Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:22:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Gabriel Lopes Coutinho Filho.pdf: 11931211 bytes, checksum: 35f4108d1416dbbe44ec2b062a23e15c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-02-11 / The objective of this paper is to examine the phenomenon of accumulation of function to those originally contracted employee, according to current Brazilian legal system . The intensity of work in the contemporary world is a subject of great tension between employers and workers. The phenomenon examined , which has several facets , has great interest because it is a content change of object clause of the employment contract . The contemporary production methods require that workers have polyvalent skills. In Brazil, the sole paragraph of art.456 of the Labor Code (CLT) allows the employer to use your "jus variandi" changing the object clause of the employment contract. The central issue is that the Brazilian labor law allows employers freely change the object of the employment contract without any limitation not exceeding the personal conditions of the employees and provided that an express contract, or some proof of contracted function does not 'exist. The law, however, provides an unfavorable presumption the employee:: i'1 practice, it is common the absence of express employment contract and the employee is hardly proof of the contractual object, limiting its "resistentia jus". The assumption behind this work is the perception of injury to the worker due to the law, which contradicts many principles of labor law. Five constitutional violations are identified in law and is made a proposal for legislative change to examination. The completion of background work is that no legally able to prevent the phenomenon of "accurl1ulation of function", except through collective bargaining agreements. However, it is necessary to have legal mechanisms that protect the worker, giving him a proper wage compensation in the face of natural increased complexity of the work it performs / O objetivo deste trabalho é examinar o fenômeno dê acúmulo de função do empregado àquelas originalmente contratadas, segundo o sistema legal brasileiro atual. A intensidade do trabalho no mundo contemporâneo é tema de grande tensão entre empregadores e trabalhadores. O fenômeno examinado, que possui várias facetas, possui grande interesse, pois representa uma alteração da cláusula de objeto do contrato de trabalho. Os métodos produtivos contemporâneos determinam que os trabalhadores possuam habilidades polivalentes. No Brasil, o parágrafo único do art.456, da CLT (CLT), permite que o empregador utilize seu "jus variandi" para alterar a cláusula de objeto do contrato de trabalho. A questão central é que a lei trabalhista brasileira possibilita que o empregador altere livremente o objeto do contrato de trabalho sem qualquer limitação que não ultrapassem as condições pessoais do empregadose e desde que não exista um contrato expresso, ou alguma prova da função contratada. A lei, portanto, traz uma presunção desfavorável ao : empregado: na prática, é comum a ausência de contrato de trabalho expresso e . dificilmente o trabalhador faz prova do objeto contratado, limitando seu "jus resistentia". O pressuposto deste trabalho é a percepção de prejuízo ao trabalhador em decorrência da lei, fato que contraria muitos princípios do direito do trabalho. São identificadas cinco infrações constitucionais na lei e é feita uma proposta de alteração legislativa para exame. A conclusão de fundo do trabalho é que não há condições de impedir legalmente o fenômeno do "acúmulo de função", exceto por meio de contratos coletivos de trabalho. Todavia, é necessário haver mecanismos legais que protejam o trabalhador, concedendo-lhe uma compensação salarial adequada em face da natural maior complexidade do trabalho que executa

Selon l’article 5 du code civil, les juges ne peuvent « se prononcer par voie de disposition générale et règlementaire sur les causes qui leur sont soumises ». L’article 1134, alinéa 1er, du même code pose le principe de la force obligatoire du contrat. Or, la jurisprudence de la chambre sociale de la Cour de cassation est normative ; son immixtion dans le contrat de travail est patente. Déséquilibré, soumis à un ordre public spécifique, source d’un conflit de droits et de libertés, le contrat de travail présente certaines spécificités. Ces dernières paraissent guider l’action du juge. L’adaptation du contrat constitue l’une des principales manifestations de son intervention. Elle se caractérise par l’enrichissement de l’accord de volontés ou, à l’inverse, par son amputation. De nombreuses obligations sont ajoutées au contrat. Si le fondement avancé par le juge varie, les articles 1134, alinéa 3 et 1135 du code civil justifient, en réalité, cette addition. La soustraction revêt diverses formes. Elle est parfois la source d’un pouvoir créateur ; celui-ci n’est pas toujours susceptible d’être rattaché à la protection des libertés et droits fondamentaux. Au-delà, la réfection conduit le juge à rebâtir et réécrire le contrat. Ce dernier est rebâti sur le fondement de l’article 1134, alinéa 2, du code civil. La volonté des parties est objectivée ; leur volonté réelle n’est pas nécessairement respectée. La réécriture du contrat découle, notamment, de l’application de l’article 1152 du code civil. Mais elle s’étend au-delà de ce texte. Originale et audacieuse, la relecture judiciaire du contrat de travail est liée au particularisme de cet accord. / According to article 5 of the French civil code, the judges cannot « decide through the mean of general and statutory rules on the causes they are submitted with ». Article 1134 al.1 of the same civil code provides for the principle of the binding effect of the contract. Yet, the jurisprudence of the labor chamber of the French High Court (Cour de cassation) is normative ; its interference in the labor contract is obvious. Unbalanced, subject to a specific public order, source of conflict of rights and freedoms, the labor contract has certain particularities. These appear to guide the judge’s action. The adaptation of the contract is one of the principle manifestations of the judge’s intervention. It is characterized by the improvement of the agreement of the wills or, on the contrary, by its amputation. Many obligations are added to the contract. If the reasons exposed by the judge vary, actually, article 1134 al.3 and article 1135 of the French civil code justify these additions. This subtraction has different forms. It is the source of a creative power ; such creative power is not always linked to the protection of freedoms and fundamental rights. Besides, the rework leads the judge to the rebuilding and redrafting of the contract. Said contract is rebuilt in accordance with article 1134 al.2 of the French civil code. The willingness of the parties becomes objective ; their real willingness is not necessary complied with. The redrafting of the contract is the result of, in particular, article 1152 of the French civil code. However it can be extended beyond this article. Original and audacious, the judicial way to read the labor contract is linked to the sense of the identity of such labor contract.