The Labor Prosecutor's Office has already registered 169 cases of electoral harassment against workers.

Karen Couto, Conjur - In Pernambuco, a member of the human resources department of the Ferreira Costa supermarket chain threatened to fire employees who declared they would vote for Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) in the elections. In Pará, a businessman was fined R$ 300 after promising R$ 200 to each worker who did not vote for the former president. In Rio Grande do Sul, the agricultural machinery company Stara threatened to reduce its workforce if the current president, Jair Bolsonaro (PL), is not re-elected. Because of this, the Labor Public Prosecutor's Office filed a public civil action seeking payment of R$ 10 million for collective moral damages.

According to the MPT (Brazilian Labor Prosecutor's Office), this year's elections, which are not yet over, have already broken the record for complaints of electoral harassment in the workplace. So far, 169 cases have been registered. The South region has the highest number of accusations, with 79 occurrences, 29 of which are in Paraná, the state with the highest number of complaints. In second place is the Southeast region, with 43 complaints, followed by the Northeast (23), Midwest (13), and North (11).

This wave of threats against workers, motivated by the presidential elections, raises an important legal question: ultimately, does the Electoral Court or the Labor Court have jurisdiction to judge this type of crime?

The online legal magazine Consultor Jurídico interviewed authorities and experts from both fields and found that there is no consensus. Some argue that electoral harassment in the workplace is a matter for the Electoral Court because, after all, it involves the illegal solicitation of votes. On the other hand, there is a school of thought that considers the Labor Court's intervention more appropriate, as it is a clear situation of coercion of employees.

Ultimately, the safest course of action is to consider that both have the authority to curb harassment against workers for electoral purposes. "I believe that (the authority) lies with both. On the electoral side, various illegal acts are established that safeguard the normality of the election and repress the undue influence of economic power. Notwithstanding this, labor law protects the individual rights of the worker," opined an electoral law expert consulted by ConJur.

Ricardo Calcini, professor and editorial coordinator for labor law, explains what electoral harassment in the workplace is: "It is the abuse of power by the employer to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or influence the worker in their vote. If the complaint is proven, the company may face a public civil action and thus may be required to pay compensation for moral damages."

According to him, "it is good to remember that the freedoms of conscience, expression and political orientation translate, at the same time, into a guarantee and a fundamental right, ensured by the Constitution in its article 5, item VIII".

According to Bruno Minoru Okajima, partner at the law firm Autuori Burmann Sociedade de Advogados and postgraduate student in Labor Law at the Getúlio Vargas Foundation, electoral harassment by employers, in addition to constituting a crime, exceeds the acceptable limits in the relationship between employee and employer, and may result in indirect termination. "The Federal Constitution guarantees workers respect for their religious, philosophical, and political positions, which must be respected by the employer, including under penalty of constituting grounds for indirect termination of the employment contract, as per article 483 of the CLT (Consolidation of Labor Laws)."

To combat electoral harassment in the workplace, the Public Prosecutor's Office for Labor (MPT) produced a document at the beginning of this year's campaign warning companies about the risk of punishment through labor lawsuits for those who engage in this practice.