News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult. Parent comment

Re:Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult by psuter on Saturday October 05, 2013 @02:23AM (#6499682)
The 1:12 project is at the same stage as the basic income one: up for referendum. Latest polls showed people were still undecided (vote is at the end of November).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult by riffraff on Saturday October 05, 2013 @02:45AM (#6499750)
I was under the impression the 1:12 vote already happened and was voted with an overwhelming majority, e.g.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21647937

http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2013/03/switzerlan...

Could you explain the discrepancy ?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult by uraza on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:00AM (#6499788)
From the original article:

  In March, Swiss voters backed some of the world's strictest controls
  on executive pay, forcing public companies to give shareholders a
  binding vote on compensation.

  A separate proposal to limit monthly executive pay to no more than 
  what the company's lowest-paid staff earn in a year, the so-called
  1:12 initiative, faces a popular vote on November 24.
The two articles you linked to refer to the first proposal.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult by chmars on Saturday October 05, 2013 @04:13AM (#6499962)
Your impression is wrong. The vote you are referring to was on shareholders' rights, i.e., shareholders will get more influence on the compensation of the executives of 'their' companies.

The vote on the 1:12 initiative will be on November 24, 2013.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Swiss to vote on 2,500 franc basic income for every adult by rstuder on Saturday October 05, 2013 @03:05AM (#6499799)
This refers to another constitution change: By strengthening the control of shareholders over payout for executives, they want to stop these extremely high bonuses. So this was a much less radical law change, that the 1:12 article would be.
[ Parent | on HN ]