Judicial Strike: The Demands and the Official Silence

A 10% wage increase, bonuses, and the resignation of their union leader are the key demands of the judicial strike in Mexico City. We analyze why the government isn't responding.

Beyond the blockades, the judicial strike in Mexico City is based on a clear list of demands: a salary increase, better conditions, and union democracy. In response to this, the authorities' response has been a silence that appears to be a political strategy.

The prolonged work stoppage that has engulfed Mexico City's judicial system is a complex political and labor conflict with specific demands that, so far, have encountered a wall of apparent indifference from the authorities. To understand the depth of the crisis, it is crucial to analyze in detail what the workers are demanding and why dialogue seems to have broken down.

The Petition Form: A Detailed Breakdown

The demands of the thousands of unemployed workers are not vague. They are articulated around three main axes that reveal a deep discontent that has accumulated over the years.

* Economic Demands: The most visible demand is a direct 10% salary increase for the 2026 budget. They are also demanding payment of food vouchers owed since 2021 and the provision of a retroactive bonus to compensate for the loss of purchasing power.

* Working Conditions: Workers report increasing workloads and a lack of adequate resources and supplies to perform their duties. This situation, they claim, has worsened with the implementation of the new National Code of Civil and Family Procedure, which has increased the caseload without a commensurate increase in staff or infrastructure.

* Union Democracy: This is perhaps the most revealing point of the internal conflict. The workers are demanding the resignation of Diego Valdez Medina, current General Secretary of the Majority Union, whom they accuse of not representing their interests. The demand for a free and democratic election for their union leadership is as crucial as the economic demands, as it suggests a complete breakdown of trust between the worker base and their official representatives.

A Growing Movement

The protest has gained sympathy and support. Workers from the Mexico City Attorney General's Office (FGJ) and public defenders have joined in solidarity, denouncing that they face similar problems of work overload, lack of resources, and insufficient salaries. This demonstrates that the discontent is not exclusive to the judiciary, but could be symptomatic of a broader crisis in the capital's justice sector.

"If the court decides to take other measures, well, it will obviously have the support of the city government." – Statement from the Mexico City Government.

The Government's Position: Strategy or Indifference?

After initial roundtable discussions, negotiations have stalled. The Mexico City government's position has been notable for its ambiguity. In one of its most recent statements, an official warned that the government would "support" the court if it "decides to take other measures" to resume activities.

This carefully chosen phrase can be interpreted as a form of pressure. By not offering a direct solution but alluding to "other measures," the government could be signaling that its patience is running out and that it could support more forceful action by the court, such as declaring the strike illegal or taking administrative measures against the strikers. This is a high-risk negotiating tactic that, rather than resolving the conflict, could escalate it.

This calculated silence and ambiguous statements have created an information vacuum, allowing protesters to control the narrative and increasing public perceptions of a government unable or unwilling to resolve a crisis affecting hundreds of thousands of residents of the capital.