Valeir Ertle | Central Única dos Trabalhadores - Cut

Thank you. Thank you. *Tonk* Thank you. Thank you. First, I'd like to thank Roger Correa and thank you for this... to be able to talk about this debate, because we have discussed a lot, The entities sindicals, the world jurídic entities are very concerned with this issue. And I want to thank all the other debateers, to thank all the people who are here watching and also the public who are being transmitted. Uh... The question of the STF on the issue of 389, that is a bit of a Rogério Carvalho, can redefine the pattern of protection. Three main questions: competence. Who is fraud in civil rights? when there is a work of human. It's absurd. A justiça comum is going to be judged on the case where it's going to work. A licitude, right? The PJS autónomo can substitute when there is subordination, personal and habitual? It's absurd. It's just the Gilmar Men's that are correct. the test "Cabe ao trabalhador provar fraude ou à empresa demonstrar autonomia real?" Just a question that we have to do STF, what do they will respond to us. There is no relation to hostility and real autonomy, it is not to prevent that the autonomy is used to eliminate the rights. So, I was just like I said earlier, periodization. How can a project be done if there is a contract of the IPJ, we know that how many people were demitized, or many were still in agreement They lost part of their contract to continue working as PJs. in numerous and various functions that are absurd, that have personalization, habitualization, and subordination. How can a PCPJ be this way, with all these principles of the right? It's a common absurdity. If a juridic can't be paid for the human being. When a company controls the activity, but deixa the issue of the encarges, there is a privatization of the gains and a socialization of the prejudice. The result is less protection individual, and less financial collective financial aid of social security. So it was already been put. I've put several slides that were talking about the numbers, but as I was already put very well on the debate, I don't want to be ater to the numbers, which are absurd. Uh... the So, about the impact on the labor of the labor. The rent, the rent, the rent, and the real real. Then the loss of fragilization, as already said here, by the Paula, the FGTS, the FGTS, the employment and the protection for the VEI. The company, the more that she does, even though it's 30 days, the guy goes to go, what he will do? The guy doesn't have FGTS, doesn't have insurance, nothing. The guy comes with one hand in front and the other is behind. It's absurd. So, the initial remuneration... They said: "You will earn a little more, you will earn a thousand or two thousand." Aspas, And when people take the money, the prejuice is absurd. Look how many months you see, I've seen several cases in the pandemic. Who had a certificate, created a new criteria. because we have all the debates in the 936, we gave them protection for the workers that were afast, right, Rogério? And now, the guys who were PJ, the MASC, received a salary a more. that had 30 years after the company - You're going to do what? It's this is the truth of reality. The worker assumes the cost of his activity and the social protection. So, the dignity cannot be defended, depending on the contractual. The real autonomy exige the power of decision, not only the IPJ imposed, as a condition to work. This is an absurd in many cases that we have seen, that companies say, or you turn a PJ, or you turn a PJ, or you turn a PJ. I'll take another person to do your work. And in functions that are absurdly, it's a complicated thing. We have a condicional mark that the Supreme should be presiding. Unfortunately, they are a disservice to the right to work, the Supreme Court of the Federal Court. our freedom with social responsibility. The human dignity of the human dignity. It's in the condition of the 1st of the 1st of the 3rd. The social rights of the work. I'm going to go to the federal level 7th value social work and the initiative I'm going to go to the federal level 1º, 4º, and 170. And the competence of the justice of the work. - Thank you. The article 114. If the Supreme should be the guardian of our federal constitution, why he uses what is the right of the justice of the work, the judgment. Today we have about 3.000 reclamation work on an year. This issue of the case of the PJs that is being discussed, it's a decision that came from the TST. Today, the decision from first instance as entidades, empresas, make a reclamation trabalhista for STF, and it's aceito. Look at the absurd! He didn't pass by the tribunal not passed by the Supreme Tribunal Federal, the TST, and directly reclamation of the trabalhist. So, there's so much to the Supreme Court, why not really the competencies? Why do we have to do a reform of the Judiciary? We have to discuss. We've discussed a lot with the NAMAT, the MPT, the Ministry of Public, etc. and the Sindicato. We've already done a document and we're going to go to the STF, asking why they're going to be... the time all they are entering in the sphere that is not theirs. So, what they should be judged, what really, there is a decision from the STF that has issues that can be done, from the STF, Now, how can a first-stance decision from the Vara and the work directly to the STF accept? This is the thing, every day, is protocolated in numerous ações, two reclamações of the STF. and everything I had to put everything in the gavetage and it was distributed And it's deliberated, and in the most most, the decisions of the reclamation of the tribunal are monocráticas. One of the people decide, and then comes the question of Gilmar Mendes, is suspended. All these actions, more than a million of actions are suspended and there is no further in this sense. It's very difficult. So there are several questions that we have to be discussing and put on a criteria. The real freedom can be for price and recusate demand? No. Is there a clientele propria and risk of the empresarial genuine? No. Is there a power of organization or subordination of the contract? It's not even there. Is there a subsidy to be free or a personal obligation? There is no one, there is no one, there is no one, there is no one, there is no one, there is no one. to be able to demand from the informal market, to be able to bring it to the Previdência, to be able to contribute, to be able to do Previdência. And today, everything is MEI. Everything can be MEI. So we have to discuss seriously what can be MEI, who can be MEI and what can be MEI, and what can be MEI. There is no cabimento. There are other questions to talk about, but as the time has been done, A prejudicedness is not to be organized. and it transfers risk, reduces protection, and fracass the collective negotiation and the state's role. The solution is recognizing the reality of human work. because the person can imagine. I have a contract with the email, who will defend him, who will fight for him, Today, if it's going to get something, it doesn't work. We know how it works. So I hope that the STF has a good sense, because the impact was put, I was going to talk about the impact, but it was very well put in the other debate, that the impact was real. And with certainty, it's very simple to take a decision like this, because the rent is guaranteed. If we had a public government, we would not happen to this. Where a minister, where a deputy, all the people would be in a public public universal. But they know what it is. There's the House of Representatives, right, Rogério? There's the Justice, there's several questions here. It's very easy to decide and prejudge all the collective that doesn't reach directly. So, this has to be very well thought and put it, because if really prevails the decision of Gilmar Mendes, it will be very serious, it will be very serious, it will be very much more than what is being said in the project. At least 50% of the celletists will become a PJ. So the impact is an absurd thing. It was put on the farm, which is a bit estrondous. But thank you for the opportunity. A big hug. Thank you.