Indemnizations for part time cleaners?

[sergio]

I have heard that Cristina K. has a plan to extend the current indemnization system for full time domestic employees to include part time people so that the part timers MUST be paid a hefty indeminization if fired, for ANY reason. I don´t have any details - does anyone else?

 

[sergio]

Surprised that this did not get any reaction. I´m interested in opinions about this proposed law that would give part time domestics the same rights as full time employees as far as severence pay is concerned.

 

[jp]

It was in the paper yesterday...
http://www.clarin.com/diario/2010/03/09/um/m-02155251.htm

 

[SaraSara]

This will probably result in many part-timers losing their jobs.

 

[sergio]

This will probably result in many part-timers losing their jobs.

A couple of my Argentine friends think that the effects will take a few years to show. They believe that once they see people being hit with sizeable indemnizations for part time employees they will decide to do their own cleaning. People may wait until their current part time domestics retire, move on or whatever and then NOT replace them. In the end, according to my friends, maids will be for the wealthy only. Yes, a form of easy employment for the unskilled will largely vanish. The measure guarantees the votes of a sector of the society and satisfies the populist tendencies of the government but ignores the long term effects. What will these women do? Become trash pickers?

 

[ElQueso]

This might give someone an opportunity to make some money with a small business - should someone wish to brave the already huge and sometimes nearly insurmountable bureacracy that is the government here.

I wonder if we will start to see, in a couple of years maybe, many small cleaning businesses start to spring up - maid services. I know there are at least a few already - those will grow, but I bet there will be a burgeoning market for more.

The small businesses, of course, would insulate the clients from the claims of their maids. The maids will now be paying taxes, which is probably what Cristina is looking for in all this (I doubt she actually has the good of the workers in mind). There will be fewer people hiring maids, but there won't be a huge loss of jobs - the maids will just be taking a lot less home in pay. As usual, the high burden will be placed on those who can less afford it and have less ability to escape the necessity to pay taxes.

It also takes more independence away from the people who already work their asses off for a living and puts more money in the government's coffers. Next will be handymen, lawn maintenance, etc.

 

[bloody_bloo]

This won't have any effect at all. The majority works "en negro" meaning: informal with no pension, healthcare, etc.

This will decrease domestic labour hired legally "en blanco". Informal work will grow despite the last years efforts in campaigns and financial help to legalize this working class.

The very little percentage of legal hiring would fall in cleaning services companies.

We have laws in abundance, that tell what to do and how, but we lack the capacity of implementing them or controlling. So, who cares? Tomorrow they may say: "now it's illegal to breathe" but no one would care less because "we know" it won't make any difference at all.

This kind of announcements are intended more as headline marketing than a real beginning of change.

 

[ElQueso]

bloody_bloo, I don't know - I think you may be missing the point of view from the EMPLOYER'S side and the almost certain extra complaints that will be filed against these "employers" to get all that the laborers are "due". That could be very significant.

People have enough problems now wanting to hire someone to do anything for them on a regular basis because the laws are already so labor-related that is a laborer makes any complaint it's almost certainly going to go the laborer's way and not the employer's way.

Imagine all these people who are now thinking "well, it's only part time, I have them come in 4 or five days a week for a half day, or a few hours, and they go away as contractors." At least up until now, it was a little better to be employing someone part time because you could claim they weren't employees and you might have some ability to fight a complaint from the laborer.

If the proposed law happens, it will make it harder for employers to hire laborers without a higher risk of encurring much more than they bargained for to have someone come to their house and clean a few hours a day.

I find it hard to believe that Argentinos won't worry about that.

 

[sergio]

El Queso is right. Bloody misses the point. There are LOTS of people working en negro however these people nevertheless have rights according to labor law. I have a friend who was recently sued by an incompetent and dishonest (he stole) employee who was working en negro. When he was fired he went to a lawyer and started a lawsuit. They settled out of court. Why was he paid en negro? Because the small business that hired him truly could not afford the taxes. It was not greed or indifference. The owner just could not afford it. Now the employer has cut back on employees, does more of the work himself and is taking on less work. The point is, an illegal worker can often prove that he was illegally employed and can demand an indemnization. It happens all the time. I agree with queso that cleaning services will spring up. Cleaners will probably make less and may be subjected to harsher working conditions.