Post by account_disabled on Feb 22, 2024 8:39:11 GMT
It is the employer's legal duty to adopt measures aimed at preventing accidents and illnesses resulting from work and failure to comply with this duty is subject to compensation for moral damages. This was understood by the 2nd Labor Court of Uberaba (MG) when condemning a company that did not make adjustments to the workplace of a former employee with dwarfism. reproduction The author worked as a cashier, but the environment was not adapted to her needs Reproduction According to the lawsuit, the author worked as a cashier and, according to her, the company adopted a culpable omissive stance by not implementing the necessary adaptations to provide a safe working environment and prevent the emergence and worsening of diseases. The former employee filed a lawsuit and requested payment of compensation for material damages and moral damages. The company, in its defense, claimed that it had always provided all its employees with a healthy work environment and mechanisms that helped them carry out their activities. He also stated that the author did not develop an occupational disease and that the alleged illness presented was not related to the service, but rather to genetic factors and degenerative processes. Judge Lucas Furiati Camargo found, when analyzing the expert report, that the worker's version was proven since the workstation did not have, for example, ergonomic accessories, such as forearm support, wrist support and adjustable foot support, considering the worker’s height.
According to the document, her work chair Finland Mobile Number List also did not have back support adjustments that would meet the employee's anthropometric measurements. According to medical expertise, the activities carried out by the author, as a cashier, presented a high ergonomic risk. For the expert, "immediate changes should be introduced following the recommendations of the analyzed method". The report concluded that "the professional presented with low back pain with the worsening of a physical disability previously presented in the form of achondroplastic dwarfism." For the judge, the Constitution itself raised the right to reduce risks inherent to work as a fundamental precept, through health, hygiene and safety standards. In this sense, the judge cited article 157 of the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), which establishes the company's obligation to adopt measures aimed at preventing accidents and illnesses arising from work. "Guilt arises from the violation of the legal duty, of an established rule of conduct, configuring the illicit act. In the event of an occupational disease, the employer's guilt remains characterized when legal, conventional, contractual or technical safety standards are not observed, hygiene and health at work.
It is the legal duty of the company, through its owners, managers and representatives, to guide the employee regarding the equipment used in the work and the risks of the operation, informing him about the precautions to be taken, in order to avoid illness. It is undeniable that the author will have considerable losses in her professional life, as she will no longer be able to carry out this activity. Her chances of re-entering the job market will be lower, and she may have to look for work opportunities that offer less advantageous remuneration", scored. Thus, Camargo granted compensation for moral damages in the amount of and a monthly pension from the date the disability retirement was granted, on 7/10/2015, until the worker turned 75 years of age, in an amount equivalent to 50%. of the monthly amount she received before retiring due to disability. And finally, he recognized the indirect termination of the employment contract, with the payment of the resulting severance pay. For the judge, "the defendant subjected the complainant to exaggerated physical efforts, exceeding her strength, so much so that it resulted in retirement due to disability, as well as failing to make the necessary adaptations in order to provide adaptation in the work environment", he concluded.
According to the document, her work chair Finland Mobile Number List also did not have back support adjustments that would meet the employee's anthropometric measurements. According to medical expertise, the activities carried out by the author, as a cashier, presented a high ergonomic risk. For the expert, "immediate changes should be introduced following the recommendations of the analyzed method". The report concluded that "the professional presented with low back pain with the worsening of a physical disability previously presented in the form of achondroplastic dwarfism." For the judge, the Constitution itself raised the right to reduce risks inherent to work as a fundamental precept, through health, hygiene and safety standards. In this sense, the judge cited article 157 of the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), which establishes the company's obligation to adopt measures aimed at preventing accidents and illnesses arising from work. "Guilt arises from the violation of the legal duty, of an established rule of conduct, configuring the illicit act. In the event of an occupational disease, the employer's guilt remains characterized when legal, conventional, contractual or technical safety standards are not observed, hygiene and health at work.
It is the legal duty of the company, through its owners, managers and representatives, to guide the employee regarding the equipment used in the work and the risks of the operation, informing him about the precautions to be taken, in order to avoid illness. It is undeniable that the author will have considerable losses in her professional life, as she will no longer be able to carry out this activity. Her chances of re-entering the job market will be lower, and she may have to look for work opportunities that offer less advantageous remuneration", scored. Thus, Camargo granted compensation for moral damages in the amount of and a monthly pension from the date the disability retirement was granted, on 7/10/2015, until the worker turned 75 years of age, in an amount equivalent to 50%. of the monthly amount she received before retiring due to disability. And finally, he recognized the indirect termination of the employment contract, with the payment of the resulting severance pay. For the judge, "the defendant subjected the complainant to exaggerated physical efforts, exceeding her strength, so much so that it resulted in retirement due to disability, as well as failing to make the necessary adaptations in order to provide adaptation in the work environment", he concluded.