The Government's Labor Ministry attempted to bring together the conflicting parties today, but the business sector remained firm in its stance to not improve the salary proposal without a prior update of their income, a decision that rests with the Transportation Ministry, an entity that did not directly participate in the negotiations. The UTA responded emphatically to the received offer, labeling it as an affront to their dignity and unprecedented.
As a consequence of the lack of agreement in negotiations, the suspension of public passenger transport services nationwide has been confirmed. Union sources have reaffirmed the strike measure called, highlighting its national scope throughout the country. The main disagreement between the parties lies in the UTA's salary demand, which seeks to raise the basic salary from $1.2 million to $1.7 million, while the business sector argues the impossibility of meeting this increase without an update of their income to cover operational costs.
After the expiration of mandatory conciliation on April 30 and the lack of agreement in the wage negotiation meeting, the business chambers proposed the payment of a one-time extraordinary bonus, along with a new basic salary starting from July 1. However, this proposal was conditional on a complete and timely update of the salary and non-salary cost structure, which generated disagreement from the union.
The business sector justified the lack of a more favorable salary offer by arguing the lack of guarantees and certainties from transportation authorities regarding the provision of resources to cover higher costs. Despite acknowledging that the strike measure may affect users, they emphasized the difficult financial situation faced by the sector, with a significant deficit in its cost structure.
After another failure in negotiations and the lack of understanding between the parties, the UTA confirmed a nationwide strike of activities for 24 hours starting next Tuesday. The union insists on the need for a salary restructuring for the coming months, while the business chambers argue a deficit in the cost structure of the sector and the lack of tariff updates compared to other jurisdictions.
