A caregiver for the elderly sought recognition of bond of employment home, alleging that worked three times per week in a residence, by completing the requirements of Law 5,859 /72. The law establishes that is considered domestic employee “who provides services of continuous nature and purpose not profitable to the person or family within these residential”.
As the judgment of first instance denied his request, she presented ordinary appeal to TRT the 2ND Region. In examining the case, the judges of the 6TH Class concluded that the receipts of payment daily merge by claimed prove that, as a rule, the provision only occurred once a week. For them, this is insufficient to characterize the continuity required by art. 1 of Law 5,859 /72, for the configuration of the bond of domestic employment.
The judgment, drafted by desembargador Antero Arantes Martins, says that the work of the housecleaner is not continuous “because at the end of each day to provide services the worker receives its paid, as occurred in the case of screen. It is not for another reason that is called housecleaner”.
The rapporteur also says that this fact breaks the concept of continuity between the various services performed, i.e. there is no relationship between a work and the previous or the following. In this way, the 6TH Class upheld the decision of first degree, who departed from the bond of employment household between the parties and, consequently , acquitted the claimed the other sums claimed.