Just cause for working 4 minutes more: when can working overtime become grounds for dismissal?

Can four extra minutes at work yield just cause? Understand Reproduction/Magnific (formerly Freepik) The Labor Court reversed the dismissal for just cause of an employee from a food company, in Uberlândia, in the Triângulo Mineiro. He had been dropped after clocking four minutes over the matchday limit. According to the process, the time clock was located in the locker room, far from the area where the employee worked. The employee stated that the excess time was spent traveling to the equipment to register the end of the shift. ?? Do you have any reporting suggestions? Send it to g1 The version was confirmed by a representative of the company itself, who stated that the journey between the workstation and the time clock took around five minutes. He also recognized that the employee would not have exceeded the working hours limit if the equipment had been installed closer. The name of the company was not disclosed by the Judiciary. When analyzing the case, the judge of the 5th Labor Court of Uberlândia, Celso Alves Magalhães, concluded that the extra minutes were insignificant and resulted from traveling to the time recording location.

For the magistrate, the worker had no intention of violating the company's rules. The decision was upheld by the Regional Labor Court of Minas Gerais (TRT-MG), but an appeal can still be made to the Superior Labor Court (TST). ? The case raised doubts among workers and employers: after all, when can working overtime lead to dismissal? In what situations can failure to comply with the journey result in just cause? Heard by g1, labor lawyers explain what the legislation says and which criteria are usually taken into account by the Court. Does overtime without authorization give just cause? According to Vivian De Camilis, a specialist in Labor Law, working overtime without authorization from the company, in itself, is not a reason for dismissal for just cause. The lawyer explains that it is necessary to analyze the context, such as the frequency of the practice, whether the worker had prior knowledge of the prohibition and whether the punishment applied was proportional. "Working overtime without authorization, in itself, is not a reason for just cause. It is necessary to evaluate the entire context of the case", he states. Although the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT) does not require prior authorization to work overtime, Vivian emphasizes that companies can establish this requirement in internal regulations or collective rules. "In these cases, failure to comply with the rule may result in disciplinary sanctions", he explains. The expert highlights that there is a difference between staying a few minutes beyond the working day to complete a task and working overtime on a recurring basis without authorization. According to her, what matters in the analysis is not just the time exceeded, but the repetition of the behavior and the fact that the worker knew he needed authorization. The problem is not working a few extra minutes, but repeating this behavior even though you know that the company requires authorization to work overtime. In these cases, the conduct may be considered disobedience to internal rules. Even in these situations, dismissal for just cause is not usually the first measure adopted. According to Vivian De Camilis, the most common thing is for the company to apply punishments gradually, starting with warnings and, if the practice persists, suspensions before leading to dismissal. "In general, the Court understands that the company must apply penalties gradually. If the worker has already received warnings and suspensions for the same conduct and continues to fail to comply with the rules, the just cause gains more support. When this history does not exist, the dismissal is usually considered disproportionate", he states. Danilo Schettini, specialist in Labor Law, recalls that the CLT provides for a margin of tolerance for small variations in time recording. By law, differences of up to five minutes per appointment, limited to 10 minutes in total per day, are not considered overtime for payment purposes. However, he emphasizes that this rule was not the main basis for the Court's decision in the case of Minas Gerais. "The discussion was not the payment of overtime, but the application of just cause. Even so, the fact that the excess was only four minutes reinforced the understanding that the conduct was less serious", he states. According to the expert, for a dismissal for just cause to be considered valid, the company needs to prove that: there was a rule prohibiting overtime without authorization; the worker knew this rule; he failed to comply with the instructions; the breach was serious; the dismissal was proportional to the infraction. "Furthermore, it is up to the company to demonstrate that the just cause was applied correctly", he states. According to Schettini, the Labor Court usually reverses the dismissal for just cause when the company is unable to prove the employee's misconduct, when the punishment is considered exaggerated or when the episode was isolated and without evidence of bad faith. In addition, it was understood that he did not act intentionally in violating the company's rules. The lawyer explains that it is important to differentiate between a one-off episode and repeated behavior. Staying a few minutes longer at work can happen for everyday reasons, such as finishing a task or traveling to the point of departure. When employees frequently work overtime without authorization, even though they know that this is prohibited by the company, they may be punished if they have already received warnings or suspensions for the same reason. from behind

Related stories