Court recognizes manicurist employment relationship with beauty salon in Manaus

TRT11

Judge ordered payment of compensation of R$9,000

Manaus (AM) – A partnership that remained only in verbal agreement. A manicurist, a nail design professional, had agreed to be a service provider and share clients with a beauty salon, but claims she never had autonomy, especially regarding payments. The action was judged in the 17th Court of Manaus of the Regional Labor Court of the 11th Region (AM/RR) and the decision was in favor of recognizing the worker’s relationship with the establishment. The compensation was set at R$9,000.

The nail designer started working at the salon in September 2019, working until July 2022. Her last remuneration was R$2,000. The manicurist’s defense claims that because she has met all the criteria in articles 2 and 3 of the CLT, she is entitled to recognition of her employment relationship and the due contractual and severance pay.

The requirements of the employment relationship are set out in article 3 of the CLT: personality, onerousness, non-eventuality and legal subordination. The process states that payments were made by the salon owner’s husband, who worked as a cashier, and that clients scheduled services with the salon, and the salon passed on the services that the manicurist should perform. Furthermore, it was proven that there was no possibility for the customer to make an appointment directly with the manicurist, because they were clients of the salon.

Employment relationship and not a partnership contract

For Labor Judge Sandra Mara Freitas Alves, “it was clear that the financial organization was resolved by the owner of the salon, as well as the arrangement of tasks. Therefore, the worker did not have autonomy, as she was legally subordinate to the employer as well.” When analyzing the conflict, the judge pointed out that those responsible for the beauty salon were unsuccessful in refuting the manicurist’s allegations, as they did not present any written contract that would establish the partnership and not the employment relationship.

The absence of a contract, therefore, contradicts what is established by the Partner Salon Law (Law No. 12,592/12) which provides for the exercise of professional activities as hairdressers, barbers, beauticians, manicurists, pedicurers, waxers and makeup artists. The text of the law determines the need for these professionals to contract with establishments that are classified as salons:

Law No. 12,592/12:

“Article 1 – A Beauty salons may enter into partnership contracts, in writing, under the terms defined in this Law, with professionals who perform the activities of hairdresser, barber, beautician, manicurist, pedicure, waxer and makeup artist”.

The judge thus concluded that the case does not meet the requirements to qualify as a partnership contract, and that it was proven that, based on the principle of “primacy”, the element of legal subordination was configured. “In fact, based on the aforementioned principle, I note that the notes attached by the defendant, unilateral and without any signature from the complainant, are not capable of ruling out the presence of the elements of the link”, she considered.

In the decision, the judge of the 17th Labor Court of Manaus ruled: “Therefore, there are no doubts regarding the configuration of the employment relationship, given the presence of the requirements set out in articles 2 and 3 of the CLT”. She recognized the employment relationship between the salon and the nail designer during the period from 09/28/2019 to 07/08/2022 and ordered the company to pay the manicurist’s labor rights.

*With information from consultancy

Read more:

Economy expected to slow down in 2024 with lower interest rates and fall in inflation

Sebrae Amazonas serves 6 thousand people through the Entrepreneurial City Program

Christmas sales should generate more than R$ 1.5 billion in Manaus commerce