September 19, 2021

The Catholic Transcript

Complete News World

A FGTS review for workers can pay between R$14,000 to R$66,000

A FGTS review for workers can pay between R$14,000 to R$66,000

Workers looking for additional income can count on a review of the Employment Compensation Fund (FGTS) which can generate more than R$300 billion in total for all workers with a balance in the Guarantee Fund accounts from 1999 to the present day. .

A total of R$300 billion indicates the loss incurred by workers over the years with the FGTS correction index below inflation, which over time added to a significant lag in the Workers’ Guarantee Fund balance.

Amounts due

According to the LOIT FGTS platform, a tool used to calculate FGTS earnings, the guarantee fund audit procedure can generate R$14,000 for workers with a formal contract after 1999.

The subject of the review will be judged by the Federal Supreme Court (STF), however, as a result of the covid-19 pandemic, which has ended up having a significant impact on the country’s economy, the Supreme Court has ended up postponing the ruling which is now awaiting a new definition.

The exact amount each worker must receive will depend on the time worked and salary as well as the period in which the balance has been deposited into FGTS accounts, so the amount each worker must receive varies from case to case.

There are currently reviews of more than R$66,000, which equates to 60 minimum wages in 2021, a cap set for proceedings in the Federal Special Court.

On average, a worker who had 10 years of formal employment after 1999 and earned the minimum wage per month, the amount of the correction can be up to R$6 thousand. However, according to Antonio Maia, responsible for the LOIT FGTS platform, it is necessary to pay attention to the working period.

See also  How one of the biggest shipping crises in history could affect your pocket

Attention should be paid to the period of work, since for workers who have been unemployed for long periods of time or without a work book, there were fewer contributions and, therefore, the value of the revision may be much lower than expected.