Experts Warn: Reform Rewrites Work Hours and Labor Relationship by Counting Only Effective Working Time
The first public meeting of the Labor Reform Observatory concluded with a forceful and unanimous statement against the labor reform initiative from the Executive, highlighting that its positive effects would be limited and it contains regressive aspects that undermine workers’ historical rights.
Key Participants and Their Views
- José Alfonso Bouzas, coordinator of the Observatory, introduced the discussion by pointing out that the initiative proposes significant changes, such as altering the labor relationship concept from “personal subordinate service” to a more restricted one linked to labor contracts, which could have negative consequences.
- Saúl Escobar, from the Institute of Workers Studies Rafael Galván, acknowledged the positivity of reducing work hours to 40 as constitutional but emphasized that the reform would be “limited” and compensated by employers to maintain a six-day workweek with one day off. He stressed that the central claim should be “a five-day workweek with two days off“.
- Dr. Manuel Fuentes, a labor lawyer and author of the document “40-Hour Week, One Step Forward and Five Back”, concurred in calling the initiative “regressive”. He denounced that changing the definition of employer and work hours is harmful, especially by proposing to count only time spent on “subordinate activities for the employer” instead of when the worker is “at the employer’s disposal“, as current law dictates. He warned that this represents a “loss of rights“, particularly for the 60% of workers without contracts.
- Magistrate Héctor Arturo Mercado was adamant in calling for the complete withdrawal of the initiative, describing it as “the worst labor project in Mexican labor history”. He argued that the proposal aligns perfectly with an employer position seeking work hour flexibility under their control.
- José Luis Tellez echoed the need for a “radical modification” of the initiative, stating that it “uberizes working conditions” with the concept of “effective working time“. He supported points of agreement, including the complete withdrawal of the initiative and defending a five-day workweek with two days off, as well as maintaining current concepts of employer and work hours (time at disposal).
Proposed Actions
The labor lawyer Dr. Fuentes and Magistrate Mercado proposed creating two documents: an analytical, systematized one and a simple 10-point version to raise awareness among workers and unions about the project’s risks. They also requested a meeting next week with the Executive’s representation to “defend” the initiative currently under analysis in the Senate.
