Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce

No, there is no concept of redundancy that would be a justified reason to dismiss employees in Brazil, and termination of employment due to shortage or work or other economic reasons would fall within the concept of “termination without cause”.

In Brazil, as a rule, termination of employment by the employer does not require a cause, and the employer can terminate the employment agreement of an employee without any reason by paying the relevant severance dues, provided that the employee is not protected against termination.

In this context, in practical terms, companies facing shortage of work or other circumstances that would lead to a reduction of workforce would, as a rule, terminate the employment agreements of the employees without cause.

Yes, there is. An employee is redundant if the following conditions are met:

• the employer adopted a decision on organisational change;
• the change concerns the scope of activities, tasks, technical equipment, number of employees, or otherwise alters the structure of the employer;
• the aim of the change is to increase work efficiency, reduce costs, or otherwise alter the performance of the employer’s enterprise; and
• as a result, the employee’s work is redundant or not needed.

According to case law, the employee’s work is not needed, either at all or at least in part, with the rest being distributed among the current employees or corporate body. Rebranding the position, hiring a new employee to carry out the work of the dismissed employee shortly thereafter, or otherwise fabricating the redundancy with an ulterior motive does not qualify as redundancy.

Czech law provides two other similar reasons based on which an employer is entitled to terminate employment – closing down or relocation of the employer’s undertaking or its part. Together with redundancy, these three reasons are known as “organisational reasons” (in Czech: “organizační důvody”) for termination of employment. However, closing down and relocation of the employer or its part are different reasons than the redundancy itself, and therefore we do not address them further.

The basic steps for the termination of an employment agreement without cause in Brazil would be:

• having a termination meeting to inform the employees about the termination and deliver a termination letter to them;
• including the relevant information about the termination in the government’s system (e-Social), which will also register the termination in the employee’s work booklet (that is now digital);
• paying the statutory severance dues and presenting the termination documents within ten days of the employee’s last day of work;
• scheduling a termination medical examination for a date within ten days of the employee’s last day of work; and
• ratifying the termination before the union, if this process is required in the collective bargaining agreement applied to the employee.

The employer must take the following steps:

• review underlying documents (including organisational charts), decide what organisational change needs to be made and work out which positions are no longer needed, and plan the timing;
• adopt a decision on organisational change, including its effective date and which redundant positions are cancelled. The decision doesn’t have to be in writing or state reasons for the redundancy. However, both are highly recommended and a market standard, as this serves as evidence;
• if there are unions, consult the unions in advance (see question 4), and if a union representative is supposed to be made redundant, obtain the union’s consent in advance (see question 11);
• execute dismissal either by a termination agreement (recommended) or a termination notice with the redundant employees. In case of termination notice, the redundancy must (based on the decision) take effect on or before the notice period expired, not after; and
• implement the organisational change (including updating organisational charts).

Organisational changes may also be governed by collective agreements, in which case additional rules may apply (this applies to all the questions below).

The process may change if there will be many employees being terminated at the same time or within a short period of time (“mass termination”).

Although the Brazilian Labour Code indicates that “the unmotivated individual, multiple or collective dismissals are equal for all purposes, and there is no need for prior authorization of a union or need for a collective agreement or collective agreement for its execution”, current case law from the Supreme Federal Court indicates that the union must be involved in situations of mass termination of employees for the terminations to be fully valid.

The law and case law do not specify how many employees being terminated would trigger the need to involve the union, so this analysis is made on a case-by-case basis, considering the total number of employees of the company and the percentage of the employees being terminated without replacement.

Yes, Czech law provides a special procedure for “collective dismissal” in all three cases of organisational changes (see question 1).

The threshold is:

• ten employees if the employer has 20 to 100 employees;
• 10% of employees if the employer has 101 to 300 employees; and
• 30 employees if the employer has more than 300 employees.

The respective number of employees must be dismissed due to redundancy within a period of 30 days. If at least five employees are dismissed within 30 days by termination notice due to redundancy, then employees dismissed in the same period by termination agreement are included in these thresholds.

In addition to the process above, collective dismissal must be:

• consulted with unions 30 days in advance, or notified to each affected employee if there are no active unions at the employer; and
• notified to the local Labour Office: (i) in advance, including information on commencement of the consultation process with unions; and (ii) on its result once it’s completed, in the form of a written report that must be delivered in copy to unions, which then have the right to comment on it – employment relationships can terminate only after the lapse of 30 days following this.

There is no need to consult with the union unless there is a mass termination of employees as explained above, in which case the risk-averse approach would be to involve the union prior to the termination.

Note that the decision from the Supreme Federal Court indicates that the union must be involved prior to the termination for it to be valid, but an agreement between the parties is not a condition for the validity of the terminations.

Yes, the employer must consult any termination notice in advance. Agreement doesn’t have to be reached (with the exception of employees with enhanced protection; see question 11). In practice, the consultation is more of an announcement.

In case of collective dismissal, consultation must take place, and the employer must try to reach an agreement and inform the Labour Office of the result.

It is possible. In a mass termination of employees, although agreement is not a condition for the validity of the terminations, the union or the labour prosecutor’s office can still try to file a lawsuit to try to suspend the terminations and/or claim the reinstatement of the employees.

If this claim is filed and a lower labour court decision determines the suspension of the termination and/or the reinstatement of the employees, the restructuring could be delayed until this lower labour court decision is reversed by a higher court. In a worst-case scenario, the terminations could be prevented if the decision cancelling the terminations becomes final. 

It is the employer’s right to make an organisational change and its factual validity cannot be challenged. However, the individual dismissals may be challenged by employees. If successful (ie, the employer doesn’t prove redundancy), the restructure in the individual case may be prevented.

In the case of collective dismissals, it may be delayed by the unions prolonging the consultation. However, even then the unions and the Labour Office can’t prevent the dismissal, and the only way to prevent individual dismissal is a successful individual challenge by the dismissed employee.

If the unions believe that the collective agreement was violated by the redundancy or in the process of its implementation, they may dispute this violation. The dispute may be resolved by a mediator or escalated to an arbitrator. However, this doesn’t prevent the employer from executing the dismissals or restructure (only if violation is later found, it may have certain implications based on the individual collective agreement and nature of its violation).

The involvement of a union in a mass termination of employees must happen before the termination of the employees. The discussions with the union do not have a fixed term to be concluded or specific items to be covered.

In the discussions with the company, the union usually tries to enhance the termination package that will be granted to the employees. In addition to the mandatory severance payments, it is common for the union to request additional financial compensation, extension of health insurance for a certain period of time, and/or outplacement services for the employees.

If the company decides to move forward with a mass termination of employees without consulting with the union, there will be a risk of a lawsuit by the union or by the labour public prosecutor claiming the reinstatement of the employees. Note that it is not certain that a lawsuit would be filed, and even if one is, the company will be able to defend its claim and present its reasons for terminating the employees without prior consultation with the union. However, case law currently indicates that the chances of loss for the company would be at least possible.

In case of individual dismissal, the consultation process is, rather, a notification (with the exception of employees with enhanced protection; see question 11) including:

• the identity of the employee;
• termination grounds (redundancy); and
• basic details of the redundancy (why and when).

It should take place prior to the dismissal (no specific deadline is given).

In case of collective dismissal, the consultation process includes:

• measures preventing or limiting the collective dismissal;
• mitigation measures (eg, employing the redundant employee at other workplaces of the employer);
• reasons;
• number and professions of redundant employees;
• number and professions of all the employees;
• the period during which the collective dismissal takes place;
• selection method of redundant employees; and
• severance pay and other rights of the redundant employees.

The consultation process must take place no later than 30 days prior to the collective dismissal. The local Labour Office must be notified as well (see question 3).

The administrative fine for violation of the consultation process with unions is up to 200,000 koruna. Employees who suffer damage as a result may claim compensation.

No. The economic business rationale is not legally required in the consultation with the union but may be requested by the union representatives during the negotiations. If presented, the union cannot legally challenge the information, unless the information itself is not valid.

Yes, an economic business rationale should be the reason for organisational change, and therefore the redundancy, and as such should be part of the consultation.

No. It is not usual for employees to be consulted individually before terminations.

In case of collective dismissals, if there are no unions or employee representatives, the employer must inform and directly consult the affected employees to the same extent.

In case of individual dismissal, it is not a requirement, nor best practice, and highly depends on the strategy in the individual case.

Employees in a job tenure situation cannot be terminated without cause by the employer for the period of their job tenure condition, so companies usually avoid terminating these employees first to avoid the exposure to a reinstatement labour claim.

The only rule is that the employee’s position or work must be genuinely redundant (see question 1). If more than one employee fulfils this condition, it is up to the employer which employee to select. However, this choice must not indicate that there are in fact different motives for the redundancy of the selected employee (eg, disputes with the employer, unsatisfactory performance, or gender or other discriminatory motives).

Yes – employees who are protected against termination either by law or by the collective bargaining agreement.

Yes, a termination notice due to redundancy is not allowed during the period for which an employee is:

• declared temporarily medically unfit for work or in institutional treatment (unless the employee has intentionally caused this unfitness, or it is a direct consequence of the employee’s alcohol intoxication or substance abuse);
• deployed in military exercises or military service;
• on long-term full leave to act in public office;
• pregnant, or on maternity leave, paternity leave, or parental leave;
• declared temporarily unfit for night work if they perform night work; or
• on leave caring for a child under 10 years of age, treating a child under 10 years of age or other natural persons, or providing long-term care, all as specified in the Czech Sickness Insurance Act.

Yes. Brazilian law sets forth a few situations that prevent employees from being terminated, such as:

• pregnant employees;
• employees in the military service;
• employees who are elected union directors;
• employees elected by their peers as their representatives in the internal commission for the prevention of accidents; and
• employees who are returning from leave in connection with a work-related accident or work-related illness.

Collective bargaining agreements usually grant additional job tenure conditions, such as protection against termination for employees who are within a certain period of time before being eligible to retire, or for employees who are returning from vacation or sick leave.

Yes, members of a trade union body during their term of office and for a period of one year after the end of their term of office. The employer must have prior consent of the unions for termination of their employment relationship by a notice. Consent is deemed to be given if the unions don’t respond within 15 days. Consent is valid for two months. Termination notice without such consent is invalid unless the court decides in the validity case that the employer could not have been justifiably required to keep the employee.

The employer must deliver a termination notice to the employee to inform them about the termination and if the prior notice period will be worked or paid in lieu of work.

The basic severance dues in a termination of an employment agreement without cause are:

• salary balance;
• prior notice;
• 13th salary (pro-rated, depending on the termination date);
• accrued and vested vacation plus the one-third constitutional bonus;
• severance pay fund deposits (FGTS) and a penalty of 40% of the FGTS balance; and
• indemnification corresponding to an extra monthly salary if the employee is terminated one month before the annual execution of the collective bargaining agreement.

The payment of statutory severance dues and the delivery of the termination documents must happen within ten days of the employee’s last day of work.

The employee must be submitted to a termination medical examination within ten days of their last day of work and, if required by the collective bargaining agreement, the termination must be ratified by the union.  

A redundant employee is entitled to a statutory severance payment, regardless of whether the employment termination is made by notice or agreement and if the redundancy is explicitly stated as the reason for the termination.

The severance payment is due on the next scheduled pay date following the termination of employment. A later due date can be agreed.

There is no formula to calculate the mandatory severance payments, which are based on the employee’s compensation, dates of hire and termination, and time of service. In summary, the amounts would be:

• salary balance corresponds to the days worked in the month of termination;
• prior notice is of 30 days plus three additional days per complete year of work with the company, limited to 90 days;
• 13th salary is calculated based on the number of months worked in the relevant year, considering the days of the notice period, and 15 days or more worked in a month is considered a full month for the calculation of this amount;
• vested and accrued vacations, plus the one-third constitutional bonus, are calculated based on the employee’s hiring date, except if the company grants collective vacation, which can change the calculation of the vacation periods;
• FGTS, which as a rule corresponds to 8% of the employee’s severance dues, with minor exceptions;
• a penalty of 40% on top of the balance of the employee’s FGTS account; and
• an indemnification corresponding to an extra monthly salary can be due if the employee is terminated one month before the annual execution of the collective bargaining agreement.

The severance payment amount differs based on the length of the employment as follows:

• one gross average monthly salary of the employee if the employment lasted less than one year;
• two gross average monthly salaries of the employee if the employment lasted at least one year but less than two years; and
• three gross average monthly salaries of the employee if the employment lasted at least two years.

If the working hours account applies (specific working hours distribution scheme under the Czech Labour Code) the statutory severance is the relevant amount above plus three gross average monthly salaries of the employee.

The severance payment may also be higher if stated so by:

• agreement between the parties;
• the employer’s internal regulations; or
• a collective bargaining agreement.

A gross average monthly salary of the employee must be calculated for each employee separately using the specific rules of the Labour Code.

No.

Not in cases of individual dismissals.

In cases of collective dismissals, the employer must notify the relevant branch of the Labour Office:

• of the intention to carry out collective dismissal;
• that the consultation process has been initiated with the unions or the employees; and
• of the specific aspects of the collective dismissal, to the same extent as the unions (see question 6).

Following the consultation, the employer must deliver a written report to the Labour Office stating:

• that the employer has decided on collective redundancies;
• the outcome of the consultation process;
• the number and occupational composition of all employees; and
• the number and occupational composition of the employees to be made redundant.

A copy of the report must be delivered to the unions, which then have the right to comment on it.

No, unless the collective bargaining agreement determines something in this regard.

No, generally there is no such obligation. If the conditions for dismissal due to redundancy are met, the employer is not obliged to offer the employee an alternative solution.

However, in some specific individual cases, the courts have concluded that if the employer still needs the work on part-time basis, the employer should first offer the employee this part-time job.

Yes. The information in connection with the termination of any employment agreement must be informed to the government system called e-Social, which happens in the same month of the termination or in the month following the termination.

There are no specific notification obligations after making the redundancies. Only general notification obligations, which are the same for all employment terminations, apply.

These general notifications must be made within eight days, using the relevant forms, to: (i) the employee’s health insurance company; and (ii) the District Social Security Administration (including the pension insurance record sheet).

If wage deductions were made to satisfy the employee’s debt to a third party, the employer must notify the relevant court (or tax authority case of tax debt), including an account of the deductions.

No. Employees can always file a labour claim against their employer to claim employment rights they understand are due to them (eg, unpaid severance payments, overtime), but unless the employee has a claim of a job tenure condition that was not observed (eg, pregnancy) the termination itself cannot be challenged.

The labour rights are discussed in labour claims that are filed before the labour court, which as a rule has three levels of jurisdictions (lower labour court, appellate labour court, and superior labour court). Arbitration is allowed to discuss employment relationships and labour rights, but it is not common in Brazil yet.

An employee may challenge the validity of a dismissal for redundancy if they consider that the statutory conditions were not met. First, the employee who wishes to remain employed must inform the employer without undue delay after the termination notice that they insist on continuing their employment. Second, the employee must file a lawsuit at the district court of the employer’s seat (residence or registered address). The lawsuit must be made within two months from the date on which the employment should have ended. After the two months, the right to file the lawsuit expires.

If the dismissal for redundancy is found invalid, the employee who wishes to remain employed remains to be employed at the original position under the original conditions and is entitled to a full compensation of salary for the whole time from the invalid termination until work is assigned again, or until the employment is validly terminated (ie, including the time of the court proceedings). The court may reduce the amount of such compensation if, for example, the employee has found another job in the interim, or could have found one.

There’s no statutory authorisation for unions to raise any claims at the court on behalf of employees except for insolvency proceedings (see question 21). However, only attorneys at law can represent employees fully and without limits in any proceedings. Another natural person can be granted a power of attorney in a specific case (not repeatedly). Theoretically, this could be a member or employee of the unions, but this is not a market standard.

No, considering that the law already sets forth a mandatory termination package that must be paid and that sometimes already represents relevant amounts. In addition, private releases are not fully valid unless ratified by a labour court in a specific procedure.  

In this context, private settlement agreements are more frequent when there is a special condition to be addressed with the employee, or if the parties agree on additional amounts and conditions at the end of the employment agreement.

One exception would be in the context of a voluntary termination programme. This option would be a programme that is negotiated with the union, in which the company usually offers an additional package for employees who voluntarily accept terminating their employment agreements.

The main advantage for the employees in a voluntary termination programme would be receiving a more robust package than they would in the context of a regular termination, while the company would benefit from a valid release, as if the agreement was ratified by a labour court.  

Yes, it is very common and highly recommended to terminate the employment by mutual agreement when making employees redundant. The termination agreement does not have to state any reasons for termination. However, should the reason be redundancy of the employee, the employee is entitled to statutory severance payment regardless. To motivate the employees to conclude the termination agreement, it is a market standard to offer a higher severance package than the statutory severance payment.

An individual redundancy process is usually completed in ten days, from the employee’s last day of work. A collective redundancy with non-involvement of the union would take the same amount of time.

If the union is involved in a collective redundancy, the process would take around 30 days, since the union usually tries to negotiate an additional severance package for the employees.

Individual redundancies generally take around two to three months. The organisational change must be prepared, and the termination agreement negotiated or the termination notice given. In case of the notice, the statutory notice period is two months. There’s no statutory notice period requirement in case of agreement, therefore it can be faster. It can also take longer (eg, more complicated cases, restructuring, C-level or other higher managers).

For collective redundancies, the process takes several months (at least three) due to higher demands on preparation, more complicated structuring, the consultation process, and the notification obligation to the Labour Office.

No, but in a worst-case scenario, the union or labour prosecutor office may file a collective labour claim if the employees dismissed did not receive the statutory severance dues and the company is hiring other employees.

The statutory law does not expressly prohibit certain conduct. However, a redundancy means that the employee’s work is no longer needed and therefore any hiring (internal or external) for the same (or largely the same) position should be avoided (or at least thoroughly considered), especially for the two-month period during which the employee can challenge the validity of the dismissal.

No.

The term “restructuring” in Czech law means one of the ways of resolving a company’s bankruptcy in insolvency proceedings. During this process, organisational changes including redundancies may occur. This kind of restructuring does not require unions’ consent; however, consultation may be required. Further, unions may represent the employees in insolvency proceedings.

In Czech law, “restructuring” within the meaning of a business transaction or corporate transformation or changes (i.e. not a type of insolvency proceeding) can also lead to transfer of rights and obligations from the employment relationship to another employer (transfer of undertakings), ie, the employee and their employment will be transferred to a new employer as a result of such transaction. In this case, the employer must inform the unions or other representatives (and if there are none, then the individual employees) and consult at least 30 days in advance:

• the effective date of the transfer;
• reasons for the transfer;
• legal, economic, and social consequences of the transfer for the employees; and
• measures to be taken in relation to the employees.

In case of cross-border mergers or spin-offs, the employer also must: (i) inform the employees or unions of their right to get acquainted with the written merger or spin-off project and give written comments on it; and (ii) generally reach agreement with unions regarding the extent and manner of the right of influence of the employees of the successor corporation (for example, in certain cases by electing a certain number of members of supervisory board in a joint stock company) if the seat of the newly formed entity is supposed to be in the Czechia. Further corporate obligations depend on the form of such restructuring.

However, the described labour law obligations don’t apply in the case of mere ownership change of the employer’s company where this has no direct legal implications for the employees (ie, it isn’t a transfer of undertaking or a termination reason).

No, the employees cannot act to legally prevent any proposals going ahead, but the company acquiring the business would become a successor in interest from the employment standpoint. Companies from the same economic group are seen as a sole employer for employment purposes, so the transfer of employees triggers the transfer of the labour rights and obligations accrued by the transferred employees, which will be fully undertaken by the new employer.

In general, employees have limited ability to influence the process of business transactions. The consultation process (see question 21) doesn’t have to result in an agreement with or of the unions. The administrative fine for violation of the consultation process is up to 200,000 Czech Koruna. If there are no unions and the employer breaches its information obligation towards the individual employees (see question 21), the law provides no administrative penalty. In each case, the employee could claim compensation for damage if any damage occurred.

In Brazil, there is no specific regulation governing the transfer of employees, and the matter is governed jointly by the Federal Constitution, the Brazilian Labour Code, the rules of the collective bargaining agreements, collective agreements, employment agreements, and case law.

There is no mandatory protection for employees who may be involved in the context of a business transaction, other than what is valid for all Brazilian employees, such as job tenure conditions, prior notice, and severance dues.

The transfer of employees between companies of the same group does not require the termination of the employment agreements of the transferred employees. The employees could be automatically transferred once the corporate structure is changed (eg, a merger) or formally transferred in the context of a purchase of assets.

In this context, it is a recommended practice to formally transfer the employees, since it is an opportunity to harmonise employment conditions and update employment documents.

If the statutory conditions for transfer are met, the transfer occurs automatically, ie, neither the original employer, the new employer, the employees, nor the unions can avoid the transfer. An employee may prevent their own transfer only by serving termination notice to the employer before the transfer’s effective date, in which case the employment terminates on the day immediately preceding the transfer’s effective date at the latest. If the employer didn’t inform employee at least 30 days in advance (see question 21), the employee may serve their termination notice within two months after the transfer’s effective date – in which case, only a 15-day notice period applies.

Individual rights and obligations are transferred in full to the new employer. The rights and obligations under the original employer’s collective agreement are also transferred to the new employer, but only for the duration of the collective agreement, and for no longer than to the end of the following calendar year.

Transfer itself is not a statutory reason for terminating the employment. However, a restructuring (organisation change) leading to redundancy may happen before, during, or following the transfer. In such a case, the employee has the same rights as in the case of other redundancies.

If the employee terminates the employment by a notice or by an agreement within two months of the effective date of the transfer, they may raise a claim at court that the reason for termination was a substantial deterioration in working conditions caused by the transfer. If the court confirms it, the employee will be entitled to statutory severance (see question 13).

The transfer of employees between companies of the same economic group would basically consist of a bureaucratic procedure. In addition to adjustments to the company’s internal systems, the information about the employees being transferred needs to be included in the e-Social system, which updates the Employee Booklet and the registration file information.

It may also be necessary to update the system in connection with the FGTS, since the FGTS deposits are made in the employee’s bank account at a federal bank that contains the employer’s information. 

In an assets acquisition, the transfer of employees to a company that is not part of the same economic group would not be automatic, so usually there is the termination of the relevant employees without cause and the rehiring of the group by the acquiring company. Note that in this context, the planned business transfer can be affected by job tenure situations (eg, work-related accident, pregnancy) and by the potential possibility of employees refusing to accept the new company’s proposal of employment.

Since the transfer of rights and obligations under employment law occurs automatically, it is generally sufficient to follow the legally prescribed procedure for a given business transfer. In addition, it is necessary to comply with the information and consultation obligation (see question 21). Further, general reporting and notification obligations to the state authorities apply.

Yes. In Brazil, the changes in an employee’s employment conditions can only occur if the employer and employee mutually give consent to them, and only then if the changes do not imply any harm to the employee. Otherwise, the changes will be declared null and void, even if the employee is educated and expressly consented to them.

In addition to the limitation to change employment conditions, there are specific benefits and additional employment rights granted by the collective bargaining agreement, which also needs to be checked before any harmonisation of employment conditions.

Currently there is a rule in connection with the government’s meal programme determining that the amounts of meal or food benefit must be the same for all the company’s workers. The benefit cannot be granted in cash, so the common practice is for the company to provide the amounts using benefit cards or meal vouchers. 

In the Brazilian Labour Code, there are regulations on equal pay for equal work determining that employees who have identical jobs or duties, of equal value, working for the same employer, in the same establishment, must be paid the same salary.

The Brazilian Labour Code clarifies that jobs of equal value are those performed by employees who provide the service with the same productivity level and same technical quality, and there are exceptions when the company has a structured career plan, the difference of time in the position between the employees is higher than two years, or if there is a difference of more than four years of service at the company between the employees.

The working conditions of the transferred employees cannot substantially worsen. If this were to happen and the employee gave termination notice within two months of the transfer, the employee could claim statutory severance (see question 23).

In addition, the employer must comply with the general principle of equal treatment and ensure equal treatment of both the original and new employees in terms of their working conditions, remuneration, and other benefits, training, and the possibility of promotion.

As a rule, salary reduction and demotions are not allowed, and any change to the employment conditions of the employees that can be considered detrimental to the employees can be considered null and void by a labour court.

There may be exceptions in connection with exceptional situations, such as the covid-19 crisis, which are governed by specific regulations, or when the union is involved in the negotiation.

Other exceptions may apply if the employee is the one requesting the change, especially if the employee is considered a “highly educated employee”, which means that they have a salary of more than twice the maximum amount of social security benefit paid in the country[1] and a college degree. These employees are considered to have more conditions when negotiating certain matters with the employer.

If the hours, pay, or benefits are agreed in the employment or other contract, then no unilateral change can be made.

Working hours – either statutory weekly working hours apply (40 hours per week) or shorter working hours are agreed. In either case, the employer determines the distribution unilaterally (subject to complying with statutory rules and limits) unless agreed differently.

Salary – if it isn’t agreed in the employment or other contract, the employer unilaterally determines the salary by an internal regulation or by a salary statement.

Benefits – if they aren’t agreed in the employment or other contract, the employer unilaterally determines the benefits by an internal regulation or by a salary statement.

Not entirely. If the change can be considered detrimental to the employee, there is always a risk that this change be declared null and void by a labour court, even if the agreement was signed.

Usually changes in the rights and benefits granted by the collective bargaining agreement can change with minor risk of questioning if the document itself changes or if there is change of union classification of the employees.

As for employment terms and conditions in general, if these have been agreed in the employment or other contract, they can be changed only by agreement. Validity of express contractual provision to vary the conditions depends on its structure and which conditions it concerns, and therefore there’s no generally applicable answer to the question.

The Labour Code further allows, in certain cases, a change in type of work, workplace, or employer by a temporary transfer of an employee to a different work position, workplace, or employer. Generally, consent is required; however, in certain cases, the employer can (and in very specific cases, has to) make a temporary transfer unilaterally (for example, if the employee is medically unfit to perform the agreed type of work, or to avert imminent danger). The employer must adhere to strict statutory conditions.

Not without risk. As a rule, the employee must consent to any change to their employment conditions, and if there is any change without this consent, and the change is considered detrimental, there would be risk for the employer.

On the other hand, in Brazilian employment courts, substance prevails over form, so if an employee was hired to work 44 hours per week, but always worked 40 hours per week (more favourable condition), an attempt to start enforcing the 44 hours per week could be successfully challenged by the employee, since the working hours were always 40 hours per week.

Yes, the employee and the employer may agree on certain changes and variations implicitly. However, it is recommended to avoid such situations.

As a rule, termination of the employment agreement without cause. In very specific situations, the employer may consider terminating the employee’s employment agreement for cause, but it would be a riskier approach.

If agreement is required to vary an employment term or condition, then the only option to vary it is an agreement.

A unilateral change that can be considered detrimental to the employee usually triggers the filing of a labour claim by the employee. The employee can claim the termination of the employment agreement is due to the employer’s fault and receive:

• severance as if they were terminated without cause by the employer;
• the payment of differences of labour rights considering the employment conditions before the change; and
• in some cases, the payment of an indemnification of pain and suffering.

Note that employees can file labour claims while working at the company, so the employee could try to reverse the change made by the employer in court immediately after the change, or file the labour claim within the next two years following the termination of their employment.

If filed within the two-year period, the employee can claim employment rights in connection with the past five years of employment, counted from the date the claim was filed.

If varied unilaterally in a case where agreement was required, the employee may challenge the variation (depending on the situation, by demanding the employer to: refrain from such conduct, restore the original terms, or compensate the employee for the damage caused by such conduct). Depending on the situation there could also be a risk of administrative penalties.

There are no upcoming legislative developments related to the matters discussed above that may bring relevant changes to our comments.

The Czech parliament is currently debating several changes in the area of labour law. However, none of the currently debated changes should affect the answers above.