As indicated in the previous proposal (GT82 2023-2025: Work, productive and service configurations, new labor subjects), the themes and problems surrounding work are diverse and are situated in specific contexts, requiring a multidisciplinary approach and its own theoretical and methodological framework. This openness characterizes the trajectory of Labor Studies in Latin America.

In this sense, the GT's foundation stems from the consolidation phase of Latin American Labor Studies, situated between the 1980s and 1990s, when a new generation of researchers emerged that emphasized productive restructuring, technological change, new forms of work organization, and control systems (De la Garza, 2000; Neffa, 1994). This process incorporated broad theoretical frameworks that placed labor at the center of analysis, drawing on contributions from French regulation theory, Toyotism, lean production, flexible specialization, industrial districts, industrial governance, and production chains. These currents were embodied in Latin America through the focus on production and industrialization models (Lucena; Celis; Senén; Leite; Abramo; Neffa; De la Garza; Carrillo; Ramalho; Urrea; Pochman; Alves).

Simultaneously, labor studies in the region transcended the analysis of work processes and shifted toward the fields of industrial relations, the labor market, the social construction of occupation, social reproduction, the role of unions (and other collective bargaining organizations) and employers, the relationship between labor and the state, and the dynamics between work and public spaces. The structural context of the 80s and 90s was marked by economic crisis, the transition to neoliberalism, and the redefinition of the roles of the state, unions, and capital-labor relations.

The work *Tratado Latinoamericano de Sociología del Trabajo* (De la Garza, 2000) synthesized these debates, integrating critical perspectives from Latin American sociology of work and engaging with European theories that predicted the "crisis" or "end" of work, such as those of Méda (1995) and Rifkin (1995). However, in Latin America, where informal work is structural, the centrality of work not only persisted but was expressed in diverse forms linked to popular economies and strategies for survival and social reproduction (Quijano, 2000).

From the 2000s onward, new problems emerged in the labor field: work identities, subjectivity, divergent and convergent production models, as well as the impacts of global phenomena such as financialization, the 2008 crisis, the platform economy, and flexibilizing labor reforms (Hernández, 2003; Basave & Hernández, 2007; Munck, 2013). Enrique de la Garza generated a new epistemic-theoretical-methodological proposal, called "configurationism," as well as that of non-classical work, through which he proposes a unified theory for the study of productive and circulatory configurations, instead of using "production models," conceptualizing productive socio-technical configurations as analytical units with which subjects interact and give meaning to their actions, taking into account that reality is in constant flux (De la Garza et al., 2021). The new Latin American Treatise on the Sociology of Work (II): Debates and Challenges in the 21st Century, edited by CLACSO and CEIL and published in 2024 (De la Garza, et al., 2024), brings together 60 researchers with a proposal from the Global South, in which Latin American Labor Studies address central themes and controversies related to work in the 21st century. The focus remains on work in its articulation with classic themes and problems of the sociology of work, as well as with emerging new ones, viewed as a form of social relation with political, economic, and cultural dimensions. Now, in the 21st century, the sociology of work gives centrality to the actors and their subjectivities. Service work acquires specificity in those sectors where there is interaction between the employee and the client, and which involves the client's labor. This is part of what is being discussed, taking into account the key theoretical and methodological proposals for rethinking service work and labor relations in contexts that reject simply reproducing or adopting proposals from the Global North (De la Garza, et al., 2024). In this new context of technologization, Industry 4.0, computerization, robotization, automation/platformization, it is necessary to reflect on the future of work in relation to economic and political models and productive configurations. These are situated within a context of capitalist restructuring in the Latin American labor market, embedded in the extractive or export-oriented manufacturing production model and its political implications.

For other authors, from a Global South perspective, Latin American Labor Studies have been key to rethinking labor relations in contexts of global subordination, extractivism, maquiladoras, and structural inequality (Munck, 2013; Quijano, 2000). The analysis of new labor modalities—especially platform, informal, non-traditional, and atypical work—has revealed specific modes of super-exploitation, vulnerability, and resistance that demand renewed interpretive frameworks (Bridi; Véras de Oliveira; Mora Salas, 2023; Ramalho & Santos, 2022). According to de la Garza, in his proposal of non-traditional work (2009), the different forms of control exerted by the client intensify exploitation (Félix da Silva, 2025).

In this sense, the GT identifies several priority lines of research: how labor reforms are configured in different political regimes; the articulation between new service economies and informality, and their linkage with public spaces; the subjectivities that acquire new meanings emerge in increasingly precarious contexts; and the role of the State in the reconfiguration of labor relations, including the challenges of the ecological transition and green work (Svampa, 2017).

We are once again confronted with emerging realities of work situated within a capitalism that is renewing its logics of accumulation and control, with serious repercussions for the world of work, as well as for social interactions and identity formation. It becomes a priority to analyze these realities through broad epistemic and theoretical frameworks and methodologies that allow for the reconstruction of the reality of Latin America and the Caribbean in all its complexity and heterogeneity.

These transformations, therefore, affect not only the organization and meaning of work but also modes of collective action, relationships with technology, and strategies for reproducing life, and even contribute to problematizing the liminal conditions between work and non-work. In Latin America, processes of automation, platformization, and "green transitions" combine with historically precarious labor structures, generating specific tensions between innovation, social justice, and sustainability.

From a Global South perspective, the group seeks to analyze these dynamics by articulating the structural, subjective, and political dimensions of work. The group's continued work aims to consolidate an interdisciplinary and intergenerational network that combines rigorous research, public advocacy, and dialogue with social movements and policymakers.

Work, as a central category in contemporary society, remains a privileged field for understanding the social, economic, and political dynamics of Latin America and the Caribbean. Although some global theoretical currents have proclaimed the supposed “crisis” or “end of work” (Méda, 1995; Rifkin, 1995), the Latin American experience demonstrates that work maintains its centrality—albeit in diversified forms—in structuring identities, ways of life, and strategies for social reproduction (De la Garza, 2000; Quijano, 2000). This regional emphasis is even more significant considering that, unlike in developed countries where the “wage-earning society” was consolidated (Castel, 1998), in Latin America this institutional framework was never fully universalized, rendering the “end of work” theses, as they emerged in Europe in the 1980s and 1990s, inapplicable. From a theoretical perspective, the relevance of this Working Group lies in its ability to articulate multiple disciplines, such as sociology, economics, and science.

politics, anthropology, cultural and legal studies, and to engage critically with global debates on productive restructuring, flexible accumulation and

Neoliberalism (Harvey, 1993; Dardot & Laval, 2016) is examined through diverse approaches and combined methodologies that allow for an understanding of work in its objective and subjective dimensions. Through the development of concepts such as "productive socio-technical configurations" (De la Garza, 2021; Retamozo & Morris, 2022) and the notion of "non-classical work," which includes informal, domestic, platform, community, and precarious work, the analytical field is renewed and the scope of labor studies is broadened. This conceptual expansion allows for the understanding not only of changes in the organization of work, but also of transformations in labor subjectivity, collective action, and the new forms of social control associated with neoliberalism.

The social relevance of the topic becomes evident in the context of intensifying precarity, the growth of classic/non-classic informal work and platform work. Work in manufacturing, and the global production networks resulting from its link with automation and computerization (consequences of the technological revolution), brings with it an impact on labor relations. These processes are part of broader dynamics associated with global productive restructuring, characterized by outsourcing, downsizing, contract flexibility, just-in-time and lean production, which radically reconfigure the capital-labor relationship. Neoliberal policies are also being transformed, and socio-environmental crises affecting work and society are deepening. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated structural inequalities, particularly affecting women, youth, informal workers, migrants, and racialized sectors (Abramo, 2022). These transformations demand new interpretive frameworks and strategies for collective action (Ramalho; Santos, 2022; Bridi, Véras de Oliveira; Mora Salas, 2023). They also call upon the academic field to review classic categories such as class, work, and collective action, whose theoretical questioning in the Global North does not always engage with peripheral realities. Furthermore, it is essential to highlight that the persistence of the centrality of work in Latin America is not only expressed in its structuring role of social reproduction, but also in the way in which labor markets continue to be articulated with the deep historical inequalities of race, gender and class in the region. This interrelation reveals that work can be understood as an economic activity, where hierarchies, territorial inequalities, and renewed forms of neoliberal discipline materialize. Likewise, the expansion of platform work and the increasing financialization of everyday life intensify new forms of precarity, particularly in urban contexts where informality coexists with algorithmic control mechanisms. Platforms reconfigure the organization of time and work, producing work subjectivities marked by hyper-individualization and by an apparent autonomy that hides subordination to diffuse business logics. These phenomena reaffirm the need to study work from the perspective of the Global South, where precarity is a structural condition. In this regard, the Working Group also raises the importance of advancing methodologies that allow us to capture the complexity of contemporary work, combining macrostructural analyses with ethnographic research that reveals the everyday experiences of workers. This implies recognizing that collective action, even in adverse scenarios, does not disappear, but reinvents itself in cooperatives, territorial movements, popular economy associations and transnational articulations that dispute meanings and rights in the face of processes of flexibility and social deprotection. In intellectual terms, the GT defends the importance of situating labor studies within the framework of the Global South and particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean, stating that Latin American realities, characterized by recurring crises, processes of deindustrialization, extractivism, maquiladora production, governments oscillating between progressivism and neoliberalism, and profound inequalities, allow for a rethinking of critical theories on labor (Munck, 2013; Svampa, 2017). In this way, the proposal strengthens a situated dialogue with global theories, enhancing the production of knowledge from Latin America. Within this framework, the GT identifies several priority areas:

- How labor reforms are configured in different political regimes (conservative, neoliberal, progressive) and their impact on production and services, considering the region's subordinate position in the world economy.

- How services and manufacturing are restructured and articulated with regional and global models.

- How do these experiences from the Global South allow us to question the idea of ​​convergence towards a "productive model of labor market and delaborization"?

- What subjectivities (meanings) in the 21st century and forms of collective organization emerge in these new work contexts.

- What is the role of the State, public policies and its institutions in guaranteeing decent work for citizens?

By placing trade unionism and collective organizing as cross-cutting themes, as practices that remain vital for defending rights and for reconfiguring new forms of collective action in the face of neoliberalism, the Working Group also highlights the enduring relevance of traditional forms of resistance. At the same time,

It recognizes the emergence of new labor subjects and organizational strategies that arise in contexts marked by job fragmentation, platformization, and

the multiple forms of precarity. In short, this Working Group contributes to an urgent and strategic agenda that seeks to understand the transformations of the world of work in the region, provide theoretical tools for its analysis, and strengthen interdisciplinary and intergenerational research networks that can influence the academic, political, and social debate. The complexity and diversity of contemporary work demand innovative, comprehensive, and situated approaches, such as those that the Working Group proposes to develop. Studying work in Latin America is thus reaffirmed as a fundamental field for interpreting the contradictions of global capitalism and for projecting democratic and socially just alternatives for the 21st century.