THE MATERIALIZATION OF WORKERS' SOCIAL RIGHTS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE

A CRITICAL LOOK AT SOME DECISIONS OF THE FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

Abstract

Labor law, whether in its material or procedural aspect, has as its primary purpose the regulation and protection of labor relations, based on the premise that there is factual inequality within the contractual relationship. In other words, it seeks to rebalance the crisis that is the essence of subordinate labor relations. This crisis, of capitalist exploitation of labor, has been extending more recently to other similar relationships. In this sense, it is crucial to realize that this branch of law, ultimately, seeks to preserve human dignity through the figure of the worker, by materializing the protection of social rights, which are manifested in several different aspects, including labor relations. The protection of human dignity, of the person of the worker, in its most diverse material dimensions, by civilizing, humanistic or even natural imperatives, is imposed beyond even constitutional norms, because, in the current stage of civilization and in the international dimension of this protection, any mistreatment of these high imperatives would be intolerable.

It is important to highlight that the construction of this protective structure has distinct stages, ranging from the implementation of public policies by the State, which even reach the existence of effective supervision of these relationships. It also involves the continuous direction of normative constructions, with the legislator being responsible for guiding its efforts as a means of seeking balance and harmony in the dichotomous relationship between capital and labor, without ever losing sight of the fact that the worker is the weaker party in this contractual structure. It is also clear that it is the duty of the Judiciary to guide its decisions based on the entire protective logic that exists in the configuration of this protective system, which does not mean assuming the existence of partiality, but rather the implementation of judgments that are supported by this principle-based protective dynamic, especially since there is a constitutional provision to this effect.

Based on these premises, we intend to analyze, in view of the premise of access to justice as a means of enforcing social rights, some decisions of the Brazilian Constitutional Court, which denote, with all due respect, a path in the opposite direction to the effective pursuit of enforcing social rights. Whether from an individual or collective perspective, or in the assessment of the jurisdiction of the Labor Court, specialized in dealing with labor disputes. It is clear that these understandings result in a gradual imposition of limits so that the worker, when having a right violated, can seek something that should be simple, the restoration of his/her injured dignity, through the attainment of his/her guaranteed rights. It cannot be understood that restricting opportunities for access to the Labor Court or directing the worker to other more complex and costly procedural avenues constitutes a path to enforcing these rights.