YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → NR-1: o empresário ainda pode cobrar produtividade?

NR-1: o empresário ainda pode cobrar produtividade? — Transcript

by CatterInfra · 8,976 words · 1,396 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00In fact, André, a new way of holding
0:02business owners hostage is being sold.
0:08In your opinion, what is the limit of
0:10what constitutes harassment? While you
0:13think you're having a feedback
0:15conversation, often the employee is
0:17recording you. There will be a lot of
0:20unemployment; many companies, many
0:22bakeries, already have robots. What I
0:24think is that the company needs to put
0:26the right people in the right place.
0:31Every business owner has already gone
0:33through or will go through a delicate
0:35situation. An employee starts producing
0:38less, loses engagement, impacts the
0:40team, and the manager is left unsure of
0:43how far they can push. Can the company
0:46demand productivity? How to
0:48differentiate low performance from a
0:50mental health problem? Where does
0:53legitimate pressure end and labor risk
0:56begin? And what changes with NR1 and
0:59the debate about psychosocial risks at
1:02work? Well, I'm André Pita, and you're
1:04listening to the Caterinfra podcast,
1:06your channel to stay up-to-date on news
1:08from the world of engineering and
1:10infrastructure. And to talk about this
1:12topic that affects companies of all
1:15sizes, I'm joined today by Dr. Samara
1:17da Souza e Maciel, a specialist in
1:19labor law, who will help us understand
1:22how business owners can protect their
1:24company and their team while
1:26simultaneously building a healthier and
1:29more productive environment. The first
1:35question is, can business owners still
1:38demand productivity? What do I mean by
1:40that? Regarding the issue of NR1, you
1:44could even explain beforehand what NR1
1:47actually is and how it relates to labor
1:51law. This is important because, at
1:53times, business owners are afraid to
1:54demand productivity when they are not
1:56properly prepared and covered by the
1:58terms of NR1. How does it work? Since
2:01it's very new, although NR1 was
2:03extended from last year to this year to
2:05allow companies to adapt,
2:07the truth is that nobody adapted to
2:10anything; they waited until May again
2:12to start implementing it. So, André,
2:14it's actually being sold as a new way
2:17to hold business owners hostage,
2:20because before we thought that
2:22employees were always mistreated at
2:25work, but the tables have turned, it
2:27seems, right? So, today's business
2:30owners are held hostage by their
2:32employees, so NR1 seems to be just
2:34another way to keep the business owner
2:36hostage. And who will be held hostage?
2:38Those who don't have legal counsel.
2:39That's the truth. Why? Because
2:41productivity can always be demanded, it
2:44always has been and always will be.
2:46What is not acceptable is setting
2:49unattainable goals. So, sometimes, the
2:53business owner just needs to have
2:55control, they just need to make clear
2:57what they want from the employee. And
3:00the employee has to deliver. Now, a
3:02hostile environment, an environment of
3:05humiliation, that can never be and
3:07never will be. So it's not NR1 that's
3:10bringing that about. It's always been
3:12like this; whenever an employee took a
3:15case of moral harassment, extortion, or
3:18humiliation to court, when they proved
3:21it, they always won. So NR1 didn't
3:23create this; it already existed. What's
3:26happening now is that the market is
3:30finding, in NR1, a way to even move
3:33financially. There are many companies
3:36that are selling this as if it were our
3:38new market destruction, that business
3:40owners will be condemned for everything
3:42. Isn't that true? A business owner
3:44needs legal counsel and needs to
3:46consult them on how far they can go,
3:48how they can proceed, establishing
3:50rules through a manual. Or, in the
3:53office, for example, we work with our
3:56clients on the company manual. And what
3:59does the company manual contain? There
4:00are rules: what you can, what you
4:01cannot. How can a sales department work
4:06without targets? It's impossible. Sales
4:08are driven by that. So, how am I going
4:11to establish these targets? So, the
4:13company just needs to be transparent
4:15with the employee, everything needs to
4:18be documented, but it's NR1 (Brazilian
4:20Regulatory Standard 1) and the employer
4:22can't demand productivity, that doesn't
4:25happen, because if it did, most
4:27companies would be better off closing
4:29down, because how are you going to sell
4:32if there's no accountability? It's
4:34necessary.
4:34Great. And in your opinion, what is the
4:37limit between accountability and
4:38harassment? Because I don't know if
4:41that's very clear, you know? Yeah, I
4:43think things are very subtle, you know?
4:45Exactly. It's a fine line. So, and
4:47nowadays, people have cell phones,
4:50today it's a weapon, right, in the
4:52hands of employees. So, while you're
4:55thinking you're having a feedback
4:57conversation, many times the employee
4:59is recording you. So, the employer, the
5:02manager, needs to have a limit of
5:04respect. So, from the moment you cross
5:07a line of, oh, you're stupid, you're
5:09incompetent, that can't happen and
5:11never can. Now, look at what the
5:14company expects from you, I expect you
5:16to deliver that. If he doesn't deliver,
5:19what measure should be taken? It
5:20depends. You might have to fire him, or
5:22you might have to apply a dismissal for
5:24just cause. Why didn't he deliver?
5:27Because it wasn't possible to deliver.
5:28It's one thing, oh, he didn't deliver
5:30because he was slacking off, he didn't
5:32deliver because he wants to be fired
5:34but doesn't want to resign. Then the
5:35company has to evaluate that and
5:37perhaps even apply a dismissal for just
5:39cause. Now, swearing, that's not
5:41allowed, right? Humiliating, belittling
5:43, that's not allowed. Now, demanding
5:45within the limits of the law is always
5:47allowed. Do
5:48you think it's possible to coexist with
5:50high performance and all these
5:52regulations and laws? Easy?
5:54I believe so, as long as the company
5:57has legal security. So, I am not able
6:00to start demanding things the way that
6:02I want to. So, what do I always suggest
6:05? I'll create a sales target. I even
6:08say, look, let's sit down and see how
6:10far we can go. And there we're going to
6:13structure a document so that the
6:15company has this document in hand and
6:17is secure. And the manager often,
6:19because the owner establishes it, let's
6:21say the company president says: "I want
6:23this." The manager will want to deliver
6:27because he's driven by results.
6:30How will he demand this from his team?
6:32We might have to establish some
6:35document, some training. So today we
6:37are thinking more about the fact that
6:40we need to train our managers so they
6:42are able to deliver results rather than
6:44effectively stopping. Because if I
6:47can't demand results, I can't work.
6:48And how does it work? Because,
6:50fundamentally, it's a matter of goals,
6:51I'm even saying this because here at
6:53CTER I also have productivity goals.
6:54Yes. But it's variable, it depends on
6:58the complexity. When you create a
7:00document, you don't just think, you
7:02don't think, "I'm going to create a
7:03document with goals, but sometimes the
7:05goal for one month will have to be
7:07higher than another, because last month
7:08I didn't do what was necessary," you
7:10understand? No, but I'm not saying you
7:12should create a specific document for
7:14that. Because if you create a document
7:17and then want to change it later, you
7:19end up being rigid. No, you need to
7:22establish a procedure. Now, the limit
7:24of how the goal will be established
7:26depends on the company, and the company
7:29needs to sell. So, it needs to
7:31establish the goal. What can't happen
7:34is for the employee, for example, I
7:36have a client who sells internet and
7:39has a ranking of salespeople, and he
7:42ends up rewarding the best salespeople.
7:45Can he present the worst salespeople at
7:48the meeting? He can't. What can he do?
7:51He can create a ranking. The top four
7:53salespeople are so-and-so because he's
7:54going to reward them. From the ones he
7:57doesn't reward downwards, he can't
7:59expose that. For example, at the sales
8:00meeting. He can't. Why? You'll create
8:03anxiety in the person who didn't sell
8:05anything. So that's exposure. That
8:09can't happen,
8:09man. But how am I going to deal with
8:11that? I don't understand.
8:12So you can call the person who's in
8:15last place and talk to them, but you
8:18can't, in a sales meeting, take a
8:20PowerPoint presentation and put up
8:24the ranking.
8:24The ranking of the last-placed person.
8:26You can put the ranking of the top
8:28performers, but you can't expose the
8:29last-placed person. The last-placed
8:32person has been there for 30 days, they
8:34haven't made a single sale, and in
8:36their mind, the exposure could lead
8:38them to take it to court and get
8:39compensation for moral damages. How
8:42much will it be? It depends on the
8:43judge. So that's the kind of care
8:45companies need to take.
8:47So I can, I can showcase the top
8:49performers. Absolutely. It's even a way
8:52to motivate the last-placed person to
8:54try to improve. Because if so-and-so
8:57sold 30 contracts and you sold one, are
9:00you having a problem? What problem are
9:02you having? But I can't put that in a
9:04meeting to expose that person to the
9:07whole company, for example. You can
9:09bring them in for feedback and
9:11introduce them to everyone and say: "
9:13Look, why did she get 30 and you didn't
9:15?" You can have that conversation.
9:18So that's an important point, because,
9:20deep down, sometimes you say: "Wow, but
9:21did that person do that in so much time
9:23?" Well, I believe that you can also
9:26accomplish this, but depending on how
9:27you choose to phrase it, the result may
9:29end up functioning differently. Exactly
9:31. It can really be a trap, a trap for
9:34the company. So, these are the
9:36precautions you'll need, because NR1
9:38deals with mental health, a standard
9:40that came about for that purpose, and
9:43in fact, this standard came about
9:45because the business owner who has an
9:47employee is being tied to this standard
9:49. But this standard came about because
9:52of the banks, as there's a lot of
9:53burnout, right, among bank employees,
9:55because the demands of the bank are
9:57really high, and also the employees,
9:59the banks were very dependent on the
10:01INSS (Brazilian Social Security
10:02Institute); the government didn't
10:04create this because of them, because
10:06there are many people. But what
10:07happened? All the business owners were
10:11parachuted in. And now the owner of a
10:14small shop who has an employee has to
10:16worry about NR1. He needs to have
10:18several care implementation processes
10:21there. So, how will he comply with NR1?
10:24We start thinking about it, and we even
10:26started thinking about it in the office
10:28, for example, because our activity,
10:30whether we like it or not, generates
10:32anxiety, because we work with deadlines
10:34, with pressure, it's a deadline, a
10:36deadline, and we live by deadlines,
10:37okay? So, what is my job, how is the
10:40employer, for example, going to think
10:43about organizing his company, okay?
10:45Because that's all it's for. NR1 is
10:47about that, what my activity generates
10:49in terms of anxiety for my employee and
10:52what I'm doing about it. For example,
10:54you have here, you have a space for
10:56them to play video games, you have a
10:58space for them to sit, watch TV, you
11:00have a coffee area. So let's think, the
11:02guy is here and he's under pressure
11:04because he needs to deliver a project,
11:06it's generating anxiety, right? Because
11:08now there's a wave of anxiety. So
11:11what is he going to do? He will, he
11:12will have, he has a space. So here, in
11:14a way, you already have NR1 (Brazilian
11:16Regulatory Standard 1), because you
11:17have a rest area. He can leave, he can
11:20sit down, he can breathe, he can have a
11:22moment for himself. In our case, we
11:25thought, okay, my work is going to
11:27generate anxiety due to the excessive
11:30demand because of deadlines. How am I
11:32going to solve this? We thought, then,
11:35we're going to have to hire someone to
11:38be like a helper, you know? To adjust
11:40the work. Today there's the 4.0
11:42adjustment, which are the judges who
11:44come to relieve the courts that are
11:46overloaded with cases. We thought, okay
11:48, let's create a support system in the
11:49office, I'll have to hire someone who
11:51will help everyone. So the civil lawyer
11:54is dealing with a high demand, and he
11:56is worried.
11:58Then he'll ask for help from this
12:00support person. So, in a way, we are
12:02going to have to hire a lawyer who
12:04understands all the different areas to
12:05assist us in every single one of them
12:07if it becomes necessary. So I'm already
12:09applying NR1 (Brazilian Regulatory
12:11Standard 1) when I do this, because I'm
12:13concerned about this anxiety. So
12:15companies really need to think about
12:17what their activity entails here, and
12:20how exactly they might be generating
12:22anxiety in their own employees
12:24throughout the process. They need to
12:27find a way to provide a space for them
12:29to have a moment of rest. Telemarketers
12:32need this, because they get yelled at,
12:34right? So many people call, they say, "
12:36I don't want to." What should
12:38telemarketers do? And in my analysis, I
12:41think they need to have a psychologist
12:45available, you know? And since it's a
12:48larger company, they need more support,
12:50or a dark room with some water running,
12:53you know? So the person can go there
12:55and say, "I just got yelled at by a
12:57customer, I need to breathe." So that's
12:59the situation the company is going
13:01through. Unfortunately, I'm not in
13:04favor of all this. I'm against it,
13:07because I think people today are
13:10generally anxious. Transferring this
13:13responsibility to companies, to me, is
13:15just another obligation that the state
13:18is imposing on businesses. So, instead
13:20of worrying about bringing wealth to
13:22Brazil, generating jobs, and everything
13:24else, we're now going to have to worry
13:26about not causing anxiety to anyone.
13:29Yes, this is a complicated point, and I
13:31say that our activity, despite being
13:33different, is similar in several
13:35aspects.
13:35Yes. Because you have your body of
13:38employees, and they ultimately have
13:41direct contact with the client, and the
13:43client, just like ours here, can
13:45generate pressure on them. How would
13:48that work in this case? Because, well,
13:49it's not the employee, right? It's
13:51not the employer, but it's the end
13:53customer. And the end customer arrives:
13:56"Hey, you have to send it by this date,
13:57it's over." And then what?
13:58Exactly. And that's where my "help"
14:01comes in, right? That's where this
14:03lawyer I'll have to bring to the team
14:05comes in. So I'll have to raise the
14:07price of my service, because since I'll
14:09have to increase my workforce, I might
14:11have to raise the price of my service
14:13so that I have someone to come and help
14:15that person when they're feeling
14:17pressured. Yes, that's the objective of
14:21NR1, that the work, like, maybe I'll
14:24even get canceled, as you're saying,
14:27but I see it as a problem for the
14:30employer, because if before everything
14:33was already considered moral damage,
14:36now it's even more so. And worse,
14:39before we had the burden of proof in
14:42labor law. So, what does that mean?
14:45Whoever alleges has to prove it, unless
14:47it's something documentary. So, in the
14:50history of labor law, we say: "Look, if
14:52an employee says they suffered
14:54workplace harassment, right, were
14:56insulted, they have to prove it. Now,
14:59when we bring in NR1 (Brazilian
15:01Regulatory Standard 1), when an
15:03employee says they suffered anxiety at
15:06work, that the work caused anxiety,
15:08nervousness, sadness, in short, worry,
15:11before they had to prove it. Now, with
15:14this new rule, the burden of proof is
15:16no longer on them. They claim they had
15:19anxiety, and I, the company, will have
15:20to prove that I didn't cause them
15:22anxiety. And that's where the problem
15:24arises. No, but why didn't I cause it?
15:25Because I had help. No, I didn't cause
15:27it because I had a video game. No, I
15:28didn't cause it because I had a
15:30psychologist available. I didn't cause
15:31it because when the client yelled at
15:33them, I, the company owner, went there
15:35and personally attended to the client.
15:37So, you see, in addition to the number
15:40of lawsuits we've had in recent years,
15:43because it was the highest number of
15:45lawsuits we've had, now we're going to
15:48have many more. There's that too."
15:50So, because, from what I'm seeing, it's
15:51a very subjective matter, right?
15:53Very subjective.
15:54Why? Because each person also has a
15:56threshold, right? A limit to their
15:59resilience. That's it. So some people
16:01have more, others less. So, and then it
16:03becomes objective. If the person says,
16:07"Oh, you put a lot of pressure on me
16:10and it went to court," then it depends.
16:13It's what I have to prove. The company
16:15will have to prove
16:16that it didn't do it.
16:18Before, it was the employee who had to
16:20prove it, now it's the contract. Now
16:21it's the opposite, it's the company
16:23that has to prove it. So, do you agree
16:25that companies will need lawyers even
16:28more? Why? Because those companies that
16:31would never have a lawsuit, they will
16:33start to have one, because people have
16:35the anxiety they already have. Everyone
16:38nowadays, society is anxious about
16:40everything. People get anxious about
16:43not touching their cell phones, I don't
16:44know, they're 5 minutes without looking
16:46at their cell phone, and they're
16:48already...Imagine now bringing that to
16:49the businessman. That's the...Okay. So,
16:52business owners need to be very
16:55cautious and also need a very good
16:58defense, because everything is
17:01jurisprudence, everything is internal
17:05precedent. So, let's think about it, a
17:07company that starts to receive
17:09convictions due to disrespect for NR1 (
17:11Brazilian Regulatory Standard 1), what
17:13will happen to it? There was a lawsuit,
17:15this employee will take this action and
17:18use it as a model in the next one, so
17:20it will be like borrowed evidence. So
17:22what happens? The idea is not to settle
17:26these cases. So for my clients, in
17:29cases where there haven't been any
17:31lawsuits in this sense yet, it has
17:32already emerged because it's still
17:34quite new, no, not yet,
17:35but there are already judges condemning
17:37, okay? A sentence was issued last week
17:39by a judge condemning based on NR1,
17:41but it's been so short a time.
17:43But the moral harassment lawsuit was
17:45filed before the law came into effect,
17:48but it was judged at this time and the
17:50judge has already interpreted and
17:52sentenced based on NR1, we already have
17:55it,
17:55but is that possible? If it was,
17:57then they will have to appeal. But then
17:59, what What's the problem? She
18:01sentenced me, you know, my head, my,
18:03you know, my sentence. And then the
18:06company will appeal, I believe they can
18:09overturn it, considering that the law
18:11has just come into effect. Uh-huh.
18:14But for them to appeal, they need to
18:16have money for the appeal deposit,
18:18because they have to pay either 6,700
18:20if it's a small business or 13,000 if
18:22it's not, you know, if it's not in that
18:25category, if it's a company outside the
18:27Simples Nacional (Simplified National
18:29Tax Regime). In that case, they need to
18:31have 13,000. In other words, to
18:34overturn this decision, they will have
18:36to have money. So, what do I think
18:38about NR1 (Regulatory Standard 1) and
18:40what is my advice to my clients? If a
18:43case reaches this level, we can't make
18:45a settlement and we have to prove
18:47otherwise and we have to have evidence
18:49to defend ourselves so that there is no
18:52conviction. Because if I make a
18:54settlement, I will, in a way, create an
18:57expectation in the other party. So,
19:00since they made a settlement, they will
19:01make one in mine. And if they lose,
19:03they will use it. This ruling is
19:04against them. It's like that unhealthy
19:06working conditions ruling. So-and-so
19:09passed the expert evaluation, it's
19:10positive. Okay, I'm going to use the
19:12same ruling, the same decision for mine
19:13, the same report. It's the same thing
19:16as NR1 (Brazilian Regulatory Standard 1
19:16). Companies need to defend themselves.
19:18So, in that sense, I'll even mention a
19:21practice we've been doing here at CTER:
19:24I'll have a meeting with a group, and
19:27we have an artificial intelligence tool
19:30, Aplaude, and I'll record the meeting,
19:33just like any other meetings. Even if
19:36it's a small one, or maybe even just
19:39feedback, it serves as proof. I say, "
19:42Look, here's my conversation." It
19:43certainly serves as proof. It's
19:46important. I think that's because what
19:49happens? You're already ahead, right?
19:54You're already ahead of many business
19:56owners, because most business owners or
19:59managers don't take the precaution of
20:01recording; they have a meeting, and the
20:03employee is actually recording it. So,
20:06without them knowing they're recording
20:08...Yes, it can, right? No, when one of
20:10the parties is recording, the other
20:12doesn't need to know. If they're
20:14participating in the conversation, the
20:15other doesn't need to, they don't need
20:16to warn that they're recording. So, the
20:17employer uses that recording, the
20:19employee uses that recording against
20:21the employer. So, what you're doing,
20:22you're already ahead, because you're
20:24gathering evidence in your favor. So,
20:26you're already recording and that
20:28recording of yours is possibly, and it
20:30can be used, it should be used in any
20:33situation.
20:33It's legal. So, in the end, this will
20:35eventually result in creating a giant
20:37database.
20:38For sure. We'll need a lot of memory,
20:40right? We'll need a lot of cloud
20:41storage.
20:43And, right? And in your perception, do
20:45you think that NR1 could cause a large
20:47labor liability, even greater than what
20:49we already have here in Brazil?
20:51For sure. We are currently coming from
20:55a period of increasing legal actions,
20:57but due to one of the inhibitors of
21:00labor processes, when the reform took
21:02effect in 2017, the number of labor
21:05lawsuits actually fell. They
21:07fell.
21:07Why? Because the employee would file a
21:09lawsuit asking for R $ 100,000 R $
21:111,000. And then he would win 10,000 in
21:14that process. He had a court-ordered
21:17payment that we call R $ 1,000. So he
21:19didn't take any money home. He'd win R
21:21$ 1,000 and lose it all to the company
21:23lawyer for the court-ordered fees,
21:24wouldn't he?
21:25So what happened? Many people stopped
21:28suing.
21:30Uh, in 2021, this article was ruled
21:33unconstitutional, so up to three
21:35minimum wages, right? If the person is
21:38declared poor, in short, there is no
21:40such conviction. What happened? The
21:42lawsuits returned. Then came the
21:44lawyers, right, doing uh advertising on
21:47the internet, right, capturing the
21:50famous leads. So today, the employee
21:53used to have to schedule a meeting with
21:56the lawyer, pay for a consultation, and
21:59then the lawyer would analyze his case.
22:02Today, no. Today you open TikTok,
22:04Instagram, and the lawyer appears. Oh,
22:07if you work in cleaning, you have the
22:09right to this. If the employee, the
22:10employer called Your attention, you
22:12have the right to sue. So, it's become
22:14a real business. And then the person is
22:17on the couch, I receive many lawsuits
22:18from my clients who come in and, to
22:20defend the power of attorney, the guy
22:22is sitting on the couch. So you see
22:25that the power of attorney was signed
22:27at 11 pm. So you see that clearly the
22:30person was served entirely online.
22:33There have been cases where the
22:35plaintiff, my client, called the former
22:38employee and said: "Wow, but you sued
22:41me, why did you do that?" He asked,
22:43right? He said: "But I didn't sue you,
22:45I just clicked on the link and in the
22:47end it ended up going through and he
22:49signed a document, it seems he didn't
22:51know." So, the internet has already
22:53brought this possibility of suing
22:56without going to the office, without
22:58paying anything. So it has increased
23:01with NR1. Now, the person wants to
23:03request, wants to leave the company,
23:04doesn't want to resign, he will invent
23:06any NR1 excuse and will file for
23:08indirect termination. So, it's going to
23:10explode, it's
23:11going to explode and it's going to make
23:12that company that doesn't have monthly
23:14legal counsel more expensive. Why?
23:16Because the lawsuit will arrive. What
23:18happens? When you hire someone, you
23:20have a health plan,
23:22you go and have the surgery through the
23:23plan, right?
23:25If you don't have the plan, you have to
23:26pay for the surgery privately, and
23:29what's going to happen? It's going to
23:30be more expensive. So, more and more,
23:32the business owner or the company,
23:34whether they have one employee or 1000
23:36employees, needs to have legal counsel;
23:38otherwise, they're going to have a
23:40really high labor liability, and when
23:42those liabilities arrive, the tendency
23:45is for them to have even higher costs
23:47because they'll have to hire a lawyer,
23:49they'll have to do a series of things.
23:51And NR1 applies to everyone, basically,
23:54to any simple company,
23:56with a CNPJ, R1, CNPJ. So it's
24:00complicated. You have 100 people.
24:02You're
24:02going to have work, huh? You're going
24:04to have work.
24:04We're going to have work. We're already
24:06seeing this because there's a real
24:07demand for consulting services. How am
24:09I going to adapt? So, uh, I'm sending a
24:12series of notices to clients. There's a
24:16law now that obliges companies to
24:19encourage employees to get routine
24:21checkups, prostate exams, breast exams,
24:23HPV exams. So there's a law that
24:26obliges, and
24:28encourages, or obliges, which is
24:29different,
24:29it obliges companies to publicize. So I
24:33need to put it on my bulletin board or
24:35my...
24:36you see? You're learning, you already
24:37know this.
24:39Yes, I've already sent the notices,
24:41okay? Yes, we're going to post them,
24:43and I'll even talk to Laila about this,
24:46because we need to have a bulletin
24:49board, whether it's a digital one,
24:51which some companies use today, there
24:53are communities, right, from the
24:55company itself, or an old-fashioned
24:57bulletin board, you know? And you have
24:59to post the notices. So, look, you need
25:01to...But we do it in a way...My
25:03communication, I made it in a way that
25:05fulfills the legal requirements, but I
25:07don't make it clear that the employee
25:08has to be absent to go to the doctor,
25:10because they already miss work for
25:12nothing. Imagine the company ordering
25:14them to be absent, right? Because the
25:15law mandates it. So, we made a
25:17communication that more complies with
25:19the regulations, but not so clearly.
25:21And then we send it to clients, there's
25:24another obligation now to have an
25:26internal reporting channel, so you need
25:29to have an email address and you need
25:31to publicize this. Similarly, put it on
25:34the bulletin board, saying, "If you
25:36have a problem with your manager, you
25:38have to post complaints@, for example,
25:41@catter," so there has to be someone
25:43accessing it. Some companies hire
25:45externally, but others have no problem
25:46with it being their own HR department.
25:49But it has to be a direct channel,
25:50because this channel aims for
25:51confidentiality, right? So, a reporting
25:54channel is needed so that people can
25:56report their manager, colleague, or
25:58anyone else, and their confidentiality
26:00is preserved. It also needs to be
26:03publicized. That's it. Another
26:05essential point is the company's
26:07obligation to monitor the INSS social
26:09security information. There are many
26:12companies with employees on leave and
26:14they don't know where they are. I have
26:17cases that I sent this to this week.
26:19What do I mean? The person...
26:21the person disappeared. I have a client
26:22who, I believe, currently has about 20
26:24people out on medical leave. So it's a
26:26large company, with more than 1000
26:27employees, so he has 20 people on leave
26:29. And so, I sent this communication: "
26:31Look, from now on we..." Because we
26:33were very dependent on the employee.
26:35They would leave, go to, and receive
26:37benefits, go to the INSS, and the
26:39company had to track them down to find
26:41out if the medical examination was
26:43granted or not. Today that's no longer
26:45necessary. The company has access to
26:47the INSS (Brazilian National Social
26:49Security Institute) company channel;
26:51you log in with a digital certificate
26:53and check the status of that employee's
26:55benefit.
26:56And then I sent it to HR. I said, "Look
27:00, you need to do this. The employee
27:02left, you have to check every week. If
27:04the benefit was accessed, you have to
27:05see, because you have to schedule their
27:07return to the occupational physician if
27:09they were off work for more than 30
27:11days. Why? Because what problem was I
27:14having? The employee would return from
27:18INSS and then INSS would say, 'Look,
27:20buddy, you're fit to go home, okay?
27:23Okay, you're fine, you can go back to
27:25work.'""
27:26So what did the company doctor do? The
27:28occupational physician deemed him
27:29unfit. What's the problem? Huge. This '
27:33unfit' thing. If he said he's unfit,
27:36consequently the company won't take
27:38this employee back. Right.
27:39Right. Who's
27:40going to pay his salary? Not the
27:43government,
27:43no.
27:44The government already said he's fit.
27:48When the occupational physician says
27:50he's unfit, from that moment on he's
27:52the company's problem. When can he come
27:56back? There's
27:57no deadline.
27:58And you know what they do? They stay
28:00home quietly. The company says I can't
28:03come back. The NSS (National Social
28:05Security Institute) says I'm fine. Six,
28:07seven, eight, ten months pass, and they
28:08file a lawsuit asking for reinstatement
28:10, employment, and payment of back wages
28:12, because he's at home, not because he
28:14wants to be, but because the company
28:15says I can't work. This causes enormous
28:17liabilities. There are many companies
28:19with gigantic liabilities. Because he
28:21said: 'Doctor, but how am I going to
28:22send him back?'""I said: 'Honey, the
28:24occupational physician needs to say
28:25that he has to go back to work, because
28:27the INSS (Brazilian Social Security
28:29Institute) has already said that he's
28:30fit. If the occupational physician says
28:32he's unfit, what will happen? Your
28:34occupational physician is creating a
28:35liability for you.
28:36So, this happens because the
28:38court-appointed physician might have
28:39made a mistake in the diagnosis, I
28:41don't know. Look, he needs to go back
28:44to work, which is what I establish as
28:46security for the company.
28:49He needs to, the occupational physician
28:50will say that he's fit, he'll go back
28:52to work. If he needs another leave of
28:55absence, he'll get a new medical
28:57certificate. And if it's longer than
28:59the previous one, he'll request a new
29:00benefit, because then he can do that,
29:02he doesn't need to appeal. Now, if the
29:04occupational physician says he's unfit,
29:06he can't even request a new benefit,
29:08because he doesn't have that right. So
29:11you understand that it's just another
29:12problem for the company?'"
29:14So, HR, the company doctor, and legal
29:16have to work hand in hand
29:19because if one lets go of the other's
29:20hand, it can create liabilities for the
29:22company.
29:23Okay. We talked about NR1 (Brazilian
29:24Regulatory Standard 1) over
29:25INSS (Brazilian Social Security
29:26Institute). It's
29:26about INSS. Now we'll enter another
29:28controversial subject, which is the
29:30reduction of the work schedule, six to
29:31one.
29:33Tell me, what's your perspective on
29:34that? First, what do you think about
29:36that? Look, I think it's absurd. Why?
29:42Because most people—I have many
29:44clients who work in supermarkets or
29:46shopping malls—so, for me, this will
29:49cause a problem; it will bring about a
29:52great deal of unemployment, and it is
29:54yet another government bill that is
29:57being placed directly onto the
29:59shoulders of the business owner. It's
30:02enough that we already have the problem
30:04with Sundays. So, for those who have a
30:066-to-1 schedule, who employ women, many
30:08companies are being sued for violating
30:11the law, because women are required to
30:13have a Sunday off every 15 days.
30:15And there's a specific law about this,
30:17an article in the CLT (Consolidation of
30:19Labor Laws) that says that female
30:21employees necessarily need to have one
30:23Sunday off. So, she works one Sunday
30:25and has the next one off. She needs it,
30:26but because she's a mother or
30:28because she's a woman? No, it doesn't
30:30say if she's a mom. The law refers to
30:32female employees. So, I already have
30:34clients who, unfortunately, are advised
30:37, but there's no workforce. So, I have
30:40a case of a client who has a store in a
30:43shopping mall in Pascaba, and we
30:45received a lawsuit from the union. The
30:48union filed a lawsuit because,
30:50unfortunately, the workforce is very,
30:53very scarce, and he had to violate the
30:55rule. And then one day he fired a woman
30:58there, and she went to the union and
31:00reported it, and we received a
31:02notification and a lawsuit for almost R
31:04$ 150,000 because of that, right? A
31:06request to the INSS for collective
31:08compensation, from the union for
31:09collective compensation.
31:11Then I held the hearing and reached an
31:12agreement. So, you see, we were already
31:14having problems because of Sundays, and
31:16now we're going to have problems
31:18because of the schedule, because maybe
31:20companies won't be able to adapt to it
31:22right now. There's a timeframe, right?
31:24There will be time to start. It's been
31:26voted on. Sorry, I'm not following the
31:28issue. It was approved by the Senate.
31:31Yes, it was approved by the Chamber of
31:33Deputies.
31:33So, but it will be 100%approved, so it
31:35will reach the Senate, the government
31:38will approve it. But what will the
31:39government do? It will make the law, it
31:42will approve this law. It's already
31:44clear that this is a political maneuver
31:46. And I'm not bringing up any political
31:49issue here. But this move is a
31:51political move. Why? Because how will
31:55the law be approved, and it has a
31:57period for it to start coming into
31:59effect, for companies to adapt to it?
32:01So I don't know the exact period, but I
32:04know there's a period for them to adapt
32:06. So what will happen until October? Uh
32:10, unemployment won't have started yet.
32:13This is going to happen, there will be
32:15a lot of unemployment, but starting
32:16next year.
32:16But why do you think unemployment will
32:17increase? Because ultimately I would
32:19have to increase the number of
32:20employees. I believe that many
32:22companies will reduce their
32:24workforce significantly.
32:26Exactly. They will reduce it. In fact,
32:29in Alphaville there are already many
32:31companies, many bakeries with robots.
32:34So, there's one that has robots to
32:37deliver the food, the tray, and there
32:40are self-service checkouts to collect
32:43payment. So, there's a bakery that we
32:46frequent a lot, that must have reduced
32:48its workforce by about 10 people,
32:50because it installed four self-service
32:52counters. So, there's one cashier and
32:54four self-service counters. And waiters
32:57, I think there are only about four,
32:59but there are six robots. You know
33:02those ones, my daughter even says, I
33:04only want the juice if the robot brings
33:06it. See, companies are already adapting
33:09to replacing manual labor. So this
33:12bakery is already ahead. I have a
33:15client who also owns a wholesale store,
33:17and he's already doing self-service. So
33:19, in a way, what he's going to do—I
33:21even saw a video of a woman doing it
33:23this week—is another self-service
33:25system that's stealing my job. So, a
33:27lot of people are worried about what's
33:29going to happen. He's going to comply
33:32with the 5x2 schedule, but he's going
33:35to replace half of the employees with
33:38self-service, with robots, with
33:41something else that isn't manual labor.
33:44I
33:44understand. Because this is a problem,
33:46deep down, I see how it affects our
33:48entire field of civil construction and
33:51works. Sometimes you have to deliver a
33:54project,
33:54and you'll have to do it yourself,
33:57you'll have to have it done, you'll
33:59have to pay overtime, you'll have extra
34:02pay, and so, whether it's 5x2 or 6x1
34:04makes a big difference.
34:06Absolutely. Absolutely. And there are
34:09businesses that operate in a way that
34:12doesn't require them to work 7 days a
34:15week. So the 6-on-1 was for that. For
34:19example, in an office, the office is 5
34:20days on, 2 days off,
34:22but consequently, how will the sales
34:25staff, supermarket staff, bakery staff,
34:27shopping mall staff work? 5 days on, 2
34:30days off.
34:31This client of mine, who had this
34:33lawsuit from the union, said: "We
34:35suspended the hearing to reach an
34:37agreement, an extra agreement directly
34:40with the union, and then just ask the
34:42judge to approve it." And then, in the
34:46meeting with the union, he said: "Let's
34:49do something, let's negotiate with the
34:52employers 'union and let's do an
34:55agreement with the employees. Let's
34:58close the mall on Sundays because it's
35:00not profitable. But the mall stores
35:03need to open according to mall rules.
35:05If they don't open, they get fined."
35:07Then he said: "If you guys make an
35:09agreement for the mall to close on
35:12Sundays, because my business doesn't
35:14justify the risk I'm taking of having
35:17to maybe break the rule and put an
35:19employee to work two or three
35:21consecutive Sundays, I'll pay, but even
35:24paying can't be done, because he paid
35:26her Sunday and he had to make a
35:28collective agreement."
35:30Yeah, deep down the problem is bigger,
35:31right? Because in the case of retail, I
35:34think they sell more on Saturdays and
35:36Sundays, right?
35:37So he was telling me that on Sundays
35:40the workday is from 2 PM to 10 AM, uh,
35:43at the mall, right?
35:44I think from 2 PM to 8 AM, right?
35:46And from 2 PM to 8 AM. So he said that
35:48it wasn't worth it, that his Sunday
35:50business and Tuesday business are the
35:53same. So he said that because of the
35:55risk, the cost, everything involved,
35:57maybe it would be better for him to
35:59open from Monday to Saturday.
36:01So, he avoided the risk of
36:04having a female employee work two
36:05consecutive Sundays and being reported
36:07to the union again.
36:09And how should the employer act in
36:11these cases? How does he prepare for
36:14this change in working hours? We
36:17haven't even talked about it, but we're
36:19bringing it up, and I'm seeing that in
36:20Brazil, instead of increasing
36:22productivity, we're actually decreasing
36:23it, right?
36:24Absolutely.
36:25And ultimately, this comes from the top
36:29down, right? How do you see this? How
36:33does the employer prepare to comply
36:35with NR1, to adapt to a 6-day-on, 1-
36:37day-off schedule? How does he legally
36:40protect himself from this? He needs to
36:43be aligned, André, and he needs to
36:45have a very close defense team, because
36:48he won't be able to do it alone, HR
36:50alone won't be able to do it, and
36:52buying online courses won't work either
36:55. Because the other day I saw, uh, I
36:58participated in an immersion program,
37:00and we had a networking session, and
37:02one of the managers came to talk to me
37:05and said, "Look, uh, no, I avoided
37:07overtime, I'm free from overtime
37:09because I put everyone in positions of
37:12trust in my company." Then I said: "
37:13What do you mean by that?""Oh, I gave
37:15everyone a 40%bonus and they stopped
37:18clocking in at the time clock." I said,
37:21"Since when did you do that?" She said,
37:24"Oh, it's been over a year." I bought a
37:26course from so-and-so, I won't mention
37:27names, but from someone on the internet
37:29, right? And he said that if I gave
37:31everyone a 40%bonus, I'd be free from
37:33clocking in. I said, "You unnecessarily
37:36burdened your company because you paid
37:3840%, and there's no way the
37:40receptionist can have a position of
37:42trust. There's no way the cleaning lady
37:45can have a position of trust. To have a
37:47position of trust, at a minimum, a
37:48person needs to have the power to
37:49command. When will the receptionist be
37:51able to hire and fire someone?" So, why
37:53am I saying this? Because sometimes
37:56people consume a lot of content, you
37:58know, about cutting corners, and then
38:00they can't really have a law firm
38:02that's there in the day-to-day. So, for
38:05me, the business owner needs to have a
38:07law firm that also employs a team,
38:09because it is not beneficial for him to
38:12simply hire an independent lawyer on
38:14his own, okay? Because a lawyer who
38:16works alone doesn't have the same
38:18problems as their client. So, for
38:20example, if the client says, "Oh, I
38:21want to give this employee just cause
38:22for dismissal." The lawyer says: "Oh,
38:24poor thing, why don't you pay him what
38:25he's owed? Fire him." Then, for example
38:28, if I'm the owner, and I have an
38:30employee, I say: "Go ahead, because
38:32he'll sue you, it'll be worse for you."
38:34So, apply the dismissal for just cause.
38:35We'll resolve this later, but apply it,
38:37because I know his pain. I know what
38:39it's like to pay and not receive the
38:41service you paid for. So, what does he
38:43need? He needs a firm that shares his
38:46pain points, that has to implement the
38:48same procedures as his company, because
38:50we have to implement the same
38:51procedures you have to implement, I
38:53have to implement them in mine. It's
38:55the same thing. I'm implementing it
38:57here, but I'm implementing it there too
38:58. I've already sent the notices to my
39:00HR department to put together. Why?
39:02Because we'll have to do it together. I
39:04do it there, and as I create them in my
39:06office, I replicate them for my clients
39:09. So he needs this close, preventative
39:11legal counsel, because when...If the
39:13process goes ahead, when the employee
39:15decides to file a lawsuit, their
39:17defense is already prepared because
39:19they've already taken all the necessary
39:21precautions, they have the security,
39:23the documents, the employee's file is
39:25already ready. If they decide to hire a
39:28lawyer only when they receive the
39:29lawsuit notification, they won't have
39:31any of that documented, and the lawyer
39:34will charge even more. Uh-huh. We're
39:36talking about productivity, right? And
39:38sometimes, I want to leave the business
39:40owner with this so they don't become a
39:41hostage to this kind of thing, right?
39:43How do they proceed? Because, you see
39:45that productivity isn't good, they can
39:47go there, they can demand answers,
39:49right? They can do it in various ways,
39:51but how do they legally protect
39:52themselves by saying, "Man, this guy
39:54isn't producing anymore, I'm going to
39:55say goodbye.""
39:57Yes, André, I think the biggest
39:59mistake a business owner can make is
40:02hiring out of necessity. We all do it.
40:05I've hired many times out of necessity.
40:08So, I have a demand.
40:10So, in your opinion, it's better to
40:12have a bottleneck and not hire just for
40:15the sake of hiring, right? I believe so
40:17. So, I think everything starts with
40:20hiring. So we can perhaps divide this
40:22answer into two moments: the hiring
40:24process and the current situation. So,
40:27today I'm using a much more assertive
40:29hiring model than I did before. So,
40:32what do I do? I think the best
40:36testimony is nothing you experience
40:37yourself, right? Because how can I talk
40:42about something I haven't lived? It's
40:44very difficult. So, in my case, I had a
40:46lot of problems with my team's
40:49productivity because I hired people—
40:53good people, not productive people,
40:56wonderful people to work with,
40:58wonderful—but the productivity didn't
41:02keep up. But why? Because we started
41:05analyzing profiles. So, there's DISC,
41:07right..." Well, that's what we're using
41:10now in new hires, and it makes perfect
41:13sense. You see the DISC, you talk to
41:16the person, and you know if they are
41:18what they answered. DISC is a
41:20behavioral profile. So, there's the
41:22dominant type. The dominant type, the
41:25lawyer profile I'm looking for today,
41:27is the DC type.
41:29They have to be dominant and compliant.
41:32What is a dominant type? A dominant
41:34type is a results-oriented person.
41:36Their fear of failure is so great that
41:39they are like a bulldozer. They do
41:42everything they have to do to get
41:44results. So they are driven by results.
41:46The more difficult the problem, the
41:48better for the dominant type. The
41:50compliant type is the person who checks
41:52, they are cautious, they are careful.
41:55Why? Because while they are dominant in
41:57solving problems, they are careful not
41:59to make mistakes in what they are
42:01solving, because they don't want to be
42:03exposed. So, for me, today the profile
42:06of a productive person is to descend. I
42:09think maybe it even resembles you,
42:11because you need someone who descends,
42:13you need someone who is...decisive, but
42:14also, you know, because after all,
42:16they're going to analyze the projects
42:18and everything else.
42:19Yes, with the wrong training, right?
42:20Exactly. But at the same time, I have a
42:23sales department, just like you do. I
42:26can't put a dominant person in sales
42:27because they don't have much patience.
42:30So for sales, I need someone who is
42:32influential, charismatic, an IS (
42:34Independent Supervisor), for example,
42:37who is stable, so they listen well,
42:39they have a lot of patience. So, the
42:41salesperson is usually an IS, they are
42:43influential because they persuade, but
42:45at the same time they listen to the
42:47client's needs. So what I think is that
42:49the company has to put the right people
42:51in the right places. If you take an IS
42:54and put them in execution, in
42:56operations, that person isn't suitable,
42:59you'll get angry, you'll lose money,
43:02and you'll lose the person. Now, in the
43:05same way, if you put someone down to
43:07sell, they won't sell to anyone because
43:08the person will start complaining,
43:10they'll get angry, but the IS will have
43:11patience. So, what I think the company
43:13has to do is...What to do? She has to
43:15hire, right? And regarding mine, today
43:17wherever I go, we are conducting weekly
43:19visits to all of our clients, aren't we
43:22? So, every time I get there and say, "
43:24HR, are you applying DISC?""No,
43:25starting today you're going to apply
43:27this because you'll save a lot of money
43:30on dismissals. Because, the biggest
43:32pain point for a business owner is
43:34really hiring and firing, because you
43:36wasted time hiring and you pay a
43:37fortune to fire.
43:39So today, to hire, use Disqus. Now, if
43:42you have an employee who isn't
43:44producing, you have to make a decision,
43:47because ultimately, perhaps in the
43:49employee's journey—because, the
43:51question is, in the employee's journey,
43:54they start well and then their
43:56performance declines, right? Anyway,
44:00that's the question, right? So, if the
44:01person is doing well, there comes a
44:03point where they can't anymore, you
44:04warned them, I don't know, twice
44:05because I think that's the standard
44:06practice, right? You warn them once,
44:07you have to talk, you have to warn them
44:09,
44:09talk, see if the person is having
44:10problems, right?
44:11Exactly. All, all, all this prior
44:13communication so the person isn't
44:15caught by surprise, let's say, this is
44:17even legally valid.
44:18Absolutely. So, if the person delivered
44:21and they're not delivering anymore,
44:23there must have been a problem." In the
44:26middle of the road. Either she has a
44:28personal problem that she needs time to
44:31resolve, or she really doesn't want to
44:33continue anymore. And then, uh, I'm
44:36more radical about this, okay? I don't
44:40think the company should be rewarding
44:42this employee. So, many times the
44:44person is in the company, uh, and this
44:47goes from the lowest to the highest
44:50position. But since we have mediums,
44:52let's look at it from an average
44:54perspective.
44:56And I have many cases of employees who
44:58start very well and then, but they are
45:00the kind of people who don't stay in
45:02the place for very long, so you know,
45:05uh, they get tired of the job, so it's
45:07very good, but then they say: "I'm
45:09tired of it here." Uh-huh.
45:11Oh, I'm not going to quit. I'm not
45:13going to. I'm not going to. I want my
45:15right. What right do you have, my
45:16friend? You don't want to work here
45:18anymore. You want me to fire you? But I
45:21need the workforce, so I am not looking
45:23to fire you; it is you who wants to
45:24leave. So we have two options. Either
45:26you quit and leave. Although, either
45:28I'll follow up with you and I'll have
45:30to give you a just cause dismissal,
45:31because I'm not going to reward you for
45:32your poor service. So, for that, you
45:35need to have support. What do many
45:37companies do? Just cause dismissal is a
45:40lot of work. Oh my, the guy is going to
45:42sue me. So the company ends up
45:44softening its stance. But what do you
45:46do in that situation? It depends on the
45:48level of the company. So, as we're
45:50talking to several, several business
45:52owners, we can think that maybe it's
45:54not the case here at CT, for example,
45:57where these are people who are really
45:59at another level of employment, but
46:01there's the level of employee in, uh,
46:03operations, who really want
46:05unemployment insurance. Let's be clear,
46:07they want unemployment insurance. So,
46:09in that case, you can't do that,
46:11because you know what your problem is?
46:14The colleague is even enthusiastic, but
46:16he's seeing the other one slacking off
46:19and you're not doing anything. The
46:21rotten apple.
46:21Exactly. So what are you going to do?
46:23The guy is there slacking off, missing
46:25work, and the other one is overloaded.
46:27Because of him. Then this guy who's
46:30working really hard sees you talking,
46:32you firing him and rewarding his
46:34laziness, right? His stubbornness,
46:37anyway. What's he going to do? If I
46:40want to leave, I'm not going to quit,
46:42I'll do the same thing. So, when we
46:44decide to advise our clients to apply
46:47just cause for dismissal, I solve a
46:49huge problem for the company. Why?
46:52Because the other colleague will say: "
46:54It's not worth slacking off here,
46:56because if I slack off, the company
46:58will follow me, will fire me for just
47:00cause. To maybe get something, and even
47:03then, I'll have to go to court and it
47:05will take a long time. So let me do my
47:07job here. If I'm not satisfied, I'll
47:08resign." With that, you completely
47:11change the company culture and you even
47:13return control to the owner, because
47:15many times the owner is a hostage.
47:18There are many business owners held
47:19hostage by their employees, many, many,
47:21many. "Some people call me and say,' I
47:23don't know what to do with this person
47:25anymore. 'Then I say,' I know what
47:26you're going to do with them. Leave it
47:29to me, I know. '
47:31No, okay, doctor, I think we've already
47:33gone on for over an hour here, haven't
47:36we?
47:36Yeah,
47:38soon you'll be a legal expert.
47:42But do you want to make a final comment
47:43? We touched on everything, didn't we?
47:46In the end, is there anything else?
47:47We've said everything. We've said it
47:48all.
47:49No, I think we've said it all. You
47:51already know you have to put up some
47:52announcements on the bulletin board.
47:53Yeah, so you see, we always learn,
47:55right? Yeah, you already know, you
47:57already know that. No, I think that's
47:59it, André. I think that, well, the
48:01businessman needs someone who thinks
48:04like him. For me, that's the summary.
48:08You need someone who's walking the same
48:10path as you and feels the same pain as
48:13you. Only they will understand you and
48:15only they will be able to defend you in
48:16the way you need."
48:18Yes, I think that the business owner
48:19needs to be well advised,
48:20right?
48:21Why? Because, deep down, my perception
48:24is that we are unable to keep up with
48:26every single aspect of everything. So
48:29you have to be well supported in legal
48:31matters, in HR matters, for example,
48:33sometimes even with an external HR
48:35department to help you with other
48:36things. And this helps you make better
48:40decisions, including, right?
48:43Because the business owner has to be
48:45focused on making money.
48:48Those who have to worry about demands
48:50that aren't related to that are the
48:52people he hired, and then everyone
48:54helps each other. So, that's why I say
48:57that, well, in our office, we have a
49:00lawyer who's always on WhatsApp, so the
49:03client...our civil caseload is smaller
49:06than our labor caseload. Our labor
49:08caseload is constant, all day long, we
49:11have some of our clients with problems.
49:14So they say: "Look, the employee
49:15arrived late, the employee disappeared,
49:17the employee..." HR doesn't do anything
49:19without talking to us. We know
49:22everything HR does. I
49:24understand.
49:25They even say things like, "So-and-so's
49:27case has arrived, I already know it's
49:29coming, I'm prepared for it."
49:32Because of his behavior, because of his
49:33behavior and the monitoring we've
49:35already done. So, and I'm dealing with
49:37a case, I think we've already applied
49:38two dismissals for just cause today.
49:40The employee was absent, didn't bring a
49:42doctor's note, arrived, argued with the
49:44manager, spoke up, the manager asked
49:45him about the doctor's note, he sent
49:47the manager somewhere, I said, "What do
49:49I do now?" I said, "Apply the dismissal
49:51for just cause." Because, oh, but I
49:53don't have any warnings, no. Okay, but
49:55he was disrespectful. He sent the
49:57manager away, he used foul language
49:59with the manager. So, I need to apply
50:01just cause dismissal to him now,
50:02because if I allow it, what will happen
50:04tomorrow? The other men will do it.
50:05Nobody does anything. Exactly.
50:07So, basically, that's it, it's having
50:09someone taking care of you while you're
50:11earning money.
50:12Awesome. Doctor, how do people find you
50:16? Social profile, social media, anyway,
50:20me copying. Yeah, yeah, right?
50:25Abbreviation for Doctor Samara S.
50:27Maciel.
50:28Doctor. Awesome. We'll also leave the
50:31website in the video description, folks
50:33. And that's it. Thank you very much.
50:35Thank you, André. We'll
50:36wrap it up here. If you liked this
50:38episode, leave a like, subscribe to the
50:40channel. Thanks and see you later.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of NR-1: o empresário ainda pode cobrar produtividade? by CatterInfra, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 8,976 words across 1,396 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.