Habib’s will pay R$300,000 to support anti-Dilma act – 03/20/2024 – Market

The Second Panel of the TST (Superior Labor Court) sentenced the social network Habib’s to pay R$300,000 in compensation for collective moral damage for having linked its employees to a demonstration against the government of then president Dilma Rousseff (PT), in 2016 .

In the week leading up to March 13, when protests were held across Brazil, the chain launched a campaign with the theme “hunger for change”, calling on its customers to take to the streets.

The stores were decorated with green and yellow decorations, as well as posters with the phrase “I want my country back”.

According to the Union of Workers in Hotels, Bars and Restaurants and Similar of Águas de Lindoia and Region, which presented the collective action, the network’s units became a distribution point for ribbons and posters that could be used in the demonstration.

The Habib’s group says, in a statement, that it does not comment on ongoing legal cases. The company can still appeal. The compensation amount will be allocated to the FAT (Worker Support Fund).

Minister Maria Helena Mallmann, rapporteur at the TST of the appeal presented by the union, considered that the company abused its corporate management power.

Even though employees were not forced to wear pins, accessories or carry posters, the campaign was incorporated into the workplace.

“[O empregador] It forced them to participate in the campaign, restricting their right to free expression of thought and political ideology”, wrote the rapporteur.

In the TRT-15 (Regional Labor Court of the 15th Region), where another appeal from the union was judged, the understanding was that “the institutional political positioning is absolutely legitimate, including as a motto for publicity and marketing actions”.

For the rapporteur, this assessment is in line with public policies to eradicate undemocratic practices.

“The Federal Constitution of 1988 ensures that everyone has the right to a balanced work environment, because it is essential to a healthy quality of life, which is why it is up to the public authorities and the community, which includes the employer, the duty to defend it and preserve it”, wrote the rapporteur.

Habib’s defense argument in the process was similar to that presented by the chain at the time, that the company did not support any party or legend.

In the Labor Court, the company stated that the mobilization had no political-ideological connotation.

Alberto Saraiva, founder of the snack bar chain, signed a statement distributed to employees that week, in which he said that the demonstration did not support any party. “I will be there as a citizen,” the report said.

For Habib’s, there would only have been electoral harassment if employees had been forced to adopt party emblems or hand out party leaflets.

The decision of the Second Panel of the TST was unanimously in favor of the union’s appeal.