A collective request for a view made by the PSDB and PL leaders in the Constitution and Justice Committee (CCJ) of the Chamber of Deputies postponedthis Wednesday (15), the vote on the constitutionality of the Proposed Amendment to the Constitution (PEC) 221 of 2019, which ends the scale of six days of work and one day of rest (6×1).
Fearing delays in this vote, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva sent to Congress, on Tuesday (14), a bill (PL) with constitutional urgency to end the 6×1 scale and reduce the working day from 44 to 40 hours per week. The PL urgently needs to be voted on within 45 days or the Chamber’s plenary agenda will be blocked.
In today’s session of the CCJ, the PEC rapporteur at the CCJ, deputy Paulo Azi (União-BA), that is, it gave an opinion that the reduction in working hours is constitutional. Beyond the end of the 6×1 scale, the PEC plans to reduce working hours from the current 44 to 36 hours per week within ten years.
O Deputy Azi’s opinion still needs to be approved by the majority of the CCJ. Deputies Lucas Redecker (PSDB-RS) and Bia Kicis (PL-DF) asked to have more time to analyze the topic.
“[O parecer do relator] It was filed in the morning and the rapporteur here skillfully read the entire opinion in full, however, I and other deputies are interested in reading it in detail because this opinion and this text are a sensitive topic. It is prudent for us to have a deadline for debate on this request for review”, said Redecker.
O parliamentarian from Rio Grande do Sul also criticized the fact that President Lula sent a PL urgently constitutional for the House, which, according to him, “burys the discussion of the PEC”.
“According to our internal regulations, we have a deadline of 40 sessions [do plenário da Câmara] to debate a [PEC na] special commission. The deadline for the government to register the emergency regime will be up to 45 days. Today, 44 days. In other words, there will be no time to debate, in the special committee, the deadline for these PECs”, he added.
“One project does not harm the other”
Deputy Rubens Pereira Júnior (PT-MA) re argued that the government’s PL only anticipates a project which can then be included in the Constitution through the PEC currently being processed in the Chamber.
“One project does not harm the other. On the contrary, it helps, strengthens. The project was forwarded by President Lula for a special reason: opposition leaders publicly stated that they would obstruct the processing of the PEC. The objective, according to them, is not to let this vote”, he said.
The presidents of PL, Valdemar Costa Neto, and União Brasil, Antônio Rueda, promised to work to avoid voting for the end of the 6×1 scale. The speech took place at a meeting with businesspeople in São Paulo, in February. Together, the two parties account for 139 of the 513 deputies in the House.
The PEC being processed at the CCJ is authored by deputy Reginaldo Lopes (PT-MG), but the proposal was attached to the PEC authored by deputy Erika Hilton (PSOL-SP), who defended the admissibility of the text in the committee.
“May the bosses understand that there is no productivity, there is no economy, with the sick worker, with the exhausted worker, with the exhausted worker. This issue is about more rest time, but it is also about quality of life”, said Erika.
There were no speeches against the merits of the project at this Wednesday’s CCJ session until the closing of this report.
The admissibility
O rapporteur Paulo Azi defended the admissibility of PEC 221that is, it rejected the arguments that argued that the proposal would be unconstitutional due, among other reasons, to the economic impact that the measure could cause, which would violate the financial autonomy of states and municipalities.
“There is no need to forecast an estimate of the budgetary or financial impact, as the determination contained in Article 113 of the ADCT [Ato das Disposições Constitucionais Transitórias] does not reach the PECs”, he stated.
Azi added that there is still the possibility of “Measures to contain the impact of on states and municipalities when discussing the merits, an opportunity in which forms of economic compensation can be articulated”.
Regarding the argument that the measure would constitute an excessive restriction on collective bargaining between employers and employees, advocating that the scale be defined through these negotiations, the deputy highlighted the asymmetry of power between the parties.
“There is an asymmetry of power in the relationship between capital and labor, which is worsened by the financial fragility of many unions. This state of affairs shows that the simple collective bargaining autonomy of labor market agents is insufficient to promote advances in the issue of reducing working hours and work schedules”, wrote Azi in the report.
