Ellint

In Mexican unionism throughout the 20th century and much of the 21st, a recognizable sequence is repeated:

A legitimacy crisis of the long-standing leader (due to age, wear, scandals, or political rupture).

The rise of an internal successor – not an external one – who presents himself as:

Consolidation of the new leadership through:

Ad hoc bylaw reforms,
Successive re-elections,
Control over membership rolls and union congresses,
Perpetuation in office until death, physical incapacity, or external intervention by the State.

The problem is not merely personal, but institutional: unions are designed to concentrate power, not to renew it.

Fidel Velázquez Sánchez (CTM)

The archetype

How did he rise? He displaced previous leaders in the 1940s–50s under the banner of “worker unity” and institutional discipline.
Initial narrative: to prevent fragmented local strongmen and to strengthen the central labor federation.
Outcome: Secretary General of the CTM from 1950 until his death in 1997 (47 years).
Legacy: He normalized the idea that union leadership is neither inherited nor relinquished: he institutionalized “lifelong leadership” as synonymous with stability.
Paradox: He came to power criticizing personalism… and turned it into a system.

Carlos Romero Deschamps (Oil Industry)

Heir who promised a break with the past

How did he rise? He replaced Joaquín Hernández Galicia “La Quina” after his political downfall in 1989.
Initial narrative: a “new era,” modernization of the oil workers’ union, closing the cycle of excesses.
Outcome: He remained in office for 26 years (1993–2019).
End: Forced resignation, not democratic succession.
Key trait: He turned the union into a patrimonial and family-based apparatus, even surpassing his predecessor.
Historical irony: the leader who came after the symbol of caciquismo became one of its longest-lasting cases.

Víctor Flores Morales (Railroad workers)

Silent continuity

How did he rise? Internal displacement following the wear and loss of legitimacy of previous leaderships.
Initial narrative: job stability in a declining sector.
Outcome: In office for almost 20 years.
Particularity: He did not need major discursive breaks — inertia did the work.
A typical case of perpetuation through the absence of counterweights, not through charisma.

Francisco Hernández Juárez (Telephone workers)

The reformer who became indispensable.

How did he rise? He displaced traditional leadership in the 1970s with a progressive and democratic narrative.
Initial narrative: union democracy, autonomy from the State, modern trade unionism.
Outcome: Secretary General since 1976 (almost 50 years).
Core contradiction: a historic defender of union democracy… without real alternation.
Even the “good” leader can become irreplaceable.

Structural factors

Political factors

For decades, the State preferred predictable leaders over uncertain democratic processes.
Longevity was rewarded with access, resources, and protection.

Recent change: real break or cosmetic adjustment? The 2019–2023 labor reforms introduced:

But:

The system changed the rules, not necessarily the players.

Mexican trade unionism has repeatedly produced the same figure:

The leader who comes in denouncing perpetuation… and ends up justifying it in the name of stability, unity, or the historical cause.

As long as there is no:

Leadership change will remain biological or political — not democratic.

Mexico: The Rise of Union Leadership and the Pattern of Perpetuation in Office