{"id":5010,"date":"2026-08-06T11:05:19","date_gmt":"2026-08-06T14:05:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/nr-1-and-psychosocial-risks-the-stf-suspended-the-penalties-not-the-obligation\/"},"modified":"2026-08-06T14:40:23","modified_gmt":"2026-08-06T17:40:23","slug":"nr-1-and-psychosocial-risks-the-stf-suspended-the-penalties-not-the-obligation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cpdma.com.br\/en\/nr-1-and-psychosocial-risks-the-stf-suspended-the-penalties-not-the-obligation\/","title":{"rendered":"NR-1 and Psychosocial Risks: The STF Suspended the Penalties, Not the Obligation"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n
The decision was widely publicized and frequently misunderstood. It is important to distinguish what actually occurred from what remained unchanged. <\/h5>\n\n
On June 25, 2026, the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court suspended, for 90 days, the imposition of fines and other penalties based on the provisions of NR-1 addressing work-related psychosocial risk factors.<\/h5>\n\n
The Supreme Court suspended the imposition of penalties; it did not eliminate the duty to manage these risks. For companies, this distinction is critical. <\/h5>\n\n

What NR-1 Now Requires<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Portaria MTE n.\u00ba 1.419\/2024 expressly included work-related psychosocial risk factors within the scope of Occupational Risk Management (GRO). Employers are now required to identify, assess, control, and monitor not only physical, chemical, biological, ergonomic, and accident-related risks, but also organizational factors capable of impairing workers\u2019 health.<\/p>\n\n

The focus is on working conditions, not on the individual: the regulation does not require clinical diagnoses, psychological monitoring, or the collection of employees\u2019 medical data. Work overload, harassment, recurring conflicts, lack of clarity regarding job responsibilities, and excessive working hours must now be assessed within the risk management framework. <\/p>\n\n

GRO and PGR: The Risk Management Framework<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Two concepts are often confused, and understanding them is essential to achieving effective compliance.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

The distinction is legal, not bureaucratic. Under Portaria 1.419\/2024, psychosocial factors became a mandatory part of this cycle. <\/em><\/p>\n\n

What the STF Decided<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

In considering ADPF n.\u00ba 1.316, filed by the National Confederation of Educational Institutions (CONFENEN), Justice Andr\u00e9 Mendon\u00e7a partially granted the request for interim relief, subject to ratification by the Plenary, suspending for 90 days the enforcement of penalties under five provisions of Chapter 1.5 of NR-1 (items 1.5.3.1.4, 1.5.3.2.1, 1.5.4.4.2.1, 1.5.4.4.2.2, and 1.5.4.4.5.3).<\/p>\n\n

At the preliminary review stage, the decision is based on the understanding that NR-1 does not provide sufficiently objective criteria\u2014regarding what constitutes psychosocial factors, which methodology should be adopted, and when measures will be deemed insufficient\u2014to support the imposition of penalties without violating the principles of legality, definiteness, and legal certainty<\/strong>. The case was referred to the STF\u2019s Center for Consensual Dispute Resolution (NUSOL) for conciliation between CONFENEN and the government.<\/p>\n\n

Unlike previous decisions on the matter, this interim ruling has general applicability. Because it was issued in a centralized constitutional review proceeding, it applies to all companies with employees governed by Brazil\u2019s Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), regardless of industry or state\u2014unlike the decisions issued in prior industry-specific actions, such as those brought by FIESP and CNSa\u00fade, which were limited to the respective plaintiff entities. It is also broader in scope: five provisions, compared with three under the preliminary injunction obtained by FIESP. <\/p>\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

At the end of the 90-day period, the reporting Justice may maintain, vacate, extend, or modify the interim ruling.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

Why Prevention Efforts Must Continue<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

The suspension is temporary and limited in scope. Three reasons make it imprudent to treat it as a reprieve. <\/p>\n\n