World News

39046 readers

2650 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

UK’s new Labour government sets out overhaul of workers’ rights (apnews.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Britain’s new Labour government unveiled Thursday a slew of new rights for workers, including more generous rules for sick pay and parental leave and major restrictions on certain precarious employment practices such as zero-hour contracts and fire and rehire — a move described by ministers as the biggest overhaul of workers’ rights for a generation.

The Employment Rights Bill was published around 100 days after Labour took power for the first time in 14 years following its crushing victory over the Conservative Party in the general election.

The 28 measures have been broadly welcomed by unions and lobby groups representing businesses, though one described it as “clumsy, chaotic and poorly planned.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

one described it as “clumsy, chaotic and poorly planned.” Hmmm, do I detect a hint of bias in the writing at the AP? Why does this need to be included if all but one of the groups seems to 'welcome' it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I got the impression from the summary that "broadly welcomed" may include opinions like "there's a lot of work to do on the implementation front, but this sounds like a step in the right direction", as is common when there's a big and complex problem. Unions are used to being given loads of assurances at the beginning when policies are declared, and then gradually over time, the concessions in a bill get eroded. "Broadly welcomed" could mean that 27 of the unions have sentiments that are roughly 65% positive on this, and 1 of them (the quoted one) is 60% negative. In this case, maybe including a quote from the mostly negative union also captures some of the sentiments of the 35% negatives from the main bulk. If this is the only quote included, it is weird, but I imagine the full article has more perspectives.

Edit: Reading the full article deepened this impression — apparently this is a big enough endeavour that it's expected to be on the drawing board for at least 2 years? Another union (TUC) said that "this bill highlights Labour’s commitment to upgrade rights and protections for millions" — language like "highlights Labour's commitment" is fairly fluffy, which suggests to me an angle of "starting this early in your elected window bodes well for your intentions, hopefully we can keep this up for long enough that we get a practical change"

In addition, the union who gave the negative quote are a small businesses union, and whilst I'm definitely on the side of the workers over businesses, I also think it's important to recognise that legislation like this tends to put a disproportionate burden on small businesses compared to the mega-corporations (who can lobby more and also absorb impacts easier).

This announcement is good news, but Starmer has moved the goalposts on past promises so many times that any optimism I might feel is tempered by a "I'll believe it when I see it". Time will tell, I suppose. !Remindme 2 years (this is a joke, I don't think Lemmy has a RemindMe bot)