The fact that the laboratory serves other clients does not eliminate the liability of the main service provider for the employees. Based on this understanding, the Sixth Committee of the Supreme Labor Court recognized Unimed’s subsidiary responsibility in Porto Alegre to pay the work credits owed to a laboratory assistant.
According to the lawsuit, the plaintiff sued the health care provider after the contract to perform clinical analysis services was unilaterally broken by the medical cooperative. The effects of the breach were “devastating”, leading the laboratory into bankruptcy and non-compliance with its contractual obligations, as the company was the principal borrower for clinical analysis services..
The medical cooperative claimed, in its defense, that it had no contractual relationships with the plaintiff and that it did not provide services. Unimed also confirmed that the contract was of a commercial nature, ruling out its classification as a service provider.
The Regional Labor Court of District IV excluded subsidiary liability, understanding that Unimed, despite being the main responsible, was not the only recipient of laboratory services, which provided assistance, simultaneously, to other clients.
When analyzing the records, Minister Lelio Bentes Corrêa indicated that there was not just an agreement between the laboratory and Unimed, but a contract to provide clinical analysis services. The judge also found that, according to the 331st precedence of the TST, the service provider must be liable for obligations the employer has not fulfilled, “nothing said, however, about exclusivity with respect to the services provided,” Courier said. Thus, the request was approved. With information from a TST consultant.
click Here To read the verdict
“Music fanatic. Very humble explorer. Analyst. Travel fanatic. Extreme television teacher. Gamer.”