The present dissertation deals with the problems related to the ineffectiveness of the fundamental right to the environment of work, especially due to the adoption of a purely monetarizing policy of risks that is only concerned with financially compensating workers for exposure to agents harmful to their life and health, As verified in the labor demands related to the Salobo Project developed in the Southeast of Pará. Thus, the main objective of the work is to verify the legal instruments that can be used to promote a healthy labor habitat for employees, as a way of protecting physical integrity and consequently reduce the rates of industrial accidents and occupational diseases, to the detriment of discussions restricted to the imposition of additional remuneration (additional to insalubrity and dangerousness) that do not serve to encourage the adoption of medical norms and security job. For this, the dissertation carried out a survey of the doctrine and the national and international legal order, as well as qualitatively analyzed four judicial processes of the Salobo Project judged by the Regional Labor Court (TRT) of the 8th Region in the last two years. The work was constructed in three chapters. The first chapter addressed the definition, characteristics, and functions of fundamental law norms, based on the thoughts of Robert Alexy. Subsequently, historical, conceptual and legal aspects related to the work environment. The second chapter discussed the formation of the risk society, according to Ulrich Beck's theory. After that, the main risks arising from the work activity were discussed and the policy of mere monetization of environmental risks at work was discussed. Finally, the third chapter examined the working conditions of workers in the Salobo project developed in Southeastern Pará, based on lawsuits that were processed in the TRT of the 8th Region, and pointed out the alternatives to the realization of the fundamental right to the environment of balanced work. In conclusion, the research verified that the workers of the mentioned project were exposed to risks to their well-being, but only monetizing instruments were used that do not alter the conditions of the working environment, not making use of preventive and precautionary measures, such as, for example, inhibitory tutelages combined with temporary emergency orders.
|
