Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
4 min of reading 
0 comments 
Yoga Instructor Awarded Damages After Dismissal Days Before Vacation; TST Understood That Sesc Violated Good Faith and Acted in a Contradictory Manner by Dismissing the Worker After Granting the Rest.
The 2nd Panel of the Superior Labor Court (TST) ordered the Social Service of Commerce (Sesc) of Bahia to pay compensation for moral damages to a yoga instructor dismissed just days before going on vacation.
The ministers understood that the measure violated the principle of objective good faith, which should govern labor relations.
The instructor worked for about six years at the Sesc unit in Salvador.
-
The new law No. 15,377, sanctioned by Lula and published in the Official Gazette of the Union on April 6, guarantees 3 days off for workers to undergo medical examinations.
-
Government sanctions new law that grants up to 3 days of paid leave in 1 year for workers, amends the CLT, and requires companies to adopt urgent health measures throughout Brazil.
-
End of the 6×1 shift: when the changes will truly come into effect with the proposal for a 36-hour workweek advancing in Congress in 2026 and mobilizing CLT workers.
-
The end of the 6×1 shift becomes a hot topic in Congress! Lula makes the decision, confirms the submission of a project to eliminate the 6×1 shift and reduce the workweek to 40 hours, with two days off and maintenance of salaries.
On May 4, 2019, he received the vacation notice, with a start date set for June 3 of the same year.
However, on May 29, just days before the break, he was informed of his dismissal.
The dismissal led him to cancel previously confirmed personal commitments and plans.
Good Faith and Frustrated Expectation
In the labor action, the instructor stated that the notification and confirmation of the vacation created a legitimate expectation of enjoying the right, making the dismissal, in such a short time, a contradictory conduct of the employer.
He further argued that the cancellation of the rest period caused frustration and embarrassment.
Sesc defended itself by claiming it exercised a potestative right, that is, the legal prerogative to terminate the employment contract by its own decision, without the need for the employee’s agreement.
The institution also disputed the existence of evidence of moral damage and requested the reversal of the condemnation.
The first-instance court ordered Sesc to pay R$ 3 thousand in compensation.
The Regional Labor Court of the 5th Region (BA), however, revised the sentence, arguing that the vacation notice does not generate provisional stability in employment.
TST Recognizes Abuse of Right
On judging the appeal, the TST reinstated the initial condemnation.
The rapporteur, Minister Maria Helena Mallmann, stated that although dismissal is an employer’s right, its application in this case constituted abuse of right.
According to the minister, by granting the vacation and then subsequently dismissing the worker, Sesc acted against the principles of good faith and mutual trust.
For Mallmann, the institution’s conduct frustrated the exercise of a relevant social right, related to rest and the preservation of the worker’s health.
“The act of granting the benefit and then terminating the contract undermines dignity and breaks the legitimate expectation created in the employment relationship,” recorded the rapporteur in her vote.
The understanding was unanimously followed by the 2nd Panel, which reinstated the compensation to the instructor.
Interpretation and Legal Effects of the Decision
The TST’s decision reinforces the understanding that the potestative right of the employer must observe the limits of good faith and contractual loyalty.
When the dismissal occurs in circumstances that cause embarrassment or nullify a previously granted right, the act may be characterized as abuse of right.
Legal scholars highlight that decisions of this nature signal the need for coherence in labor management actions.
Cases where there are already granted or scheduled benefits, such as vacations or leaves, require heightened attention from companies to avoid judicial conflicts.
Although the amount of compensation was R$ 3 thousand, the decision has guiding effects, reaffirming that contradictory measures can result in civil liability.
Good Faith and Trust in Labor Relations
According to the rapporteur, the dismissal after the granting of vacation represented a breach of trust between the parties, an essential element in employment relationships.
The TST has been reaffirming, in recent judgments, the application of the principle of objective good faith as a conduct parameter in labor relations.
This principle, according to the Court, requires the parties to behave with loyalty, predictability, and transparency.
The court has also emphasized that the power to dismiss, while legal, should not be exercised in a manner that negates already recognized rights or causes unnecessary moral damage to the employee.
Practical Repercussions for Companies and Employees
For companies, the decision highlights the importance of planning dismissals and maintaining coherence between administrative acts and communications to the worker.
Dismissing close to vacation periods, leaves, or other scheduled rights can generate compensatory obligations and judicial questioning.
For employees, the case illustrates the application of the principle of good faith as a means of protection against contradictory business conduct.
Specialized lawyers point out that preventive practices and internal personnel management policies reduce the risk of labor disputes.
The recognition of abuse of right does not prevent dismissal, but establishes ethical and legal limits for its exercise, especially when there is a legitimate expectation from the worker regarding a previously granted right.
With the reinstatement of the condemnation, the TST reaffirmed that trust and predictability are essential components in the execution of the employment contract.
Seja o primeiro a reagir!