Essay --

Colin Green HEALTH AND SAFETY IN THE WORKPLACE IN THE INTERANTIONL LABOUR ORANIZATION (ILO): INDONESIA A. Given the poor working conditions in Indonesia and other countries around the world, health and safety in the workplace has always been an important issue for the International Labour Organization. Poor working conditions continue to threaten the lives of millions of people every year. Every day approximately 6,000 workers lose their lives as a result of accidents in the workplace (Safety and Health at work in Indonesia). A safe and positive work environment is essential for a productive work area or company. Despite efforts to increase safety in the work place, annually, over 430 million people suffer injuries or illness due to working conditions (Safety and Health at work in Indonesia). Human and gender equality rights activists hope to reduce the number of minorities and women working in unhealthy and unsafe workplaces as well as reduce the number of hazardous working environments. Many third world countries such as Indonesia are made up of a low skilled labor force an...

Week 9’s Final

Part One †¢Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Write an essay of at least 700 words. Comprehensive writing skills must be used. †¢Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The First Amendment to the Constitution bars Congress from infringing on the freedom of speech of the citizenry of the United States. It does not prohibit private restrictions on speech. With this in mind, many universities have over the years instituted speech codes or have banned hate-speech. If you were in charge of a university what rules would you make for student conduct online?Explain your reasoning and support your answer with examples and other evidence. If our legal reality truly reflected our political rhetoric about liberty, Americans and especially American college and university students would be enjoying a truly remarkable freedom to speak and express controversial ideas at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Virtually every public official declares a belief in â€Å"freedom of speech. † Politicians extol the virtues of freedom and boast of America’s unique status as a nation of unfettered expression.Judges pay homage to free speech in court opinions. Even some fringe parties’ communists and fascists who would create a totalitarian state if they were in power have praised the virtues of the freedom they need for their survival. Few individuals speak more emphatically on behalf of freedom of speech and expression, however, than university administrators, and few institutions more clearly advertise their loyalty to this freedom than universities themselves.During the college application process, there is a very high probability that you received pamphlets, brochures, booklets, and catalogs that loudly proclaimed the university’s commitment to â€Å"free inquiry,† â€Å"academic freedom,† â€Å"diversity,† â€Å"dialogue,† and â€Å"tolerance. â€Å"You may have believed these declarations, trusting th at both public and private colleges and universities welcome all views, no matter how far outside the mainstream, because they want honest difference and debate.Perhaps your own ideas were â€Å"unusual† or â€Å"creative. † You could be a liberal student in a conservative community, a religious student at a secular institution, or even an anarchist suffering under institutional regulations. Regardless of your background, you most likely saw college as the one place where you could go and hear almost anything—the one place where speech truly was free, where ideas were tried and tested under the keen and critical eyes of peers and scholars, where reason and values, not coercion, decided debate.Freedom and moral responsibility for the exercise of one’s freedom are ways of being human, not means adopted to achieve this or that particular point of view. Unfortunately, ironically, and sadly, America’s colleges and universities are all too often dedicate d more to censorship and indoctrination than to freedom and individual self-government. In order to protect â€Å"diversity† and to ensure â€Å"tolerance,† university officials proclaim, views deemed hostile or offensive to some students and some persuasions and, indeed, some administrators are properly subjected to censorship under campus codes.In the pages that follow, you will read of colleges that enact â€Å"speech codes† that punish students for voicing opinions that simply offend other students, that attempt to force religious organizations to accept leaders who are hostile to the message of the group, that restrict free speech to minuscule â€Å"zones† on enormous campuses, and that teach students sometimes from their very first day on campus that dissent, argument, parody, and even critical thinking can be risky business. Simply put, at most of America’s colleges and universities, speech is far from free.College officials, in betraying th e standards that they endorse publicly and that their institutions had, to the benefit of liberty, embraced historically, have failed to be trustees and keepers of something precious in American life. This  Guide  is an answer and, we hope, an antidote to the censorship and coercive indoctrination besetting our campuses. In these pages, you will obtain the tools you need to combat campus censors, and you will discover the true extent of your considerable free speech rights, rights that are useful only if you insist upon them.You will learn that others have faced and overcome the censorship you confront, and you will discover that you have allies in the fight to have your voice heard. The  Guide  is divided into four primary sections. This introduction provides a brief historical context for understanding the present climate of censorship. The second section provides a basic introduction to free speech doctrines. The third provides a series of real-world scenarios that demons trate how the doctrines discussed in this  Guide  have been applied on college campuses.Finally, a brief conclusion provides five practical steps for fighting back against attempts to enforce coercion, censorship, and indoctrination. Part Two †¢Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Write an essay of at least 700 words. Comprehensive writing skills must be used. †¢Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Between 1949 and 1987, the Fairness Doctrine was an FCC rule designed to provide â€Å"reasonable, although not necessarily equal† opportunities in presenting opposing viewpoints in radio broadcasting in order to avoid one-sided presentations.The practice was repealed under President Reagan as part of a wider deregulation effort. Do you think the Fairness Doctrine should be revived, revised, or left dead? Why? The  Fairness Doctrine  was a policy of the United States  Federal Communications Commission  (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of  broadcast licenses  to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced.The FCC decided to eliminate the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011 the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of  public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials.The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented. The main agenda for the doctrine was to ensure that viewers were exposed to a diversity of viewpoints. In 1969 the  United States Supreme Court  upheld the FCC's general  right  to enf orce the Fairness Doctrine where channels were limited. But the courts did not rule that the FCC was  obliged  to do so. 3]  The courts reasoned that the scarcity of the broadcast spectrum, which limited the opportunity for access to the airwaves, created a need for the Doctrine. However, the proliferation of cable television, multiple channels within cable, public-access channels, and the Internet have eroded this argument, since there are plenty of places for ordinary individuals to make public comments on controversial issues at low or no cost. The Fairness Doctrine should not be confused with the  Equal Time  rule.The Fairness Doctrine deals with discussion of controversial issues, while the Equal Time rule deals only with political candidates. The Fairness Doctrine has been both defended and opposed on First Amendment grounds. Backers of the doctrine claim that listeners have the right to hear all sides of controversial issues. They believe that broad-casters, if left alone, would resort to partisan coverage of such issues. They base this claim upon the early history of radio.Opponents of the doctrine claim the doctrine's â€Å"chilling effect† dissuaded broadcasters from examining anything but â€Å"safe† issues. Enforcement was so subjective, opponents argued, there was never a reliable way to determine before the fact what broadcasters could and could not do on the air without running afoul of the FCC. Moreover, they complain, print media enjoy full First Amendment protection while electronic media were granted only second-class status. I'll be honest, I'd never even heard of the Fairness Doctrine until I read this question.After looking it up on a few different sites, I'd have to say I’m still not entirely sure whether or not I think it should be reinstated. I see both pro's and cons to requiring licensed broadcast stations to present controversial public issues (which tends to apply mainly to political situations) in a fair, equal and honest way. I think this would create a more balanced source of rational discourse and  information  for the public on such issues and in this way serves the public interest.That being said, I think this is getting uncomfortably close to infringing upon freedom of the press and speech. I understand that the Fairness doctrine has the best of intentions and has even served us well in the past, But often, even good legislation leads to increased powers and control for government. No matter how many checks and balances our government has, It only takes one government official's loose interpretation of a law in order to justify abusing his office and encroaching up the basic rights our constitution grants us.

Strain Theory Essay - 1657 Words

Strain Theory Bigger Thomas, a young African American male, Twenty years old; vicious, vile and mean; he hates himself and all human society, especially that part of society which he attributes to making him a monster. Bigger Thomas is in rebellion on what he views as the white caste system; his crime is targeted at white society and the people that he views as being his oppressors. Bigger has the choice of taking on three roles, he can take on the role passivity designed for him by the southern whites and resolve his personal conflicts through the emotional catharsis of religion; or he can strive for and establish his own middle class society and thereby consciously or unconsciously become the white mans accomplice in oppression;†¦show more content†¦He also thought that in order for him to become noticeable in society he would have to become someone with no limits, almost godlike. The only way for him to enact this image was to have control over his life and the life of others, and t hats what induced him into a life of crime and murder. He was inevitably going to become a criminal, he was young, poor, and felt trapped in a society that was not concerned with his best interests. A man with nothing to lose or so it seemed, was ready to go out into the streets of Chicago and claim the lives of those who interfered with his existence as a decent human being. Crimes of hate, crimes of passion, crimes of economic gain, crimes of retribution, crimes of reciprocity, or just crimes of notoriety, were the positions that Bigger Thomas were left to define. He sought to fulfill the dreamlike fantasy of being on top of the economic ladder, and overcoming the status that his fate had entailed. The American dream, crazily sought after, rarely achieved, is what some theorist may say. People of the lower class or should I say of all socioeconomic classes have this preconceived notion that the American Dream is attainable if you just work hard and believe in the system. Howe ver, the strain and anomie theories prove otherwise. People of all different background share this eager desire to obtain the status of the economically elite, but for some it is consideredShow MoreRelatedThe Structural Strain Theory Has Occurred1040 Words   |  5 Pagesmeans, the structural strain theory has occurred. A mismatch that occurs between legitimate means and socially-promoted goals has a typology of responses in the strain theory. Merton’s typology extends the functionalist perspective. He believed that larger deviancy rates were because of social conditions and the varying responses. One of the responses to social strain that accepts legitimate means of pursuing socially-promoted goals is conformity. Another response to social strain is ritualism. PeopleRead MoreCrime Theories: Strain Theory, Social Bond Theory, and Differential-Association Theory957 Words   |  4 Pageseven why something is. In the case of criminology the main question being asked is †Å"why does crime occur?†, but some theories also attempt to answer another equally interesting question â€Å"if being a criminal is the easy choice, why are so many people law abiding?† in order to understand criminal behavior. In order for a hypothesis to be moved forward into the category of a theory it must first be tested, and those tests must be able to be reconfirmed. In the case of criminology most of this testingRead MoreStrain Theory878 Words   |  4 PagesStrain Theory I have chosen to write about Robert Merton’s Strain Theory. I find this theory particularly interesting, especially as it relates to crime and even education. As noted in our book Sociology in Our Times: The Essentials, the definition of strain theory is that people feel strain when they are exposed to cultural goals that they are unable to obtain because they do not have access to culturally approved means of achieving those goals (Kendall 164). For example, if your goal is obtainingRead MoreStrain Theory Essay1361 Words   |  6 PagesRobert Agnew is known for his general strain theory. The theory explains that the basis of people getting involved in criminal activity is because of strain. If someone becomes upset, frustrated, depressed, or mistreated they will turn to crime in order to deal with the feelings. Yet, not all people turn to crime in order to deal with strain or stressors. There are different ways to measure strain. Subjective strains are those strains that are disliked by particular person or group. This approachedRead MoreThe Theory And General Strain Theory1262 Words   |  6 PagesA theory is described, as an idea or set of ideas generally intended to explain, to prove facts or events. Theory can be an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true, that is not an ideas that relates to a particular subject (Merriam-Webster, 2015). Theory is an explanation of something. Theories in criminal behavior explains why an individual commits criminal and delinquent acts. This paper will compare and contrast two theories of crime or criminal activities that was discuss in thisRead MoreStrain Theory Essay995 Words   |  4 PagesThe book â€Å"Crime and the American Dream† is an example of the Strain Theory. Social class and living conditions are some of the factors that increases the vulnerability of a certain group to commit crimes. People are eager to be part of the ideology of the dream that the United States has to offer. The United States promise people that if they form part of the American society they will be successful and have the opportunities that they did not have in their home country. Most people believe thatRead MoreWhat is Strain Theory?1306 Words   |  5 PagesStrain theory is a criminological theory positing that a gap between culturally approved goals and legitimate means of achieving them cause’s frustration that leads to criminal behavior. Strain (structural strain) refers generally to the processes by which inadequate regulation at the societal level filters down to how individual perceives his or her needs. Strain (individual strain) refers to the frictions and pains experienced by the individuals as they look for ways to meet their needs (the motivationalRead MoreLabeling Theory And Strain Theory3368 Words   |  14 Pages Michael Byrnes Cindy Moore Theories of Criminal Behavior 11/16/14 Labeling Theory and Strain Theory: John Dillinger â€Æ' Introduction: Throughout history there have always been many different theories of crime and why people commit crimes. In the late 1930s a new theory rose to the forefront; this theory was called the anomie theory. Anomie means a lack of ethical standards. The anomie theory was proposed by Roberton Merton. It stated that society, as a whole, generally shares the same goals relatingRead MoreThe Theory Of General Strain Theory Essay1831 Words   |  8 PagesIntroduction In the 1980’s, Criminologist, Robert Agnew, presented his theory of general strain, in which he covers a range of negative behaviors, especially how adolescents deal with stresses of strain. General strain theory focuses on the source, such as anything that changes in the individual’s life that causes strain. His theory provides a different outlook on social control and social learning theory for two reasons: the type of social relationship that leads to delinquency and the motivationRead MoreMerging Agnews General Strain Theory and Hirschis Social Bond Theory 1913 Words   |  8 PagesThe two theories I have decided to merge are Agnew’s General Strain Theory and Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory. I picked General Strain Theory because it does a good job at discussing some of the things that can trigger the release of a person’s negative emotions which in turn may lead to deviant behavior. I also decided to write about Social Bond Theory because it desc ribes some of the factors that keep people from committing crime. Both of the theories have strengths and weaknesses individually, but