In its last session, the plenary session of the House of Representatives approved other 20 articles of the labor reform. In this way, the bill, which seeks to modify the conditions of Colombian workers, advances in the second of its four debates in Congress.
(Read more: Labor reform: article that expands the cases to request licenses is approved)
Among the points that were endorsed there was one in particular that has generated controversy due to the implications it could bring.
This is article 18, which seeks “grant the worker the necessary licenses for specific cases. For example, in cases of disabling menstrual diagnoses or to attend medical or judicial appointments related to gender-based violence.”
Regarding this section of the articles, several congressmen have warned that this article could open the door to end of medical excuses in the face of absences due to health issues. This is because it does not require the employee to prove the pathology that generated the disability.
According to Representative Catherine Juvinao, of the Green Alliance, “What has just been approved in article 18, which has to do with paid leaves, is anti-technical but, above all, very irresponsible. Why? In literal E, paid leaves were left to attend scheduled medical appointments or “But the employee is not required to prove the pathology by the doctor treating that disability or illness.”
(Read more: The factors that are working against retirement in Colombia)
The legislator also pointed out that the above would lead companies to an unmanageable situation. “because, among other things, for the cases of disabling menstrual cycles that are included here, they will end up generating discrimination against women.”
In this sense, he argued that “if employers have to give women menstrual leave every month, and the woman does not even have to prove it from the treating doctor, then the incentive that the employer will have to maintain the productivity of his company is to avoid hiring of women. It is an outrage that imposes unsustainable burdens on any small company.
All of this motivated Juvinao, together with other congressmen, to present a proposal in which sought the presentation of medical disabilities to prove a license. However, this was not endorsed.
(See: Analysis: pros and cons of the regions receiving more money)
Labor reform debate
(See: The signs of weakness that the labor market is showing)
Defense of article 18
María Fernanda Carrascal, rapporteur of the bill, insisted that this article is fundamental for the rights of workers, since it contributes “to a greater balance between personal and work life.”
As the parliamentarian explained, this section, in its essence, “expands the cases in which workers will have the right to these licenses, incorporating fundamental situations such as medical appointments, emergencies, disabling menstrual cycles, school obligations and judicial and administrative situations related to gender violence.”
In response to why the proposal presented by Juvinao was not endorsed, the congresswoman pointed out that this did not happen “because it was poorly written and because Representative Miranda’s proposal was endorsed, which included everything.”
Carrascal He also indicated that he would like to include the mandatory accreditation of disabilitiesbut acknowledged that “we don’t have time”, Therefore, he proposed that this point be included in the third presentation, in the Senate.
(Read more: What would await the labor reform in the Senate? President of Congress responds)
PORTFOLIO
