|
|
If the employee participates in the cost of the meal voucher, even if small, the benefit becomes compensatory in nature, not salary. This understanding was applied by the 6th Panel of the Superior Labor Court to deny the request of a port guard from Pará who wanted the installment to be recognized as part of his salary, with repercussions on the payment of other rights. reproduction For the TST, meal vouchers are only wages if they are provided free of charge by the company Reproduction In the labor complaint, the port guard at Companhia Docas do Pará reported that, since the beginning of the contract, the value of the meal voucher had no impact on the calculation of other salary installments. Considering that the benefit is paid normally and constitutes a way for the company to repay him for the service provided, he requested recognition of the salary nature of the installment. The court of the 16th Labor Court of Belém dismissed the request as unfounded. Under the terms of the sentence, Companhia Docas has been registered, since 2010, in the Workers' Food Program (PAT), which removes the salary nature of the food allowance. The judge added that, before enrolling in the PAT, the guard already received the benefit of a compensatory nature, as, to receive it, 1% was deducted from his salary. The decision also removed from the case the application of article 458 of the CLT , which provides for the provision of food as wages.
The reason is that it is not remuneration for the Phone Number List employment contract, but a benefit provided for the provision of the service. However, the Regional Labor Court of the 8th Region (PA/AP) modified the sentence and declared the salary nature of the installment. For the TRT, based on the interpretation of article 458 of the CLT and Summary 241 of the TST, the meal voucher, provided under the employment contract, is part of the employee's remuneration for all legal purposes. The regional court highlighted that the aid had been provided since 2008 and the subsequent registration in the PAT or the provision of the compensatory nature in the following collective rules would not have any effect on the employment contract. In the TST, the decision was modified again. The rapporteur of Companhia Docas' review appeal, minister Augusto César, pointed out that, according to the understanding of all the court groups and Subsection I Specialized in Individual Disputes of the Court (SDI-1), the employee's participation, even if in small amounts, characterizes the indemnity nature of the installment. For it to be of a salary nature, the benefit must be provided free of charge by the company, which was not the case in this case.
The decision was unanimous. With information from the TST press office . Judge bars in-person union assembly in the interior of São Paulo The Labor Court of Matão (SP) granted an injunction to block a general meeting called for this Monday (28) and Tuesday (29) in front of a factory. reproduction reproduction The veto responded to the company's request, which claimed that the collective bargaining process relating to the base date of May 2021 is still ongoing, with negotiations between the employers' union and the Federation of Food Industry Workers of the State of São Paulo. The industry also maintained that the call for a face-to-face meeting to decide on a strike was only 48 hours in advance, over the weekend, which violates the union's statutory rules, which provide for a minimum notice of ten days and, exceptionally , three days. Finally, the employer claimed that holding this meeting in person contravenes the measures to restrict the movement of people with a view to preventing the spread of the new coronavirus, which puts the health of those represented at risk, highlighting that it would be viable for the Union organized to carry out this act virtually. When analyzing the request, judge Amanda Barbosa pointed out that "workers in the industry are taken care of, and the availability of technical conditions must be presumed, at least for the majority of these workers, to exercise the constitutional right of meeting via virtual means, reconciling if the prerogative combines with health protection, it is equally fundamental".
|
|
發表於 2024-3-9 18:30:05