Recent Ruling of the 4th Chamber of the Superior Labor Court Redefines Legal Criteria, Challenges Expert Reports, and Consolidates Interpretation on Activities, Ministry of Labor Norms, and Limits of Hazardous Subsidy
The 4th Chamber of the Superior Labor Court ruled that a therapeutic clinic for the elderly does not have to pay a hazardous subsidy to a caregiver, overturning previous decisions and understanding that the activity is not listed in the official list of the Ministry of Labor, thus excluding the portion.
TST’s Decision and Scope of Understanding
The panel exempted the clinic from paying the additional amount after concluding that the caregiver’s role does not fall within the list of hazardous activities defined by the Ministry of Labor, which is an essential requirement for granting the right.
The caregiver stated in the labor claim that he was responsible for approximately 10 elderly individuals, performing daily tasks such as bathing, changing clothes, assisting with meals, guiding patients, and dressing wounds during the routine.
-
Structural and finishing warranties: understand the rights that can prevent losses for the buyer of a new property
-
Any Brazilian over 18 years old can now choose at a notary who will take care of their assets and decisions in case they lose capacity in the future, thanks to self-curatorship, an instrument that gained national strength with a CNJ regulation from October 2025 and changed estate planning in the country.
-
Brazilian justice orders the Union, Iphan, Pará, and the City Hall to “save” the ghost town of Fordlândia from ruins, with a diagnosis in 90 days, land regularization, and fines for the abandonment of historical heritage.
-
Braking only in front of the radar and accelerating right after may no longer be an option for drivers, because BR-101 in Espírito Santo tested a system that measures the average speed over an entire stretch and caught a car at 124 km/h on a 60 km/h road.
According to the worker, these activities involved frequent contact with sick individuals and exposure to agents deemed hazardous, especially during cleaning and changing diapers, which motivated the request for the additional subsidy.
Understanding of Lower Instances and Expert Evaluation
In the defense presented, the clinic argued that it is a long-term care institution for the elderly, with a residential character, and not a healthcare facility, which is a central point of the judicial debate.
The judicial expertise confirmed the presence of sick elderly individuals requiring monitoring by a nurse and a nursing technician, concluding that the location could be classified as intended for human health care, according to NR-15.
The report also acknowledged exposure to biological agents, information documented in the Environmental Risk Prevention Program presented by the clinic, leading the first-degree court to grant an additional amount at a medium rate of 20%.
The Regional Labor Court of the 15th Region upheld the ruling, but the clinic appealed to the TST, which reformed the understanding by applying the Court’s Summary 448.
Legal Justification and Final Result
The rapporteur, Minister Maria Cristina Peduzzi, emphasized that the expert finding of hazardous conditions is not sufficient to guarantee the subsidy, as the explicit classification of the activity in the official list of the Ministry of Labor is required.
The minister reiterated that, for the TST, mere exposure to biological agents in the role of caregiver for the elderly does not authorize payment, as the activity is not included in the regulatory list. The decision was unanimous.
The ruling pertains to the case 0010235-24.2022.5.15.0095 and was published with information from the press office of the TST, consolidating the understanding on the subject in the superior court.

-
-
-
8 people reacted to this.