Peru Government Returns Religious Saturday Rest Bill to New Congress

Why the Executive Returned Peru's Saturday Religious Rest Bill

Peru's executive has objected to a bill that would have given public and private sector workers the right to ask for Saturdays off on religious grounds, with the missed hours compensated later. The approved text had been passed by the Permanent Commission in late July, shortly before the previous one-chamber Congress ended its functions, and now goes back to a newly formed legislature.

The government's objection centres on the existing religious freedom framework. Law No. 29635, enacted in 2010, already promotes religious rest for workers, but its regulation leaves the employer with the power of direction: the employer decides whether to grant the request. The bill would reverse that logic by forcing employers to accept the worker's request.

In its written observation, the executive argues this would undermine 'the fundamental right to freedom of enterprise and the power of direction of the employer both in the public and private sphere.' Labor lawyer César Puntriano of Muñiz backed that view, saying a rest day should not be imposed because it could harm the organization of production, and that the current framework already requires employers to consider religious motives when setting shifts.

The bill's future is now uncertain. It must be reviewed by the new Chamber of Deputies and, if approved there, by the Senate. Labor specialist María Eugenia Tamariz of Benites, Vargas & Ugaz said any final rule should account for sectors with continuous or atypical work cycles, such as mining, and should specify how workers would prove their membership in a religious entity.

What the Religious Rest Dispute Reveals About Peru's Labor Law

Why the legal balance is the real battleground

The dispute is not about whether religious rest should exist; it already does under Law No. 29635. The contested point is who controls the decision. Today, an employer must take religious motives into account when organizing shifts, but can still refuse a request for operational reasons. The approved bill would turn that consideration into an obligation. For employers running Saturday operations, that is a material change to workforce planning.

The executive and Muñiz are defending flexibility

The government's observation and Puntriano's support frame employer discretion as a structural protection for production. Their argument is that a blanket right to Saturday rest would impose a uniform rule on companies with very different rhythms, potentially affecting output, client service and shift coverage. The existing rule, they argue, already creates an equilibrium: religious needs are recognized without overriding the employer's organizational judgment.

Tamariz highlights the gaps a final law would need to fix

María Eugenia Tamariz raises two operational issues that the current bill does not resolve cleanly. First, some sectors, including mining, operate on schedules that do not align with a standard Monday-to-Friday week, so a Saturday-specific rule would need exceptions or alternative arrangements. Second, there is no clear mechanism for proving that a worker belongs to a religious community that observes Saturday. Without that, the rule could generate disputes over eligibility and create inconsistent application across employers.

New Congress, new negotiating space

Because the bill was approved by the outgoing Permanent Commission but must now pass through the new Chamber of Deputies and then the Senate, its content may change considerably. This is politically significant: the institution that approved the text is not the one that will decide its final form. The legislative return therefore gives business groups and labor specialists a second opportunity to shape exceptions and proof requirements, but it also leaves the final outcome genuinely open.

What Employers and HR Teams Should Watch as Congress Takes Over

Because the executive observation leaves current law intact, employers do not need to change Saturday scheduling now. The practical question is how to prepare if a revised version advances.

• Keep current operations under Law No. 29635 and its regulation: employers may still accept or decline Saturday rest requests after weighing production needs, so no immediate policy change is required.
• Document scheduling decisions when refusing a religious Saturday request. If the proposed obligation is revived, a clear record showing operational impact will be important in both internal reviews and any future compliance discussions.
• Follow the bill's placement on the agenda of the new Cámara de Diputados and the Senate, because exemptions for sectors like mining and rules for proving religious membership are most likely to be added at that stage.
• Prepare a company-specific view of which Saturday roles could not be paused and what alternative rest or compensation arrangements would be workable; that specificity can inform any industry comments to lawmakers if the bill moves forward.