|
|
It is not reasonable to imagine that a citizen who received around R$, each month could have compromised his family's livelihood with the expenses of a labor lawsuit. With this understanding, the rd Panel of the Superior Labor Court rejected the appeal of a former Eletrobras employee who wanted to annul the fine for bad faith litigation that he received for having claimed to be poor despite having received a high salary for a long time, in addition to high compensation when joining a voluntary dismissal plan. Disclosure The former Eletrobras employee was defeated in all labor courts Disclosure The employee was hired by the company in as a data processing technician and terminated in , upon joining the incentive dismissal request (PID). In the labor complaint, he asked for the integration of food and housing assistance into the salary, in addition to overtime, advance notice and a % fine on the FGTS balance, among other installments. The complaint was dismissed by the st Labor Court of Angra dos Reis (RJ) and the employee was ordered to pay two fines for bad faith litigation, totaling R$,, in addition to court costs.
The first, of R$, concerned FGTS Greece Phone Number compensation, even though he was aware, "undoubtedly", that the request was contrary to the term he signed when leaving the company. The second fine was motivated by the claim to benefit from free justice, with the argument that it would be a "poor person". According to the court, the statement characterized, "once again", the failure to observe objective good faith and the recalcitrance in acting "within the minimum civilizing parameters of due legal process". The conclusion was based on the fact that the employee had received more than R$, when voluntarily leaving and, previously, earned salaries of up to R$, "From any perspective, there is evident mockery towards those truly in need in the claim of being a 'poor person'", recorded the sentence. The TRT maintained the decision because it considered that the employee, a "person with a good level of education", had spontaneously adhered to the PDI rules. "There is no credibility, therefore, when he claims to have been harmed in his rights, constituting, in fact, an express violation of the principle of objective good faith", concluded the second degree court.
Undeniable bad faith The rapporteur of the electrician's review appeal at the TST, Minister Agra Belmonte, maintained the understanding. He explained that a person who deduces a claim or defense against a text expressed in law or an undisputed fact is considered a litigant in bad faith. In relation to the FGTS differences, he considered that the request did not constitute bad faith. But, as for free justice, the fine was maintained. "It is not credible that, in a country where the great mass of workers do not receive an amount greater than a minimum wage (which the benefit in question should really favor), a citizen who earns considerable salaries, in addition to receiving a significant amount at the time of his adherence to the voluntary dismissal program, come and claim benefits for low-income workers", argued the rapporteur. "It is citizens like these who make institutes such as free justice fragile in the eyes of the legal system and with low credibility in society", concluded the minister. The decision was unanimous. With information from the TST advisory.The defendant was ordered to pay the salary differences resulting from the reduction and severance pay, to collect outstanding FGTS deposits, in addition to fines for delays and non-payment.
|
|
發表於 2024-3-12 17:37:22