Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
Study Published in 2025 Reveals That Platforms Widen Inequalities and Reinforce a Model That Undermines Labor and Social Guarantees
An analysis released in May 2025 by political scientist Leonardo Sakamoto, in partnership with journalist Carlos Juliano Barros, highlights how app-mediated work has become one of the central symbols of contemporary precariousness. According to the authors, the narrative of autonomy offered by platforms does not reflect the reality experienced by drivers and delivery workers across the country.
According to Sakamoto, these workers have “fallen for a scam” by believing they were taking on an entrepreneurial position. However, their daily conditions reveal a scenario marked by long hours, reduced earnings, and a complete lack of social protection. In addition, the expansion of this model has strengthened practices that deepen inequalities and weaken historical protection structures.
Investigation Reveals How Platform Structures Redefine Rights
The book “What Coaches Don’t Tell You About the Future of Work”, launched in São Paulo and Brasília and presented on November 25, 2025 at UFMG, gathers reflections published between 2021 and 2025 in outlets such as Repórter Brasil and UOL. According to the authors, technological advancement has not eliminated archaic forms of exploitation. On the contrary, it coexists with them.
-
Retirement only at 70: men and women will have to wait until age seventy to retire in Denmark
-
Can a company require criminal background checks for hiring? Understand when the request is allowed and in which cases it can become discrimination.
-
Government submits a bill to Congress to reduce the workweek to 40 hours without a pay cut
-
Worker used company excavator to save colleagues trapped during flood in RS, was fired for just cause, but the Court reversed the punishment and ordered the company to pay R$ 20 thousand for moral damages.
Moreover, analyses indicate that platforms retain a large portion of the earnings, drastically reducing the amounts received by workers. Consequently, without formal ties, these professionals cannot contribute to social security, lack a protection network, and remain vulnerable in the event of accidents or illnesses.
Discourse Against CLT Creates Confusion and Shifts Responsibilities
Sakamoto emphasizes that many workers have begun blaming the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT) for the challenges faced in the sector. However, he states that low wages, exhausting schedules, and lack of rights do not stem from the laws but rather from corporate and political decisions made by the National Congress.
Furthermore, influencers and politicians have propagated the idea that the CLT is an enemy of economic growth. Nevertheless, the researcher explains that the rules are not responsible for inequality. Thus, the problem, according to him, lies in the structures that have shifted risks and costs to workers.
Modern Precariousness Coexists with Historical Violations
The authors emphasize that practices such as pejotization, hiring fixed freelancers without rights, and even cases of enslaved labor and child exploitation persist even amidst advanced technology. Thus, the country maintains a concerning combination of digital innovation and ancient violations.
As Sakamoto explains, Brazil has yet to eradicate contemporary slavery, despite the actions of the Labor Court and the Labor Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPT). Therefore, he asserts that the current moment demands responses that ensure dignity and reduce structural vulnerabilities.
Mobilization Grows and Social Networks Expand Resistance
Following the 2017 Labor Reform, which weakened unions, drivers and delivery workers began using social networks as their main means of articulation. Thus, entire categories are demanding a minimum fare per ride and working conditions defined in collaboration with the workers.
However, measures that expand rights, such as the Domestic Workers Amendment (PEC das Domésticas), continue to face resistance from more privileged economic sectors. Thus, the debate on labor protection remains divided between institutional advancement and opposing pressures.
In light of this scenario, what do you consider essential for the future of work in Brazil: to expand social protection or to deepen flexible models that maintain insecurity and inequality?
Be the first to react!