Against the clock: merchants criticize agreement on reforms

The unions and unions have been sitting since Monday, within the framework of the labor and salary policy agreement table, to discuss the labor and pension reform projects that will reach Congress this Thursday, March 16.

(Why would the labor reform generate more unemployment? Fenalco responds).

On the side of the businessmen, Jaime Alberto Cabal, president of Fenalco, reiterated the concerns that the merchants see with the project and spoke with Portafolio about how he sees the discussion, just three days before the deadline set by the Government.

How did you see the installation of the labor agreement table?

This Monday we had the first tripartite meeting: the government, labor unions, and unions, from 10:00 am to 1:30 pm, barely three and a half hours, to agree on the labor reform.

We have insisted from Fenalco that this is not enough time to discuss a reform of such magnitude and importance for Colombians.

Unfortunately there will not be another space, because the reform will be presented on Thursday, March 16, and on Tuesday the commission will also look at the pension reform, of which the first text is not yet known.

(Businessmen’s warning: labor reform would impact employment).

There really hasn’t been any agreement. There has been an analysis of several articulated projects. On some points, the suggestions of the unions and the labor unions have been taken into account, but there are more points that separate us and the discrepancies that exist than the few issues on which we have agreement.

You had asked to postpone the reform for the second semester, what did the minister tell you?

To the minister, in the concentration commission, we once again reiterated the importance of such a reform going better to Congress and not simply to the race, as has been done, and the minister was reluctant and ratified her decision to file it next Thursday.

We regret that, and we will leave the record on those points on which Fenalco cannot agree due, first, to the short time of discussion; and second, because they are issues that go against the possibility of creating employment and would suffocate companies with new labor costs.

What are the points that concern you the most?

Undoubtedly the excessive growth of labor costs. This growth would occur, in the first place, due to the reduction in the daytime shift from 9:00 pm to 6:00 pm; those three hours become nighttime surcharges and overtime. Second, there is also the growth in the costs of Sundays and holidays, which go from 75% to 100%; and third, the impact that the reduction of the weekly workday of 48 and 42 hours would have.

A fourth point is the costs that would be incurred by dismissals with just cause, where the project intends to increase the costs of compensation. And fifth, the costs that paternity leave would entail from four to 12 weeks. Adding all this, companies would face higher costs between 30% and 40%.

(Unions find it difficult to agree with the Government on the labor reform).

Of course, this would especially hit small and medium-sized businesses, commerce, restaurants, bars and tourism, which work on those Sunday, holiday and night shifts. It would imply that many companies could disappear or they would have to transfer these costs to the consumer, creating a greater inflationary climate.

You have also mentioned that informality could be increased…

If we analyze this reform, as I have said before, it is much more oriented towards improving the conditions of those who currently have a job, but it forgets about the unemployed, the opportunity to access work and the possibilities that informal workers can become formal labor, due to high costs.

That is why we have pointed out that many companies would choose to lay off staff, or to automate, stop hiring, or even informally reach agreements with their workers. This does not encourage formality, but on the contrary, it generates more informality.

The Colombian system also has a lot to improve. What do you think is the positive of the reform?

There are some points on which we could have agreements. For example, the principles of equity, gender; also in issues related to labor stability reinforced in some cases, because there are others that are very complicated.

We could have agreements on issues related to the contract terms, a large part of the points that we presented, for example, in terms of collective law, were accepted, such as eliminating that collective agreement rights become strike rights immediately.

(The alphabet of the labor reform proposed by the merchants of the country).

But partial strikes continue, which is detrimental to companies, or strikes by companies that provide essential public services, which is very serious for Colombians, who could be left without water or with power outages or hospital services. .

In other words, there are very few points that really unite us and there are many more that separate us.

Of the decalogue of proposals that Fenalco presented, how much do you feel that it is reflected?

Really very little. Suddenly the article related to equity in notice of dismissal, which has been incorporated. But there are very few issues that have been taken into account and that obviously worry us.

How has the discussion of the pension reform progressed?

For now, there is not much I can say, since we do not have a single text or draft of the pension reform.

LAURA LUCIA BECERRA ELEJALDE