The reports of the Government itself and of the Council of State against the changes in time registration promoted by the Ministry of Labor and Social Economy have caused a new row in the coalition Government.
Clashes, shocks, and friction are habitual. Yolanda Díaz's own team recognizes that there has not been a single norm that has not come out without friction. But on this occasion they understand the criticism as a disloyalty and a violation of the coalition agreement itself.
And they are determined to continue with the regulation without substantial changes, despite the objections of the Council of State and of their colleagues in the Government.
What rule is it? The regulatory development of time registration, a regulation approved by the first Government of Pedro Sánchez (PSOE alone) and that PSOE and Sumar agreed to strengthen. The changes were processed in the bill for the reduction of working hours that PP, Vox and Junts struck down. Now Labor recovers a large part of it via decree, which would not have to pass through Congress.
By regulation. One of the objections of the Council of State –with a dissenting particular vote—is of normative rank, understanding that a law is necessary. Labor concedes that a change in sanctions, as proposed in the project, do require a legal norm. But not the establishment of the conditions of how that registry should be, whose regulation in the Workers' Statute already foresees its regulatory development.
They see it as a warning. In the Ministry, they see this limitation as a warning. Parliamentary weakness limits Díaz to approving only changes via regulation, since in labor matters the Government has no support. At stake are norms such as the rules for absorption and compensation of salaries, the transposition of the directive on transparent conditions, or the artist's statute.
Without essential changes. Labor intends to continue with the rule without touching the two essential aspects: that the record be digital to ensure it is an objective and non-manipulable method to control the workday, and that this be accessible by the Labor Inspectorate for its verification. They maintain that the current regulation is not enough to enforce it and the Justice of the European Union has made this known. At stake are 2.5 million unpaid overtime hours each week, according to their calculations.
Despite the Council of State. The intention is not to heed the observations of the Council of State that question core elements of the norm. Labor defends that it is not the only time the Government has done so and they count fourteen norms as precedent.
The timings. The Ministry does not dare to set a date because it wants to respect the processing times in the different government bodies before elevating the text to the Council. First, changes, not substantial ones, will be introduced, and then it will pass through the different bodies. But the idea is to take it to the Council as soon as possible.
What changes? Minor, but yes, to clarify doubts raised by the Council of State, regarding data protection and collective bargaining. But not altering the core elements of the already mentioned norm.
Without distinctions or delays. No distinction will be made between companies by size –it is a right already extensible to all workers—nor is it foreseen to delay an entry into force that they see as proportionate: 20 days from its publication in the BOE and six months for the digital registry starting from its technical standards and requirements.
And foresees aid. The norm, remarks Labor, already foresees possible aid and bonuses to companies to implement a system that, in any case, they understand to be of minimal cost. First because many of the companies already have these systems. And, afterwards, because they assure that the cost of the equipment and the application is minimal.
If it violates privacy, it is already being done. They reject the doubts of the Council of State about the protection of workers' privacy with a digital register and recall that the register is already mandatory. If it were violated, it would already be being done for almost ten years.
It was already approved by the Council. The norm that Labor is now promoting was already validated as it was part of the bill for the reduction of working hours. It is not exactly the same regulation but it is in its essential aspects, which is why they see no sense in the opposition from Economy and Digital Transformation. They recall that Pedro Sánchez himself supported the changes in the clash over the reduction of working hours and understand that, if necessary, he will do so again.
Whose side are they on? At Labour they do not understand such a clear stance on the part of the two ministries and understand that their reports sought to give ‘ammunition’ to the Council of State in its opinion to try to overturn it.
It will have consequences. The opinion of the Council of State could perfectly be used in the judicial battle advanced by the employers' association to overturn the rule. One of the tasks that the Ministry now has is to reinforce possible weaknesses in this regard and the legal argumentation that supports the regulation.
On a high. The clash comes shortly after Sumar forced the PSOE to approve housing and margin control measures that it initially did not contemplate in the economic response to the Iran war. The ministers' walkout worked and this very Monday the ministers and deputies conspired in Congress to continue pressing. It may not be the last 'sit-in' of ministers.