Workers report pressure to avoid Covid furloughs

When she arrived at the factory where she works, last Saturday (22), Mariana heard from a superior that she should keep her distance from a colleague. The woman, he said, has Covid-19, confirmed by a quick pharmacy test done days earlier.

Away during the week, when the space is more crowded, the employee contaminated by the coronavirus was called to restore production over the weekend. The reckless decision of the manufacturer resulted in at least three more confirmed infections with the virus and another four suspected cases.

“I’ve had body pain, nausea and almost no voice since Friday. I learned on Monday that four more people are suspected of having Covid and are working. I still don’t know what to do”, says Mariana. She, like other workers mentioned in this article, asked to have her name preserved, as she is still an employee of the company.

The new wave of contamination by Covid-19 driven by the ômicron variant has left companies in several sectors defrauded. With the lower severity of infections, the isolation time dropped from 14 days to 10 days, but the obligation to remove all those who are contaminated or suspected of being contaminated remains in effect.

This is the rule, but what workers from different sectors report are pressures to avoid certificates, to anticipate returns and even to continue working, even if they are contaminated, since the frames are lighter.

In addition, employers refuse to pay for the tests, according to employees.

“We are surrounded by positive cases. What matters is that, regardless of the fact that there are not so many hospitalizations or deaths, the employer’s first obligation is to comply with the law”, says labor attorney general José de Lima Ramos Pereira. “The employment relationship has rights and obligations of the employer, and one of them is to keep the environment healthy and safe.”

At the factory where Regina worked – she resigned – it was the owner of the company who showed up to work with Covid-19. Days later, four people showed symptoms and were removed by the occupational physician. Those who, days later, discovered negative results in their tests, had the days of absence discounted.

At the store where Juliana is employed, the threat arrived as a joke. A manager warned the staff that if anyone else showed up sick, they would all “kneel in the corn.” The salesperson estimates that more than half of the 30-person team is currently away.

Only in the sector in which it operates, three, out of five, have Covid-19. In the register, only two, among eight employees, were still working in the last week.

what are the rights of workers in the pandemic

On Tuesday (25), the Jair Bolsonaro government (PL) formalized the update of ordinances 19 and 20, which establish a set of measures for the prevention, control and mitigation of transmission risks. The central change was the reduction in mandatory isolation time and the possibility for employees to return to work earlier.

In the early return, the removal still needs to be at least seven days for asymptomatic cases. While complying with the quarantine, the worker continues to receive the remuneration and cannot have the days discounted.

The head of the Public Ministry of Labor says that non-compliance with safety measures in the face of the health crisis has been dealt with as a priority by labor prosecutors.

Companies can be held legally liable in the civil sphere for exposing workers to risk.

How to report a health risk

He also recommends that workers report cases of violation of rights. The formalization of complaints can be made by anyone who has knowledge of the matter and does not necessarily have to come from a company employee.

“In the perfect world, the worker communicates the contamination or the suspicion to HR or the medical department, expresses the desire to do the home-office, in cases where this is possible. In the real world, this worker is at risk of being laid off. “, he says.

In addition to the MPT itself, complaints can be made to the labor inspection, which is now linked to the Ministry of Labor and Employment, and to the sector workers’ unions.

For labor lawyer Luiz Guilherme Migliora, from Veirano, the update of the ordinances was an advance in relation to the previous rule, which provided for 14 days of leave. With the high percentage of vaccinated adults, the acute period of contamination has been shorter, generating a wave of milder cases and shorter cycles.

Even if it is for a shorter time, the company is still obliged to remove the worker in the three situations provided for by government ordinances: with suspicion of Covid-19, with contamination confirmed by testing or who had contact with someone with the disease (and who , therefore, are classified as suspected cases).

“The company is subject to inspection and can be fined, but the most serious is the risk of contaminating another person and the case gets worse, which can result in collective moral damage”, he says.

For Alvaro Furtado, president of Sincovaga (Union of Food Retail Trade), updating the ordinances brings legal uncertainty to companies. He considers that the time of leave should be decided on a case-by-case basis, by a doctor.

“Ten days seems like a random parameter. Companies are not in a position to define this. In addition, the ordinance does not deal with vaccination, a requirement guaranteed even by the Federal Supreme Court”, he says.

The leader of the employers’ union says that companies try to balance compliance with protocols with business viability, and admits that, on a daily basis, deviations may occur. “But it’s not this new recommendation.”

According to Veirano’s lawyer, the time of leave provided for in medical licenses is longer than what was defined in the ordinance. If the doctor sets a longer or shorter period of leave for a worker, this is the interval to be followed.