Direct Constitutionality Action 80 proposes limiting the right to those with income of up to R$5,000
The Federal Supreme Court began judging on Thursday (May 21, 2026) an action that requests a change in the Labor Court’s gratuity rules. The ADC (Declaratory Action of Constitutionality) 80 proposes to limit the benefit to those who receive up to 40% of the RGPS (General Social Security Regime) ceiling, currently around R$5,000.
The trial was interrupted and will resume on a date yet to be defined. The action was presented by Consif (National Confederation of the Financial System). The entity asks the STF to declare sections of the 2017 Labor Reform constitutional and suspend the application of Precedent 463 of the Superior Labor Court.
The summary admits the self-declaration of economic hyposufficiency as sufficient proof for granting free justice. For Consif, this understanding undermines the changes made to the Consolidation of Labor Laws, which began to require proof of insufficient resources for workers with income above the limit of 40% of the Social Security ceiling.
The discussion began restricted to the Labor Court, but was expanded to all branches of the Judiciary. The president of the STF and rapporteur of the case, minister Edson Fachin, said that the plenary should also discuss objective criteria for granting the benefit and the need to effectively prove the lack of resources.
In the oral argument, lawyer Grace Mendonça, representative of Consif, stated that the Labor Court has been removing the CLT criteria by only accepting self-declaration. He also said that the practice excessively expanded the granting of benefits and encouraged predatory litigation.
According to the journalist, Consif presented data from the banking sector to defend the thesis. The entity said that, in 2025, 98.7% of labor actions against banks had a request for free justice, granted in 99.9% of cases. He also stated that there were cases of former employees with salaries of R$26,000 to R$84,000 benefiting based solely on self-declaration.
Here are some points under discussion:
- whether self-declaration should be sufficient to grant gratuity;
- whether the CLT requires effective proof of insufficient resources;
- whether the limit of 40% of the RGPS ceiling should be applied;
- whether the rule should apply only in the Labor Court or in the entire Judiciary.
The Federal Attorney General’s Office supported Consif’s thesis. The substitute attorney general of the Union, Ivan Bispo dos Santos, stated that the Constitution requires proof of economic insufficiency and that the reform sought to avoid abuses and an excessive increase in judicialization.
Workers’ organizations and defenders contested the action. The Central Única dos Trabalhadores defended that self-declaration continues to be accepted as an initial form of proof, subject to challenge and judicial control. The Union’s Public Defender’s Office stated that Consif’s thesis could exclude workers who earn above the Social Security limit from Justice, but are still unable to bear the costs of the process.
