How can you not imagine? How can I not remember you? Barely two years ago… Sabina’s verses correspond very well to what happened in the relationship between Yolanda Diaz And Antonio Garamendi. It seems like it was yesterday when the vice-president and the employers’ leader congratulated each other on the signing of major social agreements – the increase in the SMI to 950 euros, the ERTE Covid-19 or the reform of the work – but the relationship between the two is no longer what it used to be.
Gone are the days of “dear Antonio”, an expression with which the current interim leader of Sumar referred to the CEOE president. To make sure that Díaz was someone “you could talk to.” Now, at least in public, The atmosphere between the two is obviously conflicting.. Now it’s too late…
There are no more major agreements, and even an emergency like that of DANA has not reached a a minimal hint of reconciliation. On the contrary, the so-called measures work shield launched by the government triggered a new confrontation between Díaz and Garamendi. In addition, they arrived at the disaster with relations already very deteriorated due to the development of negotiations to reduce the working day to 37.5 hours.
It wasn’t always like this. There was a time when Díaz and Garamendi, coming from opposing ideological trenches, achieved what seemed impossible: that businessmen, unions and government marched together. The pandemic was a turning point. The ERTE not only saved millions of jobs, but also cemented an unprecedented relationship between Labor and the CEOE. “Antonio understands the reality of the country,” Díaz once said.. For his part, the president of the employers’ association was full of praise for the minister, describing her as someone “with the sense of the State”.
But the truce did not last. The 2021 labor reform was the swan song of this era of consensus. Despite criticism from the harshest sectors of the CEOE, Garamendi decided to support hertriggering internal tensions within employers. What was then considered an act of pragmatism is now interpreted as the beginning of the deterioration of his relationship with Díaz.
Yolanda Díaz and Antonio Garamendi, in an archive image.
Europe Press
From that point on, the relationship deteriorated. There are two essential points: on the one hand, the increases in the interprofessional minimum wage (SMI), which over the last two years have been carried out without the agreement of employers. In the case of the increase for 2024, the government, faced with refusal from employers, decided to go even further than its initial proposal to satisfy the unions.
On the other hand, it is worth mentioning the change through the back door of the structure of collective bargaining, giving priority to regional collective agreements over company agreements. This last thing really irritated the CEOE: the businessmen went so far as to say that if they knew the Ministry of Labor was going to do this, they would not have supported labor reform. The government’s stated intention to introduce new employers’ associations into social dialogue has also not improved relations.
Reduction of working hours
He last big disagreement Before DANA, it developed around the reduction of working hours. Yolanda Díaz has made this issue one of her political flags, calling it “the work demand of our times.” For the minister, reducing the working day to 37.5 hours per week not only improves quality of life, but also boosts productivity.
But the CEOE does not see things that way. Garamendi accuses Díaz of seeking to impose a model that could “suffocate SMEs”arguing that any change in working conditions must be agreed in collective agreements. The tone of the debate quickly intensified: what began as a technical discussion transformed into an open political confrontation.
“I miss Mr. Garamendi who worked for his country”lamented Díaz this week, after the latest clash on the social shield for people affected by DANA. Garamendi, for his part, toughened his speech, denouncing “that they want to play politics with misfortune.”
The natural disaster that hit several regions of Spain has only worsened the differences. While Díaz announced immediate measures to protect workers and their families, Garamendi accused of what he perceives as a lack of sensitivity towards the companies concerned. “We cannot offer a social shield at the expense of ruined companies,” declared the CEOE president.
Díaz was quick to respond, accusing the leader of the employers’ union of lack of empathy. In his reproachful statements, he mentioned Garamendi who “saved businesses, self-employed workers and workers”. But the mutual criticism does not stop there.
What’s going on between Díaz and Garamendi transcends the personal. Their relationship symbolizes the delicate balance of social dialogue in Spain, a space where the interests of businessmen, workers and government have historically collided. Current tension could mark a point of no returnespecially at a time when Spanish politics is going through its own storm.
Europe Press
Madrid
Both leaders insist they are open to dialogue, but ideological differences run deep. If Díaz commits to measures he considers transformative, Garamendi is reluctant about what he perceives as state interventionism. “When we see measures that seek political gain, we must denounce them,” the CEOE president declared this week.
There is little hope that the days of “dear Antonio” will return. The wounds opened by labor reform, the 37.5-hour day and the management of DANA have left scars that are difficult to heal. In this context, calls from both sides to “work together” seem more like an act of protocol than an achievable reality.
Perhaps Díaz and Garamendi are, ultimately, victims of circumstances. Or maybe, as Sabina’s verses say, it’s simply either too late for them.
