“You have not wondered what is truly under discussion. If you ask any Chilean, including me, do you want to find downgrade ? Of course they do, who says otherwise? In fact we propose a reduction to working hours. Let’s say things the way they are. The project of Member Camila Vallejos proposes a reduction of the current rigid working day (…) from 45 to 40 hours and does not incorporate any flexibility or adaptability. We propose a reduction of the working day to 41 hours on average a week, that average word is very important,” Labour Minister Nicolas Monckeberg said this morning about the current debate over projects that are in Congress for flexibility 40-hour workday.
“This is math, it’s not opinion, 41 hours a week. How to get it, very simple: the year – as far as I understand it – is 12 months, 52 weeks. 180 hours a month by 12, divided by 52 weeks is 41. Even Mandrake the Wizard isn’t going to change my math. This is mathematical, it is not opinionable”, (noted in Radio Universe)(Monckeberg is open to merge government project with Vallejo’s 40-hour project: “We have no inconvenience”).
“We propose a discount of the day to 41 hours average… The big difference, where is he? It’s not the time. They propose to lower it to 40, we propose to 41. The big difference is that they maintain all the current rigidity and we believe that a reduction in the day, in order for it to really improve the quality of life of the worker, has to go with measures of work flexibility, (…) of schedule”.
Asked whether the two projects could be mixed, he said: “Of course, of course. That’s what we said. If we are going to reduce the day, let’s worry that there is adaptability and flexibility of work so that the worker not only gains one hour less work a day, but more days off.”
Asked if a merger can be made between the two projects, asking Vallejo to pick up the flexibility in exchange for giving in the 41 to 40 hour rebate, Monckeberg replied: “We have no inconvenience and we have clearly promoted that we can reduce the working day in Chile. But fundamental to that is that we improve productivity.” “And the main factor that improves productivity in all the countries that have slowed down the day, look what I’m going to tell you… Everyone, there is no country in the world that has reduced the day, nor the most developed, maintaining the rigidity of the working day.”
-Let’s do both?
-Exactly. Let’s reduce the day, but with the hand of flexibility of schedule that improves the quality of the worker, that is more compatible with the productive cycles of the company, which recognizes that the reality of the SME is not the same as the large company. If you do both hand in hand, of course there are points of agreement.
“The problem with the Vallejo project is that it reduces the day but maintains all the rigidity, in which we believe it hurts many companies. But if you reduce the working day but introduce elements that improve productivity, for example labour flexibility, which improves the productivity of SMEs and the quality of life of the worker, of course there is a meeting point,” he added.
“We are willing to talk with all the points for and the problems (…) I want to tell him that we are even thinking about the polls, we are thinking about the good of Chile,” he stressed. “I am convinced that for an SME if it gets down sharply and doesn’t give it adaptability measures, it’s going to hit it very hard and not the owner, the workers.”
“We believe that the day can be reduced, in fact our project reduces it. If the point here is to make a reduction in working without harming the worker, without affecting their income, improving productivity,” he said, recalling Chile’s bad figures in the latter respect.
Finally, the minister said: “Hopefully that agreement will happen (between the two projects), I am pushing it, because that mixism is what our project is. It is a reduction of working hours with work flexibility. So if there is a scenario of agreement welcomed by the workers, welcome by Chile, welcome by all.”
