Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
24 comments 
Bank Claims Decisions Were Individual After Four Months of “Digital Activity” Analysis. Union Challenges Criteria, Demands Transparency, and Promises Class Action.
The Itaú Unibanco initiated a wave of layoffs on Monday, September 8, 2025, focused on teams working from home or in a hybrid model. The Union of Bank Workers of São Paulo, Osasco, and Region estimates around one thousand job losses and states that there was no prior dialogue with the entity.
The bank confirmed that there were cuts, but insists that this was not a mass layoff but rather individual decisions after “careful review” of conduct related to remote work and time tracking.
According to the union, the layoffs affected areas such as Technology Center, CEIC, and Faria Lima. The entity claims it will seek judicial accountability and requests the reinstatement of positions as the teams were already overloaded.
-
The largest food company on the planet, JBS, has just opened a 4,000 square meter laboratory in Florianópolis to develop customized proteins that modulate muscle mass gain, immune response, and metabolic performance.
-
After nearly 30 bids and competition among industry giants, a Spanish company purchases one of the largest airports in Brazil for almost R$ 3 billion and takes over the management of Galeão in a concession that will last until 2039.
-
The Federal Revenue Service now automatically cross-references everything you declare with data from banks, credit cards, brokerage firms, and insurance companies, and any discrepancy between your income and your expenses triggers an alert in seconds.
-
Amid global tensions, Brazil blocks the United States’ proposal at the WTO and paves the way for a trade crisis and possible retaliations.
What Itaú Says About “Digital Activity” and Overtime
In a statement published on Wednesday, September 10, Itaú stated it identified a “minority of employees” with low levels of digital activity over the course of four months. In the most critical cases, daily activity reportedly dropped to 20% of the workday, with overtime recorded on the same days, which the bank classifies as a “breach of trust”.
The statement provides internal examples: in one area with 316 analysts, the average digital activity was 72%, while the dismissed ranged between 27% and 37% during the period. In another structure, with an average of 75%, one individual marked 39% and still logged overtime. For the institution, around 75% is deemed a “suitable level” for remote work, considering breaks and seasonalities.
The bank also asserts that the decisions were not aimed at reducing staff, but rather at preserving organizational culture and the trust relationship with clients and employees. “Incompatible standards” were cited as the reason for the layoffs.
How Itaú Monitored Those Not Complying with Home Office Hours
Itaú claims it monitors the use of corporate equipment and software in accordance with legislation and internal policies, stating that it does not record screens, audio, or video. The focus is on indicators of digital activity correlated with recorded hours and the use of overtime. The company asserts that 60% of staff operates in a hybrid or remote regime and that the autonomy granted to teams requires individual accountability.
In practice, the metric aims to measure interaction time with corporate systems and frequency of use during working hours. Critics argue that “clicks” and screen time may not reflect deliverables, especially in analytical or management tasks. The debate has intensified with the advancement of productivity software and artificial intelligence tools for monitoring work behavior.
Experts remind that the LGPD allows monitoring if there is clear information and legal basis, but recommends objective criteria, feedback, and an opportunity for correction before punitive measures, particularly in remote work.
Union Response and Next Steps
The union classified the measure as “disproportionate” in light of the bank’s profits in the first half of the year and stated there was a “lack of transparency” in the criteria. The entity announced class action and a mobilization agenda with laid-off workers, asserting that it will not accept remote work as justification for large-scale cuts.
In interviews and meetings, leaders pointed to a “risk of error” in monitoring algorithms and requested that the institution publicly explain how data is collected, weighed, and audited. According to the union, some of the dismissed did not receive prior warnings or feedback, and some report recent good performance.
Media outlets also reported that the bank had considered a larger number of cuts before finalizing this week’s layoffs, an information not confirmed by Itaú.
And you, what do you think about this? Is “digital activity” a fair criterion to measure productivity in remote work or should deliverables weigh more than clicks? Leave your comment and say if the bank acted correctly or if the monitoring methods went too far.
Empresa privada demite quem quiser quando quiser!
O que não pode é justificar publicamente que todos tinham baixa produtividade , quando na verdade, produtividade não se mede com clicks.
Outra coisa que não pode é juntar nessa leva quem trabalhava com celular , com dois computadores , ou que tinha combinados na baixa gestão que o permitia ficar ausente.
Estou de acordo com a medida, mas discordo plenamente da maneira que foi feita: as demissões deveriam ser feita pelos gerentes , e não uma medida arbritraria do RH.
Sindicato sempre tratando empresa e ou Empregador como opressor,porem nunca vi sindicato fazer feirão de Emprego. Essa pelegada só tá preocupada e com a queda nas contribuições.
Minha amiga não fez parte dessa leva, pois ela sempre trabalhou direitinho, perguntei se ficou mais pesado após as demissões e ela respondeu q não. Logo, o Itaú se livrou de pesos mortos
Houveram muitos casos de pessoas de alta produtividade (com prêmios e promoções). Claro que são uma % menor dentro dos 1000, mas ainda sim um número representativo. E pior, esses casos ficaram manchados dentro de um bolo de pessoas que realmente n merecem.