O trabalho intermitente brasileiro e o desalinhamento com o Objetivo nº 08 da Agenda 2030 da Organização das Nações Unidas para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável

The year 2017 was important in the legal and labor field in Brazil due to the enactment of Federal Law nº 13.467/2017. The objective of this regulation, which became known as the “Labor Reform” was to reduce the unemployment rate, which at the time was in the range of 13.7%, creating new jobs with the reduction of informality, a category higher than the number of formal workers. That moment. Furthermore, it was planned that these new jobs could have a positive impact on tax collection, as formalized work creates tax obligations. This regulation was heavily criticized at the time, on the grounds that it was, in fact, a flexibilization that focused on reducing workers' rights. However, at least initially, it had positive effects, as the Labor Reform, combined with various economic factors, effectively led to a reduction in the unemployment rate to 11% at the end of 2019. This positive scenario was, then deeply affected by the pandemic at the beginning of 2020, which resulted in a very significant increase in the unemployment rate, a fact not only verified in Brazil, but in general throughout the world, especially in the face of young workers. Even though, more recently, with the appearance of signs of economic recovery, the unemployment rate is, again, decreasing, and considering the time lapse since the enactment of the referred regulation, it is proposed in this study a current reflection on the impact of a of the innovations of the Labor Reform, which is the implementation of intermittent work, currently materialized by art. 452-A of the CLT, in the labor paradigms consolidated over the last few decades. In intermittent work, work occurs on demand. With this, the employee will not be fully available to the employer and may even refuse a call, without this characterizing an infraction. On the other hand, if there is no demand for work, the intermittent worker will not be summoned to work and, consequently, will not receive any remuneration, although he remains employed and is accounted for in official data. In this bias, the reflection addresses the relativization of the principle of legal subordination and the division of the risk of economic activity between the company and the employee, as well as the discrimination of these workers in face of the others in the establishment - since it is not in the business routine. It seeks to investigate whether intermittent work really contributes to the objectives for which it was proposed and whether it is effectively aligned with the United Nations Organization's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which in its objective nº 08, provides that it should be “achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including youth and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value”. This study analyzes official statistical data, doctrine and jurisprudence. The conclusions reached demonstrate that, if, on the one hand, the employee has greater autonomy in the face of the relativization of the principle of subordination, on the other hand, a portion of the risk of economic activity that has always been linked to the employer is transferred to it. In addition, it was also found that it is a measure that moves away from full employment proposed by the UN 2030 Agenda, creating a lower category of work compared to others in the establishment - with the harmful effects that this situation entails.