Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
Superior Labor Court Recognizes Validity of Collective Norm in Port of Rio Grande.
The discussion about night shift gained new contours after the decision of the Special Section I Specialized in Individual Disputes (SDI-1) of the Superior Labor Court (TST). The panel recognized the validity of a collective norm that changed the start of the night work of dockworkers in the Port of Rio Grande (RS), establishing the period starting from 7:30 PM, and not 7 PM, as provided by law.
According to ConJur, the decision divided ministers and sparked debate among unions and industry operators. While part of the Court maintains that the night shift can be flexible through collective negotiation, another portion believes that the change violates rights related to workers’ health and safety.
What the Law Says About Night Shift
Law 4,860/1965 stipulates that, in port work, the night shift extends from 7 PM to 7 AM the next day. This period guarantees the worker a night shift allowance, which varies between 25% and 100% depending on the shift. The controversy arises precisely from the fact that the collective agreement established the start at 7:30 PM, reducing the application of the allowance by 30 minutes.
-
The Senate approves a bill that criminalizes misogyny, hatred, or aversion towards women, and includes the crime in the Racism Law with a penalty of up to 5 years.
-
Chamber Approves Bill That Allows Pepper Spray for Women Over 16 and Imposes Strict Rules for Purchase, Possession, and Use as Self-Defense
-
Chamber Approves Law to Combat Leucaena, Fast-Growing Plant That Dominates Land and Threatens Native Species in Various Regions of the Country
-
Asset Division: Know What Cannot Be Divided in Case of Divorce
The trial court recognized wage discrepancies in favor of the worker, understanding that the agreement contradicted the law. The Regional Labor Court of the 4th Region (RS) and the 7th Panel of the TST confirmed the decision, declaring the collective norm invalid for failing to compensate for the loss of the benefit.
The Turning Point in the TST Judgment
In the motions presented by the Labor Management Body (Ogmo), Minister Breno Medeiros highlighted the understanding of the Federal Supreme Court (theme 1,046), according to which it is valid for a collective norm to limit or restrict labor rights not directly ensured by the Constitution.
For him, the definition of when the night shift starts would not be an unavailable right, being subject to negotiation.
The majority followed this reasoning, recognizing the validity of the collective norm. Minister José Roberto Pimenta was in dissent, advocating for the preservation of the legally provided schedule as it is a protective measure for workers’ health.
Union Reactions and Practical Impacts
The decision provoked an immediate reaction from port unions, which argue that the flexibility represents a loss of historical rights.
For the entities, the night shift allowance cannot be relativized, as it aims to compensate for the physical and social wear of work performed at hours detrimental to family life and rest.
On the other hand, representatives of the port sector and Ogmo argue that collective negotiation should prevail, especially in complex activities with significant economic impact. They claim that flexibility can bring greater operational efficiency without compromising essential worker protections.
Legal Debate Remains Open
The case of the Port of Rio Grande exposes the central dilemma of collective labor rights in Brazil: to what extent is it possible to negotiate rights guaranteed by law?
The TST’s decision reinforces the trend of valuing collective negotiation but leaves the discussion open about the balance between party autonomy and minimum protection ensured by legal norms.
Experts believe that new judicial disputes will arise in other strategic sectors, which may bring the issue again to the Federal Supreme Court to better delineate the limits of collective negotiation.
The recognition of the validity of the collective norm in the Port of Rio Grande represents a milestone in the debate over the flexibility of night shifts, but also raises alarms about the possible weakening of labor guarantees.
And you, do you believe that collective negotiation should prevail even when it reduces rights guaranteed by law, as in the case of the night shift? Or do you think these guarantees should be preserved without the possibility of flexibility?
Leave your opinion in the comments; we want to hear from those who live this dilemma daily.
Seja o primeiro a reagir!