Labour court orders end to Brazil’s postal strike
Brazil’s top labour court ruled unanimously on Wednesday that strike action protesting changes to Brazil Post’s healthcare funding system should end.
The Superior Labour Court (TST) in Brasilia said the strike was “abusive” and ordered a full return to work effective midnight tonight (14 March).
Brazil’s National Federation of Postal Workers (Fentect), the umbrella group for the nation’s regional postal unions, was told it will be fined BRL $20,000 for every day ($8,500 USD) strike action continues.
By majority vote, the judges in the court’s specialised section on collective bargaining decided that 15 days’ pay would be docked from those workers who went on strike.
The strike, which began in January, has lasted about 42 days in total, affecting postal operations in 13 Brazilian states. Postal unions called the strikes in protest at Brazil Post’s decision to outsource management of its employee healthcare funding system to an independent agency.
Wednesday’s hearing saw judges stating that there was no breach of Brazil Post’s 2013 collective bargaining agreement with the unions by hiring another company to manage its health plan.
Therefore, the court said, strike action was not justified, since it would only be allowed if Brazil Post was in breach of a clause in the collective bargaining agreement.
In a statement, Brazil Post welcomed the ruling of the TST, and confirmed that striking workers would resume normal operations from midnight on 14 March, with 15 days’ pay taken from their payroll for April, while other days the workers went on strike will be made up in overtime.
“The judges were unanimous in their assertion that Brazil Post is not breaching the clause in the collective bargaining agreement that guarantees all current employees’ rights – maintaining the benefits of the company’s health plan,” the company said.
Brazil Post noted that the president of the TST, Barros Levenhagen, had said the management of the plan was not something affecting relations between employer and trade unions, and that it was not for the labour courts to interfere in the management model to be adopted by the company.
