#but it's work and is regulated as such including under health and safety laws

[setnet]

sex work was decriminalised in NZ in 2003. Afaik NZPC/nz sex workers collective is not formally a union but it provides similar services in terms of advocacy legal and practical advice and representation and its made up almost entirely of current or former sex workers.

The NZPC were big advocates for the decriminalisation and have a lot of research about its effects - their website is well worth a look:

if sex work was legal the workers could unionize

[sayruq]

The Malawi government has finally spoken out on the arrest of Malawian farm workers in Israel, clarifying that 12 out of 40 individuals detained are from the country. According to Minister of Information Moses Kunkuyu, the 40 individuals, representing 13 nationalities, were arrested for leaving their designated work stations and seeking employment in town without proper authorization. Kunkuyu revealed that the group, including the 12 Malawians, had abandoned their farm work to seek jobs at a bakery in Bnei Brak, violating Israel’s labor laws and regulations.

Malawi and Israel signed a labor export deal in 2022, allowing Malawi to send unskilled laborers to Israel to work in various sectors, including agriculture and construction. The deal aimed to generate more foreign exchange revenue for Malawi and provide employment opportunities for its citizens. Under the deal, Malawian workers are expected to work in Israel for a maximum of 5 years, with a minimum salary of $1,500 per month. The deal also includes provisions for workers’ safety, health insurance, and protection from exploitation. However, the deal has faced criticism and controversy, with some opposition politicians and human rights organizations expressing concerns about the secrecy surrounding the deal and the potential risks to workers’ safety.

The arrest of the Malawian workers has raised concerns about the treatment of foreign workers in Israel and the effectiveness of the labor deal in protecting their rights. Human rights organizations have called on the Malawian government to take action to ensure the safe return of the detained workers and to review the labor deal to prevent similar incidents in the future. The incident has also sparked debate about the benefits and risks of labor export deals and the need for greater transparency and accountability in such agreements.

The mistreatment of foreign workers in Israel is well documented and would explain why the 45 workers escaped the farm to look for work elsewhere

[queerpunktomatoes]

Project 2025 for the Conservatives in Your Life

Look, I know we can't get everyone to vote blue. But all we have to do is create genuine doubt. Someone who opts out of voting instead of voting for Trump is still a win.

From the mouth of Trump's team themselves, here are some policies from Project 2025 that even conservatives raise their eyes at.

Page 97 "Senior acquisition leaders should design a system that allows decision-makers to stay within the law but bypass unnecessary departmental regulations that are not in the best interest of the government and hamper the acquisition of capabilities that warfighters require." Translation: Reduce workplace safety regulations in the interest of making more money.

Page 285 "The department [of education] is a convenient one-stop shop for the woke education cartel, which—as the COVID era showed—is not particularly concerned with children’s education. Schools should be responsive to parents, rather than to leftist advocates intent on indoctrination—and the more the federal government is involved in education, the less responsive to parents the public schools will be. This department is an example of federal intrusion into a traditionally state and local realm. For the sake of American children, Congress should shutter it and return control of education to the states." Translation: The Department of Education should be eliminated.

Page 320-322 "In July of that year, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964, after Congress reached a consensus that the mistreatment of [B]lack Americans was no longer tolerable and merited a federal response... In 1973, [Congress] passed the Rehabilitation Act, and, in 1975, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act... The next Administration will need a plan to redistribute the various congressionally approved federal education programs across the government, eliminate those that are ineffective or duplicative, and then eliminate the unproductive red tape and rules by entrusting states and districts with flexible, formula-driven block grants." Translation: Repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Page 372 "The U.S. nuclear arsenal needs to be updated and reinvigorated... Fund the design, development, and deployment of new nuclear warheads, including the production of plutonium pits in quantity. Expand the U.S. Navy and develop new nuclear naval reactors to ensure that the Navy has the nuclear propulsion it needs to secure America’s strategic interests. End ineffective and counterproductive nonproliferation activities like those involving Iran and the United Nations." Translation: Withdraw from "let's not use nuclear weapons" agreements, build more nuclear weapons, and resume nuclear weapons testing.

Page 482 "Eliminate the Head Start program." Translation: Remove free education/health programs for low-income families.

Page 524 "Rescind the Biden rules and reinstate the Trump rules regarding... The Endangered Species Act rules defining Critical Habitat and Critical Habitat Exclusions."Translation: Remove protections for endangered animals.

Page 587 "The Working Families Flexibility Act would allow employees in the private sector the ability to choose between receiving time-and-a-half pay or accumulating time-and-a-half paid time off." Translation: Employers are not required to pay extra for overtime.

Page 664 "The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories." Translation: Americans should not get free extreme weather warnings. We should have to pay for it, and watch commercials between segments.

Remember, quality over quantity.

Only use the talking points you think will really stick with that conservative person. We do not want to give them more reasons to support Trump.

For example, do not tell a conservative homeschool mother that Trump wants to get rid of the Department of Education. It will backfire.

And importantly, Trump is lying about not endorsing Project 2025. His press secretary stars in the recruitment ads and he is mentioned over 300 times by name in it.

Learn this stuff so you can back your arguments and talk to the conservatives in your life about what their vote might contribute to.

[autisticadvocacy]

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) condemns the United States Supreme Court ruling on two combined cases, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce. The decision overturns a decades-old legal principle known as the Chevron Doctrine, which gives federal agencies the authority to reasonably interpret ambiguous laws when they create federal regulations. These regulations are made legally binding through a rulemaking process that is shaped by the public servants within federal agencies, the input of subject area experts across fields, and anyone who chooses to share their opinion. Instead, federal courts will now have the final say in circumstances where knowledge of highly specialized, complex, and technical issues is required. This ruling will weaken the regulatory authority of all federal agencies, including the Departments of Labor (DOL), Education (ED), Health and Human Services (HHS), the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Federal agencies create regulations or rules that fill in the gaps of laws intended to protect disability rights, civil rights laws, housing, healthcare, and more. The overturning of Chevron and the deference it gives to the courts will have devastating impacts on all marginalized people, including disabled people and particularly disabled people of color. Often, these rules concern subjects well outside of the scope of legal training, including, as Marissa Ditkowsky noted, drug safety evidentiary standards, eligibility criteria for public benefits, the threshold for disability discrimination, or guidance around worker protections. This change will lead to inconsistent and conflicting adjudication across the country, driving avoidable litigation, confusion, and decisions that do not work well for the people they affect. These harms will fall disproportionately on marginalized people, including the disability community. As the American Cancer Society explained in its amicus brief, “The resulting uncertainty would be extraordinarily destabilizing, not just to the Medicare and Medicaid programs but also – given the size of these programs – to the operational and financial stability of the country’s health care system as a whole.” The same can be said for programs within DOL, ED, SSA, and many other federal agencies. This decision is also undemocratic, moving crucial decisions out of a process where the public has an opportunity to weigh in and into the purview of the courts.

This decision invites challenges to the forty years of legal precedents relying on Chevron. While these cases and the existing Code of Federal Regulations are not automatically overturned by Loper and Relentless, many will be challenged in the months and years to come. Future regulations are also under threat. Agencies may be less ambitious in fulfilling their mandates, protecting the public, and using taxpayers’ resources well in the face of increased risk that courts will undo their work. The endangered regulations include the Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) Settings Rule, the final rule implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the final rule implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments, and the final rule regarding section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

ASAN echoes the demands of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT): “Congress should urgently enact Chevron deference into law by passing the Stop Corporate Capture Act (H.R. 1507), a comprehensive blueprint for modernizing, improving and strengthening the regulatory system. That would ensure public input into regulatory decisions, promote scientific integrity and restore our government’s ability to help the workers and consumers it is meant to serve.”

ASAN will fight to safeguard federal agencies’ ability to protect the people we serve. We will continue to do what we always have: defend the rights, health, services, safety, and well-being of all people with disabilities.

Here are statements on this issue from our allies:

Democracy Forward

National Health Law Program (NHeLP)

National Education Association (NEA)

American Federation of Teachers (AFT)

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) is a national grassroots disability rights organization run by and for autistic people. We believe that the goal of autism advocacy should be a world in which autistic people enjoy equal access, rights, and opportunities. ASAN works to make sure autistic people are included in policy-making, so that laws and policies meet our community’s needs. Our members and supporters include autistic adults and youth, cross-disability advocates, and non-autistic family members, professionals, educators, and friends.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Robert Reich's Substack:

Friends, For years, conservatives have railed against what they call the “administrative state” and denounced regulations. But let’s be clear. When they speak of the “administrative state,” they’re talking about agencies tasked with protecting the public from corporations that seek profits at the expense of the health, safety, and pocketbooks of average Americans. Regulations are the means by which agencies translate broad legal mandates into practical guardrails. Substitute the word “protection” for “regulation” and you get a more accurate picture of who has benefited — consumers, workers, and average people needing clean air and clean water. Substitute “corporate legal movement” for the “conservative legal movement” and you see who’s really mobilizing, and for what purpose.

**

[...] Last week, the Supreme Court made it much harder for the FTC, the Labor Department, and dozens of other agencies — ranging from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Food and Drug Administration, Securities and Exchange Commission, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and National Highway and Safety Administration — to protect Americans from corporate misconduct.

On Thursday, the six Republican-appointed justices eliminated the ability of these agencies to enforce their rules through in-house tribunals, rather than go through the far more costly and laborious process of suing corporations in federal courts before juries. On Friday, the justices overturned a 40-year-old precedent requiring courts to defer to the expertise of these agencies in interpreting the law, thereby opening the agencies to countless corporate lawsuits alleging that Congress did not authorize the agencies to go after specific corporate wrongdoing. In recent years, the court’s majority has also made it easier for corporations to sue agencies and get public protections overturned. The so-called “major questions doctrine” holds that judges should nullify regulations that have a significant impact on corporate profits if Congress was not sufficiently clear in authorizing them.

[...] In 1971, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, then a modest business group in Washington, D.C., asked Lewis Powell, then an attorney in Richmond, Virginia, to recommend actions corporations should take in response to the rising tide of public protections (that is, regulations). Powell’s memo — distributed widely to Chamber members — said corporations were “under broad attack” from consumer, labor, and environmental groups. In reality, these groups were doing nothing more than enforcing the implicit social contract that had emerged at the end of World War II, ensuring that corporations be responsive to all their stakeholders — not just shareholders but also their workers, consumers, and the environment.

[...] The so-called “conservative legal movement” of young lawyers who came of age working for Ronald Reagan — including Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — were in reality part of this corporate legal movement. And they still are. Trump’s three appointments to the Supreme Court emerged from the same corporate legal movement. The next victory of the corporate legal movement will occur if and when the Supreme Court accepts a broad interpretation of the so-called “non-delegation doctrine.” Under this theory of the Constitution, the courts should not uphold any regulation in which Congress has delegated its lawmaking authority to agencies charged with protecting the public. If accepted by the court, this would mark the end of all regulations — that is, all public protections not expressly contained in statutes — and the final triumph of Lewis Powell’s vision.

Robert Reich wrote an interesting Substack piece on the history of the right-wing war on regulatory power that began with the infamous Powell Memo by Lewis Powell, and culminated with the recent Loper Bright Enterprises, Jarkesy, and Trump rulings.

[mariacallous]

After passing the Senate nearly unanimously last week, the future of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) appears uncertain. Congress is now on a six-week recess, and reporting from Punchbowl News indicates that the House Republican leadership may not prioritize bringing the bill to the floor for a vote when legislators return.

In response to Punchbowl’s reporting, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer released a statement saying, “Just one week ago, Speaker Johnson said that he’d like to get KOSA done. I hope that hasn’t changed. Letting KOSA and [the Children and Teens’ Online Protection Act] collect dust in the House would be an awful mistake and a gut punch—a gut punch to these brave, wonderful parents who have worked so hard to reach this point.” The bill has also received support from vice president and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris.

But the bill created a massive divide among the digital rights and tech accountability community. If passed, the legislation would require online platforms to block users under 18 from seeing certain types of content that the government considers harmful.

Proponents of the measure, which included the Tech Oversight Project, an nonprofit focused on tech accountability through antitrust legislation, saw the bill as a meaningful step toward holding tech companies accountable for the way their products impact children.

“Too many young people, parents, and families have experienced the dire consequences that result from social media companies’ greed,” said Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, in a statement in June. “The accountability KOSA would provide for these families is long overdue.”

Others, like the nonprofit digital rights organization the Center for Technology and Democracy, said that, if enacted, the law could be used to prevent young users from accessing critical information about topics like sexual health and LGBTQ+ issues. This meant that some organizations that regularly lobby to hold Silicon Valley accountable found themselves siding with tech companies and their lobbyists in trying to kill the bill.

“KOSA is not ready for a floor vote,” said Aliya Bhatia, policy analyst with the Center for Technology and Democracy’s Free Expression Project, in a statement in July. “In its current form, KOSA can still be misused to target marginalized communities and politically sensitive information.”

Evan Greer, director of the nonprofit advocacy group Fight for the Future, which opposed the bill, tells WIRED that KOSA and legislation like it “divides our coalition” while allowing tech companies to “keep getting away with murder and avoiding regulation.”

“This was never really about protecting kids,” Greer says. “It was sort of about lawmakers wanting to say that they’re protecting kids, and that doesn’t actually help kids.” Instead of legislators focusing on the “flawed” legislation, Greer says that Congress could have spent that same time and energy on antitrust-focused legislation like the American Innovation and Choice Online and the Open App Markets Act, or on the American Privacy Rights Act.

“When our coalition is divided in fighting each other, we’re going to get rolled every time by Big Tech,” she says.

Meanwhile, Linda Yaccarino, CEO of X, has said that she supports KOSA, as has the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a tech accountability nonprofit that was sued by X last year for exposing hate speech on its platform.

Although the House Republican leadership’s decision may signal the beginning of the end of KOSA itself, Gautam Hans, an associate law professor at Cornell University, says that “given the bipartisan interest in enacting this law, I suspect other proposals will follow—with hopefully more extensive safeguards against potential censorship by the state.”

[ukrfeminism]

Pornography creators, law enforcement, parents and the public asked for views as government investigates impact of pornography

views to be collected on impact of emerging tech, such as AI and virtual reality, on pornography

results will inform independent Pornography Review that will cover harm caused to sexual relationships and violence against women in wider society

Law enforcers, pornography makers, parents and the public are being asked to help shape the future of pornography regulation in the UK from today (Thursday 11 January) as the government launches a wide-ranging call for evidence as part of its review of the pornography industry.

The questionnaire, which closes on Thursday 7 March will collect evidence on the impact of pornographic content on relationships, sexual behaviours, mental health and people’s views of women and girls.

This exercise will provide independent Lead Reviewer Baroness Bertin with evidence that represents the views of those in the industry itself and the public, which will be used to develop recommendations for the government to undertake.

The substantial impact that new technologies have had on the pornography industry will also be covered, with respondents asked for their thoughts on how AI and virtual reality have changed how pornography is made, accessed and viewed, as well as how this impacts viewers and the industry.

Law enforcement and the criminal justice system will have an opportunity to raise what challenges face them in identifying and tackling these issues in pornography – as well as giving the industry an opportunity to set out what it is doing to tackle them more effectively.

Lead Reviewer Baroness Bertin said:

Throughout this review, it is essential we engage directly with those who are most involved in the pornography industry and accurately establish what the general public thinks of the current rules governing pornography. We want to hear from a wide range of views, whether it be a worried parent, those enforcing the laws to stop exploitation or someone directing or performing in pornography themselves, to speak up and support our review. Extreme pornography can have a damaging impact - we owe it to our children and indeed to the whole of society to put the guard rails back in place. This review will help us fully understand what we must now do to protect those most affected as well as future proofing the law to keep pace with an ever-evolving pornography industry.

Minister for Tech and the Digital Economy Saqib Bhatti said:

The Pornography Review will be key to informing what we do next to tackle any harmful impact the industry may have on those working within it, or society at large. The invaluable evidence the public, experts and industry provide will be integral to what Baroness Bertin recommends later this year.

Ian Critchley, QPM, National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for Child Abuse and Investigation said:

I very much welcome this government commissioned review led by Baroness Bertin. It is one that is essential in tackling harmful sexual behaviours. This is in addition to the whole scale use of smart devices by teenagers and now under 10s, which gives them increased access to harmful material including violent pornography and indecent images of children. The Online Safety Act is one of the most important pieces of legislation for a generation and it will help us to improve the safety of children and young people. In tandem with this review will provide a greater evidence base allowing us to better understand the impact violent pornography is having on the behaviour of young people and adults who continue to pose the greatest risk of harm to children. It will then ensure we can work together across agencies to prevent what has become normalised behaviour which is causing some of the greatest harm often with lifelong consequences.

The Pornography Review, announced last year, builds on the government’s work to take the long-term decisions for a better future for our children and grandchildren through the Online Safety Act, by stopping children from accessing pornography online by requiring services to establish the age of their users, including through age verification and age estimation tools.

Read the pornography regulation, legislation and enforcement call for evidence here.

[tomorrowusa]

The Biden administration has established the first ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. It's met with approval from anti-violence activists.

Speaking in front of gun violence survivors, activists, and lawmakers, President Joe Biden on Friday announced a new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, an effort he promised would “centralize, accelerate, and intensify” the federal government’s efforts to combat gun violence. “After every mass shooting, we hear a very simple message ... do something,” Biden said in the White House Rose Garden. “My administration has been working tirelessly to do something,” Biden added, pointing to executive actions his administration had taken on ghost guns and gun trafficking, as well as the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, landmark legislation that became law in 2022. The new office, according to Biden, is one more attempt to answer that call, helping, for example, to “coordinate support for survivors, families, and communities affected by gun violence,” an effort that he said would be similar to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the government’s on-the-ground emergency response team. The office will also seek to identify more executive actions the president can take. Biden noted that he would continue to urge Congress to take legislative action on banning assault weapons and implementing universal background checks. Until then, he said the White House and activists will move forward with or without them.

The establishment of this office is not dependent on Congressional approval. House Republicans are probably too busy trying to shut down the government while seeking new ways to humiliate Speaker McCarthy.

Stefanie Feldman, an aide to President Biden who’s been working on gun safety policy with him for over a decade, will be the director of the new office. In an interview with Vox, she said that the office is meant to implement the laws and policies passed during Biden’s tenure, including the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and the president’s executive actions on gun violence. [ ... ] Currently, multiple government agencies are involved in efforts to reduce gun violence, including the Department of Justice, which gives grants to communities working to prevent gun violence; the Department of Health and Human Services, which funds research studying gun violence as a health epidemic; the FBI, which runs criminal background checks; and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which enforces national gun laws and regulates firearms sales. The White House, its gun reform allies in Congress, and advocates have been coordinating with one another for years. This office puts all of those efforts under one roof, with a dedicated leadership team inside the executive branch.

David Hogg, a Parkland shooting survivor and co-founder of March For Our Lives, has been calling for such an office.

[thequietmanno1]

TheLreads, Vigilantes ch 90, Replies Part 1

“Now, what was happening on Vigilantes- Oh yeah, blatant fuckery in the wordlbuilding department, the usual, then Number 5 showed up to the party.”- Number Hood just wanted to get in on the fighting action with the rest of the battle junkies.

2) “Ah, upstairs, in the picnic the police squad set up. Glad to see they are having fun frolicking around while everybody dies downstairs.”- There is some merit to be made that the Police become a bit too complacent in the heyday of All Might’s era, what with him running about all over the place doing their jobs tenfold before they could lift a finger. Still, some little more pro-active measures on their behalf would have been appreciated.  

3) “Yeah guys, what you think we are? law enforcers? Fuck that, let the pro hero handle it, he was the one that asked for in the first place. God knows why so many cops were needed for that.”-  If nothing else, I’d love to see a cop drama set in MHA’s world, with a young rookie wanting to be a good outstanding and efficient officer in the line of duty, dealing with a cynical mentor and the actions of heroes always bursting in and taking the credit, as he tried to work his way through the complicated system 4) “IS THAT WEED? NOW ITS TIME FOR THE POLICE TO ACT

LEAVE NO SURVIVORS, ANYBODY WITH RED EYES NEED TO BE EXTERMINATED WITH MAXIMUM FORCE POSSIBLE

you know, like in `murica”- AFO getting people hooked on drugs and illegal narcotics young, whether they want to or not. Truly, the most villainous evil that ever existed.

5) “Alright now, Furuhashi, you got the three best characters to be stuck working together, you absolutely must make sure to put them to good use, you got that?”- How about matching them up against the early-model version of one of the most interesting Nomus we’ve yet seen? That’d be a fight I’d pay to watch.

6) “Huh, I don’t know, this just looks like a normal punk rave to me, nothing out of the ordinary here alright”- 7) “And once again, we are faced with a place that is not up the fire safety regulations, smh… Although, unlike the sky egg, this one is deliberate, still I want to see AfO explaining that to the safety inspector.”- He probably happily outlined to him all the health and safety violations he’d deliberately included in the building because he wanted to make it as unsafe as possible for others to hurt themselves on for his idle amusement, before he stole his Quirk and killed him/repurposed the body for “materials”.

8) “I want to know where they kept those masks, because they are a bit too big to keep hidden under their clothes without gathering some unwanted attention.”- They pulled them straight from the plot hole dimension….assuming AFO didn’t have said gas masks stored in boxes over to the side somewhere. They are standing in front of a shelving rack, after all. 9) “Oh perish that thought Knuckles! Goodness gracious, what sort of lowly scallywag would ever dare to commit such acts?”- AFO is the type of man to commit all action of villainy, from dastardly, all the way down to just plain dick. 10) “Good thing you don’t expend a lot of oxygen while using your quirk and thus need to be constantly breathing in, even whilst inside a cloud of drug-laced gas, right Knuckles?”- Knuckles probably trained himself like a deep-sea diver, finding ways to ensure maximum lung capacity if he was ever in an environment where breathable oxygen was getting into short supply, to maximise his speed bursts 11) “GUNKLEDUSTER STRIKES AGAIN

WHY THE FUCK WOULD THE STAFF HAVE A FAKE GUN INSTEAD OF A REAL ONE? OR EVEN SOME TRANQUILIZER WEAPONS? YOU GUYS THINK A PROP WILL DEFUSE TROUBLE? THOSE GUYS WILL EAT YOU ALIVE, EVEN MORE WHEN THEY SEE THE GUN IS FAKE”- I can see AFO issuing unloaded firearms to his security staff just for the Lulz when they try to bring them to bear and find out they’re empty in a crisis situation.

12) “again, you guys think that those batons would stop a stampede of desperate brutes? you twinks there would be snapped in half, and not even the furry guy there would be able to stand there.

Just bring the heavy weaponry, nobody is gonna complain, the police is too busy making flower crowns for each other.”- Again, AFO wouldn’t want any good Quirks getting killed off by a heavy shot before he was ready to stealthily steal them in the chaos. These guys are here to look intimidating and act as a big distraction whilst he moves in the shadows doing what he wants, so if the sight of them brings the rioters up short just for a second, that’s long enough for him.

13) “Oh, really heroic of you Knuckles… Can you imagine if something had happened to them? You could kiss your hero license bye-bye, well, that is, four years before it actually happened I mean.”-  Knuckles already knows them well enough to know that A), they’re simple-minded and like a simple plan, B) they got no issues risking themselves, and C) they wanna fight. So let them fight.

14) “Wait, you are gonna give the signal? Wouldn’t be better for them to give a signal if they are in trouble? Knuckles I’m starting to think they are not just bait, but meat for the grinder.”- That’s assuming either of them can see danger and not go “awesome! I’mma fight that!”

15) “You guys need to ask? You know that kicking ass is not optional here. Go nuts, show those fuckers who’s the alpha team.”- Well, it is technically optional…as in, Rappa and Mirko are split over whether kicking or punching ass is better to proceed with.

16) “Bullshit Knuckles, and you know it. And you Rappa, keep quiet, Mirko got the gist of it, she just needs to promise that she won’t kill anyone and then kick people so hard their vertebrae pop out through their mouth like they are pez dispensers”- Arguably the main difference between them. Mirko knows when to play along before she can cut loose once she’s gained permission, whereas Rappa’s just too upfront and is entirely honest about his desire to fight to the death. Weird seeing the hero being the deceitful one, honestly.

17) “There go my two kids, they are always so happy when they are curb-stomping people into a mush…”- The joys of simple violence. Poetry in motion, to the chorus of breaking bones.

18) “Oh don’t worry Knuckles, they have no need for help. You should worry about who’s going to pay the medical bills of the people they are beating up tho, you said yourself they are ~civilians dosed without consent~”- I presume Knuckles made the police foot the bill, since they’ve contributed pretty much nothing else to this raid.

19) “THAT’S RIGHT GUNKLE! SHOT AT AfO THROUGH THE PORTAL, I THINK NOBODY ACTUALLY BOTHERED TO CHECK IF A HEADSHOT WOULDN’T SOLVE ALL THOSE PROBLEMS, WE DON’T KNOW IF HE ALREADY HAD THE ANTI-HEAD-CRUSHING MEASURE READY BY THEN”- Him still possessing his facial features is a sign that he still doesn’t have Hyper Regeneration specifically but from what we see of Hood, he’s already working on a pseudo-means of being able to heal injuries, presumably with the final product intended for his own use, but this research didn’t proceed far enough until All Might finally caught up to him and crushed his dreams along with his face. From what I can tell, it doesn’t seem to be that Hood is specifically ‘healing’ himself, but rather ‘fixing’ himself, using his unique construction as a modded human, rather than a healing Quirk outright, hence why AFO can’t exactly steal it if it comes down to the way his body’s been rebuilt rather than a power he’s using.  

20) “oh wow, a prop gun you said? Thank fuck they didn’t bothered to get a real one then, it would probably have the wield of a fucking nuclear weapon.”- I fully believe that Knuckles is the kind of guy to keep a few bullets on him in reserve in case he ever needs to shoot somebody, even if he doesn’t always bring an accompanying gun.

21) “HEEEY- THERE WE HAVE IT, OUR FIRST LOOK AT PRE-POTATO AfO, AND HE IMMEDIATELY GOES D:  HILARIOUS “- Honestly, it’s just nice to see something other than ‘smug satisfaction’ on his mug for once, even if it is only a minor victory at best.

@thelreads

[conniejoworld]

LETTERS These are our thoughts Re: “Our classes are full of life, learning — not hate,” by Tyra Damm, May 6 column. Thank you, Tyra Damm, for speaking truth to power. How refreshing to read this column. She clearly and succinctly communicated the thoughts of many of us who have worked in public schools. “There is no time or proclivity for hate. There is no hidden agenda, woke or otherwise.” For obvious reasons of political expediency, our public schools have come under the Republican gun (purposeful choice of words). Public school employees who bravely persisted through a pandemic now suffer harmful rhetoric from Gov. Greg Abbott and also experience attacks from parents and legislators who display an obtunded and obstructive mindset. Yet, with little encouragement, praise or meaningful pay, and in spite of the negativity being levied toward them, those who have chosen to continue their valuable work meet our children and grandchildren with smiles and love, committed to teaching basics and useful, meaningful life lessons. I hope Abbott and his cohorts read her column and hang their heads in shame. That would be refreshing. And thank you, Dallas Morning News , for the incredibly incisive political cartoon on Wednesday (Uncle Sam taken down by a gun addiction). Well done. Theresa Riggs, Arlington More praise for cartoon Regarding Wednesday’s editorial cartoon, what a powerful and impactful graphic representation of national maladies! Bill Bramhall has married two American tragedies into one pictorial representation that grabs our hearts and highlights the tragic results of both evils. Here’s hoping that this gripping cartoon will affect continued progress in reigning in both gun violence and drug deaths. Dan Siculan, Royse City

Some ideas to consider After the Allen Premium Outlets shooting, those who believe a right to life supersedes a right for everyone to possess a firearm, regulations derived from the Second Amendment, the expression “well-regulated” must apply. First, a firearm owner must be licensed through an extensive background check which will include psychological testing to eliminate those suicidal or psychotic. Gov. Greg Abbott insists the problem is mental health, but he provides guns to crazy people. The licensee must have a picture I.D. and thumbprint, and be over 21. Those under 21 must have an adult with them to handle a firearm. Second, for a licensee to purchase a gun, a 10-day waiting period must be used to research behavior since licensing. The purchaser must undergo training in firearm safety. No military-style rifles are to be in any one’s possession other than the military. Third, if a person has a firearm in bodily possession, he will forfeit it if intoxicated or under the influence of drugs, or if he threatens to use it illegally or exhibits family violence. Finally, private militias must not be allowed firearms. Public militias will be controlled by the Department of Public Safety and have all firearms registered. Criminals must not have guns. Walter Lindrose, Denton He blames gerrymandering Re: “Uphill battle for gun control — Amid growing pressure, GOP leaders unlikely to push reform,” Thursday news story. This story concludes that reasonable gun control laws fail in Texas because GOP lawmakers are “driven by a more powerful force: Republican primary voters.” True enough, but where is the rest of the story? In a democracy, why are only Republican primary voters in control and not the entire electorate? The missing explanation to the story: gerrymandering. When voters are “packed” and “cracked” into district lines that dilute the voting power of some groups in favor of others, the will of the majority can be thwarted and we inevitably end up with legislators narrowly focused on the extreme demands of primary voters. A third of the members of the Texas House (58 out of 150) and Texas Senate (10 out of 31) didn’t even have general-election opponents in 2022. Even in the general election, only one contested Texas Senate race and only four contested Texas House races were won by less than a 10% margin. Legislators chose their voters, not the other way around. The “powerful force” driving GOP lawmakers is one of their own choosing. Those lawmakers created that force, by rigging district lines to favor certain voters. Dave Jones, Sherman President, Clean Elections Texas What will they take next? Re: “Neighbors, not short-term rentals, foster community — Restricting these dwellings in residentially zoned areas will protect homeowners, home values,” by Douglas Newby, May 7 opinion. If my worst fears hold true, the state of Texas is forging ahead to preempt local control of neighborhood property rights with House Bill 2665. My family bought a home in a quiet neighborhood zoned for single-family residential homes, and that’s the way we want to keep it. As citizens of Arlington, a city with the foresight to restrict businesses to areas zoned for business, we are able to plan for our future and prosper here. A state so eager to usurp our ability to enjoy the fruits of our labor in a quiet, single-family-residence neighborhood doesn’t appear to stand for personal choice or personal control over the biggest longterm investment many families ever make. It seems, rather, that the once-upon-a-time-limited-government proponents at the helm of Texas government want control over local government as well as state government in order to cull the favors of business interests rather than protect the rights of individual citizens. If my own state representatives can take my property rights away, what are they going to take next? Pat Sanchez, Arlington

[uirukii]

So tell me again how ‘both sides are the same’ or ‘just as bad’?

In the agenda, “our administration will release federal funding to support programs that help parents affirm their LGBTQ+ kids and advance new regulations to protect LGBTQ+ youth in foster care”.

More of the progressive agenda under the cut that includes youth mental health and homelessness help, tackling the epidemic of bigoted book bans and creating a partnership specifically for LGBTQ safety that works with LOCAL LGBTQ community organizations.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will partner with the Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services to form a new LGBTQI+ Community Safety Partnership, to provide safety resources to local LGBTQ+ community organizations and help them prevent and respond to threats.

It also admits cops have been problematic with the LGBTQ+ community and will work towards fixing that massive problem.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will take the lead with initiatives to protect the health and safety of LGBTQ+ kids and their families. Pointing to a nationwide mental health crisis among LGBTQ+ youth, the administration will strengthen mental health resources and launch a new federal initiative to address LGBTQ+ youth homelessness.

The Department of Education will address the epidemic of book bans targeting LGBTQ+-themed content in schools and libraries. “Book banning erodes our democracy, removes vital resources for student learning, and can contribute to the stigma and isolation that LGBTQI+ people and other communities face,” the White House said.

The Department’s Office for Civil Rights will appoint a new coordinator to address “the growing threat that book bans pose for the civil rights of students,” and ensure local stakeholders understand how targeting specific communities, LGBTQ+ and communities of color among them, may violate federal civil rights laws.

[stout-stoat]

here's a list!! :>

LABOR

- expanded protections for pregnant and nursing workers - already in place for larger employers - to almost everyone in the state.

- created new worker protections for Amazon warehouse workers and refinery workers.

- banned "captive audience meetings" where employers force employees to watch anti-union presentations.

- passed new wage protections for the construction industry, against industry resistance.

- banned noncompete agreements and created statewide paid sick leave.

- created a huge new statewide paid family and medical leave program, raising the number of workers receiving paid leave from 25% to 100%.

SCHOOLING

- passed a bunch of labor protections for teachers, including requiring school districts to negotiate class sizes as part of union contracts.

- raised education spending by 10%, or about 2.3 billion.

- made hourly school workers (e.g. bus drivers and paraprofessionals) eligible for unemployment during summer break, when they're not working or getting paid.

- made public college education free for Minnesota families that make under $80k per year.

- made school breakfast and lunches free for all students.

ENVIRONMENT

- spent nearly a billion dollars on a variety of environmental programs, from heat pumps to reforestation.

- created an energy standard for 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040.

HEALTH

- created a state board to govern labor standards at nursing homes.

- banned conversion therapy for minors.

- laid the groundwork for a public health insurance option.

- made the largest increase to nursing home funding in state history.

- expanded the publicly subsidized health insurance program to undocumented immigrants.

- bumped up salaries for home health workers to address the shortage of in-home nurses.

- legalized drug paraphernalia: allows social service providers to conduct needle exchanges and address substance abuse with reduced fear of incurring legal action.

- created a Prescription Drug Affordability Board: sets price caps for high-cost pharmaceuticals.

- passed strict new regulations on PFAS ("forever chemicals"). the law, "Amara's Law," is named after a 20 year old cancer victim.

- signed a $240 million lead pipe removal bill. (this passed with unanimous support!)

- codified Roe v. Wade, protecting abortion rights.

- fully legalized marijuana.

CLASS

- created a new child tax credit that will cut child poverty by about a quarter.

- banned price gouging in public emergencies.

- put $50 million into homelessness prevention programs.

- put $1 billion into affordable housing programs, including by creating a new state housing voucher program.

TRANSIT

- forced signal priority changes to Twin Cities transit. right now the trains have to wait at intersections for cars, "which, i can say from experience, is terrible."

- passed a law to prevent catalytic converter thefts. (this is a car part that people steal and sell for scrap platinum)

- going to build a passenger train from the Twin Cities to Duluth.

- created a new sales tax to fund bus and train lines, an enormous victory for the sustainability and quality of public transit. transit will be more pleasant to ride, more frequent, and have better shelters along more lines.

- created new protections for Uber and Lyft drivers, "leading to State Senator Omar Fateh to be adorably mobbed by Uber and Lyft drivers."

POLICING

- banned white supremacists and extremists from police forces.

- capped probation at 5 years for most crimes.

- mostly banned no-knock warrants.

- made prison phone calls free.

- restored voting rights to convicted felons as soon as they leave prison.

- expanded background checks and enacted red-flag lavws, passing gun safety measures that the GOP has thwarted for years.

- massively increased funding for the state's perpetually-underfunded public defenders, which lets more public defenders be hired and existing public defenders get a salary increase.

ETC.

- passed the largest bonding bill in state history! total of $2.6 billion in funding improvements to parks, colleges, water infrastructure, bridges, etc. etc. etc.

- made a digital fair repair law that requires electronics manufacturers to make tools and parts available so that consumers can repair their electronics rather than purchase new items.

- made Juneteenth a state holiday.

- ensured that everyone, including undocumented immigrants, can get drivers' licenses.

- "you belong here:" made a raft of laws to make the state a trans refuge, and ensure people receiving trans care here can't be reached by far-right governments in places like Florida and Texas.

- already has some of the strongest election infrastructure (and highest voter participation) in the country, but the legislature just made it stronger, with automatic registration, preregistration for minors, and easier access to absentee ballots.

Massive Minnesota W read em for yourself

[vantedgesearch23]

Compliance and Regulatory Considerations in Life Sciences Executive Search 

Life sciences executive recruitment is a specialized process requiring careful attention to compliance and regulatory standards. This field, covering biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and related areas, operates under stringent guidelines that govern how businesses recruit and onboard leadership talent. Missteps can have significant consequences, both in terms of regulatory penalties and the overall success of an organization. Therefore, understanding the critical elements of compliance during the recruitment process is essential for both hiring organizations and recruitment agencies. 

Importance of Regulatory Knowledge in Life Sciences Recruitment 

The life sciences industry is one of the most heavily regulated sectors. Rules and guidelines from agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and other local regulatory bodies shape everything from research and development to product marketing. Executive recruitment must align with these regulations to ensure that new leadership not only understands these guidelines but can also implement them effectively. A thorough grasp of regulations helps identify candidates with the necessary expertise to navigate compliance issues, reducing risks for the hiring company. 

Ethical Considerations During the Recruitment Process 

Ethics play a central role in life sciences recruitment. Candidates must adhere to the highest standards of professional conduct, particularly when working in sectors that directly impact public health and safety. Recruitment firms specializing in this field must ensure that their search process emphasizes ethical considerations. This includes transparent communication, maintaining candidate confidentiality, and presenting only those individuals who meet rigorous ethical and professional standards. These principles are critical in building trust between recruitment agencies, clients, and candidates. 

Due Diligence and Candidate Screening 

Effective life sciences executive recruitment requires comprehensive due diligence. This step involves in-depth background checks, reference verifications, and assessments of candidates' professional track records. Ensuring that potential leaders have no history of regulatory violations, conflicts of interest, or ethical breaches is crucial. A robust due diligence process helps in mitigating risks associated with hiring the wrong candidate and ensures alignment with the company's compliance standards. 

Importance of Industry Expertise in Life Sciences Executive Search 

Successful recruitment in the life sciences sector demands specialized industry knowledge. Agencies like Vantedge Search bring this expertise to the table. With a deep understanding of the industry’s unique challenges, regulatory requirements, and compliance standards, Vantedge Search excels in identifying and recruiting leaders who are not only experienced but also aligned with the specific demands of the life sciences sector. 

Global Compliance Considerations for Multinational Life Sciences Companies 

For multinational companies operating across borders, compliance takes on a global dimension. Different countries have distinct regulatory requirements, making it necessary to recruit leaders who can navigate complex international frameworks. From data privacy laws to clinical trial guidelines, global life sciences executives must be equipped with the knowledge to manage cross-border regulatory variations. Recruitment firms play a key role in identifying candidates with the global perspective necessary to handle diverse compliance challenges. 

The Role of Recruitment Agencies in Ensuring Compliance 

Recruitment agencies are more than just intermediaries—they are strategic partners who understand the regulatory intricacies of the life sciences sector. Agencies like Vantedge Search conduct compliance-oriented searches that go beyond traditional recruitment practices. Their expertise ensures that only the most qualified candidates, those who can uphold strict regulatory standards and drive organizational success, are presented to clients. This approach minimizes the risk of compliance breaches and helps companies maintain their standing within the industry. 

Adapting to Changing Regulatory Landscapes 

Regulatory guidelines in life sciences are not static; they frequently change as technology advances and new scientific discoveries emerge. Effective recruitment processes must anticipate these shifts, seeking candidates who are not only well-versed in current regulations but also adaptable to future changes. Recruitment agencies with a focus on the life sciences must stay updated on industry trends and regulatory updates to ensure that they continue to deliver the best talent capable of leading through times of change. 

Conclusion 

Life sciences executive recruitment is a specialized field that demands attention to compliance and regulatory details. Ethical considerations, due diligence, and industry expertise are essential elements in this process. Recruitment firms, like Vantedge Search, play a pivotal role in ensuring that companies in the life sciences sector have access to leaders who can navigate the complexities of regulatory standards while driving organizational success. This commitment to compliance and quality makes a significant difference in a sector where the stakes are exceptionally high. 

[systemtek]

The UK's Technology Secretary Peter Kyle has set out his priorities for the online safety regulator, Ofcom, as it prepares to implement and enforce the laws set out in the Online Safety Act next year. The Statement of Strategic Priorities (SSP), published today (Wednesday 20th November), includes ensuring safety is baked into platforms from the start so more harm is caught before it occurs, pushing for more transparency from technology companies on what harms are occurring on their platforms, and creating a digital world that is inclusive and resilient to harm, including disinformation. Government is also announcing the launch of a study to explore the effects of smartphone and social media use on children, to help bolster research and strengthen the evidence needed to build a safer online world. Ofcom will have to consider each of the government’s strategic priorities as it enforces the Online Safety Act from next Spring. Ofcom will have to report back to the Secretary of State on what action it has taken against the priorities to ensure the laws are delivering safer spaces online. These reports will be critical to inform next steps as the government commits to learning from the implementation of the Online Safety Act and building on it where necessary. The priorities will be finalised with the input of online safety experts and campaigners to ensure government action is informed by those with those who have experienced the offline impacts of failures in online safety. Ofcom is due to start enforcing the first duties on online platforms under the Online Safety Act from Spring next year. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said: Keeping children safe online is a priority for this government. That is why today I will be the first secretary of state to exercise the power to set out my strategic priorities. From baking safety into social media sites from the outset, to increasing platform transparency, these priorities will allow us to monitor progress, collate evidence, innovate, and act where laws are coming up short. While the Online Safety Act sets the foundation of creating better experiences online, we must keep pace with technology as it evolves to create a safer internet, especially for children. We’re also firing the starting gun on research which will help build the evidence base we need to keep children safe online. I am committed to using all the tools at our disposal from monitoring the impact of new laws, creating more and better evidence, and working with online safety campaigners and charities to achieve this goal. The government is committed to implementing the Act as quickly and effectively as possible and has already acted to deliver safer experiences for people online. Earlier this year platforms’ responsibilities to remove intimate image abuse content were strengthened, whilst new data laws will help researchers gather critical evidence about online harms A new research project has been launched to boost the evidence base around online harms, The first stage of the project will examine what methods will best help the government understand the impact of smartphones and social media use on children after a review by the UK Chief Medical Officer in 2019 found the evidence base around the links to children’s mental health were insufficient to provide strong conclusions. The project will improve policy makers understanding of the relationship between children’s wellbeing and smartphone use and help direct future government action. Maria Neophytou, Director of Strategy & Knowledge at the NSPCC, said: We’re pleased to see the Secretary of State echoing many of the priorities that we have been campaigning on over the last few years. Through Childline, we hear daily from young people about the range of harms they are experiencing online, including online bullying, access to content encouraging suicide and eating disorders and child sexual abuse and exploitation.  Tech companies must be transparent about the harm happening on their platforms. They should be disrupting ‘safe havens’ for offenders by tackling the hidden abuse taking place through private messaging. It is right that the government is focusing on driving innovation and new technology that can identify and disrupt abuse and prevent harm from happening in the first place. The regulatory framework has the potential to change the online world for children. We continue to campaign for an ambitious approach to the enforcement of the legislation, and for children to be listened to and actively included. We look forward to engaging with the Secretary of State’s strategic priorities. The Statement of Strategic Priorities five key areas 1. Safety by design: Embed safety by design to deliver safe online experiences for all users but especially children, tackle violence against women and girls, and work towards ensuring that there are no safe havens for illegal content and activity, including fraud, child sexual exploitation and abuse, and illegal disinformation. 2. Transparency and accountability: Ensure industry transparency and accountability from platforms to deliver online safety outcomes, promoting increased trust and expanding the evidence-base to provide safer experiences for users. 3. Agile regulation: Deliver an agile approach to regulation, ensuring the framework is robust in monitoring and tackling emerging harms - such as AI generated content. 4. Inclusivity and resilience: Create an inclusive, informed and vibrant digital world which is resilient to potential harms, including disinformation. 5. Technology and innovation: Foster the innovation of online safety technologies to improve the safety of users and drive growth. Notes to editors United Kingdom Chief Medical Officers’ commentary on ‘Screen-based activities and children and young people’s mental health and psychosocial wellbeing: a systematic map of reviews’, 2019. The SSP will be laid in Parliament for approval, before then being formally designated by the Secretary of State. This is expected to take place in Spring next year. Read the full article

[indexblogging]

Navigating Labor Law in NYC with the Help of a Labor Attorney

In the bustling business environment of New York City, understanding labor law can feel like navigating a labyrinth. Whether you're an employer striving to comply with regulations or an employee seeking justice, a labor attorney can be your guiding light.

This blog will break down the role of a labor attorney nyc, highlight common workplace issues they can address, and provide insights into choosing the right legal partner for your needs.

Understanding the Role of a Labor Attorney in NYC

A labor attorney NYC specializes in the complex web of employment laws that govern the employer-employee relationship. These laws cover everything from wages and working conditions to discrimination and wrongful termination. By offering legal guidance and representation, labor attorneys help ensure that both employees and employers understand their rights and obligations under NYC labor law and federal regulations.

For Employers: A labor attorney nyc can assist in drafting compliant employee handbooks, implementing fair workplace policies, and defending against claims.

For Employees: They provide legal counsel on employment contracts, wage disputes, and potential discrimination or harassment issues.

Common Issues a Labor Attorney Can Assist With in NYC

Labor attorneys in NYC handle a variety of cases, each with unique challenges:

Wage and Hour Disputes: Issues such as unpaid overtime, minimum wage violations, or incorrect wage deductions.

Workplace Safety Violations: Ensuring compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards.

Wrongful Termination: Assessing the legality of termination and negotiating severance agreements.

Legal Rights and Obligations for NYC Employees and Employers

Understanding the rights and obligations under NYC labor law is vital for both parties:

Employees enjoy protections such as minimum wage, safe work environments, and the right to report violations without retaliation.

Employers must maintain accurate records, provide certain benefits, and avoid discriminatory practices.

NYC also has unique laws like the New York City Human Rights Law, which offers broader protections than federal statutes.

Choosing and Engaging a Labor Attorney in NYC

Selecting the right labor attorney nyc involves several important steps:

Initial Consultation: Begin with a consultation to discuss your specific needs. This meeting allows you to gauge the attorney's experience, approach, and compatibility.

Evaluating Experience and Reputation: Look for attorneys with a proven track record in labor law cases relevant to your situation. Online reviews and referrals can provide insight into their reputation.

Understanding Fee Structures: Labor attorneys may charge different fees, including hourly rates, flat fees, or contingency fees. Clarifying costs upfront prevents unexpected expenses later.

Building a Partnership: Choose a labor attorney nyc who communicates clearly and makes you feel comfortable, ensuring an effective working relationship.

Why Seek Professional Legal Advice?

Navigating NYC labor law demands expertise and precision. Engaging a skilled labor attorney can protect your interests and provide peace of mind, whether addressing an immediate issue or proactively managing compliance.

If you're facing a labor-related challenge or wish to learn more about your rights and obligations, don't hesitate to reach out to a labor attorney NYC. Their guidance can be invaluable in achieving a fair and lawful workplace.

[sankhlaco]

Understanding the Factories Act in India: A Comprehensive Guide

The Factories Act is one of India’s most pivotal labour laws, introduced to ensure the health, safety, welfare, and working conditions of workers employed in factories. Initially enacted in 1948, it has undergone various amendments to adapt to the evolving industrial landscape and labour requirements. Let’s delve into the key aspects of the Factories Act and its significance in modern India.

What is the Factories Act, 1948?

The Factories Act, 1948, is a central legislation that regulates working conditions in factories across India. It defines a “factory” as a premises where ten or more workers are employed with the aid of power, or twenty or more workers are employed without the aid of power, and work is carried out in connection with manufacturing processes.

Objectives of the Act

The primary goals of the Factories Act are:

To ensure adequate safety measures for workers.

To promote the health and welfare of workers.

To regulate working hours and conditions to prevent exploitation.

To safeguard workers against hazardous processes and unsafe working environments.

Key Provisions of the Factories Act, 1948

1. Health Provisions

The Act emphasizes maintaining a healthy workplace by mandating:

Cleanliness and hygiene.

Disposal of waste and effluents.

Proper ventilation and temperature control.

Availability of drinking water, lighting, and sanitation.

2. Safety Measures

To prevent workplace accidents, the Act includes:

Installation of safe machinery and protective gear.

Periodic maintenance and testing of equipment.

Fencing of dangerous parts of machinery.

Training for workers on handling hazardous substances.

3. Welfare Measures

The Act ensures worker welfare by mandating:

Adequate facilities for washing and storing clothing.

Canteens in factories employing more than 250 workers.

First aid facilities and welfare officers.

4. Working Hours and Leave

The Act regulates:

A maximum of 48 working hours per week.

Prohibition of overtime exceeding certain limits.

Mandatory weekly holidays and annual leave with wages.

5. Employment of Young Persons

The Act prohibits the employment of children below 14 years.

Adolescents (14-18 years) can work only after obtaining a certificate of fitness and under specific conditions.

6. Special Provisions for Women

Prohibition of night shifts for women (though this has been revised in some states under specific conditions).

Separate washrooms and crèches for factories employing more than 30 women workers.

The Role of State Governments

While the Factories Act is a central law, state governments have the authority to implement its provisions. They can also introduce rules and amendments to address specific local requirements. For instance, several states have revised the working hours or relaxed provisions for certain industries.

Recent Developments and Challenges

1. Impact of Labor Codes

The Factories Act, 1948, is set to be subsumed under the Occupational Safety, Health, and Working Conditions Code (OSH Code) introduced in 2020. This aims to simplify compliance and make labor laws more flexible for businesses while safeguarding workers' rights.

2. Balancing Automation and Employment

With the rise of automation and Industry 4.0, the Act needs to evolve to address challenges such as workforce displacement and the need for upskilling.

3. Health and Safety Concerns

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted gaps in health and safety standards in many industries, emphasizing the need for stricter implementation of the Act’s provisions.

Significance of the Factories Act

The Factories Act remains a cornerstone of labour welfare in India. By ensuring a safe and conducive working environment, it not only protects workers but also enhances productivity and efficiency in industries. For employers, compliance with the Act fosters trust and minimizes legal risks.

Indian Factories Act 1948, has been instrumental in shaping industrial labour practices in India. As industries grow and evolve, it’s crucial for this legislation to keep pace with modern challenges, ensuring that worker welfare and industrial growth go hand in hand. Both employers and employees must understand their rights and responsibilities under the Act to create a fair and safe industrial ecosystem.