The Chamber of the Dairy Industry of Uruguay (CILU) issued this Friday a statement in which affirms that it is incomprehensible that the Federation of Workers of the Dairy Industry (FTIL) speaks of “abusive peace clause”leaving the intersection of what the FTIL communicated and decided this Thursday.
The federation that brings together the workers in the sector reactivated union measures, for example from this Friday and Saturday the work to regulations, but also announced a partial strike for Thursday June 9 and a special meeting for next Monday, in which they could decide on other measures.
The exhibition of press releases of each part is framed in a dispute initiated more than two months agoperiod in which there were union measures that, according to authorities from Conaprole and Cambadu, have generated shortages of some products in the local market and losses for the business sector.
From the chamber that brings together the industries of the dairy sector, it was stated that “The FTIL does not want peace, but presses with strikes and other union measures, threatens to block exports and also intends to repeatedly impose unfounded claims by force, despite the privileged working conditions”.
The document indicates that in the framework of the negotiations in the wage councils, given that the lack of agreement persisted, there was a proposal from the Ministry of Labor and Social Security (MTSS), for the tripartite sphere, which was accepted in its entirety by the industrial sector (and not accepted by the FTIL)with the following contents:
- The salary recovery in 24 months of 4.82% of the “bridge period” of the pandemic (almost 3% is recovered in the first 12 months).
- Carrying out six-monthly and annual corrective adjustments by IPC for a period of 4 years.
- A special item of $2,000 per month during the last year of the agreement (2025) based on the growth of an index of liters of milk over hours worked.
- A peace clause that supposes the non-realization of wage claims during the term of the agreement, a clause in force in all agreements and that is the natural consequence of the existence of an agreement.
- Faced with future technological updates, the companies agree to review – together with the union organization – if it is worthwhile to make a salary adjustment.
In its statement, the CILU expressed a set of questions regarding the expression “abusive peace clause” used by the entity that represents the workers.
- Is it abusive to have employment stability and very good salaries?
- Is it abusive to have one of the best salary recoveries of the “bridge period”?
- Is it abusive to maintain the real salary each year and have a significant monthly item for each worker for a year and also the commitment to analyze technology updates?
Below is the CILU statement, sent to The Observer:
EO
