The amendment reduces the standard workweek from 44 to 40 hours without cutting pay and guarantees two paid days off per week. The weekly limit will initially fall to 42 hours on Dec. 16 before dropping to 40 hours a year later.

In addition to easing restrictions on rest days, Dino ruled that during the transition period, which runs through Dec. 15, 2027, employers without collective bargaining agreements may spread the 42-hour workweek over five days, under a 5×2 schedule, with shifts of up to eight hours and 24 minutes without triggering overtime pay. Under Brazil’s Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), work exceeding eight hours a day normally requires overtime compensation.

The injunction, which must still be reviewed by the full Supreme Court, was issued in response to constitutional challenges filed by the National Confederation of Commerce in Goods, Services and Tourism (CNC) and the National Confederation of Industry (CNI). Both organizations had sought additional time to comply with the new rules (ADI 8041 and ADI 8042).

Flexibility on days off

On rest periods, Dino ruled that collective bargaining agreements may override the weekly requirement of two days off and the monthly requirement of eight days off. Employers could therefore grant just one day off in a given week, provided they preserve the eight monthly rest days. Under the injunction, even those eight days could be taken at a later date.

Retail and wholesale representatives raised the issue during a public hearing Tuesday (Nov. 10), citing the demands of the Christmas and New Year holiday season. In his ruling, Dino also pointed to other sectors that could be affected, including agriculture, where working schedules depend on planting and harvesting cycles; tourism and hospitality, which experience seasonal peaks; and offshore operations aboard vessels and platforms. Oil workers, for example, may work rotations of 90 days offshore followed by 90 days off.

“I believe these limits may be adjusted through collective bargaining agreements, provided the full entitlement to two paid weekly rest periods is preserved, even if their use is deferred,” Dino wrote.

The justice also granted unions and employers an additional 90 days, starting Dec. 16, to renegotiate any reciprocal concessions in existing collective bargaining agreements that may need to be revised because provisions conflicting with Amendment 141 will no longer be valid.

During that period, he said, a failure to reach a new agreement does not, in itself, justify eliminating previously negotiated concessions or changing them unilaterally.

Another significant provision gives Congress 180 days to regulate special working arrangements and establish implementation rules for microenterprises and small businesses. Dino also set a 180-day deadline for adapting public contracts to the new working-hour requirements, shortening the original one-year period.

Legal certainty during the transition

Labor law specialists say the decision to maintain the implementation timetable leaves companies facing a “very challenging” situation. Still, they believe the flexibility over rest days, the temporary authorization of eight-hour-and-24-minute shifts and the additional time for collective bargaining provide greater legal certainty during the transition.

Marcello Burle, a partner at law firm Martorelli Advogados, said the ruling offers “indispensable operational relief” by preventing companies from immediately accumulating overtime liabilities if they fail to conclude collective bargaining agreements by December.

“The injunction neutralizes the risk of bargaining deadlocks at the turn of the year and gives companies the predictability they need to redesign shifts and rebalance their collective agreements in an economically rational way during the first quarter of 2027,” Burle said.

Danilo Masko, of law firm Briganti Advogados, also highlighted the exemption from overtime pay for the additional 24 minutes worked each day.

“This prevents labor liabilities from arising solely because negotiations are taking longer,” he said, stressing that the provision is temporary and applies only to this specific situation, rather than granting blanket permission to extend working hours.

Because Dino’s ruling still requires approval by the full Supreme Court, Masko recommends that employers carefully document their new work schedules.

He also noted that the Supreme Court left the distribution of rest days to collective bargaining, without imposing weekly or monthly limits.

“However, the two paid weekly rest periods remain untouchable.”

José Eymard Loguercio, a partner at law firm LBS Advogados, which represents the Unified Workers’ Central (CUT), said preserving the timetable for reducing working hours was important. However, he warned that the flexibility granted for rest days “could create more problems than it solves” because the exemption was defined too broadly.

“The constitutional rule is mandatory. Any exception should be permitted only in exceptional circumstances justified by an inability to comply,” Loguercio said.