Bruna Zampieri Colpani
Lawyer at Marcos Martins Advogados
With the regulation of teleworking by Law 14.442 of 2022, the legislator not only defines what remote work is for legal purposes, but also expressly determines that this modality must be included in the employment contract, in a decision that has led many employers who have adopted it in the pandemic to adapt their employees’ contracts.
In this scenario, companies that previously wouldn’t even have considered this option have adopted it and have had extremely satisfactory results, and it is now one of the most coveted forms of employment among workers.
Since it came into force, a world of opportunities has opened up, with the emergence of countless questions and situations that the Labor Courts were not used to. One example is the situation faced by the First Panel of the Regional Labor Court of the 21st Region (TRT-RN) when it was called upon to resolve a dispute over a damaged computer. In the case, the employee misused the object, and after the company deducted the cost of the repair from her paycheck, she filed a lawsuit to recover the amount deducted, totaling R$600.00.
In requesting compensation for the amount deducted from her salary, the plaintiff claimed that it was a work tool, and that the company was responsible for the work tools and should therefore pay for the damage to the computer. She also claimed that when it was delivered, the object was already damaged.
The judge in the case pointed out that the employee signed a term of responsibility when she handed over the computer and that the document contained her acknowledgement and authorization for a discount in the event of damage caused by the employee. In addition, it was found that, due to the location and shape of the damage, it could have been detected if the object had been damaged as soon as the computer was removed, so that during the time she had possession of the work instrument, she never reported the incident. Thus, the decision of the First Panel of the TRT-RN upheld the original judgment of the 2nd Labor Court of Natal (RN), denying the reimbursement sought by the employee.
It is a fact that, regardless of the means of working, whether face-to-face, telepresence or home office, the employee and employer are subject to fulfilling all the rights and duties provided for in the employment contract and in current legislation, in accordance with the provisions of article 6 of the CLT.
However, with the pandemic and the mass adoption of home office work, the possibility has arisen of establishing contracts with clear policies and by mutual agreement between employee and employer, with reasonable and proportionate rules, aimed at protecting both parties and achieving legal certainty.
This means that, for companies that choose to remain or even hire new employees to work from home, the best position is to adopt addenda to the employment contracts already in force and clear clauses in the new contracts, in a reasoned and detailed manner, not only regarding the modality, but mainly the obligations of both parties to the contractual relationship – both in terms of the work itself and the material goods provided by the company or owned by the employee but used to perform the job.
According to article 462, paragraph 1 of the CLT, even if it is proven that the employee has damaged the equipment provided to the employer, it is only permissible to deduct the corresponding amount from wages, provided there is express provision in the employment contract. For this reason, it is extremely important that the contract expressly provides for the employee to be held responsible in the event of damage caused to the equipment provided by the employer.
In this context, it is essential for companies to comply with the guidelines provided by the authorities and the legislation in force, emphasizing the correct identification of the rules and their application.
