The Federal Supreme Court (STF) is expected to resume this Wednesday (21) the trial on the constitutionality of the intermittent employment contract, inserted in the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT) by the 2017 labor reform. The case is on the trial agenda scheduled for today’s session, which is expected to start at 2 pm. 
The trial was suspended in 2020, when a 2-1 vote was formed in favor of the validity of the intermittent work rules.
The rapporteur of the case, Minister Edson Fachin, considered the work model unconstitutional. According to Fachin, this form of hiring leaves the worker in a position of fragility and social vulnerability due to its unpredictable nature.
Nunes Marques and Alexandre de Moraes voted in favor of the modality because they understand that the rules are constitutional and aim to reduce informality in the labor market. The votes of eight ministers are missing.
As defined in the labor reform, intermittent workers are paid for hours or days worked.
He receives vacation pay, the Severance Pay Guarantee Fund (FGTS) and the thirteenth salary proportional to the period worked. The contract defines the hourly wage, which cannot be less than the minimum hourly wage or the remuneration of other employees performing the same function.
The employee must be called at least three calendar days in advance. During the period of inactivity, he/she may provide services to other companies.
The legality of the intermittent employment contract was questioned by the National Federation of Employees in Fuel and Petroleum Derivatives Service Stations, the National Federation of Workers in Telecommunications Companies and Telephone Switchboard Operators and the National Confederation of Industrial Workers.
For the entities, the model favors the precariousness of the employment relationship and the payment of salaries below the minimum wage, in addition to preventing the collective organization of workers.
Labor guidelines
The Supreme Court is also expected to re-analyze in today’s session the validity of the presidential decree that removed Brazil from Convention 158 of the International Labor Organization (ILO), which prohibits dismissals without just cause.
The rule has been suspended in Brazil since 1996, when then-President Fernando Henrique Cardoso issued a decree to revoke Brazil’s participation. The presidential act was issued months after the National Congress approved the country’s accession to the convention.
The court must also begin oral arguments in the action in which the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) intends to recognize Congress’s failure to regulate the constitutional rule that determines the protection of urban and rural workers in the face of automation.
