When one reviews the history of the Argentine labor movement, an important contrast is obvious. That time when the unions had a concrete representation in Congress and were a backbone of Peronism today seems a distant memory. In current national and provincial lists, union extraction names have the fingers of one hand, and most respond more to the centrality of Kirchnerism than to the historic gravitation of the CGT.
During the governments of Juan Domingo Perón, the labor movement had a concrete and decisive political presence. In the Chamber of Deputies, approximately 11 % of the legislators were of union extraction in 1946, a figure that increased to more than 20 % in 1951. This was not the product of a formal percentage distribution, but of the political force that the unions had within Peronism, which made them a backbone of the national and popular project. This representation allowed workers not only to negotiate in the streets or in the factories, but also had a direct voice in legislative decisions, consolidating a link between politics and labor movement that is almost unthinkable today. Those years left a precedent: when trade unionism is united and organized, its influence on politics can be real and transformative.
Trade union gravitation was still sustained in more difficult contexts. During the recovered democracy, in the 80s, union leaders played a decisive role in Congress. An emblematic case was that of deputy José “Pepe” Rodríguez, of Smata, who intervened firmly in the debates on the laws of due obedience and end point. Also in the Senate, a Puntano Railway leader, Oraldo Britos, together with the Neuquino Felipe Sapag, stopped the Mucci Law promoted by Raúl Alfonsín, who sought to modify the Argentine union model. These facts show that the workers’ voice was not only present, but could influence issues of maximum national relevance.
However, In the 90s that participation began to dilute. Peronism in power was reconfigured under the sign of neoliberalism and trade unionism went to the background, limited to negotiating resistances rather than being the protagonist of the great decisions. That loss of political centrality was deepened during the Kirchnerism years. Although there was a claiming discourse of work, electoral construction relied more on social movements, mayors and youth groups, relegating the CGT to a secondary role in partisan life.
In more recent times, the most classic Peronist trade unionism suffered a displacement within the PJ. Without their own space on the lists, Several historical figures were forced to build their own matches to place their candidates, as happened with the third position of Luis Barrionuevo, the Fe Festo de Momo Venegas or the Party of Culture, Education and work of Hugo Moyano. This reflects how the lack of unity and the redefinition of the PJ left the traditional unions outside the electoral decision table.
Today, that historical force is found in one of its lowest points. In the 2019–2023 period, the Chamber of Deputies had only 10 union extraction legislators over a total of 257, which represents only 4.6 %. The CGT, which knew how to mark agenda in Congress, today fails to build its own and sustained representation.
How do we get to this?
On the one hand, the political system itself was transforming to the Justicialist Party, where the mayors, the governors and the political youth such as La Cámporas were increasingly weighed. The social movements occupied spaces that were previously union, and the guilds did not know how to respond together with that advance.
On the other hand, it is impossible to deny that the internal fragmentation of trade unionism weakened us. A CGT divided into several aspects, with permanent inmates, was the best scenario for lista shipowners to leave us outside. Without unity, the negotiation force is diluted.
There is also a social background change. The industry worker, unionized and with stability, is no longer the majority subject. Today the workers of the informal economy, the precarious ones weigh more. Politics sought to speak to them, and trade unionism often spent an old language for a new reality.
To this is added the image wear of traditional trade unionism. That we have little legislative representation does not mean that trade unionism has lost power. We are still central actors in the distributive bid. We remain those who defend the salary in the peers, who stop production when an adjustment must be stopped, who fill the streets when workers are at risk. The problem is that this force, which in the street is real and concrete, does not translate into institutional political representation.
The labor movement needs to recover its place in politics. Not to ask for positions by habit, but for the workers’ voice to have weight in the strategic decisions of the country. Because without workers in Congress, laws are discussed between businessmen, governors and mayors. And without trade unionists on the lists, Peronism runs the risk of forgetting who gave him historical livelihood.
The question then is not if we want to be, but how we are going back. And the answer starts with what our strength was always: unity. If we are still divided, they will continue to relegate us. But if we understand that no guild is saved alone and that working youth has to be the protagonist, then politics cannot ignore us.
After all, history shows that every time the labor movement joined, Argentina was more fair. And every time we fragmented, others took our rights ahead.
General Secretary of the Personnel of Chemical and Petrochemical Industries
Source: Ambito
David William is a talented author who has made a name for himself in the world of writing. He is a professional author who writes on a wide range of topics, from general interest to opinion news. David is currently working as a writer at 24 hours worlds where he brings his unique perspective and in-depth research to his articles, making them both informative and engaging.
