Chinese (Simplified) 
Chinese (Traditional) 
English 
French 
Alemão 
Italian 
Japanese 
Norwegian 
Spanish 
3 min read
12 comments
The Supreme Court begins analyzing the employment relationship in Uber and Rappi lawsuits. The decision will have repercussions on thousands of lawsuits and could redefine the future of the platforms, according to O Globo.
The Supreme Federal Court (STF) began a landmark trial on Wednesday that could profoundly change labor relations in Brazil. The Court will decide whether app drivers and delivery people must be recognized as formal employees of digital platforms.
The case, which directly involves giants like Uber and Rappi, is being closely watched because it affects more than ten thousand lawsuits already stalled in lower courts. The decision could redefine not only labor rights of these professionals, but also the business model of technology companies in the country.
What's at stake in the STF
The actions under analysis were filed by the companies themselves, which challenge Labor Court decisions favorable to the employment relationship.
-
Bill 1.409/2025 promises to shake up the automotive market: the proposal authorizes individuals to import used cars.
-
Brazilian Chamber approves bill that limits land expropriation and changes agrarian reform rules three decades after the original law.
-
With the new law signed by Lula, banks are required to disclose all costs, allow automatic salary portability, and create credit options with lower interest rates.
-
'CPF for Real Estate' starts in 2026 and could change how your property tax is calculated, but the tax authorities deny a tax increase.
For Uber, it is a technology company, not a transportation company, and recognizing a formal relationship would compromise free enterprise.
Rappi, in turn, claims that previous decisions violate understandings already consolidated by the Supreme Court.
On the other hand, workers' organizations argue that there is subordination, regularity and fixed remuneration, points that, according to the CLT, characterize an employment relationship.
The argument is that, in practice, these professionals do not have full autonomy, being subject to the rules and algorithms of the platforms.
The role of the Attorney General's Office
On the eve of the trial, the Attorney General's Office (PGR) presented an opinion against recognizing the link.
Attorney General Paulo Gonet cited STF precedents that validate alternative forms of hiring, reinforcing that the Constitution does not require that all employment relationships be governed by the CLT.
This positioning strengthens the companies' arguments, but does not end the discussion.
The ministers' final decision may establish a thesis of general repercussion, creating mandatory parameters for all instances of the Judiciary in similar cases.
Impacts for companies and workers
If the Supreme Federal Court recognizes the link, companies like Uber and Rappi will have to bear labor charges, vacation pay, FGTS (Unemployment Severance Fund), and 13th-month salary, which could increase costs and alter the dynamics of the sector.
Experts assess that, in this scenario, part of the impact could be passed on to the consumer, with an increase in the price of rides and deliveries.
For workers, the decision could mean greater social protection and stability, but also risks of reduced flexibility and even a decrease in the number of jobs available.
The current model of “autonomy” allows many to choose when and how to work, even without minimum wage guarantees.
A judgment of general repercussion
The trial also marks Edson Fachin's debut as president of the Court.
Later this week, the ministers are expected to hear oral arguments from the parties involved and begin constructing votes.
The expectation is that the process will be closely monitored by the private sector, unions and labor law experts.
Second The Globe, The decision could guide the future of the entire digital economy in Brazil, serving as a reference for other categories that operate under similar models.
It's a debate that goes beyond the companies mentioned and touches on the very definition of what work is in the era of platforms..
The Supreme Court's ruling could redefine the lives of millions of people. app drivers and delivery people, in addition to transforming the business model of companies that have become part of urban life.
The decision promises to divide opinions between social protection and preservation of flexibility.
Do you think the Supreme Federal Court should recognize employment relationships or maintain the current autonomy model? How would this decision impact your daily routine? Share your thoughts in the comments—we'd love to hear from anyone who's experienced this firsthand.
Brazilians like to ruin everything that is good, seriously.
Uber was never created to be compared to a formal job with a CLT (Consolidation of Labor Laws). The initial proposal was always to offer additional income, with flexibility, without the same costs and obligations of a traditional contract. In Brazil, many drivers have ended up making the app their primary source of income, which is a legitimate choice, but different from the original proposal.
It's important to remember that if Uber is forced to comply with the Labor Code (CLT), the company will inevitably have to pass on the costs to passengers. This could make rides more expensive, reduce demand, and ultimately even lead the company to leave the country. In this scenario, the drivers who currently depend on the app and request this employment contract are the ones who suffer the most, as they could lose their own source of income.
We just need our rights recognized, and nothing more! No one offers to deliver for us, but if we don't, the platforms lose out! So we need our rights recognized! Platforms make billions a year thanks to delivery workers, who earn peanuts and work tirelessly, yet the support points they promised so much don't even exist!
You go to work with a record and then you go hungry, it's like that because you're not happy and just don't turn on the app.
As a driver for a little over six years in São Paulo, I prefer the current model. However, I've decided we need more autonomy, better earnings, and we receive requests for rides that are almost laughable. I, like thousands of others, don't want a CLT (Consolidated Labor Laws), but some adjustments need to be made.