👷 Issue
Work and pensions: what each party thinks
By Fadrique Garcia Font ·
Replacing the Afores with a public pension system and keeping minimum-wage rises above inflation every year.
2 questions, 16 party positions and no complete disagreements (how they are assigned).
Further reading on this topic: «Mexico’s parties and work: 40 hours, minimum wage and pensions».
What divides the parties on this issue
This is the test's least contested theme: across its two questions no pair of parties sits at opposite ends of the scale, and on one of them everyone is on the same side. All eight back the minimum wage gaining ground on prices every year, although PAZ does so only by estimate: its texts call for fair wages without mentioning the minimum. Strong agreement comes from the PT and the PRI, the first because its platform pledges to defend annual raises and the second because its declaration of principles calls for pay that outstrips inflation; the rest sit one step lower. The amendment barring a minimum below inflation passed the Chamber unanimously in September 2024, but the current Constitution does not include it. Morena presents the recovery of purchasing power as an achievement to protect, without committing to a fixed rule, and SOMOS proposes an hourly minimum calculated from the cost of the basic basket.
The Afores, the funds that manage workers' individual retirement accounts, are more divisive, though not along the expected lines. The only party in favor of replacing them with a public system is the PT, which wants to bring back pay-as-you-go financing with a state-run manager, while keeping each worker's account. Its partners do not follow. Morena takes an intermediate position: in 2024 it promised to restore collective insurance, but in 2026 its government ruled out returning to the old ISSSTE scheme and proposes strengthening PensionISSSTE, the public manager already operating within the current system. The PVEM is also in the middle, with a program that aims at universal insurance funded by taxes and a platform that only proposes adjustments.
Facing them, the PAN, the PRI and Movimiento Ciudadano disagree, each in its own way: the PAN defends saving in individual accounts; the PRI objects to tapping those savings to fill the government's Pension Fund for Well-being, a move its leader called a "heist"; Movimiento Ciudadano wants more competition and lower fees. PAZ talks of rebuilding pensions with national bonds, and SOMOS, also newly registered, of an undefined single pension scheme, so its intermediate position is estimated.
Morena and the PAN end up one point apart across both questions, closer than Morena and the PT. Only two positions are estimates, one per new party.
Written from the documented positions of the eight parties on the questions in this issue; where part of it rests on estimated positions, that is stated. It does not include the answers of people taking the test.
What each party proposes on this issue
A summary of their positions on the questions in this issue, based on their electoral platforms, founding documents, votes in the Chamber of Deputies and public statements. The numbers refer to the questions below, each with its details and sources.
1. The private retirement-fund system (Afores) should be replaced by a public pension system.
Since 1997 at the IMSS and 2007 at the ISSSTE, new workers' pensions come from an individual account managed by an Afore. Before, they were paid by a public pay-as-you-go system funded by current workers' contributions.
Of the 8 parties with a position on this question: 1 in favor, 4 in between and 3 against.
| Party | Position | Source |
|---|---|---|
| PAN | Against | Programa de acción del PAN (vigente desde 2023), p. 28, punto 157 Why |
| PRI | Against | El Universal, 23 de abril de 2024 Why |
| PVEM | In between | Programa de acción (2023), p. 8; plataforma electoral 2024, pp. 13 y 132 Why |
| PT | In favor | Plataforma electoral 2024, p. 35 Why |
| MC | Against | Plataforma electoral 2024, p. 108 Why |
| Morena | In between | Plataforma electoral 2024, p. 33; El Imparcial, 9 de junio de 2026 Why |
| PAZ | In between | Programa de acción (registro de 2026), pp. 6 y 10 Why |
| SOMOS | In between | Estimated position Why |
-
PAN AgainstPrograma de acción del PAN (vigente desde 2023), p. 28, punto 157 Why
-
PRI AgainstEl Universal, 23 de abril de 2024 Why
-
PVEM In betweenPrograma de acción (2023), p. 8; plataforma electoral 2024, pp. 13 y 132 Why
-
PT In favorPlataforma electoral 2024, p. 35 Why
-
MC AgainstPlataforma electoral 2024, p. 108 Why
-
Morena In betweenPlataforma electoral 2024, p. 33; El Imparcial, 9 de junio de 2026 Why
-
PAZ In betweenPrograma de acción (registro de 2026), pp. 6 y 10 Why
-
SOMOS In between
Estimated position: inferred from the party’s platform and statements as a whole, without a specific document stating it.
Why
2. The minimum wage should keep rising above inflation every year.
The minimum wage is set every December by the National Minimum Wage Commission (Conasami). In 2026 it is 315.04 pesos a day, and 440.87 in the northern border free zone.
Of the 8 parties with a position on this question: 8 in favor, 0 in between and 0 against.
| Party | Position | Source |
|---|---|---|
| PAN | In favor | Votación nominal en la Cámara de Diputados, 24 de septiembre de 2024 (art. 123, en materia de salarios) Why |
| PRI | Strongly in favor | Declaración de principios (2024), p. 10 Why |
| PVEM | In favor | Programa de acción (2023), p. 7; votación nominal en la Cámara de Diputados, 24 de septiembre de 2024 (artículo 123, salarios) Why |
| PT | Strongly in favor | Plataforma electoral 2024, p. 18 Why |
| MC | In favor | Plataforma electoral 2024, p. 109 Why |
| Morena | In favor | Plataforma electoral 2024, p. 15 Why |
| PAZ | In favor | Estimated position Why |
| SOMOS | In favor | Programa de acción de SOMOS (registro de 2026), p. 38 Why |
-
PAN In favorVotación nominal en la Cámara de Diputados, 24 de septiembre de 2024 (art. 123, en materia de salarios) Why
-
PRI Strongly in favorDeclaración de principios (2024), p. 10 Why
-
PVEM In favorPrograma de acción (2023), p. 7; votación nominal en la Cámara de Diputados, 24 de septiembre de 2024 (artículo 123, salarios) Why
-
PT Strongly in favorPlataforma electoral 2024, p. 18 Why
-
MC In favorPlataforma electoral 2024, p. 109 Why
-
Morena In favorPlataforma electoral 2024, p. 15 Why
-
PAZ In favor
Estimated position: inferred from the party’s platform and statements as a whole, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
SOMOS In favorPrograma de acción de SOMOS (registro de 2026), p. 38 Why
Explore other issues
Who do you agree with on this issue?
The questions in this issue are part of the full test. Answer them and see which parties you agree with.
Take the political test