For millions of Brazilian citizens, having a job formalized by the Labor Card (CLT) represented security and stability, guaranteeing benefits such as paid vacation, thirteenth-month salary, medical leave, and retirement. However, this perception is changing; for many young people, the CLT model has come to be associated with difficult conditions, such as waking up early to catch crowded public transport with minimum wage.
This contrast is evident in the political proposals and statements of candidates for the Presidency of the Republic. While some advocate for maintaining and strengthening the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), which structures labor relations in Brazil since 1943, others suggest creating alternative hiring systems, expanding negotiation autonomy between employers and workers, or even replacing the current system.
Does the CLT need changes?
The suggestions from presidential contenders stem from the recognition that the work environment has undergone significant transformations. The increased use of applications, remote work, hiring professionals as Legal Entities (PJ), micro-entrepreneurship, and technological advancement have profoundly altered the way Brazilians earn income and work.
The divergence among candidates lies in the interpretation of these changes and the proposed solutions. Some see the expansion of these modalities as proof that labor legislation has become excessively restrictive, requiring more freedom in relations between companies and employees. Others, on the other hand, believe that these same transformations require updating the mechanisms of social support for those who do not fit into traditional employment formats.
Why is the CLT being questioned?
The CLT was established in 1943, during the government of Getúlio Vargas, in a period of Brazilian industrialization and structuring of labor relations. Over the decades, it incorporated essential protections, such as paid vacations, 13th salary, FGTS, maternity leave, and working hour regulations. The signed card was historically access to these rights for several generations.
However, the labor market has evolved: industry has lost economic relevance in favor of the service sector. With the internet, new forms of hiring emerged, digital platforms began mediating activities, and millions of people started working independently, either as micro-entrepreneurs or PJs.
Currently, about 1.8 million Brazilians work through digital service platforms. Furthermore, the percentage of self-employed individuals with a CNPJ reached an all-time high according to IBGE, jumping from 15% in 2012 to 27.1% in 2025. These data are used by proponents of change, arguing that the market demands greater flexibility in labor relations.
In recent years, this discourse has gained strength on social media: the signed card has come to be linked to inflexible routines, long commutes, low wages, and little autonomy. In contrast, informality, entrepreneurship, and independent work are often seen as symbols of freedom and potential for financial advancement.
Sociologist Ricardo Antunes observed that many young people grew up seeing relatives in exhausting routines without achieving financial stability. Simultaneously, they were exposed to a culture that values individual entrepreneurship and professional autonomy. He stressed that although the promise of being one's own boss is very attractive, there is a crucial distinction between this promise of autonomy and the reality experienced by these workers.
Political scientist Mayra Goulart adds that many seek more freedom to manage their time and build less hierarchical relationships. However, she warns that this does not imply a real capacity to negotiate their economic subsistence. According to her, these individuals do not have the real ability to manage their time or rest because they must fight for dignity.
In the researcher's analysis, this picture reflects a trend of transforming precariousness into merit. She points to the dissemination of an ideology where the fight for dignity can lead to overexploitation or self-exploitation, making working without rest or vacation seem like a moral virtue.
Why do the diagnoses differ so much?
For Mayra Goulart, the differences in opinion derive from deeper views on social inequality, economic freedom, and the role of the State. Part of the criticism of labor legislation is linked to the belief that state regulation restricts economic freedom.
In practice, the disagreement among candidates manifests in how each group perceives the dynamic between employees and employers. Proponents of flexibility argue that the market has become too dynamic to be maintained under rules conceived for the past industrial era. For them, increasing contractual freedom would boost jobs and meet the demand for more autonomy.
In contrast, defenders of maintaining or expanding rights operate from a different premise: workers and companies do not negotiate on equal footing, thus requiring minimum guarantees ensured by law. The political scientist notes that the discussion has become complicated because technology advanced faster than social protection systems could adjust.
Additionally, specialists cited by g1 point to an apparent contradiction in the flexibility proposals: several candidates advocating for fewer rules also reject changes such as ending the 6x1 shift or reducing working hours without a salary cut. Mayra Goulart concludes that the positions reflect distinct views on state action: one side focuses on guaranteeing broader minimums, while the other aims to decrease direct interference and increase the autonomy of the parties in defining contractual terms.
What is truly at stake?
Labor market indicators show that, despite the debate about the signed card, formal employment continues to rise in the country. Data from the Ministry of Labor reveal that Brazil generated 165.8 thousand jobs with a signed card in August alone, raising the annual balance to over 1.1 million formal jobs.
The unemployment rate fell to 5.3%, the lowest level recorded in the IBGE historical series. The employed population reached 103.5 million people, and the number of workers registered in the private sector reached 39.5 million, both records.
These data suggest that, even with the growth of apps, PJ status, and self-employment, the signed card remains a vital element in entering the Brazilian labor market. Ricardo Antunes argues that the core issue is not maintaining or completely replacing the 1943 legislation, but rather determining which rights should accompany workers in the new modes of occupation that have recently emerged.
Mayra Goulart suggests that society reflect on which protections are considered essential: whether the worker will be covered in cases of illness or old age, and how many hours they will work. Ultimately, the debate centers on how Brazil intends to deal with responsibility for the risks of professional life in an increasingly flexible economy.
Regarding the specific proposals of the candidates:
Flávio Bolsonaro (PL) states that he does not intend to abolish the CLT or remove rights. His proposal is to expand the freedom of negotiation between employees and companies, focusing especially on working hours. He advocates for strengthening the concept of 'negotiated over legislated,' allowing direct agreements to define certain conditions, which, according to him, generates more opportunities without nullifying legal rights.
Romeu Zema (Novo) proposes an alternative work regime to the CLT, which would coexist with the current model. This second option would be based on direct negotiations and would allow combining aspects such as hourly pay, variable remuneration, or vacation division, always respecting the weekly limit of 44 hours. The goal is to provide more flexibility and formalize millions of informal workers. Zema also suggests reducing costs for hiring those who have been away from the formal market for a long time.
Renan Santos (Missão) presents the most radical change, proposing to replace the CLT with a new regulatory framework centered on contractual freedom between the parties. According to this perspective, the current model has become excessively bureaucratic.
