The pressure for companies to improve their work environments is becoming increasingly intense. While the implementation of NR-1 comes into force this Tuesday (26th) – a rule that expands the obligation to identify, monitor and mitigate psychosocial risks – the Labor Court records a significant increase in actions for moral harassment.
Data released by the Superior Labor Court (TST) last week shows that, between 2020 and 2025, 601,538 actions were filed involving claims for compensation for moral damage resulting from moral harassment. In the first four months of 2026 alone, another 30,000 new cases have already reached the Judiciary.
The advance, according to experts interviewed by the InfoMoneyonly indicates that the issue of mental health will gain increasing importance within the job market, transforming what was previously seen as just an individual conflict into a growing risk for corporations.
Study abroad
Upgrade your career!
The combination of greater worker awareness, a generational change within companies and new regulatory requirements should further increase the pressure on legal departments, human resources areas and corporate leadership, in the opinion of experts.
Read more:
For Libya Alvarenga de Oliveira, responsible for the labor, union and executive remuneration area at Innocenti Advogados, this increase in actions reflects a cultural transformation in labor relations. “Today, people have much more information about what characterizes abusive behavior. Furthermore, the new generations that are entering the market have less tolerance for hierarchical relationships based on humiliation, excessive pressure and disrespect”, he states.
Continues after advertising
According to her, easier access to information, social networks, institutional campaigns and the growing debate on emotional health helped to make behaviors previously naturalized as “management rigor” more visible.
This diagnosis is similar to that of the Superior Labor Court (TST) itself. For Minister Agra Belmonte, general coordinator of the Safe Work Program, the growth in cases may simultaneously indicate a greater number of complaints and the persistence of the problem in labor relations.
“Institutional campaigns, expanding public debate and strengthening reporting channels are fundamental to this”, stated the magistrate.
Experts, however, issue an important warning to avoid distortions. Increasing judicialization does not mean that all demands for productivity constitute abuse. “The employer can and should demand results. What characterizes moral harassment is not the demand itself, but the way it happens”, explains Libya.
The limit is exceeded when management resorts to:
- public humiliation;
- constant threats;
- vexatious exposure;
- goals that are known to be unattainable;
- deliberate isolation;
- personal disqualification.
The distinction is relevant because goals, performance and collection are part of the legitimate directive power of companies. The problem arises when pressure turns into a toxic management method, according to the lawyer.
Continues after advertising
NR-1 increases responsibility
The entry into force of NR-1 adds a new component to the discussion. With the inclusion of psychosocial risks in occupational management, employers now have a formal obligation to monitor factors capable of triggering mental illness.
In practice, this increases the need to better train your leaders; create secure internal reporting channels; adopt clear anti-harassment policies; create effective investigation mechanisms, and review charging methods. “Employer omission can reinforce the company’s liability in disputes involving occupational mental health”, says Libya.
More judicious justice
Despite the growth in actions, experts highlight that the Judiciary does not automatically accept allegations. According to Libya, the worker needs to present concrete evidence, such as witnesses, messages, emails, documents and even medical reports, when there is an associated illness. “Today the Labor Court investigates very carefully. It is not enough to just allege harassment”, he states.
Continues after advertising
The evidentiary requirement helps to explain why companies also need to invest in internal documentation and traceability of their management practices, so that relationships do not become a liability. In a market increasingly attentive to corporate governance, combating harassment is no longer just a compliance issue but has become an economic issue.
This is because cases of harassment can generate:
- labor liabilities;
- social security leaves;
- drop in productivity;
- absenteeism;
- reputational damage;
- employer brand wear.
“Moral harassment is no longer seen as a subjective or merely behavioral issue. Therefore, now companies that maintain abusive practices are more exposed to labor, financial and reputational risks and the Judiciary has expanded its understanding of practices that constitute psychological violence in the workplace and there is no turning back”, says Insper’s Labor Law professor, Ricardo Calcini.
Continues after advertising
