Secretary General of CGT, Jorge SolaHe analyzed informal work and stated that “not all people want to move to formality,” because that would mean adhering to rules and obligations that many would rather avoid. in Fontificia modeOn Net TV and Radio Perfil (AM 1190), the leader stressed that the solution does not involve cutting off rights, because “amending some employment relationships does not necessarily lead to generating real work,” and stressed that the priority should be tax reform that allows “investment to be productive and not financial.” Furthermore, he stated that voting in Argentina had become “emotional rather than rational”, and that politics should be “excited again with a future project that includes everyone”.
Jorge Sola is a lawyer, graduate of political science and sociology, and professor of biological sciences. He is one of the three joint secretaries-general of the General Confederation of Labor, a position he most recently assumed on 5 November. He also holds the position of Secretary General of the Insurance Federation of the Argentine Republic.
How many years did you spend studying?
a lot. I also completed 3 years of construction engineering, which I gave up, and an extended high school, because in technical schools the studies are doubled in 6 years. I’m still 40 years old, I finished my degree at FLACSO in Sociology and Political Science, so I’m still studying.
Authoritarians don’t like this
The practice of professional and critical journalism is an essential pillar of democracy. This is why it bothers those who believe they are the bearers of the truth.
There may not be another member of the union who has this academic training. So I would like to get general thinking about what it means to work today in the 21st century, as well as general political thinking.
Today, work still means social achievement for man. This, as a first matter, seems to contradict the point of view regarding the economic value of work, but firstly it has a social issue that men and women must undertake within society. That is why, for us, a point of view taken according to the same bottom line that capitalism has been implementing for so long is so important. That capitalism, which transformed from productive capitalism to financial capitalism, transformed work, and no longer interfered much in the generation of goods and services, but rather in a lateral way, and transformed from productive capitalism to financial capitalism, in reproducing money in exchange for money itself, where human intervention is biased.
In addition to this, technology, robotics, and the emergence of artificial intelligence are modifying work methods. In all this perspective, workers and their representatives, i.e. trade unions, are interested and preoccupied with understanding how men and women can execute tasks, empower themselves with new technologies, artificial intelligence, and not be replaced. I don’t know if all politicians understand this because sometimes, what distinguishes us is only the economic value of the workforce, not the social perspective, as I said before. This is where our CGT delivery goes north.
They condemn the loss of 200,000 jobs and the complete lack of dialogue with the government
How do you explain Miley winning twice in a row?
I have a phrase that seems accurate to me, which is that “the uncertainty of the future may triumph over the certainty of the past.” There’s a lot of that out there. That is, it seemed to me that there was a search for many people who gave him victory, of course, not all, who looked for an uncertain future, but did not want to turn back. Looking back, perhaps for those with memories going back to that point, what would have been a possibility recently was inflation of over 15% per month. “Well, I don’t want to go back to that. I want to continue inflation, which is high by global standards, but low for Argentina.” Well, that’s good. It is not explained rationally, because rationally, many people begin to disagree with huge amounts of policies implemented by this government. It is explained from an emotional point of view. and The vote ended up being emotional rather than rationalin many ways. Even crossed with discrediting democratic mechanisms. Our low voter turnout is an important manifestation. Then there is an edge there, an edge, which is the old battle between Peronism and anti-Peronism.
And this crack is still broken 80 years ago, since ’45, it started, and it seems to me it’s still there. For me, who has an ideological connection to Peronism, this sector of the powerful opposition has a task: Look into the future without looking in the rearview mirror. Here we have to get excited again with a project for the future of the country that is not limited to stopping, but rather gives hope and gives the passion that generates a future society that includes everyone. And I insist again: votes today are emotional, not rational. and You have to start finding that much emotion when it comes to bringing people together. In the face of a society of people who are embarrassed, who feel cursed, well, we must create a society of people who want a future that includes all of us, and where, in that future, there is something fundamental to us, which is social justice.
I point this out in a little detail. I am the son of parents who did not have work rights, and my children, the grandchildren of these grandparents, have rights today. Social justice happened in the middle. I come from a very poor place. However, I was able to study in a public school. If there was no social justice, it would not exist. So you’ll feel excited again. I can’t do it discursively. I have to do this both realistically and discursively. This is the task of the organized labor movement and the labor movement as well.
What do we talk about when we talk about tax reform?
How do you resolve what you say, with pride, that your parents do not have labor rights, and that you have them and that your children have them, even though the 50% who do not have them? What is your judgment on the remedy of putting the 50% of workers who do not have these rights today in the labor market with their rights, facing labor reform?
First, let us assume that among the huge number of people working in the informal sector, not all people want to move to the formal sector, because Going to formalities means adhering to some rules regarding working hourswith obligations and so on. There is a way of working, which may be in the minority, but we must take into account, that people want to be self-employed. We must pay attention to this, and this attention must be paid by the state. A smart and efficient country.
the second: No jobs are created by simple modification of employment relationships Between investment capital and the labor force, between employers and workers. This alone cannot be modified. But this should be done when the country is in the development stage. and Today we are in a recession. So for me what happens is that They reverse the order of priorities and put the cart before the horse. First they have to create Tax reform So that the tax burden borne by those who want to invest productively in Argentina is as simple and cheap as possible, so that more productive investment, more employment opportunities, better conditions, and better economic conditions are generated in the first place.
If that doesn’t happen, then labor reform is nothing more than a quest to try to get rights from workers, and to try to pass part of the wealth that workers have to a sector that might benefit. How can I give, for example, what happened: it They removed fines for hiring blacks, yet you didn’t see real jobs created. In the past two years, we have lost about 290,000 formal jobs, i.e. approximately 19,000 small and medium enterprises. However, let’s say, do you insist that the solution could be labor market reform? Tax reform no Productive investmentNot for financial investment. The boys are working on phenomena there.
Let me disagree on one point. You might say, “Look, they eliminated the fines for black labor and black labor has not decreased.” I can tell him: “They imposed fines for 10 years and black employment increased.” Clearly the solution didn’t come from there either.
We will both agree on that. I look at it from the point of view that I wanted to set it as an example of three things, one of the three things that this government has done to try to reform labor relations, that will generate real action. In addition to these fines, a dependent worker number has also been created, i.e. up to three collaborators a worker can have monotributista without taking into account the existence of a subordinate relationship. That didn’t really work either. The other is the stop box. I have no employers, no union activities, employers who came in large numbers knocking on doors to create a severance fund to replace compensation. To confirm this: that Modifying some work relationships does not necessarily lead to real work. First, there must be investment, and investment must be proportional to production.
Today this country is in recession. She is in stasis, although she has not been officially told. Low consumption, low purchasing power, low credit, massive debt held by households and SMEs… well, this points to a country that is not forward looking. The investments being considered today provide few jobs because they are investments in energy and mining. So, coming back to that original question, we’ll be very careful about whether the rights acquired are extended, because that’s not a burden to not invest them either. But it seems to me that they should reconsider the idea that it is necessary to implement labor reform in order to obtain workers’ rights. I say that again even though we do not have the official project. Rather, I put forward the statement and then deny it. But wait, we haven’t been called to any meeting yet.
Republic of Macedonia/ff
About The Author
