We invite you to read DF MAS’s publication on the Karin Law, in the context of International Women’s Day, where they spoke with our Labor Group Director, Jocelyn Aros.
More than a year after its entry into force, Law No. 21,643 not only strengthened formal channels for reporting harassment, but also exposed power asymmetries with a marked impact on women.
Between August 2024 and December 2025, the Labor Directorate received 66,596 complaints related to the Karin Law. Of these, 40% were pre-classified as cases that effectively fall within the scope of the legislation, and within that universe, 66.7% of the complaints were filed by women, a figure that exceeds 90% in cases of sexual harassment.
For Labor Minister Giorgio Boccardo, the data “is not a surprise, but rather a confirmation of a larger reality,” recalling that workplace violence affects women differently. In his view, the increase also reflects greater institutional support: “For years, many of these situations were invisible. The Karin Law clearly stated that abuse is not part of the job.”
Roxana Muñoz, partner at RMM Abogados and expert in labor law and implementation of the Karin Law, argues that the overrepresentation of women in complaints constitutes ‘a structural signal’, as the concentration of women in positions with greater hierarchical dependence increases vulnerability to abusive behavior.
A similar interpretation is offered by Jocelyn Aros, director of the Labor Group at Albagli Zaliasnik, who affirms that the figures reveal persistent gaps in participation in management positions, a greater presence in precarious jobs, and organizational dynamics that reproduce power asymmetries.
Cultural change
The predominance of workplace harassment (86.9% of pre-classified cases) shows that the law is operating across a broad spectrum of organizational conflicts.
For Muñoz, the system is ‘in an intermediate stage’: mandatory formalization of protocols, traceability of investigations, and the incorporation of mental health into labor management have been implemented.
However, profound cultural change is still in development, and in some organizations, implementation remains ‘defensive’.
Although protection against retaliation is now more robust, informal costs, such as isolation or exclusion from projects, may persist in practice. The difference, says Muñoz, is that ‘now these scenarios leave a trace,’ and that changes corporate behavior.
In terms of adjustments, he points out that it would be advisable to move towards greater methodological standardization of internal investigations, mandatory specialized training for those conducting the proceedings, and strengthening follow-up after cases are resolved.
Aros adds that the ability to report is also conditioned by economic factors, such as wage gaps, informality, and caregiving burdens, which affect economic dependence. “When a woman reports abuse, she often does so in a context of greater vulnerability,” he argues.
Minister Boccardo assures that the system has responded “with seriousness and commitment,” strengthening enforcement teams and focusing on prevention, although he acknowledges challenges in SMEs, which account for 29% of complaints, and in sectors with less capacity for implementation.
‘The Karin Law established a standard of enhanced diligence in matters of dignity at work. The challenge now is to ensure that this standard is not only regulatory, but also organizational,’ concludes Muñoz.
