Do Cambodians know where their country is headed?
Do Cambodians know where their country is headed?
I was thinking recently that the Cambodians probably see Cambodia getting wealthier and more stable due to their throwing off all the western ideas of labor laws etc. by joining forces with the Chinese. Let's face it, it is the Chinese and Sino- Khmer that own Cambodia and the lion share of its wealth. Do the people realize that by throwing away these charter style acts to help the poor that eventually by becoming pals with China it is going to see more mass murder? Who were the DK's main supporters ? Who are the new economies main supporters? They are now increasingly making noises against western tourists and governments and supporting China, as Sihanouk did in the past. History repeats itself they say. The EU, US and possibly ASEAN are waiting. China and Cambodia don't have a chance.
Or maybe you think they do?
Or maybe you think they do?
Which parts of the labor laws are you calling Western?
Maybe I misunderstood. Bear with me, it is Friday.
Bless
Maybe I misunderstood. Bear with me, it is Friday.
Bless
- Lucky Lucan
- K440 Knight Captain
- Reactions: 761
- Posts: 22525
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 12:24 pm
- Location: The Pearl of the Orient
It seems like a bit of a random question.
Do *insert nationality* know where their country is headed?
Do *insert nationality* know where their country is headed?
Romantic Cambodia is dead and gone. It's with McKinley in the grave.
- Miguelito
- Ordinary Schmo
- Reactions: 219
- Posts: 7053
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:19 pm
- Location: Penh's Hill
Americans are going to Make America Great Again, after Boris Johnson sorts out all of the U.K.'s global issues.Lucky Lucan wrote:It seems like a bit of a random question.
Do *insert nationality* know where their country is headed?
- vladimir
- Feminist Watch List
- Reactions: 4
- Posts: 34235
- Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:43 am
- Location: mod edit
The labour law is seldom enforced, it is mostly window-dressing, and it's not just Khmers who ignore it.Abou-Gor wrote:throwing off all the western ideas of labor laws etc.
ירי ילדים והפצצת אזרחים דורש אומץ, כמו גם הטרדה מינית של עובדי ההוראה.
- salvajeuno
- I Am Losing It All to the Internet
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 2:54 am
- Location: Cat Lady Towers
Just in case you don't know what Mr. Lucan is referring to:Lucky Lucan wrote:It seems like a bit of a random question.
Do *insert nationality* know where their country is headed?
The word “Khmer” is used to refer not only to the official Cambodian language but also to the ethnic Cambodian population. Approximately 90 percent of Cambodia’s inhabitants are ethnic Khmer; the rest are mostly of Vietnamese or Chinese origin. A number of semi-nomadic tribal groups can also be found in the country.
Quoted from: https://www.alsintl.com/resources/languages/Cambodian/
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
இ லொவெ ம்ய் டௌக்ஹ்டெர்ஸ் மொரெ தன் அன்ய்தின்க் இன் தெ வொர்ல்ட்
-
- Wun Gwo Pee
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2014 8:07 am
LL is being unfair: the OP asks a very valid question. I doubt the vast majority of the population could locate China on a map so it's doubtful they know or care about the tilt to China and, to a certain, extent Russia.
As to 'educated' elite. Yes they will know but self interest and short termism prevails over all else. As long as they see their wallets stuffed today, they either won't have the foresight to look ahead nor even care about the long term damage becoming a pariah satellite state will bring.
As to 'educated' elite. Yes they will know but self interest and short termism prevails over all else. As long as they see their wallets stuffed today, they either won't have the foresight to look ahead nor even care about the long term damage becoming a pariah satellite state will bring.
Hi Alex, could you give me a brief run down on the history of the Labour laws here?Alexandra wrote:Which parts of the labor laws are you calling Western?
Maybe I misunderstood. Bear with me, it is Friday.
Bless
Much obliged .
-
- I have Cheap Mobile Internet
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 9:22 am
I agreealanclarke72 wrote:LL is being unfair: the OP asks a very valid question. I doubt the vast majority of the population could locate China on a map so it's doubtful they know or care about the tilt to China and, to a certain, extent Russia.
As to 'educated' elite. Yes they will know but self interest and short termism prevails over all else. As long as they see their wallets stuffed today, they either won't have the foresight to look ahead nor even care about the long term damage becoming a pariah satellite state will bring.
Most Cambodians don't know where there next meal is coming from, much less where they are headed as a country.
" Tho I am wise I have to wait like any other fool"
That's not how this works. The burden of proof lays on the one who makes a claim: in this case you.Abou-Gor wrote:Hi Alex, could you give me a brief run down on the history of the Labour laws here?
Much obliged .
The fact that the labor law was introduced by the UN doesn't make it Western. Have you read the labor law? Can you list the Western countries where employment can't be legally terminated against the employees will after holding the same position for 2 years?
Please make your claims without demanding I prove them for you. Much obliged.
Bless
It was purely to gain better understanding as you seemed to know something more about it. I was keen to here your opinion as you seem to think it wasn't western in its construction.Alexandra wrote:That's not how this works. The burden of proof lays on the one who makes a claim: in this case you.Abou-Gor wrote:Hi Alex, could you give me a brief run down on the history of the Labour laws here?
Much obliged .
The fact that the labor law was introduced by the UN doesn't make it Western. Have you read the labor law? Can you list the Western countries where employment can't be legally terminated against the employees will after holding the same position for 2 years?
Please make your claims without demanding I prove them for you. Much obliged.
Bless
Yes, I have read it; although, that may have been an abridged version. I have read very similarly worded documents in the west. However, I would like to see the part where it says after two years one can't fire an employee.
What the laws call senior workers can be laid off but if the position remains and is open later they get dibs on getting re-hired. For example:
Once a worker reaches this level of not being replaceable there are, in my experience, ridiculous payouts involved in their removal.
Bless
It is probably for this reason why Khmer companies are so keen on rotating staff around various positions, or even terminate those who would fullfil these requirements in the near future. I can't think of any Western country that has this written in law.Article 95:
Any layoff resulting from a reduction in an establishment's activity or an internal reorganization that is foreseen by the employer is subject to the following procedures:
The employer establishes the order of the layoffs in light of professional qualifications, seniority within the establishment, and family burdens of the workers.
· The employer must inform the workers' representatives in writing in order to solicit their suggestions, primarily, on the measures for a prior announcement of the reduction in staff and the measures taken to minimize the effects of the reduction on the affected workers.
· The first workers to be laid off will be those with the least professional ability, then the workers with the least seniority. The seniority has to be increased by one year for a married worker and by an additional year for each dependent child.
The dismissed workers have, for two years, priority to be re-hired for the same position in the enterprise.
Workers who have priority for re-hire are required to inform their employer of any change in address occurring after the layoff.
If there is a vacancy, the employer must inform the concerned worker by sending a recorded delivery or registered letter to his last address. The worker must appear at the establishment within one week after receiving the letter.
The Labor Inspector is kept informed of the procedure covered in this article. At the request of the workers' representatives, the Labor Inspector can call the concerned parties together one or more times to examine the impact of the proposed layoffs and measures to be taken to minimize their effects.
In exceptional cases, the Minister in Charge of Labor can issue a Prakas (ministerial order) to suspend the layoff for a period not exceeding thirty days in order to help the concerned parties find a solution. This suspension may be repeated only one time by a Prakas of the Ministry.
Once a worker reaches this level of not being replaceable there are, in my experience, ridiculous payouts involved in their removal.
Bless
Abou-Gor wrote:
It was purely to gain better understanding as you seemed to know something more about it. I was keen to here your opinion as you seem to think it wasn't western in its construction.
Yes, I have read it; although, that may have been an abridged version. I have read very similarly worded documents in the west. However, I would like to see the part where it says after two years one can't fire an employee.
Article 95:
Any layoff resulting from a reduction in an establishment's activity or an internal reorganization that is foreseen by the
employer is subject to the following procedures:
The employer establishes the order of the layoffs in light of professional qualifications, seniority within the
establishment, and family burdens of the workers.
· The employer must inform the workers' representatives in writing in order to solicit their suggestions, primarily,
on the measures for a prior announcement of the reduction in staff and the measures taken to minimize the effects
of the reduction on the affected workers.
· The first workers to be laid off will be those with the least professional ability, then the workers with the least
seniority. The seniority has to be increased by one year for a married worker and by an additional year for each
dependent child.
The dismissed workers have, for two years, priority to be re-hired for the same position in the enterprise.
Workers who have priority for re-hire are required to inform their employer of any change in address occurring after the
layoff.
If there is a vacancy, the employer must inform the concerned worker by sending a recorded delivery or registered letter
to his last address. The worker must appear at the establishment within one week after receiving the letter.
The Labor Inspector is kept informed of the procedure covered in this article. At the request of the workers'
representatives, the Labor Inspector can call the concerned parties together one or more times to examine the impact of
the proposed layoffs and measures to be taken to minimize their effects.
In exceptional cases, the Minister in Charge of Labor can issue a Prakas (ministerial order) to suspend the layoff for a
period not exceeding thirty days in order to help the concerned parties find a solution. This suspension may be repeated
only one time by a Prakas of the Ministry.
That all looks fairly western to me. Not sure if I have read similar articles in uk Labour law, but it would be good if they contained such passages for lay offs. All it is saying is that if your let go because the company needs to down size or reorganize, the company should rehire you in the exact same capacity (as required by the company) as before, when they were forced to downsize/reorganize. At least, that's the way I read it. It certainly doesn't mean you can't fire people if they aren't performing after two years. I think the clause about "professionals" is a bit weird though. We all have the same basic needs after all.
It was purely to gain better understanding as you seemed to know something more about it. I was keen to here your opinion as you seem to think it wasn't western in its construction.
Yes, I have read it; although, that may have been an abridged version. I have read very similarly worded documents in the west. However, I would like to see the part where it says after two years one can't fire an employee.
Article 95:
Any layoff resulting from a reduction in an establishment's activity or an internal reorganization that is foreseen by the
employer is subject to the following procedures:
The employer establishes the order of the layoffs in light of professional qualifications, seniority within the
establishment, and family burdens of the workers.
· The employer must inform the workers' representatives in writing in order to solicit their suggestions, primarily,
on the measures for a prior announcement of the reduction in staff and the measures taken to minimize the effects
of the reduction on the affected workers.
· The first workers to be laid off will be those with the least professional ability, then the workers with the least
seniority. The seniority has to be increased by one year for a married worker and by an additional year for each
dependent child.
The dismissed workers have, for two years, priority to be re-hired for the same position in the enterprise.
Workers who have priority for re-hire are required to inform their employer of any change in address occurring after the
layoff.
If there is a vacancy, the employer must inform the concerned worker by sending a recorded delivery or registered letter
to his last address. The worker must appear at the establishment within one week after receiving the letter.
The Labor Inspector is kept informed of the procedure covered in this article. At the request of the workers'
representatives, the Labor Inspector can call the concerned parties together one or more times to examine the impact of
the proposed layoffs and measures to be taken to minimize their effects.
In exceptional cases, the Minister in Charge of Labor can issue a Prakas (ministerial order) to suspend the layoff for a
period not exceeding thirty days in order to help the concerned parties find a solution. This suspension may be repeated
only one time by a Prakas of the Ministry.
That all looks fairly western to me. Not sure if I have read similar articles in uk Labour law, but it would be good if they contained such passages for lay offs. All it is saying is that if your let go because the company needs to down size or reorganize, the company should rehire you in the exact same capacity (as required by the company) as before, when they were forced to downsize/reorganize. At least, that's the way I read it. It certainly doesn't mean you can't fire people if they aren't performing after two years. I think the clause about "professionals" is a bit weird though. We all have the same basic needs after all.
Are you suggesting that all countries have the same capacity of forethought? That eg the US and Cambodia are equals In this respect?Lucky Lucan wrote:It seems like a bit of a random question.
Do *insert nationality* know where their country is headed?
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 14 Replies
- 3702 Views
-
Last post by spitthedog
Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:01 am
-
-
Which country would you rather live in?
by Mike Farce » Wed Nov 29, 2023 7:59 pm » in 'Not' Cambodia - 4 Replies
- 329 Views
-
Last post by fapsara
Thu Nov 30, 2023 4:30 pm
-
-
- 37 Replies
- 4771 Views
-
Last post by Iridesce
Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:15 am
-
- 7 Replies
- 1433 Views
-
Last post by Lucky Lucan
Sun Aug 21, 2022 4:02 pm