How do labor and union practices in Chile differ from the US?
After hearing Courtney talk about the challenges that small business owners face with respect to compliance with Chilean labor laws, I wanted to learn more about how these laws inform the growth of the Chilean economy. Several other students have posted about how quickly the Chilean economy is growing, how it is becoming a more attractive place to do business, etc., and it has made me more curious as to what is is like to work in Chile, particularly regarding unionization--something that is becoming increasingly less common in the U.S.
Courtney referenced out-of-date practices, such as 6 day work weeks. The broad statutory right to unionize and bargain collectively probably helped to (mostly) eradicate this practice. As some others have referenced, Chileans have imposed more labor regulations in recent decades (dealing with things like termination, severance pay, overtime, maternity leave, etc.), but the country has still moved toward a more market-oriented approach to this kind of regulation, as opposed to a more rigid labor market (pre-1970s).
However, it appears that despite these regulations, there is still tension between laborers, specifically large unions, and the Chilean government, which appears to be struggling to pass legislation that is both industry- and union-friendly. For the most part, though, it looks like both parties have similarly good intentions and are just trying to haggle over the details. Last spring, workers launched a nationwide strike over some language in a proposed piece of legislation. United construction workers and united copper workers weren't happy with a clause that permitted employers to fire striking workers who "pose an alleged risk to damaging infrastructure, the environment, or health services."
At the same time, the government has been trying to move away from Pinochet-era regulations that limit unions activities like collective bargaining. The bill in question also provided that business weren't allowed to just replace workers who were striking. The bill was also intended to beef up unemployment benefits and the collective bargaining process. To me, this stuff is fascinating, mostly this is so different from the way US labor laws are moving, while similar to our past at the same time.
In December of last year, the Chilean civil aviation authority announced a strike, following a similar strike in September of last year. This was not welcomed by holiday travelers, to say the least. Collective bargaining efforts failed when the government rejected the aviation authority's proposal to join the state-sponsored military pension plan, which offers better benefits than aviation workers' current plan. Luckily for travelers, the strike only lasted 48 hours.
Despite these spats between unions and governments, the atmosphere still seems pro-union--at least, much more so than the US. Just a few years ago, the Chilean Supreme Court upheld a $50,000 fine on global superpower Starbucks imposed by the Court of Appeals. Union workers claimed that Starbucks had violated their union and bargaining rights by cutting benefits, replacing workers during a strike, which is illegal in Chile, and threatening to lay off striking workers, which is also illegal. Interestingly, this union only represented a small minority of Starbucks workers in Chile, so perhaps more workers have joined that union in the wake of the successful suit.
Moving forward, I'll be interested to hear more details about unions, collective bargaining, and how both affect businesses in Chile on a day-to-day basis.
Sources:
A Comparison of US and Chilean Labor and Employment Laws
Chileans Launch Nationwide Strike
Chile Threatened By Airport Strike Ahead of Holidays
Chile Airport Workers End Strike That Left Thousands Stranded
Chilean Court Upholds Starbucks Labor Practices Fine
Courtney referenced out-of-date practices, such as 6 day work weeks. The broad statutory right to unionize and bargain collectively probably helped to (mostly) eradicate this practice. As some others have referenced, Chileans have imposed more labor regulations in recent decades (dealing with things like termination, severance pay, overtime, maternity leave, etc.), but the country has still moved toward a more market-oriented approach to this kind of regulation, as opposed to a more rigid labor market (pre-1970s).
However, it appears that despite these regulations, there is still tension between laborers, specifically large unions, and the Chilean government, which appears to be struggling to pass legislation that is both industry- and union-friendly. For the most part, though, it looks like both parties have similarly good intentions and are just trying to haggle over the details. Last spring, workers launched a nationwide strike over some language in a proposed piece of legislation. United construction workers and united copper workers weren't happy with a clause that permitted employers to fire striking workers who "pose an alleged risk to damaging infrastructure, the environment, or health services."
At the same time, the government has been trying to move away from Pinochet-era regulations that limit unions activities like collective bargaining. The bill in question also provided that business weren't allowed to just replace workers who were striking. The bill was also intended to beef up unemployment benefits and the collective bargaining process. To me, this stuff is fascinating, mostly this is so different from the way US labor laws are moving, while similar to our past at the same time.
In December of last year, the Chilean civil aviation authority announced a strike, following a similar strike in September of last year. This was not welcomed by holiday travelers, to say the least. Collective bargaining efforts failed when the government rejected the aviation authority's proposal to join the state-sponsored military pension plan, which offers better benefits than aviation workers' current plan. Luckily for travelers, the strike only lasted 48 hours.
Despite these spats between unions and governments, the atmosphere still seems pro-union--at least, much more so than the US. Just a few years ago, the Chilean Supreme Court upheld a $50,000 fine on global superpower Starbucks imposed by the Court of Appeals. Union workers claimed that Starbucks had violated their union and bargaining rights by cutting benefits, replacing workers during a strike, which is illegal in Chile, and threatening to lay off striking workers, which is also illegal. Interestingly, this union only represented a small minority of Starbucks workers in Chile, so perhaps more workers have joined that union in the wake of the successful suit.
Moving forward, I'll be interested to hear more details about unions, collective bargaining, and how both affect businesses in Chile on a day-to-day basis.
Sources:
A Comparison of US and Chilean Labor and Employment Laws
Chileans Launch Nationwide Strike
Chile Threatened By Airport Strike Ahead of Holidays
Chile Airport Workers End Strike That Left Thousands Stranded
Chilean Court Upholds Starbucks Labor Practices Fine