After the government announced the postponement of consideration of labor reform until February, Hugo Yasky He linked this government decision to the mobilization in the Plaza de Mayo and the official defeat in the Chamber of Deputies. “If we manage to get to the regular session period, there may be opinions on the labor reform projects we have,” the lawmaker and union member said Fontevecchia modefrom Net TV And Radio profile (AM 1190).
Hugo Yasky is a teacher, trade unionist and politician. He currently serves as the National Representative for the Province of Buenos Aires, representing the Unión por la Patria. He is also General Secretary of the Central Workers’ Organization of Argentina. He previously represented the CTERA Guild.
Labor reform in February: The government postponed the debate in the Senate to extend negotiations
Authoritarians don’t like that
The practice of professional and critical journalism is a mainstay of democracy. That is why it bothers those who believe that they are the owners of the truth.
The two big issues yesterday were, on the one hand, the exit of the CGT and, on the other hand, the scandal in Congress between the government’s back and forth with the MPs on the famous Article 75. I would like you to take stock of yesterday’s busy and politically interesting day on both levels.
I start with the march on the Plaza de Mayo. I think it was an important expression of rejection of the government-sponsored labor reform. Let us remember that he intended to adopt a law containing 197 articles in a short time. They wanted to do a bit of a gallop to get an opinion on it and get it approved before Christmas. I think it’s clear that this is no longer possible. The government has given up and I believe that the important mobilization in the capital had an impact on this, but also the mobilizations that took place in several provinces. And I think without a doubt that what happened in Congress the night before is related to that.
The government took for granted a procedure for approving the budget. To achieve this, he had tried to win the votes of MPs from several provinces through the kind of give-and-take relationships he builds with various governors, and I think they were surprised. Of course, they did not even have the hypothesis that it could happen that they would lose the vote on nothing more and nothing less than that Article 75, in which they intended to repeal the two laws that Congress had passed by two-thirds to remain in force through the mechanism of perseverance. To achieve two-thirds of the votes in the Chamber of Deputies, we speak of a majority made up of the votes of different blocs. Many of these MPs had to deal with the humiliation of having to vote twice against what they had voted for a few months earlier..
Four times because they voted for disability twice and for university twice.
Yes, if we add the two laws together, it is four times as much. I think that’s what, to everyone’s surprise, resulted in the majority package that the government took for granted, because it was a surprise to the libertarians, but it was also a surprise to us. In the end they voted against the article, i.e. for the laws for the university, for the legislation for the disabled. And since they had raised other issues that were also sensitive to the government, they were rejected. This undoubtedly prompted them to warn that they could not rule out the same thing happening to them on the issue of labor reform. This explains the fact that they postponed the continuation of the reform treatment until February.
Because of the union structure, part of the strategy was also to ensure that the bill was dealt with in ordinary rather than extraordinary sessions, with the logical assumption that the government was at its strongest and that it would weaken as the months of February, March or April progressed. Is the fact that we’re heading straight into February a first victory?
Yes, Enacting labor reform for ordinary citizens is our first victory. What you say is true, because if we were to address this issue of labor reform in regular meetings, we could put our own projects up for discussion. In the extraordinary meetings only the project proposed by the governing party is discussed and one can discursively refer to one’s own projects, but without practical consequences. On the other hand, if we manage to reach the regular session, there may be opinions on the labor reform projects we have, such as workers on digital platforms, reducing working hours and others.
The CGT marched on the Plaza de Mayo and threatened a nationwide strike
Is the fact that the government has said it is not interested in this budget if Article 75 is not passed some kind of forceful negotiating strategy, or do you think that is ultimately their aim? Just like the famous omnibus law in February last year, when they wanted to reduce it, they abolished it directly. How do you assess the development of the budget?
First of all, it must be said that the government wanted to use the vote on the budget law to repeal two laws that had already been passed. This is absolutely unconstitutional because the budget law is a one-year law. Once the deadline set in the budget has passed, another law must be discussed. An attempt to repeal laws whose validity extends beyond the financial year would at least lead to this repeal becoming legal. I don’t know whether to attribute this to ignorance or to the arrogant way in which the government often follows the dictates of the Constitution.
Perhaps it is a mixture of both, as I pointed this out when I had to explain our CTA’s position on the issue of labor reform in the Senate. The government’s proposed reform violates Article 14bis of the Constitution. For this reason, the working chapter of the DNU is not in force because the judge declared it unconstitutional. 75% of the content of the government’s intended reform includes everything that is in the DNU’s working chapter and has been declared unconstitutional. And yet they insist. That is why I say that, in my opinion, it is a mixture of an arrogant attitude, a desire to comply with the law and perhaps also a certain ignorance, because I know that the members of the bloc themselves, when we explained to them that this would inevitably lead to legalization, even if they approved it, many did not understand what we were talking about.
TV
About The Author
