2024-02-24 08:01:00
<!– –>
The Argentine labor regime has become outdated, and there is talk of reform again. FundAr researchers surveyed the reforms carried out in Spain, Mexico, Chile and the United States. Joan Manuel Vezzato is one of them and spoke with PULSO.
QUESTION: Do you have an alternative view regarding the meaning of a “labor reform”?
ANSWER: Yes. We try to contrast with a paradigm that has been around since the mid-70s, and is the idea of flexiregulation, labor deregulation, and that returns from time to time as the solution to the problem of job creation. The excuse is always the need to update labor laws to the new changes in the world of work.
Q: What is the research you carried out at FundAr about?
R: We take five countries with characteristics that are dissimilar to each other, that have advanced in modern labor reforms, and that are not advancing in deregulation, but quite the opposite, with greater participation of unions, strengthening of union institutions, of the elements to regulate income, for example minimum wages.
There are those who imagine a regimen of six hours a day or four days a week. I think it is not such an ambitious discussion. In Argentina we have a 48-hour work week. A reduction to 40-hour workweeks would already be progress.
Q: Do you think it is necessary to update labor laws?
R: I think it is logical, because indeed the changes in the world of work in the last 20 years have been abysmal, and then labor legislation must actually be adapted to that. What we show is that this rearrangement does not necessarily have to do with deregulation.
Q: What did you find regarding the extension of the work day?
R: It is indeed being discussed. For example, in Mexico the debate on reducing the working day is currently progressing. In Chile, progress has already been made in the reduction. What there is to analyze there is the reduction from which day onwards. Sometimes there is talk of reducing the working day and some imagine going to a regime of six hours a day, or four days a week. I think it is not such an ambitious discussion. In Argentina we have a fairly long working day of 48 hours a week. A reduction to 40-hour workweeks would already be progress in that sense, and it does not seem crazy.
Q: “Labor reform” is associated with progress in labor rights. What is happening in the world?
R: Well, in fact the government’s initiative through the DNU implies just that, with reduction in compensation, extension of trial periods, and cuts in regulations that have to do with penalties for labor fraud. In other countries the opposite is happening. Spain was a country that had very flexible labor contracting. A lot of temporary work, a lot of workers who were registered as temporary workers, when in reality they were permanent workers. And there was a very strong modification. Those who criticized the reform said that this was going to increase unemployment, because companies, by having to hire for an indefinite period of time, were going to lay off more. What can be seen is that after the reform, temporary work plummeted and meanwhile unemployment also continued to fall.
Employment is generated by economic growth. What the reforms allow, in any case, is to improve or worsen the quality of employment.
Q: Does the reform guarantee an improvement in the labor market?
R: In labor reforms the premise is always job creation. We highlight that neither an inclusive labor reform, like the ones we are citing, nor a flexible labor reform, like those we usually discuss in Argentina, generate employment per se. Employment is generated by economic growth. What the reforms allow, in any case, is to improve or worsen the quality of employment.
Q: What have you found regarding labor costs?
R: The discussion usually revolves around labor cost regulations, or differentiated employer contributions according to company sizes or types of sector. But the differential issue has to do with productivity levels. There are studies that analyze productivity in small Latin American companies compared to small European companies, and what is seen is an enormous differential in productivity, which then impacts the ability of these companies to register their workers. . Indeed, in Spain or Chile, informality is less. The Argentine case is more profound, because in general SMEs do not cover the tax burden.
Q: Do collective labor agreements exist in other countries?
R: Yes, they exist. It depends a lot on each country. The agreements are usually per company. So in the reform of Spain for example, the unions were strengthened in sectoral negotiation. The bet is to incorporate the unions into the discussions. The union systems, both in the United States and in Mexico, are very different from ours and very different from that of Spain, but in all cases what is attempted is, based on the characteristics of each of those countries , strengthen the negotiation.
Q: ¿What do you think regarding the Argentine conjuncture?
R: The inflationary context affects all workers, but especially those who do not have labor institutions, or do not have unions that negotiate. In this regard, we said, even before the change of government, that a stabilization plan should contemplate an income policy that coordinates salary negotiations with some type of compensation for workers. We believe that it is important to contribute elements to the debate, because it seems that the only way to reform our labor regime is one, and it is not even close to what is happening in the world.
Profile
Joan Manuel Vezzato is a political scientist (University of Buenos Aires) and has a master’s degree in Economic Sociology (IDAES/UNSAM).
He is a professor at the National University of La Matanza and part of the research team at FundAr.
He worked as an industrial policy analyst in the Ministry of Industry and Productive Development and as a parliamentary advisor specialized in budget in the Buenos Aires Legislature.
1708765029
#âœNo #type #labor #reform #guarantees #improvement #employment.â #Diario #RÃo #Negro