SINDPD-SP and SEPROSP signed an agreement to end the 2020 collective bargaining agreement and, with that, formalized the Collective Bargaining Agreements for the category, referring to the 2020/2021 and 2022/2023 validity periods.
The Collective Bargaining Agreements in their entirety can be obtained from the websites of union entities.
The points that deserve to be highlighted are those related to salary readjustments, the granting of meal or food vouchers, the PLR, and assistance contributions.
Salary adjustments:
| YEAR | INDEX | NOTE |
| 2020 | 4,48% | Applicable on the salary in force on 01/01/2019 and must be paid retroactively, if advance payment is not granted |
| 2021 | 5,45% | Applicable on the salary in force on 01/01/2020 and must be paid retroactively, if advance payment is not granted |
| 2022 | 2021 INCP | Estimate of 10.90% |
| 2023 | 2022 INCP | Estimate of 5.02% |
Meal ticket:
According to a recent legal change, the meal allowance or voucher may be replaced by food allowance/voucher, in an amount corresponding to 22 (twenty-two) business days, paid in advance.
The values for 2022 and 2023 will be automatically corrected by the INPC for 2021 and 2022, respectively.
Profit sharing:
The obligation to set up a commission to discuss the feasibility of implementing the profit sharing plan, within 120 days from the beginning of the Convention's effectiveness, remains, and not the obligation to pay participation.
We reiterate our opinion on the subject in accordance with “Legal Tips” nº 59 of February/2021, that the participation of Unions in the approval of a PLR is no longer mandatory.
Assistance contributions:
According to the wording of clause 60 of each Convention, the deduction of assistance contribution of each employee, unionized or not, was stipulated, and, in relation to the payments for the years 2020 and 2021, it was defined as follows:
As can be seen, the entities signed an agreement to make a retroactive payment mandatory, which may be paid in installments, for those employees who did not file the "opposition", establishing the criteria for opposition from January 2022.
Our associates' guidance is that these clauses are null, since it is not possible to stipulate any type of contribution or fee, even if by assembly or normative instrument, just as it is not valid to require the delivery of an opposition letter .
It is worth remembering that with the labor reform, no contribution can be discounted without prior and express authorization, even if provided for in the Collective Agreement, to check:
Art. 661 – B – CLT: The illicit object of a collective agreement or collective bargaining agreement is exclusively the suppression or reduction of the following rights:
XXVI – workers' freedom of professional association or union, including the right not to suffer, without their express and prior consent, any wage collection or discount established in a collective bargaining agreement or collective bargaining agreement; (Included by Law No. 13,467, of 7.13.2017)
The topic has already been widely discussed, with the edition of the binding Precedent No. 40 of the STF. To better illustrate, it is worth checking the recent judgment of the STF in this regard, through the link: https://conexaotrabalho.portaldaindustria.com.br/noticias/detalhe/sindical/2geral/stf-decide-que-e-inconstitucional-desconto-em-folha-da-contribuicao-sindical-aprovado-em-assembleia-com-participacao-dos-trabalhadores-da-categoria/
Within the scope of the labor judiciary, the TST updated Normative Precedent No. 119, which now reads as follows:
No. 119 UNION CONTRIBUTIONS – BREACH OF CONSTITUTIONAL PRECEPTS – (maintained) – DEJT disclosed on 08.25.2014
“The Constitution of the Republic, in its arts. 5th, XX and 8th, V, ensures the right of free association and unionization. It is offensive to this modality of freedom, a clause contained in an agreement, collective convention or normative sentence establishing a contribution in favor of a union entity as a fee to fund the confederative system, assistance, reinvigoration or union strengthening AND OTHERS OF THE SAME SPECIES, forcing non-union workers. If the stipulations that do not observe such restriction are null, the amounts irregularly discounted become subject to refund.“
In the same vein, the Regional Labor Court of the 2nd Region, edited the Prevalent Legal Thesis No. 10:
"TJP 10 TRT/SP- ASSISTANCE CONTRIBUTION. NON-UNION WORKER. ILLICIT DISCOUNT. If the deduction made from the payroll as assistance contribution in relation to the worker not affiliated to the union is illegal, the employer must be refunded”.
An example of the TRT decision of the 2nd Region can be seen at this link: https://pje.trt2.jus.br/consultaprocessual/detalhe-processo/1000090-36.2021.5.02.0434
- ASSISTANCE AND CONFEDERATIVE., The extension of the compulsory collection of assistance and confederative contributions to non-union workers is hampered by the absence of a tax nature and the guarantee of the right to affiliation to union entities. In this way, the return of the amounts by the union entity is imperative (Binding Precedent No. 40 STF. OJ 17 SDC-TST, PN 119 TST). Assistential contribution. Deductions from the worker's wages as confederative contribution and assistance, do not have legal protection to reach non-members of the union entity., ASSISTANCE….
Therefore, there is no obligation to disclose or comply with the content of said clauses, and the assistance contribution of employees associated with the union, or non-members, who expressly authorize it, may only be deducted and passed on. Even members need to authorize the payroll deduction.
Furthermore, there is no obligation for retroactive collection or presentation of a letter of opposition, not even notification of any legal discussion of the matter, considering that only the Public Ministry of Labor is competent to propose actions for nullity of a collective agreement or convention (Article 83, IV of Complementary Law 75/93).
We remain at the disposal of our associates for further clarification during our shifts.
SEE OTHER LEGAL TIPS
EN 
PT 
