Labor inspectors called off their strike at noon on Tuesday, choosing to pause indefinitely even though their goals were not fully met. The so-called sine die action by the so-called labor police lasted a single day, and the five centers that gathered in support explained their decision not to extend the strike because government partners had politicized the action.
Why did labor inspectors launch their first indefinite strike?
The dispute within the Labor Inspectorate emerged from a clash between the inspectorate itself, the Ministry of Labor, the Treasury and Public Function, and the civil service structure. Differences of opinion among coalition partners have slowed the implementation of the agency’s planned reforms. Tensions within the political center intensified in the run up to elections, and these tensions fed into the labor conflict, widening the rift over how inspections should be organized and funded.
Yet the preparations for the current indefinite strike lacked the unity that had driven earlier union actions. Although six power plants announced stoppages, five ultimately supported the strike, and the main unions, including the major federation, faced internal disagreements while planning the protests. This fragmentation influenced how the action unfolded and how it was perceived by the government.
Thus, the investigators launched the first indefinite strike in the history of the government agency as it neared the 100th anniversary in July. The core demand was clear: the government would approve a new organizational structure for the agency before dissolving the Cortes. When the government’s replies did not meet that demand, the strike was called off. Insights from union leaders emphasize that a formal commitment on structural changes was a prerequisite to continuing the action, and without that assurance, the stoppage lost momentum.
The unions stated that the Spanish government instrumentalized the Labor Inspectorate, a public service in place since 1906, at a moment when it serves to defend workers’ rights. The Labor Party charged the Treasury with giving preferential treatment to officials in ministries led by the PSOE and undermining talks with inspectors by tying negotiations to an electoral strategy. The Treasury has refuted these accusations, asserting that the public service is governed by established rules and that negotiations were proceeding within those frameworks. The episode underlines how labor governance and political considerations intersect when regulatory bodies push for reforms that affect day-to-day oversight and worker protections.