‎Brazil News

 

 

 

 

Judge Luiza Alves Martins, from the 3rd Labor Court of Brasília, ordered a car rental company to compensate R$12,000 to a woman who was fired without just cause upon returning from a nine-day medical leave to accompany her son. , who was admitted to an ICU due to severe bronchiolitis.

 

The woman, who worked as an administrative analyst at the company, filed a lawsuit for moral damages, alleging that there was gender discrimination in the dismissal. According to the records, the woman stated that she heard from other employees that the “boss had said that he would not hire women in the company, only men, as they are not lacking because of the children”.

 

The woman pointed out that she was denied care for her child on two other occasions in private hospitals. One, due to inactivity of the plan due to lack of payment, and another, due to the grace period. The health plan was included in his employment contract. The company was responsible for paying in full, while the child's share was deducted from their paycheck.

 

 

The woman also stated that after denial of care by the health plan, she went to a public hospital, which gave an “inaccurate diagnosis” and prescribed palliative medications that worsened the child's health condition.

 

In defense, the car rental company denied the existence of the statements attributed to the “boss” and pointed out that “there was no humiliation, offense or embarrassment” that led to the conviction. Regarding discriminatory dismissal, the company argued that dismissal without just cause is part of the employer's management power.

 

According to the decision of the 3rd Labor Court, the evidence in the case confirms the son's health condition during the period of leave and indicated that there was a delay in paying for the health plan — the reason for the denial of hospital care.

 

In the opinion of judge Luiza Alves Martins, discriminatory dismissal is the dismissal of an employee based on aspects that are not related to their professional performance, but rather on stigmas or prejudices. For her, the lack of motivation is a strong indication of discrimination in the author's arguments.

 

For the judge, although there is no specific evidence of discriminatory speech, the dismissal on the day of her return is “more than enough proof that the employer fired her due to the leaves that were necessary because she was a mother and a woman”.

 

“In the case at hand, it is possible to see the worker's gender as a determining factor for dismissal, it is clear that the defendant did not present justifications to motivate the termination of the contract, it is worth highlighting that the act of dismissal is within the employer's directive power. , but it is not an absolute right”, stated Martins in the decision.

 

The action is being processed under number 0000296-09.2023.5.10.0003 at the Regional Labor Court of the 10th Region (TRT10).