Thursday, September 18, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Mill Pride Closet Organizers
unconstitutional
The abolition of university competitions is not (unless shown otherwise) unconstitutional:
From the blog:
The abolition of university competitions is not (unless shown otherwise) unconstitutional:
From the blog:
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
January 31, 2008 at 7:18 pm
@ colombo by Privett:
I might indicate a document which explains
the unconstitutionality of the abolition of university competitions?
Wishing then also be formal
stabilization should be unconstitutional!
31 January 2008 at 7:37 pm
Rivoluzioneitalia is not a specific provision of the Constitution on university competitions, but the general rule on recruitment in public administration (the university is a public authority). This is art. 97, paragraph 3, of the Constitution which says:
"employment in public administration is through competitive examinations, except as provided by law " .
Furthermore, Article. 51, paragraph 1 of the Constitution stipulates that citizens' access to "public office" should be "on equal terms."
However, the competition method is commonly considered the most suitable (in theory) to provide the basis of equality, the constitution, as you see, believed to be a larger value than the other (eg. Quickness of choice) .
It 's true that Article. 97, paragraph 3, leaves open the possibility of exceptions, but these must be taken explicitly by law.
why Mussi repeatedly stated that - even considering that it was not the best system for the university, one of the competitions - with a simple regulation he could not remove them, but just try to regulate them differently.
To remove it would take a strong law, serious and thoughtful (which was going to depart from the constitution, essentially). What I said, I believe, is that the majority of them dreamed of the attributes to make a law so calmly.
stabilization would be unconstitutional on this basis, for those who have never made a competition (contractors). For those who have made a contest (fellows), probably in the transformation of the relationship would remain indefinitely within the limits of constitutionality, because there was a competition.
understand why every now and then to insist otherwise analyze the different figures of temporary workers?
In any case, if stabilization had not been automatic, but through a selective review of national fitness, I think that the competition arrangements could have been respected rietenere the same (and in this case also for contractors who were drettamente put on trial in place of eligibility.
Revolution, hoping to be helpful
Best regards