/img alt="Imagem da capa" class="recordcover" src="""/>
Dissertação
Perspectivas da tutela jurisdicional dos interesses metaindividuais trabalhistas no Tocantins
The object of the present study are the demands distributed to the Labor Courts in Tocantins in 2016, with diagnostic focus of the judicial protection of metaindividual labor interests in this State. The purpose of the study was to categorize these demands, knowing what and how many are the proce...
Autor principal: | Fernandes, Suzidarly Ribeiro Teixeira |
---|---|
Grau: | Dissertação |
Idioma: | pt_BR |
Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Tocantins
2018
|
Assuntos: | |
Acesso em linha: |
http://hdl.handle.net/11612/884 |
Resumo: |
---|
The object of the present study are the demands distributed to the Labor Courts in
Tocantins in 2016, with diagnostic focus of the judicial protection of metaindividual labor
interests in this State. The purpose of the study was to categorize these demands,
knowing what and how many are the processes of collective jurisdiction, analyzing the
quantitative of collective processes in comparison with the total number of demands, and
verifying, in the Internal Labor Courts, which individual cases present collective potentiality.
Qualitative-quantitative descriptive research was guided by deductive method and
consisted of a case study, with a theoretical basis based on incursions of historical
materialism. The investigation allowed to identify an absolute preponderance of individual
processes, to the detriment of procedural collectivization. It was possible to verify a greater
number of collective demands in Courts at State’s capital in comparison to judicial units
located at inland, as well as, in such units, the existence of a large percentage of individual
demands that, due to the similarity of objects and identity of defendants, could constituent
a class action suit. It was also possible to attest to the occurrence of a phenomenon of
generation of individual demands, based on collective judgments of Labor Courts at
Palmas, increasing the procedural quantitative of these Courts. It was concluded that the
percentage of collective demands, by itself, does not allow to assess the effectiveness of
judicial protection of metaindividual labor interests, considering the expressive number of
individual cases resulting from decisions rendered in collective demands, being perceived
the impossibility to properly comply the goals established by CNJ for the prioritization of
collective actions, in view of the absence of correct framing of collective nature demands,
and it was ascertained that several actions, although they proceeded as individuals, had
as their objects the protection of diffuse, collective and/or individual homogeneous
interests. |