Buenos Aires, Dec 14 (NA) -- Mercedes Cabezas, Adjunct Secretary General of ATE National, strongly criticized the labor reform proposal pushed by the Government, which she described as a 'pro-employer reform' that, in her view, seeks to legalize the existing labor precariousness in the country.
She stated that the solution to informality is not to 'crystallize or whiten it,' but to ensure that workers who do not know what it is to have a job with real rights actually have them. 'This labor reform is not aimed at that,' she emphasized.
Cabezas called it 'very strange' that the reform does not cover the situation of precarious sectors such as delivery platforms (Rappi or Pedidos Ya): 'What I cannot understand is why, for example, Rappi and Pedidos Ya, all those who are working off the books today, will not be covered by the labor reform.' As an example, she cited Mexico, 'which has just reduced the working day to create more formal jobs.'
The central debate: Who generates wealth?
The leader questioned the axis of the discussion and called for putting the worker at the center: 'I think there is something fundamental, which is where you place the focus, the employer who gives you the job or the working class that generates the wealth. Because if the working class generates wealth, then it has the right to discuss it,' she stated.
Specific criticisms
Cabezas pointed out the clauses she considers most problematic, including the 'bank of hours.' 'I find that very strange,' she said. She also argued that this is due to a 'false view of entrepreneurship in Argentina,' while 'in the world, the possibility of a convention for platform workers is being debated.'
She also criticized the end of the ultra-activity of collective agreements, explaining that the project forces the renegotiation of expired agreements within a year and grants power to the Ministry of Employment to intervene: 'The ultra-activity of collective agreements ends. If a collective agreement has expired and a government did not want to renegotiate it, say, it continues to be in effect, right? [...] If the Ministry of Employment disagrees with any clause of the agreement, it can be canceled.'
According to the ATE Adjunct Secretary, this is like telling the worker: 'tell me, government, how you want me to work, and then I will work according to what you say needs to be done.'
Finally, Cabezas noted that the 'bank of hours' deprives the worker of control over their personal life and time: 'Specifically, the issue of the bank of hours, where the employer has to tell you what days you work, how many hours, and you have no say over your time, is an outrage, because time is something that no one ever gives back to you.'
