Mexico’s parties and work: 40 hours, minimum wage and pensions

In the legislature that began in September 2024, the Chamber of Deputies voted on four major changes affecting work, and all four shared something unusual: no group voted against them in general. The differences showed up in the fine print, in the articles voted on separately. This analysis reviews those votes and where each party stands on the five statements in the test topic “Work and pensions”.

The asterisk (*) flags estimated positions, held by parties that have not taken a stand on that statement and whose view has been deduced from their other statements or documents. Here there are few, 6 of 40, because almost everything in this topic went to a vote. Those of SOMOS and Partido PAZ, registered in 2026 and still without deputies, come from their founding documents: they are provisional until the two parties file their platforms in January 2027.

Four reforms, no votes against in general

Votes according to the Parliamentary Gazette. The wages amendment has one peculiarity: the Chamber passed it unanimously, but the current text of Article 123 (as of the latest constitutional amendment, of 7 October 2026) does not include it. This analysis makes no assumption about where in the process it stopped.

The 40-hour week and two days off

The amendment published on 3 March 2026 says the working week will be forty hours, and its transitional article phases it in each 1 January: 48 hours in 2026, 46 in 2027, 44 in 2028, 42 in 2029 and 40 in 2030, with no cut in pay or benefits allowed. What did not change is rest: the text keeps that for every six days worked, workers shall enjoy “at least” one day off. The amendment also limited overtime to twelve hours a week, paid at double, and at triple for hours beyond that limit.

That is where the argument was. The test asks whether the law ought to guarantee two days off along with the 40-hour week, and it is one of its tie-break questions (offered only when two or three parties end up almost tied in your result). The PRI and Movimiento Ciudadano strongly agree: both voted against the articles that kept a single day off. According to the PRI’s leader in the Chamber, the commitment was five days of work and two of rest.

Morena, the PT and the PVEM backed the text as drafted (247, 45 and 60 votes in favor of the reserved articles, none against) and disagree. The PAN is neutral: its senators faulted the amendment for not establishing five days of work for two of rest, although in the Chamber its group supported all of it. SOMOS (agrees*), which takes the 40-hour week as its benchmark, and Partido PAZ (agrees*), which calls for balancing work and family, have not spoken on rest days.

The minimum wage

The statement on raising the minimum wage faster than inflation each year is among the least divisive: no one is against it. The PRI and the PT strongly agree: the PRI’s declaration of principles defends a wage above inflation, and the PT’s platform promises to defend “the annual increase in wages and benefits.”

The rest agree, with nuances in how they frame it. Morena’s platform presents the recovery of wages as a gain to defend “against any attempt at backsliding,” though it sets no annual rule. The PAN says real wages must cover the needs of workers and their families. The PVEM backs a wage “above prices.” Movimiento Ciudadano links it to productivity and the cost of living. SOMOS proposes setting the minimum wage per hour, based on the basic basket of goods, so that 40 hours are enough to live on and save. Partido PAZ (agrees*) calls for “fair wages” without mentioning the minimum.

All six groups with deputies voted for the September 2024 wages amendment, whose text said the annual minimum wage could never be set below inflation. As noted above, that rule is not in the Constitution today.

App delivery workers and drivers

This is the other statement with no one against and, together with the one on environmental taxes, one of just two in the test where all eight parties have a source and land on the same side. The December 2024 reform added a chapter to the Federal Labor Law: anyone who works through a digital platform and earns net monthly income of at least one monthly minimum wage is an employee, and the platform must register them with the IMSS, the social security institute, and pay their contributions; those who fall short are self-employed but keep rights for the time worked (DOF, 24 December 2024).

Five parties strongly agree that these workers deserve the same social security as other employees: Morena, the PT, the PVEM, the PRI and Movimiento Ciudadano, which voted for the whole reform; the last of them had already called for it in its 2024 platform. The PAN agrees: it supported the reform in general, although it rejected the reserved articles. SOMOS proposes universal social security that includes informal and digital work, and Partido PAZ proposes gradually bringing people without a fixed wage into systems with “the same benefits”: both agree.

The Afores

The only statement in the topic that is also in the quick test asks whether the Afores, the private firms that manage individual retirement accounts, should be replaced by a public system.

Only the PT agrees: in its 2024 platform it describes the reforms that gave rise to the Afores as “neoliberal” and proposes returning to a pay-as-you-go system, run by a “State Pension Manager,” while keeping each worker’s individual account.

Morena is neutral: its platform proposes “restoring the collective insurance scheme,” but in 2026 its government ruled out going back to the old ISSSTE system as unfeasible and is betting on strengthening PensionISSSTE, the public retirement account manager. Also neutral are the PVEM, whose program of action aims for universal social insurance paid for through taxes but whose platform proposes improvements within the current system; Partido PAZ, which proposes bonds to “rebuild the national pension system,” both public and private, without saying what would happen to the Afores; and SOMOS (neutral*), which calls for a “single pension system” without defining it.

Disagreeing are the PAN, the PRI and Movimiento Ciudadano. The PAN defends individual accounts and preserving retirement savings. Movimiento Ciudadano proposes reforming the Afores so they charge lower fees and face more competition. In 2024 the PRI called it a “heist” that the Fondo de Pensiones para el Bienestar (Welfare Pension Fund) was fed with Afore savings.

The cap on public pensions

The Article 127 amendment published on 10 April 2026 caps the retirement and pension payments of non-unionized senior staff at decentralized agencies, state companies, development banks and public trusts, at federal, state and municipal level: half the pay of the president. And it also applies to pensions already being paid. The Armed Forces, pensions funded by voluntary or union contributions and the non-contributory pension for older adults are excluded.

The test asks whether no public pension should exceed the cap, including those already being paid, another tie-break question. Morena, the PRI, the PVEM and the PT agree: they voted for the whole amendment (the PRI, with 36 votes in favor and none against both in general and on the reserved articles). The PAN, which supported it in general, voted against the reserved articles; PAN deputy Margarita Zavala objected that “acquired rights” were being taken away, and its position is disagrees. Movimiento Ciudadano, which voted in favor in general and abstained on the reserved articles, is neutral. SOMOS and Partido PAZ (neutral*) oppose privileges in their documents but do not address the cap or whether it should apply to pensions already granted.

The positions in one table

Each party’s page and the “Work and pensions” page link to the source of every documented position.

What the data show

On work, the usual blocs blur. The PRI votes closer to Movimiento Ciudadano than to the PAN on this topic: both pushed for two days off, and the PRI fully supported the pension cap that the PAN rejected in the fine print. Morena, the PT and the PVEM voted together throughout, but on the Afores the PT goes further than Morena, whose government has ruled out returning to the old ISSSTE system.

For working people, what is already law comes with concrete dates: in 2027 the maximum working week falls to 46 hours, app workers who earn at least one minimum wage a month have been entitled to the IMSS since June 2025, and the cap on senior staff pensions is already in force. All five statements are in the test: the Afores statement in both the quick and the full version, the minimum wage in the full one, and the other three in the tie-break.