A (in)constitucionalidade na limitação do dano extrapatrimonial estabelecida pela lei da reforma trabalhista

Abstract

With the purpose of question the impact caused by the labor reform in the study of labor law, the possible unconstitutionality in the limitation of non-economic damage established by the law number 13.647/17 will be analyzed. This new law brought to legal order a limitation in the maximum value to be paid in indemnity to non-economic damage, causing many questions, on one side this represents and advance in the labor law that aims to protect economic activities developed by the employer however this can be equally seen as an act of regress against social justice to the employees’ rights. This study was made through a hypothetical-deductive methodology, as initially the study was based on the assumption of the unconstitutionality in the charging of non-economic labor damage and afterwards it was deducted the veracity of the hypothesis above, moreover a bibliographic-exploratory research was conducted, and the data found in journals, books, articles and the law were analyzed to

deepen the approached theme as a way to try to comprehend legal supervision of non- economic damage and its incorporation to law. Thereafter, the regulation before and after the

labor reform was approached, as well as criteria to its charging. At the it takes up the (un)constitionality of the present limitation to non-economic damage. The study concluded that the charging of non-economic damage ins unconstitutional, therefore the Supreme Court must declare the article 223-G, paragraph 1st, items I to IV, of CLT unconstitutional or interpret them according to the Constitution.