“En el Perú la remuneración mínima vital es miserable”
¿El sueldo mínimo en el Perú es suficiente para que una familia viva en condiciones appropriate?
The answer is obvious. No family can live with S/.550.00, is very low, even in the region. In comparable terms, the minimum living wage (RMV) is miserable in comparison with other countries, and if there are countries that also have miserable salaries is because they are very poor countries.
"In Peru there is the ability to increase the RMV?
I think so, because there are very few countries in the world where wages are a fifth of the total product. I do not think Bolivia is in that situation. Wages are a fifth of all income is very uneven. Salaries and Wages are the largest part of income in most countries.
What is the minimum wage worker would earn in Peru?
What should a worker earning the minimum basket depends. Hardly a family budget, even basic, may be under the S/.2, 000, that is, the RMV should be S/.1, 000, because it assumes that the family has two contributions: the father and mother. But we are far from it.
may be a short-term goal ...
Obviously that should be a progressive goal. What is there should be no loss of power purchasing. There must be subsequent recoveries in the medium term. It is the recommendation of the ILO do when inflation is justified, but here there is no system and the agreement that was assumed was not fulfilled.
So the government can increase inflation as workers removed them?
increased to S/.550 When nothing happened, then that should not affect S/.35 (employers). RMV should put at least S /. 580. I guess it's not difficult, is the least that could be done. S/.30 is a Daily Sun, is a miserable thing.
say that could not be pay in the provinces ...
Then get into a serious set of adjustments newspaper basket study, who are the leveling had to leave while in Lima and other cities where it can be increased.
Recently the Minister of Labour said that it could not raise the RMV in 2009 because it was a year of crisis ...
But the crisis is for workers and employers and employees more for insurance. When there is a crisis the owner of the company is better protected than those who work for the company. The argument should be workers. I do not think a good argument.
also say it will hit the mypes ...
Small businesses are a great excuse for many things, it is mostly a pretext for major businesses to reduce labor costs. They always say 'small business does not stand', 'small businesses unable to pay pensions, "but it is not.
Some companies can not assume that spending on wages ...
then so small that companies can not afford a decent pay more or less not deserve to exist, because you can not do a company by looking to pay your workers want. If so, then return to best days of slavery.
"This government wants to grow at the expense of their workers?
not think there is a development program that may be based on the over-exploitation. Even the Chinese are subsidizing their workers. Have insurance, housing, and if you add the RMV goes out more than in Peru. If people are not developing exploits, are generating profits. If you want to develop have to raise wages.
But that does not speak ...
The remuneration is not an issue. This Peruvian-liberalism that is not even real because liberalism is a kind of rent seeking associated with the power-does not.
"A council does not meet the agreements do not serve"
Do you think the government has absolutely no interest in improving the situation of workers?
Early 2006 to 2007, rose from S/.500 to S/.550, rose 10% with low inflation, then we had a real leap, but the jump has been lost in the next two years. In 2008, inflation has been strong, and beginning in 2009 must be fulfilled under the National Labour Council.
The trigger clause ...
Yes, but not fulfilled. The unions withdrew, and I think that's okay because what sense does a breach well. Could have remained in political terms, but the question is what is the guarantee of a council where agreements are made after they are broken. What
showed that non-compliance?
An alliance between the government and employers. If the government had strong simply because the minimum wage had risen beyond the agreement. If he could do, if I had a positive employment policy, if I had plans of medium and long term to ensure that the workforce will be recovering the huge losses it has had in the past 30 years.
Does anything a Labour Council in those conditions?
The council is a forum for dialogue is right there, but some institutions should be given to things like this. If it fails what is agreed, it is meaningless.
