The measures, as announced The Observerare the following:
- days of shake and mobilize to be held in front of the Fritran and Conaprole plant in the following weeks: September 26 to October 1 and October 3 to 8.
- Start of work to regulation in the dairy industry from Tuesday, October 11.
- 24 hour national strike industry-wide by Thursday, October 13.
It was further resolved to convene a new extraordinary plenary of the FTIL for Monday, October 10nevertheless Before that, there will be an ordinary plenary session, already scheduled for Friday, September 30..
Finally, from the FTIL it was specified that the federation remains open to dialoguewhich has been communicated to the Ministry of Labor and Social Security (MTSS).
Industrial sector sources consulted this Friday by The Observer They excused themselves from making statements, at least for the moment, since they are analyzing the situation.
Crossroads of communications
At the beginning of this week, each of the parties issued a statement regarding the dispute between workers and the company.
The FTIL, among other considerations, explained: “Faced with the conflictive situation at Fritran, the ice cream and frozen food distributor Conaprole, where We have been denouncing a brutal unilateral restructuring, the systematic union repression and we continue to reiterate the rejection of the abusive dismissal of the president of the union, in the face of the business outrage after the hiring of strikebreakers, the outsourcing of sales, the breach of signed collective agreements, abusive sanctions to the and the workers of Fritran (Sudec Union – Single Union of Cemesa Employees)”.
The company presented its opinion on this situation. According to a statement, “it deeply regrets the declaration of pre-conflict” and “emphatically rejects the unfounded accusations made by the union”. Furthermore, he stated: “The sanctions received by some workers respond to lack of marking and rude and systematic errors in their tasks that affect customers and the company, putting their viability at risk” Y “in no case were sanctions applied for participating in a union activity, but the union hides these facts and poses a false situation to justify the conflict”.
Regarding the dismissal of a worker, the company maintains: “It was the consequence of an investigation that had all the guarantees.”
