Friday 16 Mar 2012, Andrew Lynn wrote:
> [snip]
> (b) Work with local community of employee and employer, so as to
> ensure fundamental security for the employees. This is where labour
> rights come in. No need for policing.

Fully agreed with all the points you have made.  However, you are 
missing one important difference between the original issue and your 
proposed solution: communities choosing to enhance their own security 
are doing precisely that: choosing.  There had not been any fiat from on 
top forcing them them enhance their security.

As a member of a community I can opt to mobilise my neighbours to set up 
neighbourhood watch schemes.  As a resident, I can choose to live in an 
area that has such schemes active.  Or not, as the case may be.  The 
success or otherwise of the government in protecting me is for me to 
decide, and the amount of time, effort and money I'm willing to put into 
extra protection is also purely up to me.

Similarly, whether organisations choose to provide extra security and/or 
transport for their employees (whether male or female) ought to be a 
matter for the organisation to decide.  Workers would then have a choice 
as to whether or not they wish to join such organisations.  If the need 
for extra security is great enough, organisations that do not provide 
such facilities will automatically find themselves short of 
appropriately skilled workers, and either change their policies or 
change their line of business.

However, what we are talking about here is a government directive 
forcing extra security for a certain segment of society.  This sends out 
three messages that a government must not be guilty of under any 
circumstances:

- A condescending and paternalistic (I know what's good for you) 
attitude.

- An admission of failure in fulfilling its primary objective (security 
for citizens).

- Reservations translating into restrictions for s specific segment of 
society (You must provide transport, ergo if you can't provide transport 
you must not hire women to do certain jobs).

The key out here is a voluntary social consciousness as opposed to a 
diktat mandating a sham of social consciousness.

Regards,

-- Raj
-- 
Raj Mathur                          || raju at kandalaya.org   || GPG:
http://otheronepercent.blogspot.com || http://kandalaya.org || CC68
It is the mind that moves           || http://schizoid.in   || D17F