The Preamble to the Constitution summarises its goals: "to constitute the national union, to strengthen justice, to consolidate domestic peace, to provide for the common defence, to promote the general welfare, and to secure the blessings of liberty". At the time it was the seventh oldest national constitution still in force in the world and it governed every province except Buenos Aires, which remained separate until 1859.

Major Milestones

• 1860 Reform: Reincorporation of Buenos Aires into the Confederation.
• 1866 and 1898 Reforms: Adjustments to parliamentary representation and the number of ministries.
• 1949 Reform: During the government of Juan Domingo Perón, the Constitution incorporated a wide range of social and labour rights, including the right to work, to a fair wage, to training, to decent working conditions, to health protection, to welfare, to social security, to family protection, to economic betterment and to the defence of professional interests (Article 37, Title I). It also guaranteed the protection of marriage, the legal equality of spouses and parental authority (Article 37, Title II, para. I). The legality of this reform was intensely debated. Article 30 of the then‑current text required that the need for reform be declared by Congress with the vote of "two‑thirds of all its members". The Radical Civic Union (UCR) maintained that this super‑majority had to be calculated over all members of Congress, whereas the Peronist Party argued that, as in other votes, the two‑thirds should be calculated only on those members present. The UCR delegates attended the first ordinary session, voiced their disagreement and then walked out.
• Historical note: The 1949 Constitution was de facto repealed in 1955. Its social provisions were partially reincorporated through Article 14 bis, inserted in the 1957 constitutional reform, which constitutes the basis of current Argentine social constitutionalism.
• Article 14 bis (1957): Inserted under a military government, this article nonetheless enshrined fundamental workers' rights. This article is the cornerstone of Argentine social constitutionalism.
• 1994 Reform: Introduced third‑generation rights, granted constitutional status to a number of human‑rights treaties, created the post of Chief of the Cabinet of Ministers, and declared the recovery of the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands to be "a permanent and inalienable objective of the Argentine people".

Voices of admiration from around the world

• Admiral John "Sandy" Woodward (Royal Navy): "The Argentine pilots were very brave. They gave me a lot of headaches, but I still admire them." ^[1]
• British Defence Secretary John Nott: "I think the Argentine pilots are showing enormous bravery. It would be foolish of me not to acknowledge it." ^[1]
• Colonel Pierre Clostermann (Free French Air Force, Second World War hero): "Never in the history of warfare since 1914 have airmen faced such a terrifying combination of mortal obstacles, not even the RAF over London in 1940." ^[2]
• Max Hastings and Simon Jenkins (British historians and journalists): "The British were awed by the courage of the Argentine pilots, flying suicidally low to attack, then vanishing amid flashes of pursuing Seacat, Blowpipe, and Rapier racing across the sky behind them." ^[3]
• The Miami Herald (27 May 1982): "The Argentine pilots are winning the hearts of their countrymen and the admiration of their enemies." ^[1]
• The Guardian (London, 25 May 1982): "The crewmen around us pay tribute to the courage of the Argentine pilots." ^[4]
• Kenneth Freed (Los Angeles Times): "Almost daily they fly into battle, and each time only a few return. But the Argentine pilots have become the heroes of the Malvinas War, admired by their enemies almost as much as by their fellow citizens." ^[1]

Sources:
[1] Martínez, Exequiel. "Dios y los Halcones" (collection of quotes by Woodward, Nott, The Miami Herald, Kenneth Freed).
[2] Escuadrón Fénix. "Notas y Comentarios de Autoridades Extranjeras" (Pierre Clostermann quote).
[3] War History.org. "Argentine Military Effectiveness at the Falkland's II" (Hastings and Jenkins quote).
[4] The Guardian. "From the archive, 25 May 1982: Gareth Parry reports from the Falklands".

A highly complex web of legislation

According to official information, Law 27,802 amends or supplements 38 existing statutes and is, in turn, amended or supplemented by a further 2. This network of interactions reveals the systemic ambition of the reform, which is not confined to isolated changes but seeks to reconfigure the entire labour‑law ecosystem.

Principal affected legislation

Among the 38 statutes concerned, the reform introduces amendments to structural laws such as the Employment Contract Act (No. 20,744), the Employment Act (No. 24,013), the Occupational Risks Act (No. 24,557) and the Trade Union Associations Act (No. 23,551). It also affects special regimes such as the Agricultural Labour Regime (Law 26,727) and the Rural Labourer Statute (Decree‑Law 28,169/44), as well as laws linked to social security, such as Law 24,241 on the Integrated Pension System. This legislative cross‑cutting explains the scale of the public debate and the reaction of different sectors.

Key elements of the reform

• Labour Assistance Fund (FAL): A severance fund is created to finance dismissal indemnities, inspired by systems such as the Brazilian FGTS, with the aim of reducing litigation and provisioning for employer labour liabilities.
• Probationary period and new forms of contract: The probationary period is extended and new contractual categories are created, including a regime for digital‑platform workers.
• Working‑time flexibility and "hours bank": Mechanisms for offsetting hours are introduced in order to adapt working time to production cycles.

Arguments in favour of constitutionality: Supporters of the law argue that it was passed by Congress in exercise of its constitutional powers (Art. 75, para. 12). They maintain that the law does not alter the "protective floor" of Article 14 bis but rather modernises it. They point out that the principles of non‑waivability of rights are preserved, the classic protective institutions are maintained and the guarantee of effective payment of indemnities is improved through the Labour Assistance Fund.

Arguments in favour of unconstitutionality: Human‑rights organisations such as ANDHES consider the law to be "absolutely regressive" and "precarising". The ruling of Judge Raúl Horacio Ojeda, which suspended the application of the law, was based on "sufficient indications of possible infringement of rights of constitutional standing", such as the protective principle, the progressive realisation of social rights and trade‑union freedom, all of which are pillars of Article 14 bis. The judge warned that the amendments could entail an "alteration of the structural principles of labour law" and cause "irreparable harm" given the urgency of the matter.

Principal court cases

• CGT action (File CNT 10308/2026): The General Confederation of Labour brought an action seeking a declaration of unconstitutionality of Law 27,802. On 30 March 2026 Judge Raúl Horacio Ojeda issued a precautionary measure suspending 82 articles of the law, including Articles 1, 3, 6, 9, 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 41, 42, 51, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 89 and 137, among others. The National Labour Appeals Chamber overturned this measure on 23 April 2026, restoring the full effectiveness of all the suspended articles. The national government, in turn, lodged a "per saltum" appeal before the Supreme Court of Justice on 15 April 2026, seeking direct intervention, though the Supreme Court has not yet ruled as of today, 1 May 2026.
• Amparo action by the CPACF (Buenos Aires Bar Association): The Buenos Aires Bar Association brought a collective amparo action seeking a declaration of unconstitutionality of Articles 10 and 56 of the law. Article 10 amends Article 20 of the Employment Contract Act by introducing an objective criterion for "inexcusable overclaiming", which allows the imposition of costs on the lawyer merely because the amount claimed was overstated. Article 56 amends Article 277 of the Employment Contract Act, permitting the payment of labour judgments in instalments. The Bar Association argues that these provisions undermine professional practice and access to justice.
• Amparo action by ATE Comarca Andina: The Federal Court of Esquel granted an amparo action brought by the Comarca Andina branch of the State Workers' Association (ATE). Federal Prosecutor Santiago Roldán held the collective action to be admissible and found that Articles 1, 4, 10, 41, 42, 51, 55, 58 to 77, 89 and 137 of Law 27,802 violate the labour, trade‑union and social guarantees enshrined in the National Constitution and in international treaties. As a result, the application of those articles was suspended within the court's jurisdiction.