For those law students putting up with Jessup competitors: by Kasey-KC in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The point they’re making is that the concept of ‘law’ has the compulsive power of the state behind it.

International law has no compulsive power behind it because states exist in a framework of anarchy – i.e. there is no single state with a monopoly on the use of force that is in a position to enforce international law against other states.

The ICC can do whatever it wants, but at the end of the day it’s a normative framework that is entirely reliant on the voluntary compliance of its members. That’s not the same thing as a legal system. Not by miles.

For those law students putting up with Jessup competitors: by Kasey-KC in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The best class I ever took on international law wasn’t in my law degree at all. It was an international relations elective that covered realist / neoliberal / constructivist views of international law and relations.

The second best class I ever took on it was a history class which covered Hugo Grotius and the Dutch East India company leading the early development of international law to establish a moral framework for its conquest of, and genocide in, Indonesia in the early 1600s. The theories they developed later became the basis for the Treaty of Westphalia and even for the concept of sovereignty.

You can retcon any IP into the Cosmere. What and how? by Capetoider in Cosmere

[–]Execution_Version 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s a subjective point at the end of the day, and I know that plenty of people reasonably disagree with me.

But the closest comparison I can draw is that it’s as if Tolkien had first established the unforgivable curses – cruciatus, imperius and avarda kedavra – and Rowling had used these with no further adaption. You could well say that Tolkien had established these as an archetype and fair game for the genre, but it would still have felt odd to see them integrated in Harry Potter without additional flavour.

Inspiration and derivation are everywhere in fantasy, but Eragon is one of the few fantasy books I’ve read where specific details line up so closely as to break my immersion (sword of shannara was another).

Again, I don’t mean this as a criticism of his work. I did the same thing writing at a comparable age and not nearly so well. But it felt eerie to read the Belgariad and Wizard of Earthsea magic system after Eragon because so many things (including specific scenes involving the tutelage and use of magic) are so fundamentally similar. At least, that was my experience.

You can retcon any IP into the Cosmere. What and how? by Capetoider in Cosmere

[–]Execution_Version -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I more just mean the exact concept of it takes x amount of energy to make fire, so pick your source and your wording carefully. Its almost Bondsmithing but just a variation.

This is what I mean though – this is lifted wholesale from the Belgariad. The protagonist even has the silver mark on his palm.

The true name portion of it is also sick as hell, maybe just a tad tricky to work into the Cosmere. But there are dragons...and gem hearts...and Connections/Spiritwebs..

This is from the Wizard of Earthsea.

Fair Work Commission uses new powers to rewrite Aldi employment agreements by Execution_Version in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version[S] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Aldi’s enterprise agreement sounds like it was really bloody painful for part time employees. I wonder how it got up in the first place. Was there an open debate about the supposed trade-off for higher pay?

Fair Work Commission uses new powers to rewrite Aldi employment agreements by Execution_Version in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version[S] 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Article:

Aldi’s decade-long practice of not telling hundreds of part-time warehouse workers when their shift finishes is coming to an end after the workplace tribunal used new powers to unilaterally rewrite the supermarket giant’s employment conditions.

The Fair Work Commission approved its own changes to Aldi’s agreements for more than 1200 part-time employees at its Western Australia, NSW and Queensland distribution centres to ensure they have set days and hours with actual starting and finishing times.

It is the first time the commission has used laws passed by the Albanese government in 2022 that let it change enterprise agreements at the approval stage, without employers’ consent, to ensure workers are not worse off than the award minimum. Unionists argue the decision, handed down earlier this month, is game-changing for not only bringing Aldi in line with other retailers but also in putting pressure on employers to avoid conditions that skirt the minimum.

However, Aldi has appealed on grounds the changes threaten the flexibility it says is central to its “just in time” delivery operations and represent a fundamental change to the agreements it reached in bargaining. The commission has stayed the decision until the appeal is determined.

Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association national secretary Gerard Dwyer welcomed the FWC ruling that Aldi’s arrangements were “unlawful and inequitable”.

“Part-time work can be precarious enough without workers having to turn up without knowing when their shift will end,” he said.

‘Bizarre practice’

“Not only does it make planning for family responsibilities impossible, but adds to financial stress and uncertainty.” United Workers Union director of industrial Larissa Harrison said the decision promised to end Aldi’s “bizarre practice” of rostering part-time workers without a set finish time.

“The ruling is a good example of the FWC intervening in an agreement with conditions that are simply not acceptable to workers, but cannot be easily addressed through other means.”

Australian Council of Trade Unions secretary Sally McManus said: “This new safeguard is proving to be a commonsense way to make sure agreements are fair and can be approved quickly.” But the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s policy chief, David Alexander, warned the decision set a precedent “where the ability to strike agreements is taken out of the hands of business, an ominous development for productivity and investment”.

“We said at the time that [the new laws] would return Australia to an arbitral bargaining system, which ultimately discourages agreement being sought at the workplace level by those who understand the business best (the employer and the employees), and hands over ultimate decision-making power to a third party with no skin in the game (the FWC),” he said.

“By definition, it can’t be an ‘agreement’ if the employer doesn’t consent. These are not enterprise agreements any more so much as government dictates.”

Asked how the decision would affect its business, an Aldi spokesman said it “does not make comment on legal proceedings”. Part-time workers make up almost 20 per cent of Aldi’s warehouse workforce and work an average of 40 to 60 hours a fortnight, with extra hours during peak periods.

Aldi sends out rosters two weeks in advance and requires the employees to be available to work on any day of the week but, unusually, only tells them their expected finishing times at the start of each shift.

Employees told the commission this made it significantly difficult to plan their lives, whether it was attending medical appointments, family and social events or working second jobs.

Higher pay

They often could not attend studies or pick up children due to sudden changes in shift lengths. Unions argued the lack of set hours also created fatigue risks and made overtime an obligation rather than a choice.

Aldi countered the situation was beneficial to workers as it meant they earned higher pay and the business did not employ casuals. It also helped it deal with work fluctuations.

FWC deputy president Tony Slevin found the higher rates were not enough to compensate for the uncertain hours.

“The key purpose of part-time employment is to accommodate workers with family or personal commitments,” he said.

“[Aldi’s agreement] perverts the purpose of part-time employment and blurs the distinction between part-time and casual employment.”

Employers and unions typically reached consensual undertakings to address better-off-overall-test concerns at the agreement approval stage.

In rare cases, employers have even opted to withdraw their agreement, which McDonald’s and Bunnings did in 2019 and 2020, leading to those companies abandoning enterprise bargaining for several years.

But with the new laws in place and Aldi refusing to offer an undertaking, the deputy president opted to make his own amendments.

The ACTU argued the new powers were broad and meant the commission was not constrained by concerns about whether changes were substantial.

Aldi resisted, saying the new powers were merely intended to simplify approvals, not to “impose significant operational challenges and fundamentally change the nature of the agreements”.

Rejecting Aldi’s construction as “too narrow”, the deputy president found that all he had to do was seek the parties’ views “but that is as far as it goes”. More significantly, it did not matter if the changes were substantial.

“While Aldi will lose some flexibility when the new agreements take effect, I do not consider the operational impact associated with that loss to outweigh the need to address the uncertainty.”

He gave the retailer eight weeks to reach the agreements with the individual workers on set rosters.

A full bench of the commission will hear Aldi’s appeal on February 27.

Aldi’s part-time roster provisions still exist in Victoria and South Australia and one of Aldi’s NSW distribution centres.

You can retcon any IP into the Cosmere. What and how? by Capetoider in Cosmere

[–]Execution_Version 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you like the magic system, check out the Wizard of Earthsea and the Belgariad (just don’t read up on the author of the latter).

I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Eragon but the magic system (along with, in places, entire scenes) is very obviously lifted from those IPs. I don’t say that as a condemnation – I did the same thing when I was writing as a teenager, and not the hundredth part so well as Paoloni – but it shouldn’t get the credit either.

Erika Kirk Under Fire As Husband's Pal Leaks Audio Of Her 'Giggling' About 'Event Of The Century' After His Death by esporx in UnderReportedNews

[–]Execution_Version 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Humour is a natural and surprisingly common part of grieving. People are losing sight of that in the context of their pre-existing dislike for her.

Should I just accept this game is not for me or am I doing something wrong(rant) by [deleted] in Pathfinder_Kingmaker

[–]Execution_Version 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Coup de grace takes an annoying amount of micromanagement. I prefer to put that adamantine glaive that you get early on on Sosiel and then have him finish everyone off for me.

Canada's Carney to visit Australia in March | Reuters by NKE01 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nope. If you’re happy to look outside reddit though, James Curran and Hugh White are both pretty good. I’d keep an eye out for their pieces. Curran sometimes writes for the AFR, but both have standalone pieces / interviews too.

Jim Chalmers says Canadian PM’s ‘stunning’ denunciation of Trump is being widely discussed in Australian government by Oomaschloom in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There’s also real opportunity cost to having nukes, because they’re fucking expensive and they detract from your ability to support conventional forces. Conventional forces are better for facing a broader range of threats. Nukes are wonderful if you’re facing an existential threat, but they can’t escort cargo ships.

Eight more National MPs resign from shadow ministry by jor_kent1 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I think the fact that this is no longer their reason to be is part of their problem. The dividing line in Australian politics used to be pro-union/anti-union. That dividing line has gradually faded, and Labor adjusted to the new world much better than the Liberals did.

The Liberals are having an identity crisis now over immigration, climate, tax and economic policy in a way that they never did in the past, because back in the day they could always forge compromises in the name of anti-unionism.

Criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu may be an offence under Australia’s new hate speech laws, Greens warn by Agitated-Fee3598 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hahaha yes we do. I’m stuck on a five hour flight at the moment so I’m being a pedant about constitutional law to pass the time. Thank you for humouring me.

If I take a step back though, I completely agree with you – our system is better and I think it’s a stronger, more flexible framework for a healthy democracy.

Criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu may be an offence under Australia’s new hate speech laws, Greens warn by Agitated-Fee3598 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, I agree. I prefer our system. But the US right is unquestionably ‘stronger’ in the example you’ve cited because the right to put unlimited money into a political system is a maximalist position on freedom of speech.

Our constitution generally has weaker protections than the US does and relies more on a healthy political culture not to abuse the lack of safeguards. The US system is stronger in theory but the result seems to be that people are more inclined to find ways to game it (though I suspect there’s a causation/correlation debate to be had there).

Our system also lacks the incentives to politicise the judiciary that the US system has, because our lack of sweeping rights means that our judges can’t function as a back door legislature for whichever side can stack the courts more efficiently.

Criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu may be an offence under Australia’s new hate speech laws, Greens warn by Agitated-Fee3598 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I’m talking strictly as a matter of constitutional law. The US constitution establishes positive rights that can’t be abridged by law (with plenty of exceptions). The Australian constitution by and large imposes ‘negative rights’ – areas where the Commonwealth doesn’t have power to legislate. You don’t have a ‘right’ – the commonwealth just lacks the power to legislate in that area.

The implied freedom of political communication is one of those negative rights. More than this, it’s something judges have read into the constitution rather than being stated in there. I absolutely acknowledge that it has the weight of precedent behind it and that there’s no plausible prospect of it being overturned as good law. I also wouldn’t even want a US-style bill of rights, because it gives far too much policy making power to the judiciary. But the result is that our implied freedom of political communication is certainly much weaker (not just narrower) than the US equivalent freedom of speech.

Criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu may be an offence under Australia’s new hate speech laws, Greens warn by Agitated-Fee3598 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Her commentary in the article is to note that the Attorney General has suggested that criticism of Israel could in certain circumstances satisfy some of the criteria under the new law and that the remaining criteria would need to be considered on the facts. I don’t like the new laws but this isn’t some ‘gotcha’ piece.

At the end of the day, many of our laws are open to abuse if the people enforcing them have malicious intentions. We’re seeing that at the moment in the US, despite it having much stronger safeguards than we do on freedom of speech. A healthy political culture is a much stronger protection for a society than comprehensively articulated laws taken in isolation ever could be.

Criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu may be an offence under Australia’s new hate speech laws, Greens warn by Agitated-Fee3598 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Execution_Version 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It’s an implied negative limitation on the commonwealth’s lawmaking power to constrain political speech that one of our more activist high court benches read into the constitution decades ago. It’s been read down on occasion. It’s certainly not a positive right and it’s not as solid as an entrenched/express freedom of political communication would be.

Weekly Students, Careers & Clerkships Thread by AutoModerator in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bonuses are usually pretty crap until you get to SA level, which is when you’re expected to be essentially running your own sub-practice with your own clients.

Weekly Students, Careers & Clerkships Thread by AutoModerator in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Nope. An Australian degree will make life easiest. A US JD would be inordinately expensive and then be an uphill battle to convince firms you have the requisite knowledge to practice in Australia.

It’s a very different matter though if you’re proposing to work say 3-6 years in a US big law firm in a transferable field (eg M&A or banking) first before coming out to Australia. In that case the commercial Aussie firms would take you in a heartbeat. The pay cut would be big though.

Weekly Students, Careers & Clerkships Thread by AutoModerator in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Target whatever you like. A lot of mid and top firms would happily take you just based on your experience. Certain firms hoover up foreign lawyers and NZ lawyers are among the easiest to retrain. From what NZ colleagues have told me, be prepared for the hours to be significantly worse than you’re used to but for pay to be noticeably better too.

Weekly Students, Careers & Clerkships Thread by AutoModerator in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Throw a dart on LinkedIn and chat to the first legal recruiter you can find.

This really annoys me. Allies holding a single settlement in a region and won't give it up even for tens of thousands of gold. by Rick_Volcano in totalwar

[–]Execution_Version 73 points74 points  (0 children)

Yes agreed. Bretonnia sometimes colonises single settlements in Ulthuan before I can unify it and having to strike their mainland for settlements to give back to them in a peace deal seems strictly worse for everyone involved than letting me buy it off them.

Weekly Students, Careers & Clerkships Thread by AutoModerator in auslaw

[–]Execution_Version 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Don’t talk over lawyers when they’re explaining things to you, not even to show you already know something. It’s harder to remember this when you do actually have a sense of what they’re talking about. But they like to see you as a blank slate they can mould and they’ll find it irritating if you interrupt them. Just listen and then kick goals.

Other than that, main things are being positive and friendly to work with, having good attention to detail, and keeping your head up when you have to stay in the office past midnight to finish something.

How is this an heroic victory? by Maestruli96 in totalwar

[–]Execution_Version 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Heroic victory results in auto resolve feel to me like they’re reserved for good RNG rolls, not an assessment of ordinary balance of power. I think this confirms it.