Argumentação jurídica e fundamentação em direito

um estudo de caso nas sentenças que decidem sobre a indenização pelo assédio moral no ambiente de trabalho

Abstract

The general objective of this research is to identify, in the Sentences analyzed, whether the arguments and legal foundations contribute to discouraging the practice of moral harassment in the workplace. The importance of the analysis is due to the need to review the paradigms used by legal professionals when dealing with moral harassment, since it is not uncommon for the moral damage caused by moral harassment to be equated, in terms of monetary compensation, with moral damage, caused by consumer relations. The research was carried out through jurisprudential analysis, seeking to identify the elements present in the argumentative speech, and in the justification used, that contribute to achieving the objective of this study. The analysis is carried out in the TRT-6, among the sentences that rejected requests for compensation for moral damages. The study concludes that in the Sentences analyzed, the argumentation and legal reasoning validate elements that make the action of the Judiciary insufficient to discourage the practice of moral harassment; either because the sentences present weak arguments and justification, or because they ignore the probability of moral harassment under the objective responsibility of the company, when there is no proof of the subjective responsibility of the employee or representative investigated for the practice of moral harassment, or even because an attempt is made to disqualify the harassment moral focusing on economic growth and challenges, productivity and company profits, among other points.