Cristina Kirchner chaired the beginning of the Senate session in which telework regulation became law
The Senate signed into law the controversial project on the regulation of teleworking by 40 affirmative votes and 30 against, in an extensive session in which the Front of All defended the project and the absence of modifications, while the opposition agreed that it did not have sufficient consensus and that it will be « a lost opportunity to generate employment in Argentina. »
The debate, which lasted for three and a half hours, also had some strong crosses, chicanes and moments of tensionlike when the official Oscar Parrilli stressed that he is « a proud Kirchner militant » after Juan Carlos Romero He questioned an SME businessman who spoke about teleworking before the Commission because he is « a K militant whose group is a rubber stamp. »
The law, which establishes rights and obligations for those who carry out remote work, had obtained a favorable opinion last Thursday with the endorsement of the ruling party in the Senate Labor and Social Security Commission, which refused to introduce modifications and ratified the project approved on June 25 by the Chamber of Deputies, with 214 votes in favor, one negative and 29 abstentions.
Opening the debate on behalf of officialism, the president of the Labor and Social Security Commission, Daniel Lovera, He stressed that « we worked on 30 different projects », with « nuances but many points in common to advance the fundamental rights of those who work in this modality ».
The time of the vote: there were 40 affirmative and 30 negative votes
« We listen to all sectors that make up the tripartite dialogue ”, he assured, after which he said that the project“ does not seek to promote telework but to regulate a modality that is actually done in the country ”and that“does not bureaucratize« Because » nobody locks up those who want to create jobs « .
For Lovera, the initiative sets “a framework of respect for workers directed not only to skilled labor but also to those who are unprotected and forced”To telework.
He said that they had not accepted modifications in the project because the ruling party did not agree with the opposition’s proposal, he maintained that some changes could be implemented because « the Executive Branch will have to advance its regulation”And complained that they had listened to“ sectors that favored an absence of regulations so as not to hinder the market ”.
Then he spoke Gladys González, Together for Change, who stated that « Argentina loses an opportunity to retain talent and generate employment« Because the project »will be an obstacle”For the promotion of work. Addressing his peers from the ruling party, he reproached them: « You have interpreted this modality as a threat and not an opportunity to live better. »
Daniel Lovera justifies the position of the ruling party in the Senate
« This law did not arise through the imposition of employers but through the will of the workers themselves, who want more time with their family, » he warned, after which he complained that « we listen to all sectors, although some pretended to listen«
He noted that « the worker is protected by taking care of the job and not just listening to the unionism anchored in the past » and said that « there was no rush« In sanctioning the law because it will be applied 90 days after the end of the pandemic, and that is why it interpreted that » there is no will to improve it. «
González said to be « fed up with the crackIn this sense, he called for « stop looking at our navel: let’s think about young people, not about laws that delay and bring uncertainty. »
From the oficialismo, Beatriz Mirkin began his speech with criticism of Mauricio Macri for his trip to France. « Is that why the (opposition) concern about retaining talent? I am interested in knowing if (the former president) will have given his cell phone to the judge, ”he said at the first political junction of the session. The senator immediately added: “When I hear the opposition, who until recently led the country’s destinies, say that they did not propose this project, how many fewer jobs did they leave? How many workers did employers expel from their jobs during the Macri government? Did they have telecommuting or any regulation? They had no chance because nothing was left standing«
« Argentina loses an opportunity to retain talent and generate employment, » said Gladys González.
Then, defending the fact that the law contemplates the tasks of caring for women, he replied to González and his reference to “unionism anchored in the past”: “What are the old leaders who were defending coming to speak to me? to the Momo Venegas, who kept rural workers as slaves! ”he said, mentioning the late leader of UATRE and the main union ally of Macrismo.
« It is the best law of greater comprehensiveness that we have been able to carry out at this time for when there is more work and more opportunities, » he said, and he again questioned the opposition: « They have made us lose years of history. In the last century we had 35 years governed by radicalism, 36 by Peronism, and the rest by civic-military dictatorships. Those who delayed the country are not 70 years of Peronism, but were 120 years in which the oligarchy kept men and women putting their paws on their heads. We want to modify this situation because there is the possibility of teleworking and we want to regulate it. This project does not delay but regulates because work dignifies ”.
The opposition’s harshest intervention was in charge of Esteban Bullrich, Together for Change, who, after expressing his “frustration and discomfort« For » being together to vote a law without changes « , he maintained that the ruling party had exposed » the usual arguments for not changing anything « and accused him of arming »a consensus account and the process of listening to this law«
« If they do not accept changes there is no consensus, which is achieved when arguments are given to seek a midpoint, » he said. And he warned: “We bet on mediocrity when we are among the countries with the most recession and least investment in the world. For 60 years we have had the least growth and the fault lies with the leadership for continuing to do mediocre things and not correcting what we have to do. ”
Bullrich considered that « With this law we do not guarantee anything » and he pointed out that while « technology is advancing we can get ahead believing that we are slowing it down, but it is like when we get in front of a train ». For the opposition senator, the law « locks and destroys jobs » and thus « we generate more uncertainty by the closure of not wanting to listen. »
« We have no consensus with this law, » he said, « because it puts the generation of more jobs by telework in check and, therefore, raises the possibility of disappearance of jobs in this modality. »
He then raised the 29 opposition senators « work differently« Because there are » enormous challenges ahead « , for which he proposed » that the projects come out with absolute consensus, with aggravated majorities and, if possible, with unanimous votes because that will make them projects that are true, transparent and that generate certainty ». And he concluded: « We have to search among all the best laws, not mediocre laws, so that Argentina can get out of this well in which it has been immersed for 60 years « .