Basic employment relations and their development tendencies Abstract The dissertation focuses on basic employment relations and tendencies in their development. First, attention is drawn to the conception of labour law and its position within the system of law. Second, basic employment relations are analysed, namely work performed under an employment contract, and work done under agreements other than an employment contract. Only such relations allow for what is called "dependent" work which is (a) subject to superiority of an employer and subordination of the employee, (b) done on behalf of an employer, (c) in compliance with an employer's instructions, and (d) the employee must do the work in person. Dependent work is the subject of individual employment relations. Legal regulation of employment relations is analyzed in the dissertation. A significant change was introduced by the Labour Code 2006. The main principle of the Code is that "everyone may do whatever is not prohibited by the Code, and no one may be forced to do what is not imposed by the Code" (or in other words "what is not prohibited is allowed"). Section 4 of the Labour Code expressly declares the principle of subsidiarity of the Civil Code in relation to the Labour Code, namely that employment relations are governed by the Labour Code;...

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:21:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Marcelo Luis Roland Zovico.pdf: 1204292 bytes, checksum: 668863ce803eb11dba42bd35de4e4aa7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-10-19 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Studies on the Theory of Society, developed by Niklas Luhmann original form that identifies the function of law in contemporary society becomes one of law and does not limit its action, rather it seeks to overcome the traditional form of exercise and bounded right of action, thus contributing to more open spaces as possible to the action. In this dimension, the idea of risk, while bond with the future, becomes a technical elaboration of complexity in Modern Society. From this reflection, the thesis seeks to show how the policies of Public Security, contrary to what is expected, increase the likelihood of generating more risks, a fact that demonstrates both a paradox in social relations involving the theme as needs new forms and legal discussions to overcome it / Os estudos sobre a Teoria da Sociedade, desenvolvidos de forma originária por Niklas Luhmann identificam que a função do Direito na atual sociedade passa a ser de não limitar o Direito e sua ação, pelo contrário, ela busca superar a forma tradicional e delimitada do exercício da ação do direito, contribuindo, assim para abrir quanto mais espaços possíveis para a ação. Nessa dimensão, a ideia de risco, enquanto vínculo com o futuro, passa a ser uma técnica de elaboração da complexidade na Sociedade Moderna. A partir desta reflexão, a tese busca evidenciar como as Políticas de Segurança Pública, ao contrário do que se espera, aumentam as probabilidades de se gerarem mais riscos, fato que tanto demonstra um paradoxo nas relações sociais que envolvem o tema quanto necessita de novas formas e discussões jurídicas para superá-lo

[pt] Pretende-se propor um paradigma ecológico alternativo ao paradigma da modernidade que, estruturado sob uma racionalidade instrumental, produziu um conhecimento mecanicista e fragmentado, a partir de um pensamento disjuntor e reducionista, baseado na concepção da natureza como ser inanimado e pronto para a dominação do homem. Tal visão de mundo, validada pela ciência, legitimou o uso insustentável dos recursos naturais e a ideia mitológica de progresso ilimitado, responsáveis pela deflagração, no século XX, de grave crise ambiental, que produziu sérias injustiças socioambientais entre países desenvolvidos e em desenvolvimento, bem como no próprio âmbito interno das nações. Embora tenha sido atribuído ao meio ambiente uma perspectiva integrada da relação homem-natureza, com a conscientização ambiental iniciada na década de 1970 e consolidada com a constitucionalização brasileira do Direito Ambiental, ocorrida em 1988 - que abraçou um olhar antropocêntrico alargado -, a estrutura jurídica como um todo ainda se revela fundamentalmente arraigada na doutrina positivista, amparada no pensamento simplificador, possuindo como fundamentos a certeza, a previsibilidade, a segurança e a ordem. Sucede que o Direito Ambiental se baseia em aspectos como incerteza, imprevisibilidade, insegurança e desordem e, por isso, não consegue dialogar com o sistema jurídico em si, que valoriza aspectos opostos àqueles concernentes ao meio ambiente e à sua tutela. Além de promover a baixa efetividade do Direito Ambiental, a disparidade mencionada induz e legitima movimentos de retrocesso ambiental, haja vista que a legislação ambiental, embora contenha em si elementos finalísticos de tutela ao meio ambiente, é de difícil implementação na prática, caracterizando, assim, a função simbólica do direito ambiental. É preciso, pois, romper com o paradigma moderno em favor do paradigma da complexidade, ecologizando todo o sistema jurídico, de modo a transformar a racionalidade dominante em uma racionalidade ambiental, por meio da inserção de regras, princípios e valores que modifiquem as mentalidades e ideologias das instituições, governos, estabelecimentos de ensino e paradigmas de conhecimento, com o intuito de construir um futuro sustentável, equitativo, plural e democrático. / [en] This dissertation intends to propose an alternative ecological paradigm to the paradigm of modernity that, structured under an instrumental rationality, produced a mechanistic and fragmented knowledge, starting from a breaker and reductionist thinking, based on the conception of nature as an inanimate being and ready for the domination of the men. This world-view, validated by science, legitimized an unsustainable use of natural resources and a mythological idea of unlimited progress, responsible for the emergence, in the twentieth century, of a serious environmental crisis, that produced serious socio-environmental injustices between developed and developing countries, as well as within the internal realm of nations. Although an integrated perspective of the human-nature relationship with an environmental awareness has begun in the 1970s and has been consolidated with the brazilian constitutionalization of Environmental Law in 1988 - which embraced a broad anthropocentric view -, the legal structure as a whole still remains fundamentally rooted in the positivist doctrine, supported by simplistic thinking, having as its foundation certainty, predictability, security and order. It turns out that environmental law is based on aspects such as uncertainty, unpredictability, insecurity and disorder and, therefore, it can not dialogue with the legal system itself, which values aspects opposed to those concerning the environment and its protection. Besides promoting the low effectiveness of Environmental Law, such disparity induces and legitimizes environmental backtracking movements, given that environmental legislation, although it contains in itself final elements of protection of the environment, it is difficult to be implemented in practice, thus characterizing the symbolic function of environmental law. It is necessary, therefore, to break with the modern paradigm in favor of the paradigm of complexity, greening all the legal system, in order to transform the dominant rationality into an environmental rationality, through the insertion of rules, principles and values that modify mentalities and ideologies of institutions, governments, educational establishments and knowledge paradigms, with the aim of building a sustainable, equitable, plural and democratic future.

En tant que « pilier de l’ordre juridique », le contrat n’est pas ignoré du droit pénal. Incontestablement présent dans d’innombrables incriminations, le contrat fait toutefois l’objet de conceptions particulières que la doctrine relève ponctuellement comme autant de marques d’autonomie de la matière. Mais la présentation du contrat en droit pénal par le simple constat de solutions autonomes ne peut suffire, qui ne permet pas de déterminer, de manière positive et rationnelle, ce en quoi le contrat consiste en droit pénal.En refusant de lui transposer l’ensemble du régime contractuel, le droit positif semble pourtant formuler le principe d’une sélection que la finalité du droit pénal peut éclairer de manière décisive. Le contrat en droit pénal apparaît alors, qui résulte ainsi d’une sélection fonctionnelle des dispositions du régime contractuel : seules celles assurant la finalité du droit pénal doivent être caractérisées. / As a « bedrock of the legal order », the contract is not ignored by criminal law. Unquestionably present in many offences, the contract is the object of specific conceptions that the doctrine find here and there as signs of the autonomy of criminal law.However, the presentation of the contract in criminal law through the statement of fact that autonomous solutions exist, is not sufficient. It doesn’t allow establishment in a positive and rational way, the real definition of the contract in criminal law.By refusing transposition of the entire contractual settlement, current law expresses the principle of a selection and that the purpose of criminal law may clarify it in a decisive way.Then, the contract in criminal law appears, resulting of a functional selection from the dispositions of contractual settlement: only the ones which maintain the aim of criminal law must be distinguished.