Supreme Court overturns rulings against collective agreements
The Federal Supreme Court (STF) has been overturning lower court rulings that rejected collective bargaining agreements negotiated between companies and unions which relax labor rights that are not constitutionally guaranteed. In at least eight cases, justices decided to revoke sentences and ordered the suspension of the proceedings until it can be decided whether these agreements should prevail over labor laws, which is the position that was ushered in by the country's 2017 labor reform package.
The rulings came from complaints taken to the STF. In these complaints, the parties argue that judges continue to rule on the cases even after a July 2019 order by Justice Gilmar Mendes, the rapporteur for the case, that suspended all related proceedings. Today, according to jurimetrics system Data Lawyer, there are more than 625,000 lawsuits being heard, with a total potential value of R$49.5 billion - an estimate that only considers electronic proceedings since 2014.
The STF has yet to schedule a hearing for case ARE 11121633 in which it will issue a ruling with general repercussion, meaning it will be applied to all similar cases. But the recent track record of merit rulings since 2015 privileges what was agreed to with unions, even if the agreement involves a relaxation of existing labor norms. However, it was only in 2017, in article 611-A of labor reform Law 13,467, that it was expressly stated that collective bargaining agreements should prevail over what was legislated.
One complaint (Rcl 41902) was reviewed by Justice Cármen Lúcia. She overturned a decision by the 7th Panel of the Regional Labor Court (TRT) of Rio Grande do Sul. The regional court judges had annulled a clause in a collective labor agreement that prevented the use of cellphones to control the working hours of promotional staff selling pharmaceutical products to doctors. After annulling the clause the judges ordered the payment of overtime to a pharmaceutical salesman.
Justice Lúcia said the TRT decision was proffered on May 26, after Justice Mendes had called for the suspension of all pending proceedings. For her, the TRT, "in an oblique way," refused to recognize the validity of the collective agreement clause, when "it should have resulted in the immediate suspension of the proceedings."Daniel Chiode, with law firm Chiode Minicucci Advogados, who filed the complaint on behalf of the pharmaceutical company, says the TRT did not comply with Justice Mendes's decision. In...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO