Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
5 min of reading 
0 comments 
The Decision Was Supported by the Jurisprudence of the Superior Labor Court (TST), Which Considers That Offering the Break at the Beginning or End of the Shift Is Equivalent to Not Granting the Break Correctly. The Manufacturer Argued That the Break Was Regularly Granted, According to the Time Records.
The 3rd Panel of the Regional Labor Court of the 3rd Region (TRT-3) unanimously decided that there was suppression of the intraday break by a vehicle manufacturer. The rapporteur of the decision, Judge César Machado, emphasized that the intraday break is not limited to a moment for a meal, but is essential for pausing activities, allowing for the physical and mental recovery of the worker.
The company appealed against the judgment of the 4th Labor Court of Betim, which had ordered it to pay for overtime due to the suppression of the break. TRT-3, however, upheld the conviction, especially regarding workers on the night shift, who had the meal break granted only in the first hour of work.
Witness testimonies demonstrated that, in the shift starting at 9:57 PM, the break was given between 10 PM and 11 PM, resulting in a continuous work period until the end of the shift, around 6 AM. One witness corroborated that this was the only available time for a meal, which also applied to the complainant. The intraday break is a right guaranteed by the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), according to Article 71, which establishes the obligation of a rest period for meals and recovery during the work shift.
-
R$ 1.9 billion for 59 bathrooms, spa, medical clinic, and 6,500 m²: most expensive mansion ever listed in the US goes on sale in Bel-Air
-
Brazilians return to shopping at Shein and AliExpress after the end of the import tax on items up to $50, but there’s a little-known detail: orders up to $3,000 also had a tax reduction.
-
A delegation representing 12 trillion dollars in economic power landed in Beijing alongside Trump, with Musk and the CEO of Nvidia aboard Air Force One: the mission is to pressure Xi to open the Chinese market.
-
Brazil placed three airports among the ten busiest in Latin America in 2025, with Guarulhos leading the continental ranking ahead of Bogotá and Mexico City, while Congonhas is set to receive R$ 2.4 billion and increase from 22 to 30 million passengers per year.
According to lawyer Rafaela Carvalho, the suppression of the break occurs when the worker does not take the pause as provided by law, either due to noncompliance with the minimum time or by granting the break inappropriately, such as at the beginning or end of the shift.
In the TRT-3 decision, the vehicle manufacturer was condemned for granting the break at an inappropriate time, specifically at the beginning of the shift, which led the court to understand that there was suppression of the break, harming the physical and mental health of the workers.
What Is the Legal Consequence of the Suppression of the Intraday Break?
The suppression of the intraday break results in the employer’s obligation to pay for the corresponding period as overtime, with a 50% additional charge on the value of the normal hour, as provided for in the CLT.
Rafaela Carvalho explains that the penalty is justified, as the lack of a break compromises the necessary recovery for the worker to continue their activities without harming their health. The absence of a pause, in long shifts, can lead to serious impacts on physical and psychological well-being, such as fatigue, stress, and repetitive strain injuries.
In this case, the manufacturer appealed the judgment of the 4th Labor Court of Betim, which had condemned it to pay for overtime due to inadequate granting of the break. However, TRT-3 maintained the conviction, especially regarding the night shift, when the break was granted only in the first hour of work.
The jurisprudence of the Superior Labor Court (TST) considers that granting the break at the beginning or end of the shift is equivalent to its suppression, according to the decision of TRT-3. Rafaela Carvalho points out that this practice does not allow the worker to have the necessary break at the correct moment in their shift, directly affecting their health.
The break for meals and rest should occur at an intermediate time, ensuring that the worker has time to recover physically and mentally, so as to avoid harm to their health. This understanding is based on the principle that the break should occur at a time that allows the worker to relax and recharge their energies to continue their activities, being incompatible with the idea of interrupting work only at the beginning or end of the shift.
Reasoning of TRT-3 in Upholding the Conviction of the Vehicle Manufacturer
The decision of TRT-3 was based on witness evidence that demonstrated that the break during the night shift, which started at 9:57 PM, was granted between 10 PM and 11 PM, that is, at the beginning of the shift, resulting in uninterrupted work until the end of the shift.
Lawyer Rafaela Carvalho highlights that the analysis of witness evidence was fundamental for confirming the conviction, as it proved that the break granted did not allow for adequate recovery of the workers, violating labor protection standards. The witness confirmed that the break between 10 PM and 11 PM was the only available time for the team’s cafeteria, constituting an irregular practice that resulted in a continuous work schedule. This underscores the importance of proper management of breaks, not only to meet legal requirements but to ensure the well-being of workers.
Understand the Implications of This Decision for Companies
The decision of TRT-3 reflects the strict application of labor laws, especially regarding the granting of intraday breaks. For companies, as emphasized by Rafaela Carvalho, this decision reinforces the need for adequate control of breaks to avoid not only judicial condemnations but also to preserve employees’ health.
Proper compliance with the intraday break contributes to a healthier work environment, which, in turn, can result in increased productivity and worker satisfaction. Additionally, the decision serves as a warning for other companies to adopt practices that effectively meet labor law standards, avoiding potential litigation regarding violations of workers’ rights.
The recent decision of the 3rd Panel of TRT-3, which recognized the suppression of the intraday break in a vehicle manufacturer, has significant repercussions in the field of labor law. Lawyer Rafaela Carvalho from VLV Advogados emphasizes that the correct granting of the break is essential to guarantee the health and safety of the worker, preventing physical and psychological problems arising from excessive work hours.
The consolidated jurisprudence of the TST, which considers granting the break at the beginning or end of the shift as equivalent to its suppression, reinforces the importance of strictly observing labor rights. Companies must pay attention to compliance with these standards, not only to avoid penalties but also to ensure a healthy and productive work environment.
Therefore, proper management of intraday breaks is an essential preventive measure for the protection of workers’ rights and compliance with labor legislation. Companies must invest in adequate controls and training to ensure that their employees enjoy breaks as established by the CLT, avoiding risks of penalties and harm to their employees’ health.
Gabriela Matias, journalist, writer, and press officer, graduated from the State University of Southwest Bahia (UESB). INSTAGRAM: @gabrielamatiascomunica https://www.instagram.com/gabrielamatiascomunica/
With information from publications on various sites, such as https://vlvadvogados.com/ and news site https://portal.trt3.jus.br/internet/conheca-o-trt/comunicacao/noticias-juridicas/concessao-de-intervalo-para-alimentacao-no-inicio-da-jornada-equivale-a-supressao-da-pausa
Be the first to react!