Background on Infonavit and the Relevant Parties
The Infonavit is a housing fund in Mexico managed by the National Housing Fund (FONAVIP) that provides credit to workers for purchasing or constructing homes. Employers and employees contribute to this fund, with the former typically covering half of the contribution. The reform in question altered the rules regarding salary deductions for Infonavit credits during labor incapacities.
Who is affected by this reform?
The reform impacts both employers and employees. Employers were obligated to continue deducting salary for Infonavit credits during their employees’ incapacities, a period financed by the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS). Employees, on the other hand, faced potential financial strain if they were unable to work and still had salary deductions for their Infonavit credits.
Supreme Court’s Ruling
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) issued a ruling that acknowledges the possibility for employers to suspend salary deductions for Infonavit credits when employees are absent or on incapacitation, provided that the loan repayment is guaranteed according to legal timelines.
“The Supreme Court established jurisprudence that prioritizes legal certainty, proportionality, and workers’ economic security. This decision was made by determining that employers can temporarily halt salary deductions for Infonavit housing credits when employees are absent or on incapacitation, ensuring that loan payments continue as per the law,” stated SCJN in a press release.
Implications of the Reform
The reformed Infonavit obligation created uncertainty for both employers and employees, as salary deductions continued even during incapacitation periods when the employee had no control over their income, and the IMSS covered those periods. This situation led to potential financial burdens for employees and employers alike.
- Lack of legal certainty: The reform created ambiguity regarding the obligation to make salary deductions during absences or incapacitations, as per the Social Security Law.
- Financial strain on employees: Employees faced the prospect of continued salary deductions for Infonavit credits during periods when they were unable to work, potentially causing financial hardship.
- Employer concerns: Employers worried about the implications of being held responsible for salary deductions during employee absences, which could result in additional financial burdens or potential legal issues.
Experts’ Perspectives
In April, a month after the reform’s enactment, experts interviewed by El Economista warned of the new measure’s lack of legal certainty for both parties. They highlighted potential issues such as employer-employee disputes and possible Infonavit non-compliance opinions leading to registration cancellation in the Registry of Specialized Services Providers (REPSE), a requirement for offering specialized services subcontracting.
Potential Consequences
One of the risks for workplaces under this scenario, according to experts, was a potential Infonavit non-compliance opinion that could lead to the cancellation of their registration in the REPSE, operated by the Secretariat of Labor and Social Security (STPS). This registration is essential for offering specialized services subcontracting.
Key Questions and Answers
- What was the issue with the Infonavit reform? The reform required employers to continue deducting salary for Infonavit credits during employees’ incapacities, causing financial strain and uncertainty for both parties.
- How did the Supreme Court address this issue? The SCJN ruled that employers could temporarily suspend salary deductions for Infonavit credits during employee absences or incapacitations, ensuring loan repayments adhered to legal timelines.
- What were the potential consequences of not addressing this issue? There was a risk of employer-employee disputes, possible Infonavit non-compliance opinions, and even registration cancellation in the REPSE for offering specialized services subcontracting.
