JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Caderno CRH |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/crh/article/view/45335 |
Resumo: | The article examines the responses to the demands involving outsourcing in the post-labor reform scenario. Have the judgments of the Federal SupremeCourt (STF) – which rejected the allegations of unconstitutionality of the legislation, declared the lawfulness of outsourcing and overcame the distinction between peripheral and core business activities – put an end to the judicial debate? Using the methodological procedures of jurisprudential survey and documental analysis, with mapping of lawsuits judged in the last two years, we examined the arguments in the litigations, investigating aboutthe modification in decision patterns. The research concludes that the controversies over fraud in outsourcing remain in dispute in the Labor Court, subject to the control of the Supreme Court, which presents contradictory positions in relation to this aspect. Another finding of the research is that the requirement of “economic capacity” is absent fromthe debate. The emergence of factual issues and the friction between the Labor Court and the STF point to the persistence of disputes in the judicial arena even after the new regulatory framework. |
id |
UFBA-7_833b17910f1b8cb987c0030639717392 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.periodicos.ufba.br:article/45335 |
network_acronym_str |
UFBA-7 |
network_name_str |
Caderno CRH |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trendsLES RÉPONSES JUDICIAIRES À L’EXTERNALISATION: débats récents et tendancesRESPOSTAS JUDICIAIS À TERCEIRIZAÇÃO: debates e tendências recentesDireito do trabalhoJustiça do Trabalhoreforma trabalhistaterceirizaçãoprecarizaçãoTerceirizaçãoLabour LawLabour JusticeLabor law reformOutsourcingPrecariousnessDroit du travailJustice du travailRéforme de la loi du travailExternalisationprécarisationThe article examines the responses to the demands involving outsourcing in the post-labor reform scenario. Have the judgments of the Federal SupremeCourt (STF) – which rejected the allegations of unconstitutionality of the legislation, declared the lawfulness of outsourcing and overcame the distinction between peripheral and core business activities – put an end to the judicial debate? Using the methodological procedures of jurisprudential survey and documental analysis, with mapping of lawsuits judged in the last two years, we examined the arguments in the litigations, investigating aboutthe modification in decision patterns. The research concludes that the controversies over fraud in outsourcing remain in dispute in the Labor Court, subject to the control of the Supreme Court, which presents contradictory positions in relation to this aspect. Another finding of the research is that the requirement of “economic capacity” is absent fromthe debate. The emergence of factual issues and the friction between the Labor Court and the STF point to the persistence of disputes in the judicial arena even after the new regulatory framework. L’article examine les réponses aux demandes légales impliquant l’externalisation dans le scénario postréforme du travail. Les arrêts du Tribunal fédéral – qui ont rejeté les griefs d’inconstitutionnalité, déclaré la légalité de l’externalisation et surmonté la distinction entre activités accessoires et finales – ont-ils mis fin au débat judiciaire? A partir d’uneenquête et d’une analyse documentaire, avec une cartographie des actions de travail jugées au coursdes deux dernières années, nous avons examiné les motifs des jugements, en enquêtant sur le changement des modèles de décision. La recherche conclut que les controverses sur la fraude en matièred’externalisation et de sous-traitance restent en litige devant le Tribunal du travail, mais sous le contrôle du Tribunal fédéral, qui a eu des positionscontradictoires sur ce point. Une autre conclusion de la recherche est que l’exigence de «capacité économique» est absente du débat judiciaire. L’émergence de questions factuelles et les frictions entre le tribunal du travail et le STF indiquent la persistance des litiges dans l’arène judiciaire, mêmeaprès le nouveau cadre réglementaire.O artigo examina as respostas às demandas que envolvem a terceirização no cenário pós-reforma trabalhista. Os julgamentos do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) – que rechaçou as alegações de inconstitucionalidade da legislação, declarou a licitude da terceirização e superou a distinção entre atividades empresariais acessórias e finalísticas – colocaram um ponto final no debate judicial? Utilizando os procedimentos metodológicos de levantamento jurisprudencial e análise documental, com mapeamento de ações julgadas no último biênio, examinamos os argumentos nos litígios, investigando acerca da modificação em padrões decisórios. A pesquisa conclui que as controvérsias sobre fraudes em terceirização permanecem em disputa na Justiça do Trabalho, submetida ao controle do Supremo, que apresenta posições contraditórias em relação a esse aspecto. Outro achado da pesquisa é que o requisito da “capacidade econômica” está ausente do debate. A emergência de questões fáticas, as fricções entre a Justiça do Trabalho e o Supremo e os argumentos sobre responsabilidade empresarial apontam para a persistência de disputas na arena judiciária mesmo após o novo marco regulatório.Universidade Federal da Bahia2021-12-05info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo avaliado pelos paresapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/crh/article/view/4533510.9771/ccrh.v34i0.45335Caderno CRH; v. 34 (2021): PUBLICAÇÃO CONTÍNUA; e0210351983-82390103-4979reponame:Caderno CRHinstname:Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA)instacron:UFBAporhttps://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/crh/article/view/45335/25595Copyright (c) 2021 Caderno CRHhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGrillo, Sayonarade Lacerda Carelli, Rodrigo2021-09-28T02:34:29Zoai:ojs.periodicos.ufba.br:article/45335Revistahttps://portalseer.ufba.br/index.php/crh/about/editorialPolicies#custom-0PUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevcrh@ufba.br||revcrh@ufba.br1983-82390103-4979opendoar:2021-09-28T02:34:29Caderno CRH - Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends LES RÉPONSES JUDICIAIRES À L’EXTERNALISATION: débats récents et tendances RESPOSTAS JUDICIAIS À TERCEIRIZAÇÃO: debates e tendências recentes |
title |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends |
spellingShingle |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends Grillo, Sayonara Direito do trabalho Justiça do Trabalho reforma trabalhista terceirização precarização Terceirização Labour Law Labour Justice Labor law reform Outsourcing Precariousness Droit du travail Justice du travail Réforme de la loi du travail Externalisation précarisation |
title_short |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends |
title_full |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends |
title_fullStr |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends |
title_full_unstemmed |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends |
title_sort |
JUDICIAL RESPONSES TO OUTSOURCING: recent debates and trends |
author |
Grillo, Sayonara |
author_facet |
Grillo, Sayonara de Lacerda Carelli, Rodrigo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
de Lacerda Carelli, Rodrigo |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Grillo, Sayonara de Lacerda Carelli, Rodrigo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Direito do trabalho Justiça do Trabalho reforma trabalhista terceirização precarização Terceirização Labour Law Labour Justice Labor law reform Outsourcing Precariousness Droit du travail Justice du travail Réforme de la loi du travail Externalisation précarisation |
topic |
Direito do trabalho Justiça do Trabalho reforma trabalhista terceirização precarização Terceirização Labour Law Labour Justice Labor law reform Outsourcing Precariousness Droit du travail Justice du travail Réforme de la loi du travail Externalisation précarisation |
description |
The article examines the responses to the demands involving outsourcing in the post-labor reform scenario. Have the judgments of the Federal SupremeCourt (STF) – which rejected the allegations of unconstitutionality of the legislation, declared the lawfulness of outsourcing and overcame the distinction between peripheral and core business activities – put an end to the judicial debate? Using the methodological procedures of jurisprudential survey and documental analysis, with mapping of lawsuits judged in the last two years, we examined the arguments in the litigations, investigating aboutthe modification in decision patterns. The research concludes that the controversies over fraud in outsourcing remain in dispute in the Labor Court, subject to the control of the Supreme Court, which presents contradictory positions in relation to this aspect. Another finding of the research is that the requirement of “economic capacity” is absent fromthe debate. The emergence of factual issues and the friction between the Labor Court and the STF point to the persistence of disputes in the judicial arena even after the new regulatory framework. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-12-05 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artigo avaliado pelos pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/crh/article/view/45335 10.9771/ccrh.v34i0.45335 |
url |
https://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/crh/article/view/45335 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.9771/ccrh.v34i0.45335 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/crh/article/view/45335/25595 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Caderno CRH http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Caderno CRH http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal da Bahia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal da Bahia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Caderno CRH; v. 34 (2021): PUBLICAÇÃO CONTÍNUA; e021035 1983-8239 0103-4979 reponame:Caderno CRH instname:Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA) instacron:UFBA |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA) |
instacron_str |
UFBA |
institution |
UFBA |
reponame_str |
Caderno CRH |
collection |
Caderno CRH |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Caderno CRH - Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revcrh@ufba.br||revcrh@ufba.br |
_version_ |
1799699056768843776 |