Table of Contents
The streets of Buenos Aires fell largely quiet on the day a 24-hour general strike paralyzed the capital, with commuters, businesses and public services affected as lawmakers in the Chamber of Deputies debated a contentious package of labour changes. The stoppage—called by the General Confederation of Labor (CGT) and backed by several transport and public-sector unions—aimed to pressure legislators considering measures that would alter severance pay, expand the working day and limit the right to strike. Protesters and union leaders framed the action as a defense of job protections and national industry.
Public transport was particularly disrupted: subways did not run, many bus lines operated at reduced capacity and Aerolíneas Argentinas warned of widespread flight cancellations. Banks, schools and other institutions joined the shutdown in solidarity, magnifying the strike’s economic and social impact. The work stoppage coincided with a parliamentary session in which deputies debated the bill that had already cleared the Senate.
What the bill proposes and why it matters
The reform package championed by President Javier Milei and his party, La Libertad Avanza, aims to make labour rules more flexible to attract investment and stimulate hiring. Key elements include reductions in how severance pay is calculated, an increase in the statutory workday from eight to 12 hours, and limits on the scope of lawful industrial action through a broadened list of essential services. Supporters argue these changes will lessen bureaucratic burdens and reduce informal employment.
Opponents warn the measures risk eroding long-standing worker protections. Unions have emphasized that recalculating severance to exclude bonuses and other supplementary pay would materially cut payouts for dismissed employees. The proposed shift toward an hours bank system—where overtime can be compensated by reduced future hours rather than increased pay—has drawn particular ire from labour representatives, who say it undermines fair compensation for extra work.
Union response and the strike’s effects
The General Confederation of Labor described the strike as an expression of widespread rejection of a bill it views as regressive. In social media posts and public statements, the CGT urged citizens to oppose the reforms “in the streets, in Congress, in the courts and in every workplace.” Transport unions pledged to enforce the stoppage, effectively limiting mobility across the metropolitan area and creating ripple effects for commerce and air travel.
Union leaders argued the legislation would not meaningfully increase job creation and instead would transfer bargaining power toward employers. They also criticized provisions that would reduce sick pay for injuries or illnesses occurring outside the workplace—measures that differentiate between routine and higher-risk activities and apply significant salary cuts. Mass rallies and public demonstrations accompanied the work stoppage, underscoring political polarization around the reforms.
Voices from the streets and workplaces
Reactions among workers and small business owners varied. Some individuals, including migrants who fled crises elsewhere, said they hoped fewer regulations could revive business activity and stabilize incomes. Others blamed macroeconomic issues—especially inflation—for damaging livelihoods, arguing that changes to labour law alone cannot restore purchasing power or currency stability. These perspectives reveal the complexity of public sentiment: while some seek flexibility to spur growth, others fear the social cost of weakened labour safeguards.
Political dynamics in Congress
The bill had passed the Senate and was under active debate in the Chamber of Deputies. Analysts expect intense legislative battles as opposition parties and union allies press for amendments. If deputies alter the text, it must return to the Senate for final approval, prolonging the political standoff. Milei’s coalition secured substantial electoral support in recent contests, giving the government momentum, but the parliamentary arithmetic and street mobilization ensure no simple path to final enactment.
Broader implications and next steps
Beyond immediate disruptions, the strike highlighted deeper debates about Argentina’s economic strategy. The Milei administration frames labour reform as necessary to attract foreign capital and formalize employment; critics counter that austerity for workers could deepen inequality and weaken domestic demand. The dispute also has international dimensions: the president has courted support from allied foreign figures and financial arrangements that hinge on political outcomes, intensifying scrutiny of the reforms.
In the short term, the labour bill’s fate will depend on negotiations in the Chamber of Deputies and whether unions can sustain pressure through additional industrial actions, court challenges or public mobilization. Regardless of the legislative outcome, the episode marks a significant flashpoint in Argentina’s protracted debate over how to reconcile labour protections with efforts to revive a volatile economy.