For the reform seeking to reduce the work week from 48 to 40 hours to have the necessary flexibility, it must be made exclusively to the Federal Labor Law (LFT) and not to the Constitution.
This is the opinion of Ricardo Martínez Rojas, founding partner of D&M Abogados. Taking into account that every law is perfectible, the specialist points out that, this way, if it is required to be modified at any time, this can be done more easily.
During the first forum for the discussion of the 40-hour work week held in Mexico City, the lawyer specializing in labor law and social security shared this idea.
In an interview with El Economista, he added that the Constitution already establishes a maximum limit of eight hours for the workday, but does not provide for a work week.
“Our Constitution and our law work with minimums. Thus, that is the minimum established in our Constitution. This means that a reform can be made solely to the Federal Labor Law, establishing that the work week will now be of 40 hours and there is no need to reform Article 123 of the Constitution”, he stated.
Martínez Rojas considered that making a reform to the Constitution would create inflexibility because, after the established timeline for presenting the initiative and reaching 2030 with a 40-hour work week, after the leanings obtained from gradualness, amendments could be required.
“And if we establish everything in Article 123 of the Constitution, a majority of Congress and approval by state congresses would be required. On the other hand, if it is established in the Federal Labor Law, Congress could amend it. This is sufficient and we become less juridically inflexible”, he stated.
Gradualness, Flexibility and Sectorization
Little by little, the main characteristics that the initiative for the reduction of the work week should have are taking shape. It was agreed in the first exercise in dialogue, that gradualness in the reduction of work hours, the flexible application of the law and considering rules by sector, according to activities and operation are a fundamental part.
The business sector requested that not only weekly schedules be considered, but also daily, biweekly or monthly schedules, in addition to hour banks and overtime.
In this regard, Ricardo Martínez Rojas expressed the opinion that only one mandatory weekly rest day should be established.
“We believe that the work week can be arranged in a productive manner with 40 hours. And with that our workers will obtain the required rest, but we do not render companies unproductive”, he said.
He added that having a single rest day is much more flexible than six days. “You can modify, you can arrange the work week. And this is not so burdensome on the employer. Imagine that you force all employers in the country to stop for two days. You stop the production plant. Instead, you give them the 40 hours, but they only rest one day. Then, you adjust the hours in a better way. This is more productive.”
And triple overtime? It must be regulated
One of the solutions analyzed by companies for reducing the work week to 40 hours is to hire more personnel or increase overtime. Given this, the lawyer considers that overtime should not be taxed with Income Tax (ISR), which would also allow workers to obtain a better income.
“Actually, what we need to seek is that overtime be less burdensome. What do I mean? At this time the worker is charged income tax for the triple overtime that is paid. This should be eliminated so that the worker truly receives more money”, he explained.
He trusted that the forums will be a means for Mexico to reach greater productivity and “we can be more competitive, because this is what the world requires.”
