Reinforcing Worker Security: A Double-Edged Sword for the Economy
In an effort to strengthen worker security, the amended Labor Code introduces a financial constraint that is causing concern among a significant portion of the economic fabric. Measures aimed at protecting employees may ultimately transform the daily lives of service providers, particularly small businesses that are already vulnerable.
A Reform with Far-Reaching Consequences
Adopted in May 2025, the reform prohibits labor subcontracting and imposes generalized tenure, two advances welcomed by unions and job seekers. However, a decree published in September adds a requirement with significant consequences: every service company must deposit a bank guarantee representing 20% of the contract value within three days of signing. This amount, mobilized in case of employer default, must cover employee salaries and social security contributions.
A Mechanism with Uncertain Outcomes
In practice, if a company delays paying its employees, the client is required to do so on their behalf, before reimbursing themselves through the blocked guarantee. The mechanism appears straightforward, but its application raises serious questions. The calculation basis is one of the most contentious points. The guarantee is fixed on the total contract amount, including not only salaries but also ancillary costs, materials, and profit margins. However, in many services, labor costs represent only a fraction of this total. For many economic actors, this formula amounts to demanding a disproportionate effort.
A Threat to Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises
While large companies sometimes have the necessary financial resources, small and medium-sized enterprises, which make up the bulk of the economic fabric, risk being excluded from many tenders. For them, immobilizing 20% of the contract value means freezing vital liquidity. In a context already marked by difficulties in accessing bank credit and tight cash flow, this obligation could become a factor of exclusion, or even outright disappearance.
A Paradoxical Situation
The paradox is evident: a measure intended to secure employees' rights may end up weakening the structures that employ them. The desire to protect social rights clashes with the reality of financial balances, especially in a sector where margins are often narrow. The reform illustrates a classic tension between social ambition and economic constraints.
A Future Uncertainty
Only time will tell if this mechanism proves sustainable. Only field experience will allow us to measure its feasibility and identify potential adjustments. The coming months will be a real-world test to determine whether worker protection can coexist with the survival of service companies, or if the mechanism needs to be revised quickly.
