Caught your eye, didn't I? But I am talking
about economic rape, not the sexual kind. And specifically, the rape of the
Mexican workers. But to understand this we should look at labor law in México
and how it is applied to the workers in the formal market.
For our US audience, we should review Mexican labor laws. México has no
unemployment insurance as most western countries do. For that matter, very
little "welfare benefits" either. As an offset to this, the employees are
given legal protections that would astound the US.
Concerning employees that are laid off (this includes supervisory
personnel also), there are complex liquidation formulas mandated that require
90 days of pay for the first year of employment and 20 days additional for
each successive year worked. In addition are such things as the mandatory
end-of-the-year bonus and other acquired benefits that include
proportionalized vacation time. This may also include other benefits due under
the labor contract for hourly workers. In other words, laying off someone due
to lack of work is expensive. But there are no unemployment taxes collected
from either the company or the employee.
But regarding the unions, there is a "Mexican" facet. Unions usually
survive financially by collecting dues for their members. But in México, since
the wage levels are so abysmal, unions cannot aspire to their desired life
style from dues alone. So it is common for a union to collect fees "under the
table" from the employer for "considerations" in framing and enforcing the
union contract. More considerations, more fees. These fees can be substantial,
and make up a good part of the union's income.
On top of this, if a company goes bankrupt and is unable to meet the
weekly payroll, things get interesting. While in the US, the first priority
for collection of company assets is the government for taxes owed. Not so in
México, as the workers get first crack on the assets. And as it usually works
out, the workers, through their union as their acting sales agent, end up
selling off the assets, passing on the proceeds (after deduction of a
"collection fee" that usually exceeds 60%) leaving nothing left for the
government, secured creditors, stockholders or anybody.
This is a little like having a lawyer represent you in a case where you
are being sued. At the same time, your lawyer is on the payroll of the
plaintiff and is secretly hoping that you will go under so that he can collect
the bigger fees. Talk about a compromised position! In most countries this
would be highly illegal, but in México it is the custom. And who comes out on
the bottom of this situation? You guessed it . . . the workers. As a result,
companies go to all kinds of either slightly or completely illegal means to
make a buck.
Some companies have "ghost" contracts with a union that the workers don't
even know about. The employers are protected by the union against any actions
from the workers who are actually under the union's hidden control.
I have seen some companies conspire with a union to force a bankruptcy so
that the union can sell the assets, split the proceeds with the management and
ends up with the workers receiving almost nothing. The government receives
nothing and creditors are left holding an empty bag wondering what hit them.
Sometimes the stock holders are left holding the empty bag too.
Some companies, with the cooperation of a union, simply negate an
existing contract and rehire the workers on a continuing temporary basis in
order to prevent the workers from acquiring benefits. And of course, while it
can be illegal, it can be only done with the cooperation of the involved union
to the detriment of the employees. For an under-the-table-fee, you can do
anything. While most companies in the civilized world want to build up skill
levels and productivity in their work forces, in México, greed is the prime
mover.
But as one businessman tells me, he would be willing to raise his workers
basic pay if he could just eliminate some of the government payroll taxes
(about 5 or six of them) and pay this directly to his employees. They would
probably come out ahead this way, as the government's ineffective bureaucracy
wouldn't be skimming off up to half of the tax proceeds. But then, we would
have to teach Mexicans how to manage money, wouldn't we?
And we wonder why they flee México for the North? And why national
productivity is going nowhere?
_____________________________________
Richard N. Baldwin T., a HispanicVista.com (http://www.hispanicvista.com/)
contributing columnist, lives in Tlalnepantla, Edo de México. E-mail at:
R1041643422@aol.com
By
Richard N. Baldwin T. /HispanicVista.com