Intermittent employment contract

comparative analysis between Brazil and Portugal

Abstract

Given the importance of the matter and the news brought about by Law no. 13,467/2017 (Labor Reform), the scientific paper
aimed to analyze and compare the differences and similarities in the normative treatment given by Brazil and Portugal in relation to
the intermittent employment contract. The approach method used was, primarily, comparative, under a functionalist bias, framing the research as a micro-comparison. After the development of the work, it was found that the Brazilian system adopted a “super flexible” intermittent employment contract rule that guaranteed almost no rights for the worker, substantiating a truly insufficient protection for workers due to the violation of the constitutional model of minimum protection for workers; on the other hand, the Portuguese model, despite having undergone some recent objectionable modifications, adopts important rules that, in theory, subject this type of employment contract to reasonable parameters of civility. In this sense, it was found that the hypothesis presented at the beginning of the article proved to be correct, since, in fact, Portuguese Law has regulations on intermittent employment contracts that are more favorable to workers than the model adopted in Brazil. In view of this conclusion, the Brazilian legislator, even in order to escape the state of unconstitutionality in which the current deficient regulation finds itself, must adopt several urgent improvements in the discipline of the intermittent employment contract, which can be based on the guidelines already adopted by Portugal, namely: limiting the modality to only some specific business and economic situations that effectively justify the adoption of this special contractual modality; the guarantee of a minimum annual amount of services provided in intermittent work; and the guarantee of monetary compensation to the worker for the period of inactivity.