Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
Decision of the 3rd Panel of the Regional Labor Court of the 12th Region Recognizes That Sending an Email with Information about Dismissal and Historical Records Exceeded the Employer’s Authority, Caused Concrete Damage to the Electrician’s Career, and Constituted Indemnifiable Moral Damage
The Regional Labor Court of the 12th Region, in Santa Catarina, ruled that the email disclosure of information regarding the dismissal of an electrician exceeded the employer’s authority, caused harm to professional reintegration, and resulted in a compensation for moral damages in the amount of R$ 15 thousand.
Context of the Dismissal and Professional Activity
The case involves an electrician who worked on a construction site in the municipality of Palhoça, in Santa Catarina, hired on a trial period by a contracted company in the construction sector.
According to the employer, the dismissal occurred due to non-compliance with the so-called gold safety rules adopted at the site where the worker performed his professional activities during the trial period.
-
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.
The information used to justify the dismissal originated from records of a previous employment relationship, when the electrician provided services for another contracted company that operated at the same site.
Email Sending and Shared Content
After the dismissal, the company sent an email to other companies in the construction sector informing them of the reason for the termination and recalling historical records attributed to the worker.
Among the shared information was the accusation that the electrician had reported to work on two occasions showing signs of intoxication, a claim considered serious for his professional image.
However, there was no record of any penalty applied to the worker at the time of the events related to the alleged intoxication, as recorded in the process analyzed by the Labor Court.
Impacts on Reintegration and Legal Action
The electrician reported that after the email was sent, he began to be rejected in new selection processes, claiming that he had been included in a sort of blacklist shared among companies in the sector.
Facing professional setbacks and difficulties reintegrating into the labor market, the worker filed a labor lawsuit seeking compensation for moral damages resulting from the company’s conduct.
In the first instance, the Labor Court of Palhoça ruled the request unfounded, understanding that the early termination of the trial contract constituted a regular exercise of the right to dismissal.
Decision of the 3rd Panel of TRT-12
Upon reviewing the appeal, the 3rd Panel of the Regional Labor Court of the 12th Region altered the initial decision, accepting the arguments presented by the affected worker.
The reporting judge, José Ernesto Manzi, assessed that the email exceeded the limits of what could be communicated at the end of the contract, especially when addressing a previous episode that occurred for a different reason.
According to the judge, the disclosure of the information had a concrete repercussion on the professional image of the plaintiff, creating effective barriers to new hiring and limiting his competitiveness in the market.
Manzi further emphasized that the conduct violated the fundamental right to freely exercise any profession, preventing the worker from competing for positions on equal conditions with other candidates.
Solidary Responsibility and Compensation
Although the email was sent by only one of the defendants, the 3rd Panel understood that the consortium responsible for executing the work should also be held liable for the damages caused.
Part of the disclosed information had been recorded and shared by the consortium, leading the court to recognize the solidary liability of the companies involved in the incident.
Thus, the defendants were ordered to jointly pay R$ 15 thousand to the electrician as compensation for moral damages resulting from the improper disclosure of the information.
With information from Conjur.
-
-
2 people reacted to this.