Traditionally, governments have tried to dilute their responsibilities by agreeing on measures and laws with social agents. This is how tripartite social consultation arose. The government of the day, instead of legislating what it considered appropriate for the country, sought consensus with the unions and employers to dampen criticism and score a political point.

In the event that any of the interlocutors refused to accept the pact, they received strong pressure until they modified their position. This is what the UCD government chaired by Leopoldo Calvo-Sotelo did in the ANE (National Employment Agreement, 1981) with the CEOE.

But that was nothing compared to the threats that the employers are now receiving from the second vice president and Minister of Labor, Yolanda Díaz. First was the interprofessional minimum wage, a decision that the government must adopt after listening to the social agents. Nowhere is it written that it has to be consensual. Since the employers refused to endorse it, they were conveniently “punished” by raising the increase, even though this could harm employment or the country’s economy. That was the least important thing, the important thing was that the businessmen entered through the hoop.

Now the operation is repeated with the purpose of reducing the working day to 37.5 hours per week in two years. This is a decision that employers and unions should agree upon within the framework of bipartite negotiation within collective bargaining. If there was an agreement, the pact would be submitted to the Government, in case it wanted to assume it and turn it into law with the support of Parliament. In the event that there was no agreement, the Government could adopt the appropriate decisions and assume their consequences. This is the most democratic and what our Constitution provides, which considers that social agents have to agree on all aspects that affect them within companies.

But not. This measure had already been decided by Pedro Sánchez and Yolanda Díaz when they signed the government agreement between the PSOE and Sumar. Therefore, as the president of the CEOE, Antonio Garamendi, says, “it is a negotiation in which the end and the result are marked.” Consequently, they only expect business owners to endorse it with their signature. As is said among businessmen, this is not about social dialogue but rather an imposition, since if they do not agree, companies will be harshly punished.

But these confrontations between the Government and the employers have not dissuaded Yolanda Díaz from acting differently. In social concertation it is not about seducing as she did in the past, but rather convincing that her proposal is the best solution for the interests of everyone and above all for the country.

It will not be easy for him to push through a new Workers’ Statute with threats, nor to eliminate the limitation on compensation for unfair dismissal to make it a deterrent when it comes to reducing workforces; much less limit the salary of executives.

On this occasion, the social pact is essential for Junts and PNV to vote in Parliament in their favor, since otherwise they would not have a sufficient majority to be approved.