MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Macri administration feels the pressure from trade unions
Argentine labor unions appear to be pressuring the government by holding marches and threatening strikes ahead of the country's key October mid-term elections, Interior Minister Rogelio Frigerio said Monday. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesNo doubt Cristina is behind all this mess hoping that if the government falls or fails in whichever manner, she just may be able to avoid landing in jail for a considerable period of time, due to her and her cohorts total corruption over many years. Hopefully commun sense and above all JUSTICE will prevail and we will see her shortly behind bars.
Mar 14th, 2017 - 04:09 pm - Link - Report abuse -3@ Little J
Mar 14th, 2017 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +2“No doubt Cristina is behind all this mess.”
It would be to Cristina's credit to assume she remains so powerful as to send people go down to protest in the streets just to destabilize a government. If such were the case, it would be a matter of time for Cristina to regain her seat of president on a landslide.
A more impartial look would suggest the actions of the Macri administration have generated discontent and therefore mobilization. Let's remember that the union leaders have withheld taking action for a long time, and are more and more pressured by their bases.
Yeah, it's not like there weren't protests when Cristina was president too, so why should she be behind the ones happening now? The 40% inflation is reason enough on its own, and isn't the country still in recession?
Mar 14th, 2017 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -3@DT
Mar 15th, 2017 - 01:30 am - Link - Report abuse +3Not only is Argentina still in recession--it's intensifying, and despair among the most vulnerable--and the no so much vulnerable--is growing. The foreign debt grows exponentially--and the money is basically financing operations--not capital projects. There is not a single economic indicator on the black.
Less and less people speak about “errors,” and it's becoming more clear every day that a methodical plan to transfer resources from the less fortunate to the few wealthiest is being applied.
Meanwhile, Macri continues to practice his favourite marketing program: deny, divert, deny.
@EM
Mar 15th, 2017 - 12:47 pm - Link - Report abuse -2You complain that Macri is borrowing to finance operations, but weren't the subsidies on utilities one of the big expenses for the government, which it was borrowing to pay for? Yet you were opposed to removing them. Wouldn't it be better for the government to borrow less, or else spend the money on capital projects rather than subsidies?
It's interesting that the unions were supporting Macri to some extent though. They must have been really dissatisfied with how things were going under CFK to give any support to a right-wing president, but it's not surprising they are unhappy now. I'm not very impressed by Macri, the Post Office debt deal and other scandals shows a lack of judgement, either of what is appropriate or at least of what voters would find acceptable. And although I think he was right to get rid of the subsidies, he did it in a ham-handed way.
@DT
Mar 15th, 2017 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse +3It is indeed refreshing to have a commentator who argues and questions ideas instead of bashing the messenger.
One of Mauricio Macri's promises was to preside over a lean state. He was apparently fulfilling that promise when his administration let go public employees, mostly on the premise they were “ñoquis,” that is, employees who get paid but don't show up for work. What did he do next? Hire new employees at much higher levels of pay. He also formed a government fatter than the previous one, with a lot of new ministries with unclear roles. The end result was a fiscal deficit much higher than that of the previous government.
Now for the subsidies, they may not have been well thought, were perhaps badly designed and perhaps excessive. However, the previous government paid those subsidies with its own resources--not with borrowed money. Macri ended many subsidies and at the same time is borrowing like there is no tomorrow, with little to show for the money.
You are right that the Post Office debt deal shows lack of judgement. There is also the scandalous Avianca deal. Both also show absolute lack of ethics, greed, disregard for the notion of conflict of interest, and the despicable attitude of “let's do it, and if people don't realize it we're good.”
As for the unions, you need to know they form a class in itself already called in the 1960s “burocracia sindical,” (a sad inheritance left by Peronism) who are extremely backward people who look after their own good only and who have, with few honourable exceptions, negotiated with every military dictatorship in the late 1950s, 1960s and 1970s.
They now may be calling for a national day of strike at the end of the month, but only because the union members are pushing for it.
I remember seeing an article about this - saying more government employees had been hired under Macri than the previous administration. Perhaps those fired employees were not really ñoquis after all? But this article claims that the deficit was lower under Macri than CFK's final year:
Mar 15th, 2017 - 09:54 pm - Link - Report abuse -3http://www.reuters.com/article/argentina-budget-idUSL1N1FE5RQ
And if the previous government had a deficit, then they were paying for things, including the subsidies, partly with borrowed money. I certainly think the subsidies were a bad idea - they weren't limited by income, and they encouraged waste which is bad for the environment as well as the budget. But lowering them would inevitably be unpopular.
If Macri removed the subsidies though, what is he spending all this borrowed money on?
Avianca was one of the low cost airlines right? I didn't really follow that, was it partly owned by Macri's father or something? He certainly doesn't seem to understand the problem with conflicts of interest, anyway!
As for the unions, do you mean they only look after their members? (That seems normal.) Or do you mean the leaders only look after themselves? If so, why don't the members elect someone new? How could these people cling to power for so long unless the union members were at least somewhat happy with them?
@DT
Mar 16th, 2017 - 04:12 am - Link - Report abuse +3Avianca:
http://www.wral.com/argentina-prosecutor-launches-probe-into-macri-over-avianca/16559701/
The top CGT (General Labour Confederation) leaders are in for themselves only. Union leaders, some are better than others, but union history in Argentina is narrowly tied to Peronism and has two sides--one is large membership--the other is lack of internal democracy. In any event, one of the CGT leaders said they will announce tomorrow a date for a one-day general strike, which will probably happen in the first week of April.
However, I'd like to briefly comment on today's street demonstrations that took place in many provinces. Apparently, many of such demonstrations surprised by their spread and in many cases, seem to have been pretty much spontaneous. In any event, today may've been a watershed moment for a good part of the population that seems to have lost hope in waiting for changes. On the other hand, the government claims a K conspiracy to unseat them, when in reality Kirchnerism would have limited power today to create mobilizations as large as today's.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!