Rescisão indireta do contrato de trabalho por assédio moral: critérios de reparação nas decisões do TST e do TRT - 21ª

Abstract

This study analyzes the jurisprudential treatment given to workplace harassment as grounds for indirect termination of employment contracts, based on a comparative study between the Superior Labor Court (TST) and the Regional Labor Court of the 21st Region (TRT-21). It uses a qualitative methodology, with a literature review and analysis of judicial decisions issued between 2018 and 2025, considering the central elements for establishing serious employer misconduct: evidence, immediacy, excessive rigor, and non-pecuniary damages. The results demonstrate that the TST adopts a protective stance, valuing testimonial evidence, relativizing the requirement of immediacy, and expressly differentiating between moral damages and existential damages, recognizing the latter when the harassment impacts the worker's routine and life project. In contrast, the TRT-21 presents a more conservative approach, requiring robust material evidence and restricting the recognition of workplace harassment to situations of explicit offense, without clearly distinguishing between the two categories of damages. The differences between the Courts reveal a lack of uniformity in jurisprudence, which compromises the predictability of decisions and the effectiveness of labor law protection. It is concluded that there is a need for greater interpretative coherence and for strengthening preventive policies aimed at protecting mental health in the workplace.