PGR defends that the minimum wage law for nursing is constitutional

- Article Top Advertisement -

The Attorney General of the Republic, Augusto Aras, sent a demonstration to the Federal Supreme Court (STF) in which he defends the constitutionality of the law that established a national salary floor for nurses, nursing assistants and technicians and midwives.

The move took place in a lawsuit filed by the National Confederation of Health, Hospitals and Establishments and Services (CNSaúde) against provisions of the norm.

- Article Inline Advertisement 1-

For Augusto Aras, there is no doubt that the Parliament considered aspects related to the budgetary impact, and that the vast majority of parliamentarians decided that the creation of a salary floor for nurses, nursing assistants/technicians and midwives “was a desired and viable political conduct”. , in the exercise of a typical function of that Power”.

“The adoption of a certain salary floor will result in a new redistribution of costs to be absorbed and shared by the system. There will be undeniable effects on the agents’ actions, however, the political judgment that it is worth bearing such costs in favor of valuing health careers is strictly a political decision, entrusted to parliamentarians, through the legislative process”, he said.

- Advertisement -

According to Aras, reconsidering the matter would be the same as bringing it to another round of strictly political discussion.

“In a strictly functional view, it is not advisable that the eminently political function fit in the judicial review, otherwise the limits between these two powers will be obscured”.

For Aras, “the assessment of the social and economic impacts of the law approved by the National Congress, and sanctioned by the President of the Republic, is part of the very merits of the legislative process, not being given to the Judiciary, under the pretext of insufficiency or deficiency of debates, re-examine the decision of Parliament in order to affirm the right or wrong of its assessment and of the product of legislative activity”.

Aras also stated that the lack of indication of a prior budget allocation for the implementation of the measure does not have the force to invalidate a law, from the constitutional point of view. “The lack would only create an impediment to the implementation in the same financial year in which it was foreseen”, said Aras.


Last Sunday (4), Minister Luís Roberto Barroso suspended the rule. The minister claimed that it was necessary to pay attention to the possible negative impacts of the adoption of salary floors and that the Legislative and Executive did not pay attention to enable the implementation of the floor.

The decision was taken to the virtual plenary. So far, the score has three votes to keep Barroso’s decision. In the virtual there is no discussion, only the presentation of votes. Ministers can ask for a view (more time for analysis) and the trial is suspended. If there is a request for prominence, the judgment is taken to the physical.

Source: CNN Brasil

- Article Bottom Advertisement -


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Hot Topics

Related Articles