São Paulo – The new Dieese bulletin, released on Monday (14), shows that intermittent work has not created new jobs, nor has it reduced unemployment. To make matters worse, a good part of these contracts resulted in an income below the minimum wage.

The mode of intermittent work was created by the Michel Temer government (MDB) labor “reform”, characterized by the absence of fixed hours, without the provision of minimum days or hours of work. For the technical director of Dieese Fausto Augusto Junior, the study noted the negative points for the workers included in this regime.

Dieese’s bulletin recalls that supporters of the reform claimed that intermittent contracts could generate millions of new jobs. However, at the end of 2018, there were 62,000 intermittent active links. In 2019, 168 thousand more intermittent contracts were contracted, of which 121 thousand lasted at least until the end of the year. Data up to October 2020, on the other hand, indicate 210,000 intermittent bonds, which corresponds to 0.44% of the total formal bonds.

“The information related to 2019 employment shows that, as in 2018, many of the contracts spent a good part of the year shelved, that is, they generated little or no work and income, and the income generated was very low”, points out the bulletin from Dieese.

Without income

Among the jobs admitted in 2019, 22% had no income. In other words, one in five intermittent contracts did not generate any type of remuneration for the worker. This result was worse than that registered in 2018, when 11% of the bonds had no income.

Fausto recalls that intermittent work is born to occupy specific points of production, but passes a lot of insecurity to those who occupy it. “This type of intermittent contract sold as a new type of contract, which would generate many jobs, showed that it does not do this and still creates a lot of financial instability, becoming a decoy for the worker”, he says, in the participation of Dieese in the Current Brazil Newspaper.

The specialist says that the modality encourages job insecurity. “The intermittent contract was inspired by England’s zero hour contract, which does not guarantee a fixed working day. In some ways, this is the institutionalization and legalization of ‘beak,’ ”he adds.

According to the bulletin, for every three months of work, intermittent bonds were left in the drawer for another three months. At the end of 2019, the average monthly remuneration paid for each intermittent job was R $ 637 – counting the months after admission, whether worked or not, equivalent to approximately 64% of the official minimum wage. There was a worsening in relation to the previous year: in 2018, the average remuneration of intermittent bonds corresponded to 80% of that year’s minimum wage.

STF judges intermittent work

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) debates the validity of the intermittent employment contract. On December 3, the judgment on the matter was suspended at the request of Minister Rosa Weber, at a time when the score was two votes in favor and one against this type of contract.

Ministers Nunes Marques and Alexandre de Moraes voted for the constitutionality of intermittent work, while Minister Edson Fachin voted against it. The STF is judging three unconstitutionality actions against the intermittent contract and there is no time limit for the trial to be resumed.

In his vote, Fachin said that the intermittent system brings “unpredictability” by not setting a minimum wage provision for workers. “With the situation of intermittence, unpredictability is installed on an essential element of the formal labor relationship, that is, the remuneration for the provision of services”, said the minister.

Fausto endorses the need for the debate on the trial, since the unconstitutionality of intermittent work can curb other “evils” planned by the Minister of Economy, Paulo Guedes. “One of Guedes’ current defenses is the implementation of the hourly contract, that is, breaking up all forms of hiring per hour. This is quite serious. Since 2017, there has been a movement to make contracts and labor rights more flexible, attacking income and hours. They want to precarious and take away the financial security of the worker. ”