It is known that the Aldi supermarket group transferred a student worker from a store in Picoas, Lisbon, to a store in Porto, more than 300 kilometers away, a situation that has generated reports of intimidation by the company. The case was followed by unions, who consider the transfer as a way of pressuring the worker to terminate the contract.
According to CGTP, cited by , the transfer took place “without prior agreement”, and since arriving in Porto on March 16, the worker had been the target of continuous pressure to leave his post, claiming that his life had been completely changed. The interunion highlights that “with this transfer and the intimidation that has been imposed on him since he arrived in Porto, Aldi is trying to force the worker to resign, abdicating his rights”.
Union denunciations and scheduled protests
CESP (Union of Commercial, Office and Services Workers of Portugal) had already warned of the situation in February, describing the episode as a “covert dismissal”. According to the same source, “a worker at an Aldi store in Picoas received notification of a definitive transfer of his workplace to a store in Porto, where he does not have any support network”.
Tiago Oliveira, general secretary of CGTP-IN, will participate in a protest action called by the union on Friday, April 10, between 9 am and 9:30 am, at Aldi Ramalde, in Porto, with the aim of denouncing the transfer. “The action aims to draw attention to the pressure exerted on workers and demand that the company respect labor rights,” says a statement.
Legal context of the transfer
The Portuguese Labor Code establishes clear rules for workplace transfers. Article 194 determines that the transfer can only occur in cases of change or closure of the establishment, or for other reasons of interest to the company, as long as it does not imply “serious harm to the employee”.
In the case of a definitive transfer, “the worker can terminate the contract if he suffers serious damage, being entitled to the compensation provided for in article 366”. These provisions are highlighted by unions as legal instruments that could protect workers from alleged pressure.
According to CGTP, the transfer to more than 300 kilometers without a support network constitutes, in practice, a hidden dismissal, as the worker could feel pressured to abandon the contract. The same source says that “CESP requested a meeting with the company, which remained silent, reinforcing the feeling of pressure on the worker”.
Union reaction
The interunion reinforces that the company would be trying to force the worker to give up their rights. It is worth noting that “CGTP considers this action a violation of basic labor standards and a case that deserves public and union attention”.
According to the same source, “the situation raises questions about human resources management in large retail chains, especially when it involves workers in a study context or without nearby support alternatives”.
Friday’s protest should be closely followed by unions and the media. “Commercial and service workers intend to highlight the need to respect labor rights, especially in transfers that involve long distances and significant impacts on personal life”, adds the union.
Also read:
