Juan Carlos Gómez, president of Adeoms Salto, stated in Plaza 33 that they "don't want unions" and called for "no backtracking." We verified each statement with current regulations and official documents. The result: several statements are false or inaccurate ; others are rhetorical and unverifiable.
What happened
The protest took place in front of the Salto City Hall, with slogans against a resolution regulating union leave and setting an annual salary cap for leadership. The municipality maintains that it seeks to regulate the use of union hours and ensure services.
Checking by statements
“They don’t want unions.” — False.
The Uruguayan Constitution promotes union organization and declares strikes a union right. There is no legal basis for claiming "they don't want unions." Furthermore, collective bargaining in the public sector is recognized by law.
“They don’t want workers organizing workers.” — False.
The current framework allows for unions and negotiation in public bodies, including departmental governments. Law 18,508 mandates formal forums for dialogue. Regulating licenses does not equate to prohibiting organizing.
“They don’t want a political structure to defend our comrades.” — Misleading.
The Mayor's Office approved an administrative resolution requiring license registration and setting a cap of 400 annual daily wages for all management, without abolishing the institute. This is a regulation of use, not an elimination.
“They come to take away rights.” — Without general evidence.
Rights such as freedom of association and the right to strike are guaranteed by the Constitution. Disputes are processed through the Ministry of Social Security's negotiating committees, with rules and minutes. There is no law that abolishes the existence of unions.
“Our union has more than 70 years of history.” — Not controversial.
It's an identifying reference that the union often invokes; it doesn't contradict public employers' ability to regulate leave to make it compatible with the service.
“We will always win.” — Rhetorical statement.
It's a political slogan, not verifiable. The outcome depends on formal (MTSS) and legally compliant resolutions.
The missing context
At the same time, the situation of 292 public employees who gained stability through an agreement initiated in September 2024 and formalized in 2025 is under discussion. There is local press coverage and calls for applications at the Ministry of Social Security (MTSS). This shows that institutional negotiations are underway, not a ban on dialogue.
Why it matters
The Plaza 33 speech presents an "all or nothing" scenario. The available evidence indicates otherwise: Uruguay supports the existence of unions, and the Salto Municipality regulated —not abolished—union licenses through a formal resolution. The conflict, if it continues, must be channeled through the Ministry of Social Security (MTSS).
