Labour Rights

General Overview

The area of labor rights in Argentina shows a high concentration of setbacks: within the space of twelve months, the Milei administration simultaneously attacked the right to trade union organization, the right to strike, pension rights, and general working conditions. The preferred tool was the decree of necessity and urgency, which allowed the executive to advance without legislative debate on reforms affecting millions of workers. At the same time, relevant legal defenses by civil society managed to halt, at least in part, some of the most regressive measures.

The Labor Reform in the Ley Bases

On July 9, 2024, with the enactment of Law 27,742 (Ley Bases), a wide-ranging labor reform came into force. Its main measures included the elimination of penalties for unregistered labor; the extension of the probationary period from three to six or twelve months depending on company size; the weakening of the presumption of employment relationship; the creation of the “collaborative worker” category, allowing up to three collaborators without an employment relationship; the introduction of a severance fund as a substitute for indemnity payments; and a labor tax amnesty with debt forgiveness of between 70% and 90% depending on company size. The set of these measures was characterized by specialized analysts as a regression toward unconstitutional labor standards.

Veto of Pension Update and End of the Moratorium

In August 2024, Milei vetoed a law passed by Congress that established an additional 8.1% increase in April pension benefits and stipulated that the minimum benefit could not be less than 1.09 adult basic food baskets. Congress was unable to gather the votes needed to override the veto. In March 2025, the government decided not to extend the pension moratorium that had allowed housewives and people without sufficient contribution records to access retirement benefits — closing off an inclusionary pension mechanism that had benefited hundreds of thousands of people — predominantly women — over the past two decades.

The DNUs on Strikes and Trade Union Organization

In May 2025, the government issued two decrees of necessity and urgency that directly attacked collective labor rights. DNU 340/25 restricted the right to strike by expanding the activities considered “essential services” — which require 75% mandatory service provision during a strike — and creating a new category of activities of “transcendental importance” with 50% mandatory provision. It also included as a criterion for defining an essential service any activities that affect “fiscal revenue collection targets” — a category so broad that it could potentially apply to virtually any sector of the economy. DNU 342/25 established the possibility for the executive to intervene in trade unions in cases that the government itself defines as “union leadership vacancy,” opening the door to direct State interference in the internal life of workers’ organizations.

The anti-blockade protocol, implemented through Resolution 901/2024 of the Ministry of Security in September 2024, had been the direct precursor to this escalation: it provided for the deployment of federal forces to end trade union blockades, automatic communication to employers to facilitate dismissals for “serious injury,” and the identification of participants for possible criminal action — effectively criminalizing the right to labor protest.

Legal Defenses

In response to the DNUs on strikes, on June 2, 2025, the Association of State Workers (ATE) obtained a favorable injunction ruling that suspended the restrictions on the right to strike set out in DNU 340/25. On June 30, 2025, the National Labor Court of First Instance No. 3 declared Articles 2 and 3 of DNU 340/25 constitutionally invalid, in a ruling that highlighted the absence of the emergency that would justify the use of a decree, and the illegitimacy of the restriction on the right to strike. The General Confederation of Labor (CGT), which had filed its own injunction on May 27, thus saw its position upheld by the judiciary. These rulings constitute a significant example of the restraining function the courts can exercise against executive encroachment on collective rights.

General overview

The area of labor rights in Brazil shows a predominantly positive balance in terms of measures taken by the federal executive, offset by the judicial confirmation of the labor reform enacted in 2017 and by threats linked to the precarization of work. The period also records a notable level of trade union activity, with strikes, mobilizations, and legislative proposals that placed the labor agenda at the center of public debate.

Executive advances: labor protection and the fight against slave labor

The Lula government recorded several concrete advances in labor rights during the period. In June 2024, the Ministry of Education reached an agreement with university teacher unions — ANDES-SN and SINASEFE — that ended a 70-day strike: the agreement provides for a restructuring of the pay scale and salary increases. In September 2024, Lula signed a decree establishing new labor protection rules for the 73,000 outsourced workers in federal government agencies, aligned with ILO standards, with a maximum working week of 40 hours and an obligation to respect the category minimum wage in public tenders. Also in September 2024, the Ministries of Labor, Human Rights, and Justice published an administrative order reaffirming the commitment against labor rights violations, through the regular publication of the list of employers with slave labor complaints. In October 2024, the government launched the “Acredita no Primeiro Passo” program for the socioeconomic inclusion of low-income families. Meanwhile, Operação Resgate IV, carried out between July and August 2024, rescued 593 workers subjected to conditions analogous to slavery across 11 states — 11.65% more than the previous year’s operation. The contextual data is significant: agriculture, civil construction, and services were the sectors with the highest incidence, with Minas Gerais, São Paulo, and Pernambuco recording the most cases.

Setbacks and threats: the persistence of the 2017 reform and labor precarization

In November 2024, the Superior Labor Court confirmed that the labor reform approved in 2017 under the Temer government would also apply to employment contracts predating that law, depriving workers of benefits such as payment for commuting time that had been eliminated by the reform. This judicial ruling consolidated setbacks that the Lula government has not been able to reverse legislatively. In June 2024, the STF analyzed the constitutionality of the intermittent work contract — which allows payment only for hours actually worked — with a vote going 3 to 2 in favor of maintaining it. In December 2024, Lula enacted a law capping the increase of the minimum wage at 2.5% above inflation until 2030, a measure that, while aimed at providing fiscal predictability, was criticized by trade union federations as a ceiling that could erode purchasing power over the long term.

Trade union resistance and the 6×1 working hours agenda

The period recorded trade union activity of notable scale. In July 2024, employees of the National Social Security Institute (INSS) — the Brazilian federal body responsible for administering and paying social security — went on an indefinite strike demanding salary adjustments and career recognition. In August 2024, postal workers launched a strike with wage demands. In October 2024, SINASEFE — the national union representing teaching staff and technical-administrative personnel of the Federal Network of Professional, Scientific, and Technological Education — held a 48-hour national work stoppage demanding compliance with previous salary agreements. In November 2024, large-scale mobilizations across the country placed the 6×1 working schedule at the center of debate — the regime of 6 consecutive working days with 1 day of rest, implying up to 44 hours per week, which particularly affects workers in commerce, services, and healthcare.

In response to these mobilizations, in February 2025 Representative Erika Hilton (PSOL-SP) introduced Constitutional Amendment Proposal (PEC) No. 8/2025 to eliminate the 6×1 schedule, establish a maximum 36-hour working week, and institute a 4-day work week. The proposal was filed with 234 lawmakers’ signatures and nearly 3 million citizens’ signatures. In March 2025, gig workers in several cities halted activities for two days demanding a minimum rate of R$ 10 per delivery. On May 1, 2025, the trade union federations delivered to President Lula the “Workers’ Class Agenda 2025,” with demands including the regulation of app-based work, reduction of working hours without salary reduction, restoration of retirees’ purchasing power, and the end of the 6×1 schedule.

General overview

The area of labor rights shows an unfavorable balance concentrated in the early months of the new CDU/CSU–SPD coalition government, which took office following the February 2025 elections. The two measures recorded during this period are threats — not effective setbacks — in the MIDA sense: policy announcements and intentions that have not yet materialized into definitive normative changes, but which point in a concerning direction.

Repeal of the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act

In April 2025, the parties of the new governing coalition — CDU/CSU and SPD — announced their intention to repeal the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG), which obligated German companies to ensure respect for human and labor rights throughout their global production chains. The measure was justified as part of an initiative to reduce administrative burdens. According to the coalition agreement, the LkSG would be replaced by a simplified implementation of the European Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), without reporting obligations and with enforcement suspended except in cases of serious violations. This decision represents a setback in the international projection of German labor standards, with potential consequences for workers in supply chains in countries of the Global South.

Flexibilization of working hours

In May 2025, the governing coalition declared its intention to replace the maximum daily working hour limit — currently set at eight hours, with a maximum of ten in exceptional cases — with a weekly limit. Although the coalition agreement does not provide precise details on the new framework, the measure would open the possibility of shifts of more than twelve hours on individual days. The minimum rest period of eleven hours between shifts would remain mandatory. Trade union organizations noted that this flexibilization would disproportionately affect workers with less bargaining power, who are most dependent on legal limits to protect their working conditions.

General Overview

The area of labor rights records the highest number of advances in Spain during the period. The Sánchez government — with the Ministry of Labor headed by Yolanda Díaz and Sumar as coalition partner — deployed a labor reform agenda of considerable scope during the period: reduction of working hours, increase of the minimum wage, early retirement in jobs considered hazardous, and labor protection for persons with disabilities.

Reduction of Working Hours and Minimum Wage

In December 2024, the Ministry of Labor signed an agreement with the trade unions Comisiones Obreras (CCOO) and Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT) to reduce the maximum working week from 40 to 37.5 hours without wage reduction, benefiting more than 12 million workers. The agreement includes mandatory digital time-tracking and reinforcement of the right to digital disconnection. In May 2025, the Council of Ministers presented the draft law to formalize this reduction in the legal framework, with time-tracking and the right to disconnect as its pillars. In February 2025, Royal Decree 87/2025 set the Minimum Interprofessional Wage (SMI) at 1,184 euros per month — 16,576 euros annually — an increase of 4.4% compared to 2024. Since the beginning of the Sánchez government, the SMI has accumulated an increase of more than 60%, up from 735.9 euros per month in 2018.

Early Retirement and Disability Protection

In May 2025, Royal Decree 1192/2024 implemented the early retirement reform for hazardous jobs — those with high exposure to risk or toxicity — lowering the retirement age in those sectors. In May 2025, Law 2/2025 harmonized Spanish legislation with European guidelines on disability, eliminating automatic dismissal due to permanent incapacity — a significant labor inclusion measure that protects workers with disabilities from dismissal.

Spain’s labor agenda for the period contrasts radically with those of Argentina and the United States, where far-right administrations actively dismantled labor protection mechanisms. The reduction of working hours without wage reduction advanced in Spain as a result of collective bargaining with the major trade unions.

General Overview

The area of labor rights shows a clearly differentiated trajectory between the two governments of the period: the Biden administration closed its tenure with a historically positive balance on trade union organization, while the Trump administration rapidly dismantled the main labor protection mechanisms built over previous decades.

Biden Administration (June – January 2025)

Advances in Trade Union Organization and Working Conditions

Biden’s final year recorded a peak in the creation of new unions and in the election of pro-worker union representatives, according to a report by the Center for American Progress that monitored the past 15 years. This result was closely linked to the profiles of the officials appointed to lead the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In October 2024, the Department of Labor launched a specific WANTO (Women in Apprenticeship and Nontraditional Occupations) fund of 6 million dollars to promote the labor inclusion of women in non-traditional jobs. In December 2024, the Starbucks workers’ union staged an unprecedented strike in more than 300 stores across a dozen cities, demanding a collective bargaining framework.

Trump Administration (January – June 2025)

Dismantlement of Labor Protections

The Trump administration began a systematic dismantling of labor protections from its earliest days, acting on three simultaneous fronts: oversight bodies, federal workers’ rights, and the minimum wage.

Trump fired Gwynne Wilcox, a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), leaving the body without a quorum and unable to protect labor rights. He also fired Jennifer Abruzzo, General Counsel of the NLRB, who had implemented policies strengthening the right to trade union organization (January 27).

The Executive Order “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” revoked Executive Order 11246 of 1965 — which required affirmative action programs from federal contractors — and eliminated DEI programs in agencies and contracts (January 21).

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) instructed agencies to disregard telework clauses in union agreements when implementing the full return-to-office policy (February 3).

The Department of Homeland Security announced the termination of the collective bargaining agreement with Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents, eliminating union rights for approximately 47,000 workers (March 7).

The Executive Order “Additional Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions” revoked Biden’s EO 14026, which established a minimum wage of $17.75 per hour for federal contractors, affecting approximately 390,000 workers. The applicable minimum wage reverted to $13.30 and in some cases even to $7.25 per hour — a potential reduction of between 25% and 60% of annual income (March 14).

Trump signed Executive Order 14251 excluding approximately 1 million federal workers in more than 20 agencies from collective bargaining rights, invoking a national security clause. The affected agencies suspended the automatic deduction of union dues, financially weakening the unions (March 27).

Resistance

The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and various union leaders responded sharply to Trump’s executive order eliminating collective bargaining rights for federal workers (March 28). However, resistance in the labor area was fewer in number and more limited in scope than in other areas, reflecting the structural weakening that the government’s own measures imposed on trade union actors.