ILPC 2026

In Argentina, trade union competition in terms of equality only exists in the public sector. It generates a particular dynamics in the relation between the State and the unions of this sector. The action of the government presents certain peculiarities: on the one hand it acts as employer (in parity round tables, for example); on the other it exerts decisive political influences in the configuration of the trade union map. In this sense, it usually implements strategies of division between these unions, with the target to become stronger and this way to avoid labor and social discomforts coming of those actors. One of these maneuvers is to encourage dialogue and negotiation with one of the unions –showing it as the “valid speaker” and the “real representative” of the state workpeople– and de-legitimize the actions and claims of the rest of the unions –identifying them with violence, intransigence, absence of realism–.

This political intervention of the government in the State-public employees relation generates unequal conditions for the unions of this sector. Whereas the relegated organizations lose resources of power, the benefited one manages to grow and to increase his influence. These changes can be clearly seen in the evolution of membership in the rival unions of the public sector bearing in mind different governmental stages. The alliances that are established between unions and governments change across the time and depend on different factors: the ideological identity of these actors, the need of the government to displace to a too powerful union, the need to support the mastery of one of them to avoid labor and social disorders, etc.

To illustrate in depth this phenomenon, we will present a case study. In this sense, we will analyze the relation between the municipal unions of the Azul city (province of Buenos Aires) and the different communal governments that have taken place from 1991 until our days, indicating the impact that the governmental changes have had in the evolution of the union membership and in the variation of the union power opposite to the State as employer.

To develop this work, we conducted interviews with key informants from the political and union scene of this city. Also we have interviewed current and former union leaders and municipal government officials. At the same time, we have realized an examination of documentary material –both of the unions and of municipal and national official departments– relatively to the number of workpeople, his membership, his contractual status, etc. Finally we have made use of journalistic archives of the city, and we have carried out participant observation in trade union head offices and in some state agencies.