THE JUDICIALIZATION OF COLLECTIVE CONFLICTS OF WORK: AN ANALYSIS OF STRIKES JUDGED BY TST IN THE YEARS 2000

Abstract

This work is a synthesis of the dissertation defended in 2014 that addresses the judicialization of strikes in the 2000s, is finding that 30% of the strikes were settled by labor courts. What were the reasons that led the strikes to be judicialized? What were the legal instruments used? How did the actors in the Judiciary act in relation to the judicialization of the strikes? What did the Judiciary decide about the strikes? How can the results stemming from the judicialization of the strikes be evaluated? The causes and effects of the judicialization of the strikes are important analytical instruments to complement the comprehension of the changes in the labor market structure, as well as the direction of labor regulation, of the normative power of the Labor Courts and of the trade union activity. The hypothesis presented here is that, although there is a fall in the judicialization rates of the collective bargaining agreements, the Labor Courts are not “less prevalent” in labor relations. On the contrary, the challenge is to comprehend the characteristics, the content and the instruments that the Labor Courts (specifically the TST – Supreme Labor Court) are using to make their decisions on the right to strike, taking into account the changes stemming from the Constitutional Amendment n.45/2004, especially the increase of prohibitory interdicts.