BRAZIL Law and Practice Contributed by: Caio Medici Madureira, Rodrigo Souza Macedo and Nestor dos Santos Saragiotto, Tortoro, Madureira & Ragazzi Advogados
Employers shall give priority to employees with dis - abilities and employees with children or children under legal guardianship up to four years of age when allo - cating positions for activities that can be performed through telework or remote work. 5.2 Sabbaticals The only provision in the CLT that comes close to the concept of sabbatical leave is the suspension of the employment contract for a period of two to five months for the employee to participate in a profes - sional training course or programme offered by the employer, with a duration equivalent to the contrac - tual suspension, subject to provision in a collective bargaining agreement or collective labour agreement and formal consent of the employee. There is no legal provision for leave outside this sce - nario. The absence of legal provision, however, does not prevent sabbaticals from being provided for in col - lective instruments (collective bargaining agreement or collective labour agreement). It is also possible to negotiate them individually. How - ever, for individual negotiations, there will be greater legal certainty only for those employees who have higher education and remuneration above twice the ceiling of the RGPS (general social security regime, currently BRL16,314.82), since the CLT ensures that only employees who meet these two requirements can negotiate individually with the employer and that such negotiation will prevail in the event of a conflict with the law or with the collective instrument of the category. 5.3 Other New Manifestations In recent years, one of the most relevant and dis - cussed innovations in the labour law area has been the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) and algo - rithms in managing labour relations. Technological advancements have allowed companies across vari - ous sectors, especially those linked to the so-called “platform economy”, to begin employing automated systems to monitor, evaluate and even hire workers. This phenomenon has sparked a series of legal reflec - tions on the protection of workers’ rights, the defini -
tion of employment relationships, and the ethical limits of automation in labour relations. In the Brazilian context, the discussion has gained momentum mainly due to the popularisation of trans - portation and delivery apps, such as Uber, iFood and Rappi. On these platforms, labour management is carried out almost entirely through algorithms, which define routes, evaluate performance, assign tasks, and can even “disconnect” workers for poor perfor - mance. This scenario raises questions about algorith - mic subordination, a concept used to describe work - ers’ dependence on the guidelines and commands established by automated systems, often equating it to the traditional legal subordination established by the Consolidation of Labour Laws (CLT). Legal debates focus on issues such as the transpar - ency of algorithmic criteria, the possibility of reviewing automated decisions, and the obligation of companies to provide clear information about how these tools operate. Several experts advocate the need for spe - cific regulations to ensure that the use of AI respects fundamental rights, such as human dignity, the pro - tection of personal data, and the right to disconnect. The Brazilian Judiciary has already faced cases in which workers seek recognition of their employment relationship due to the subordination exerted by the algorithm. Recent decisions show that the Courts’ understanding remains heterogeneous, varying depending on the analysis of the specific case and the evidence presented. However, there is a growing recognition that technology, when used to direct and control the provision of services, can indeed consti - tute typical elements of the employment relationship, challenging traditional concepts of labour law. In conclusion, the discussion about the use of artifi - cial intelligence in labour relations represents one of the greatest contemporary challenges for labour law. Addressing this issue requires not only updated leg - islation but also a proactive stance from legal practi - tioners, who must seek balanced solutions to ensure worker protection without hindering technological advancement and business innovation. The future of work will inevitably be increasingly digital and auto -
56 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook