News

The Superior Labor Court (TST) provided important clarification on how the decision of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) in Theme 935 of General Repercussion is to be applied.

In its ruling, the STF confirmed that the collection of the assistance contribution provided for in collective labor agreements and conventions is indeed constitutional, provided that the worker’s right to object is ensured.

The decision aimed to lend effectiveness to the funding of union activities directly related to collective bargaining and the defense of the category’s interests, considering the difficulty in financing union activities after the Labor Law Reform ended mandatory union contributions.

However, the TST made it clear that this understanding cannot be extended to the confederative contribution. This type of contribution may only be required from unionized workers, and it is not legitimate to charge employees who are not members of the professional category’s union.

While the assistance contribution may be established in a collective rule and apply to all workers in the category — provided the right to object is guaranteed — the confederative contribution must be restricted to union members.

Given this scenario, it is essential that companies pay close attention when reviewing any union funding clauses included in collective agreements and conventions, ensuring the correct distinction between the types of contributions and avoiding practices that may lead to judicial and/or administrative challenges. Improper paycheck deductions may expose the company to labor liabilities and the obligation to reimburse employees.