PASO Election Results

Dougie

Registered
As a business owner (and a progressive one if that that is fully compliant and voluntarily involved in community projects trying to generate a positive impact for the “other” side of Argentina) 100% agree.

Unfortunately, most businesses see an employee en-blanco as a “time bomb” due to the laws around employment and (in)flexibility in things like work hours and scope of jobs, meaning they would rather produce less, open less hours, or go understaffed rather than actually take the risk to grow or be more productive. Or worse still, do things under the table and exploit a workers desperation. It has little to do with actual “firings” and everything to do with risk. Especially in an uncertain climate like this where the success of your business is far from certain and demand for your goods/ services far from “stable”.
If no one wants to compromise, no one moves.

Anyone who criticizes this reality is free to use their money to start a business that employ people en blanco in Argentina and see for themselves the massive responsibility and liability this creates to see how disproportionate it is even compared to European countries like France or Germany.

This is the number one reason young Argentines complain about not having opportunities and suffer disproportionately from poverty, despite their keen willingness to work.
This is what people don't understand. There are businesses who are trying to implement positive social change with their products and hiring people in the community. They follow regulations to a T, and then find themselves bankrupt, the former employees now have to go work a Temp job as a security guard at Coto, making half the salary.

Any attempt to make these laws more sensible is met with "MACRI" while labor laws are so much better in advanced Western European markets.
 

jblaze5779

Registered
It's not a starting point, it's a consideration when a business hires someone. It's a consideration made across the world, not just the US. If you didn't consider costs of labor then you'd go out of business pretty quickly.

It hurts PYMES and companies who are trying to be compliant the most. The large corporations have lots of ways to get around these regulations already. Temp agencies are a favorite. You're actually strengthening large corporations at the loss of small businesses. Less competition, more monopoly power, ability to move prices, it's what we have in Argentina.

That you use the words "Macri and Friends" to describe business in general tells me that you think of this issue only in superficial political terms which is unfortunate.
Yes, the basics of setting up and running a business anywhere in the world. Knowing your risks and accounting for them.

Glad you said it not me. I don't want to push my politics of common sense and hurt the feels of others.
 

FrankPintor

Registered
This is what people don't understand. There are businesses who are trying to implement positive social change with their products and hiring people in the community. They follow regulations to a T, and then find themselves bankrupt, the former employees now have to go work a Temp job as a security guard at Coto, making half the salary.

Any attempt to make these laws more sensible is met with "MACRI" while labor laws are so much better in advanced Western European markets.
I'm wondering where these companies that follow regulations to a T are, though? Here's a counter-example, maybe you've had empanadas from Mi Gusto? They advertise on TV, have a bunch of places all around Buenos Aires. So with that visibility you'd imagine they must at least employ their workers legally? Well, no. And they were able to get permission for their illegal employees to use public transport all through the pandemic.

With that institutionalized corruption (and I don't know when it started), what do you do?
 

Dougie

Registered
I'm wondering where these companies that follow regulations to a T are, though? Here's a counter-example, maybe you've had empanadas from Mi Gusto? They advertise on TV, have a bunch of places all around Buenos Aires. So with that visibility you'd imagine they must at least employ their workers legally? Well, no. And they were able to get permission for their illegal employees to use public transport all through the pandemic.

With that institutionalized corruption (and I don't know when it started), what do you do?
Yes exactly my point.The large corporate companies who have enough money to advertise on TV, have influence with the government and so on are the companies that don't follow the rules as I mentioned in the previous post, or they find loopholes.

Just because they have visibility doesn't mean they must follow rules haha. Tell that to HSBC and Nestle.

What do you do? You make rules that every business can reasonably follow, not ones that can only be gamed by the big boys.
 

antipodean

Registered
There are plenty of SMEs that do things by the book - depending on the business you are in, the cost of not doing them is an administrative and financial death blow. When you enter the "system" here the "system" enters you. Selling empanadas or running a kiosko probably does not even come close since it is mostly a cash business that does (or can do) much of its dealings "outside the system" making it look artificially smaller than it is.

Larger companies have such a scale of business that paying a few years worth of severance when the kak hits the fan barely registers as more than a rounding error or they have other ways of getting around the rules. It is those in the middle who do serious and specialised business who truly suffer. They are also the ones that have the greatest capacity to create quality jobs in Argentina beyond delivery drivers or dishwashers.

The state simply needs to focus on guaranteeing basic rights and setting rules that work for everyone in the 21st century, encouraging and monitoring compliance and then enforcing those rules rather than always trying to "broker a deal" between parties at its own discretion (read, personal interests) and change the rules based on a whim (read, political favor)

Firstly, business owners should first never be "pushed" into doing things "en negro" by an inflexible system and unrealistic policies. Otherwise it will forever be used as an "excuse" to cut corners or do less than one could/ should out of fear.

Secondly, businesses should be incentivised to create quality jobs and do things "en blanco". With the payroll and business tax burdens here going well beyond mere corporate tax rates and access to capital for most scarce/ non-existant, this would be a welcome step. And "incentive" is not like todays programs along the lines of "if you hire someone I will pay you A$1.000.000 but if you fire or suspend them because your market stops buying your products and you can't afford them any more, I will take your business licenses and fine you A$100.000.000 and put you in court on criminal charges to face jail time." - that would just be another "time bomb".

Thirdly, workers need to know their rights and demand to be hired en-blanco having the ability to denounce violations without fear of repercussion ...or the business paying a union to "make the problem go away" as all too commonly happens. This also means a welfare reform to support job seekers until they find work in the short term - the current maximum unemployment benefit of A$10.000 or so for a few months and then nada does not make the cut and actually drives workers into informal and exploitative situations where they work like slaves and live below the poverty line.

Fourthly, unions need to check themselves or be checked. They cannot continue to be instruments of monopolistic and anti-competitive business practices that only serve some well connected big local business owners and do little to genuinely improve the lot of their workers. This will be the hardest step since it has the most money and dodgy dealings with the political class riding on it.

Without taking a first step, nothing can ever actually change.
 

Somewhereinba

Registered
"Can I fire this person?" as a starting point for employment is an aspect of the US that I really hope we don't see in Argentina.
Why not? You tried running a business here. The laws are tipped way to far in employees favour so no one wants to start businesses. The tax scheme also makes it a nightmare.
 

dilmah

Registered
"Can I fire this person?" as a starting point for employment is an aspect of the US that I really hope we don't see in Argentina.
all these leftist ideas that employees and renters require "protection" from employers and landlords stem from false premises:

(1) false premise that all employers and landlords are rich;

(2) false premise that all employers and landlords "exploit" employees and renters.

In fact many employers and landlords are not wealthy and are themselves indebted to real masters of this world: those whose families are wealthy for many generations. Employers and employees, renters and landlords are not separate classes, they do not require protection from each other. They cooperate to grow prosperity in mutually beneficial ways.

That's inherited wealth we should fight and protect from. They are separate overlord class. Not employers and landlords.

Ideal system is to have near zero regulations on employers and landlords, near zero income and corporate tax. But instead tax inheritance to maximum.
 

Ronnie Hotdogs

Registered
all these leftist ideas that employees and renters require "protection" from employers and landlords stem from false premises:

(1) false premise that all employers and landlords are rich;

(2) false premise that all employers and landlords "exploit" employees and renters.

In fact many employers and landlords are not wealthy and are themselves indebted to real masters of this world: those whose families are wealthy for many generations. Employers and employees, renters and landlords are not separate classes, they do not require protection from each other. They cooperate to grow prosperity in mutually beneficial ways.

That's inherited wealth we should fight and protect from. They are separate overlord class. Not employers and landlords.

Ideal system is to have near zero regulations on employers and landlords, near zero income and corporate tax. But instead tax inheritance to maximum.
So, how many properties do you exploit people with?
 
Top