The UGT has rejected the labor law reform proposed by the government to social partners, labeling it as “inappropriate” and highlighting other priorities they consider more significant.
In a statement, the organization described the discussion as “untimely, inappropriate, and unjustified,” adding that it is “inappropriate, particularly due to the current context.”
“Our economy is growing, our public accounts are consolidated, and there is no external pressure to correct potential imbalances,” they stated, noting the “labor market functioning well, with employment numbers setting records and historically low unemployment, except for youth unemployment.”
“We also note that the number of job vacancies at IEFP has been increasing, and the major issue with our labor market is not a lack of dynamism, but rather a shortage of labor, as employers affirm,” it added.
As a result, the UGT expressed confusion over “why the government prioritizes changing labor legislation as the first effective post-election discussion at the CPCS [Permanent Commission for Social Dialogue].”
The organization also reminded that “there was a significant change to labor legislation not long ago,” indicating that their priorities lie elsewhere.
For the UGT, it is more crucial to address issues such as “the minimum wage and wages in general,” housing, “which requires immediate measures, including better market regulation, suitable support, and tax measures,” and “professional training, the role of IEFP, and its coordination with social partners, ensuring the enhancement and adjustment of qualifications to meet market needs.”
The UGT also emphasized the importance of “migration and ensuring greater involvement of unions in regulating labor relations and protecting migrant workers.”
The organization expressed concern that the starting point of the discussion “raises apprehension” when it is noted that “the slogan is ‘to flexibilize,’ which, contrary to the government’s belief, is not synonymous with modernization.”
“Many of the changes relate to particularly sensitive subjects (including fundamental rights), highlighting the evident intent of the proposals made, demonstrated by employers’ clear satisfaction,” they pointed out.
The UGT warned that “removing subjects from the principle of more favorable treatment (teleworking and overtime pay),” as well as extending grounds and duration for fixed-term contracts and other precarious employment, the return of individual time banks, reducing professional training hours, among others, including “removing powers from ACT [Authority for Working Conditions],” are on the table.
“These proposals aim at greater individualization of labor relations, liberalization, and precarization of the labor market, seeking to introduce more discretion and grant more power to the employer,” they stated.
According to the UGT, “the goal of setting the minimum wage is now to align with income and price policies,” which “could distort the current legal and even constitutional balance, sidelining the workers’ needs in the process and endangering the social role of the minimum wage.”
The UGT is also concerned about changes to strike laws and other issues related to trade union activities.
“We express our concern and reservations about various issues, not only because we believe these changes are unnecessary in our labor market, but also because many of the changes are likely to undermine rights, which we find troubling,” they stated.
The UGT believes “this will be, like all labor discussions, a difficult one.”
On July 24, the government approved a draft proposal for a “profound” labor legislation reform in a Council of Ministers meeting, which will be negotiated with social partners and includes the revision of “over a hundred articles of the Labor Code.”
