Labor litigation should not be read as legal statistics, but as a set of variables that shape corporate performance
When it comes to litigation, most corporate reports come down to the volume of actions, success rate or provisional values. These are relevant but insufficient data for those who need to make decisions at the top of the organization. The CFO and the advice do not just want to see the photograph of the liability; They need to understand how it projects in cash, operational efficiency and reputation risks.
The blind point is that most labor metrics were built to meet, not the business. They describe processes, but do not translate strategic consequences. The current challenge is to rethink the indicators from the perspective of the corporate impact, building a language that directly dialogue with the company’s financial governance and long -term commitments.
Kpis beyond the obvious
Some indicators, when revisited, offer a much clearer portrait of the company’s performance and resilience against labor liabilities:
- Average cost per action and evolution trend: It is not just the amount spent, but its dynamics throughout the economic cycles. A company that reduces costs even in awarding scenarios demonstrates resilience capacity and legal efficiency.
- Relationship between agreements and convictions: It is not enough to tell how many processes were closed, but what was the intelligence of allocation of resources. The right agreement, at the right time, can be a value protection KPI as relevant as a judicial gain.
- Average procedural cycle time: Each more month in processing an action can mean inflated provisions and immobilized capital. The duration metric is not only legal efficiency, but direct impact on liquidity and financial planning.
- Fall in repetitive actions after internal measures: A prevention KPI that reveals institutional maturity. Here, labor data connects directly to compliance, corporate culture and employee and third party engagement strategy.
- Value effectively recovered: released judicial deposits and reversals in higher instances speak the same language as cash flow. This is an indicator that the board understands without the need for translation.
- Influence on Accounting Provisional: The true impact metric. The consistent reduction of provisions, when linked to well -delineated legal strategies, translates into improvement of EBITDA, positive impact on valuation and greater predictability for investors.
ESG AND HUMAN CAPITAL: Liabilities as a cultural thermometer
Labor Litigation can also and should be read from the perspective of ESG AND HUMAN CAPITAL. Litigies involving harassment, discrimination or safety at work are no longer just numbers in provisions and began to signal cultural weaknesses and reputational risks.
Indicators such as recurrence on sensitive topics, impact of turnover on litigation and the relationship between investments in labor compliance and reduction of disputes help translate the S ESG in tangible metrics for investors and advice. After all, a poorly managed labor liability can compromise access to credit, valuation and even remove strategic partners attentive to the predictability of results.
A new reading of litigation
These KPIs are not just numbers; These are signs of how the organization manages risk and value on one of the most complex land of its operation: labor relations. What is at stake is not just the result of a process, but the company’s ability to absorb shocks, protect liquidity and preserve credibility to the market.
In this context, labor management is also a governance metric. When translated into strategic indicators, it reveals whether the company has control over variables that directly affect its competitiveness. A poorly monitored labor liability can compromise credit negotiations, impact valuation and even ward off investors attentive to the predictability of results.
Labor litigation should not be read as legal statistics, but as a set of variables that shape corporate performance. The CFO and the Council do not seek more extensive reports, but metrics that talk to cash, reputation and long -term sustainability.
In the end, numbers that do not reach financial governance do not reach the decision table. The real differential is to transform labor data into future indicators and not just past records.
*This text does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the young Pan.
