Submitted by Biblioteca Central (biblioteca@unicap.br) on 2019-02-05T13:37:51Z No. of bitstreams: 2 priscila_braz_monte.pdf: 265306 bytes, checksum: 8f6f1c81e1c63cc913802ebbd45f3291 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2019-02-05T13:37:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 priscila_braz_monte.pdf: 265306 bytes, checksum: 8f6f1c81e1c63cc913802ebbd45f3291 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-09-01 / The dissertation has as object of study the judicial activism in the higher courts in particular the emphasis on the Precedent 308 of the Superior Labor Court that would be unconstitutional. Since the Federal Constitution, article 7, XXIX brings standard that regulates the extinctive prescription labor bringing two distinct periods: the five-year prescription (partial) and biennial (total). It turns out that despite the Federal Constitution provides, the workers have two years after the termination of the employment relationship to join the lawsuit claiming credits and can only claim up to five years in default funds during the employment contract. The TST in the docket 308 stipulated that the partial prescription count would be from the filing date and not the termination of the employment relationship which further restricts workers' rights. It aims to analyze based on this doctrinal study if that TST posture driven by the Judicial Activism, with the approach of the Legal Civil Law systems with the common law, would be going beyond the interpretation function of the standard that is the constitutional Judiciary function extrapolating the limits of judicial activism, resulting in the creation of a standard for the limitation period score that therefore violates a basic principle of the Federative Republic of Brazil which is the tripartite division of powers since the created standards is constitutional competence of the Legislature. Moreover, it discusses if such precedent goes against the intent of the constitutional legislator and the constitutional principle of access to justice and the principle of the worker protection, specifically the sub principle of in "dubio pro operario", meaning, in doubt the interpreter should opt for the most favorable interpretation to the worker; this principle is guiding the development and interpretation of the rules in material and labor procedural field. Furthermore, it will examine whether the Precedent 308 is riddled with unconstitutional by transgression of the tripartite division of powers and the fundamental principles governing the employment relationship, considering that the Federal Constitution made clear that the treatment of labor prescription is differentiated from others due worker hyposufficiency because the state's highest law expressly brought the computation is from the termination of the employment relationship and not the injury. / A dissertação tem como objeto um estudo sobre o ativismo judicial nos tribunais superiores, analisando, especificamente, se a Súmula 308 do Tribunal Superior do Trabalho seria inconstitucional, uma vez que a Constituição Federal em seu artigo 7º, XXIX traz norma que regula a prescrição extintiva trabalhista, trazendo dois prazos distintos: a prescrição quinquenal (parcial) e bienal (total). Ocorre que, em que pese a Constituição Federal dispor que .os trabalhadores tem dois anos após a extinção da relação de trabalho para ingressar com a ação pleiteando os créditos oriundos desta, podendo pleitear apenas cinco anos de verbas inadimplidas durante o contrato de trabalho, o TST por meio da súmula 308 estipulou que a contagem da prescrição parcial seria a partir da data de propositura da ação e não da extinção da relação laboral, o que restringe ainda mais os direitos dos trabalhadores. Assim, se visa analisar, com base num estudo doutrinário, se essa postura do TST impulsionada pelo Ativismo Judicial, com a aproximação dos Sistemas Jurídicos do Civil Law com o do Common Law, estaria ultrapassando a função de interpretação da norma que é a função constitucional do Poder Judiciário, extrapolando os limites do ativismo judicial, acarretando na criação de uma norma para a contagem do prazo prescricional que, por conseguinte, viola um princípio basilar da República Federativa do Brasil que é o da tripartição dos Poderes, uma vez que a criação de normas é constitucionalmente competência do Poder Legislativo. Ademais, se discute se a referida Súmula vai de encontro à intenção do legislador constituinte, bem como ao princípio constitucional de acesso à justiça e ao princípio da proteção ao trabalhador, especificamente, o subprincípio do in dubio pro operario, ou seja, na dúvida o intérprete deve optar pela interpretação mais favorável ao trabalhador; este princípio é norteador da elaboração e interpretação das normas no campo material e processual trabalhista. Em face disso, se analisará se a Súmula 308 está eivada de inconstitucionalidade por transgressão à tripartição dos Poderes e aos princípios fundamentais que regem a relação laboral, considerando que a Constituição Federal deixou inequívoco que o tratamento da prescrição trabalhista é diferenciado das demais, em razão da hipossuficiência do trabalhador, pois a Lei Maior do Estado trouxe expressamente que o computo desta é a partir da extinção da relação de trabalho e não da lesão.

Workers’ protection can be achieved, to a large extent, through labour law and workers’ organisation through trade unionism. Workers’ protection is defined as social protection. This study investigates workers’ experiences of their employment with regard to social protection as manifested in job security and wage adequacy. In this study workers’ perception of labour law, as a tool for workers’ protection, is considered in relation to the argument of the régulation theorists that law serves as a ‘mode of regulation’ to perpetuate the stability of the prevailing capitalist regime of accumulation. The impact of the changing nature of work on the effectiveness of labour law at achieving workers’ protection is investigated from the perspective of workers. A large employer subcontracting some support services was selected as a site of study. Data was collected using one-on-one in-depth interview to ‘tap’ into the working experiences of relevant workers and union officials. This study concludes that the changing nature of work as manifest in the decline of standard employment relationships and increase of atypical (non standard) employment, such as subcontracting undermines workers’ protection. Wages and other benefits of workers are affected. Workers survive through the support of their families and by borrowing from micro lenders which tend to suck them into a poverty cycle. The ineffectiveness of labour law to adequately protect subcontracted workers substantiates the position of régulation theorists that law is an extra-economic institutionalised practice helping to stabilize the prevailing capitalist regime of accumulation. The thinking here is that labour law is not unilaterally imposed by the state, rather, it is a product of social interaction (social relation) or struggle between labour, capital and the state within a social ‘field’ or ‘subfield’. The nature of employment of subcontracted work weakens the power of workers’ collective through trade unions. The restructuring of work leads to deunionisation and the ability of unions to organise these workers is undermined by difference in employer and pay-point between permanent workers and subcontracted workers. Copyright / Dissertation (MSocSci)--University of Pretoria, 2009. / Sociology / unrestricted