O tratamento da despedida arbitrária no Brasil

• Autor(a) principal: Barros, Caroline Brossa
• Data de Publicação: 2013
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/33649
• topic: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO::DIREITO PRIVADO::DIREITO DO TRABALHO; Despedida individual; Despedida coletiva; Dispensa arbitrária; Dispensa imotivada; Dispensa sem justa causa; Demissão em massa; Proteção ao emprego; Individual Dismissal; Collective Dismissal; Unfair Dismissal; Mass Dismissal; Job Protection

The Constitution of 1988 gave among other rights, job protection against Unfair Dismissal through article 7º, item “I”. Although this law still depends on another law to regulate the condition, this doesn’t mean that is not effective, because it represents constitutional guarantee for employees. The employer can still dismiss employees, but he needs to reduce the dismissal’s social effect on employees. While a new law doesn’t yet regulate this situation, the courts are transferring this government obligation to the employers, as e.g., forbidding the dismissal of employees with serious health problems unless there is a serious motive, because the dismissal is presumed discriminatory. In the collective right, the subject is more sensitive, because the judgments are restricting mass dismissals, which requires previous collective bargaining with the union. However still there is a gray area without specific legislation, mainly when the judge decides to cancel the dismissals and to order to reinstatement the job of or pay an indemnity