VOLUNTARY JURISDICTION PROCEEDING: THE NON-APPROVAL OF EXTRAJUDICIAL AGREEMENT BY THE LABOR JUDGE AND THE POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES TO THE EMPLOYEE

Abstract

This article aims to analyze provisions 855-B to 855-E, Title X, Chapter III-A, of Decree-Law No. 5.452/1943, Consolidation of Labor Laws, added by Law 13.467/2017, called Labor Reform , which deals with the Voluntary Jurisdiction Process for Homologation of an Extrajudicial Agreement, with a focus on non-approval by the labor judge of this type of agreement and the possible consequences for the employee, aiming to point out damages to the worker in labor relations, when the request for Voluntary Jurisdiction of parties is denied by the judge. The main issue revolves around the possibility of non-approval by the judge of an out-of-court agreement between employee and employer, addressing the specifications of articles 855-B to 855-E, seeking to identify which solutions, in case of rejection, problems and possible failures in the process of voluntary jurisdiction for homologation of extrajudicial agreement. It also seeks to discuss the possible consequences of non-approval, or partial approval of the extrajudicial agreement by the Labor Judge, analyzing the discretion of the judge and the contentious and voluntary jurisdiction, and in view of the possible alternatives, pointing out the path of due process of law. The research methodology has a deductive character, applying qualitative research, within the bibliographic analysis of the current legislation related to the country, the Federal Constitution of 1988, Decree-Law No. 5.452/1943, Consolidation of Labor Laws, Law 13.467/2017, Labor Reform, jurisprudence, doctrines, journalistic articles, news sites and scientific articles. Finally, the expected result is to encourage the debate around the voluntary jurisdiction process and the non-approval by the labor judge and the consequences for the employee.