Labor & Employment | Edition 18

05.12.2025

Key Highlights

Impact of recess and breaks on working hours. The Federal Supreme Court (STF), by majority, established in the judgment of ADPF 1058 that, as a rule, recess periods and breaks between classes are part of teachers’ working hours. However, the Court set aside the automatic presumption of such inclusion if the employing institution proves that the teacher devoted those periods exclusively to personal activities.

Moral Damages. Workplace operating without a business license. The 3rd Panel of the Paraná Regional Labor Court convicted an employer to pay moral damages to 37 employees assigned to a company distribution center that operated for more than two decades without a fire-prevention plan and without a Fire Department operating permit. The Court held that the employer exposed employees to “significant risks” and that, by failing to meet minimum fire-safety requirements, the company “breaches its fundamental duty to provide a safe and healthy work environment, as required by legislation and by the principles of human dignity and worker protection.”

Committee approves protection for SAF against old club debts. The Sports Committee of the Chamber of Deputies approved Bill No. 3032/2023, which makes clear that the Football Joint-Stock Company (Sociedade Anônima de Futebol – SAF) is not liable for the club’s prior civil and labor obligations incurred before the SAF’s creation. According to the bill’s reporting opinion, many courts—especially in the Labor Courts—have interpreted the rules to include the SAF in lawsuits and to hold it jointly liable with the club for debts predating its corporate formation, contrary to the law that created this corporate structure and generating legal uncertainty for investors. The bill will proceed to internal review in the Chamber and will subsequently be sent to the Senate.

Security Guard. Guarantee of compensation and hazard pay. The 11th Panel of the Minas Gerais Regional Labor Court convicted a company to pay compensation, and a hazard pay premium to a security guard who worked at an isolated site with radio towers, without access to a restroom or potable water. He was solely responsible for protecting the employer’s property at a location with frequent vandalism, attempted theft, and the presence of drug users.

Data Protection. Compensation for leakage of professional history. The 3rd Panel of the Santa Catarina Regional Labor Court convicted a company to pay moral-damages compensation arising from the disclosure—by email to other companies—of information that harmed a former employee’s image and hindered his reentry into the labor market, which the Court found exceeded managerial authority and constituted an abuse of rights.

Professional Sports and Recreational Sailor. The Senate approved Chamber of Deputies Bill (PLC) 25/2018, which regulates the profession of sports and recreational sailors for private, non-commercial purposes. The bill provides for the formalization of thousands of sailors who are currently treated under domestic-work relationships. The approved PLC defines responsibilities, requires certified qualifications, and obliges employers to provide training and insurance to this class of sailors. Proper identification of these professionals aims to provide greater security for the expansion of the nautical market, especially in activities carried out in marinas, yacht clubs, and nautical garages.

Expense Allowance and Commissions. Salary payment fraud. The 6th Panel of the Campinas Regional Labor Court recognized fraud in the payments made to a saleswoman who received part of her remuneration through card credits. Although the employer claimed these were expense allowances and benefits, the panel concluded that the amounts—paid regularly and without proof of an indemnity nature—were commissions paid off the books, since the card statements showed much higher and recurrent values, characterizing payments of a salary nature.

Hypothetical damage. Impossibility of compensation. The 6th Panel of the Campinas Regional Labor Court denied a construction worker’s claim for moral-damages compensation allegedly due to dangerous working conditions that, according to him, even led to a colleague’s death. The reporting judge upheld the first-instance dismissal, stating that “the legal system presupposes that compensation for moral damages arises from actual and not hypothetical harm.” In addition, the company submitted documents proving delivery of protective equipment appropriate to the activity. Finally, the panel emphasized that even if the claimant’s work could involve accident risk, “he did not suffer a workplace accident, and therefore there is no duty to indemnify, as there is no indirect (ricochet) damage arising from an accident involving a coworker.”