|
|
Even if the employee is not stable, his dismissal must be declared abusive — and, therefore, null — when it involves the violation of any fundamental right, and the worker's reinstatement must be ensured as a priority. 123RF For judge, dismissal was discriminatory 123RF Based on this understanding, judge Jaeline Boso Portela de Santana Strobel, from the 11th Labor Court of Brasília, decided to reverse the dismissal of a worker who was in the process of gender transition, considering the dismissal discriminatory. In addition to ordering the reinstatement of the professional, the judge also ordered the company to pay R$30,000 in compensation for moral damages. According to the records, the employee was dismissed two days before undergoing masculinizing mastectomy surgery. He was hired in July 2014 and, in January 2017, when he joined Cipa and had job stability, he began the gender transition process, starting to receive medical and psychological support. The worker alleged that, as the transition process progressed, he began to receive disrespectful treatment from his superiors.
For example, being prevented from participating Phone Number List in meetings with clients and being replaced on those occasions by an employee who was subordinate to him. And precisely after leaving Cipa and announcing that he would undergo the surgical procedure, he was dismissed without just cause. In its allegations, the company stated that there was no type of discrimination and denied any act that could cause embarrassment to the worker. When analyzing the case, the judge judged the employee's action to be valid and pointed out that the testimonies of the witnesses called by the company were not cohesive when trying to explain the reasons for the dismissal. The judge drew attention to contradictions in the witnesses' testimonies and pointed out that this, added to the haste demonstrated in dismissing the worker, "has the power to confirm the exordial's thesis regarding the discriminatory dismissal of the complainant, since, after the expiration of the mandate in Cipa and the news that the employee would need to undergo surgery, the complainant decided to fire him". "
In view of the evidence, I believe that there were no demonstrations of the legality of the breach of contract, which is why I consider it abusive", she said. The judge also argued that the company was fully aware of the transition process and the need for the surgical procedure that would take the worker away from work for many days. She stated that the need for surgery was proven by medical reports and that the company dismissed the employee, failing to make a diagnosis of his physical and emotional health, thus disrespecting occupational health and safety standards. "Conduct such as that practiced by the defendant cannot be tolerated in a Democratic State of Law", she maintained in the decision. Lawyers André Toledo de Almeida, Ana Paula Dias Carvalho and Paulo Roberto Carvalho da Silva acted for the complainant .
|
|
發表於 2024-3-9 18:43:32