By ANTONIO BARSCH GIMENEZ & THIAGO FELICIANO LOPES
Even with the increase in productivity over almost two centuries, nothing has been done to shorten the working day.
The working day in question
The issue of working hours has resurfaced in Brazil after a long time in which there was no effective demand for improving working conditions. This is why Safatle (2024) announced the death of the left, whose heirs are today nothing more than defenders of status quo problematic.
The issue has already reached a certain proportion for some time, to the point of earning Rick Azevedo – founder of the popular movement that started these demands and who worked under the 6x1 scale – the position of most voted councilor in Rio de Janeiro (Alves, 2024).
Support for this cause is large enough to take a good number of workers to the streets of several capitals – São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte, Recife, Fortaleza, Curitiba, Aracaju – on November 15 (Bimbati; Guimarães, 2024).
For some time now, the reduction of working hours has been on the agenda in Europe, especially in the United Kingdom, where it has shown good results. Based on this, Belgium, Spain and Portugal have started their own experiments with a four-day work week without salary reduction, as in the United Kingdom. Despite the lack of labor, several companies have chosen to take part in the experiment in Germany, aiming to increase productivity and reduce health problems with the longer rest period (Joly et al., 2024; Plasdon; Wrede, 2024).
Tabata Amaral, who today represents the ideal type of liberal parliamentarian and his respective sober technicality, made a moderate defense of the reduction of the working day, invoking the lack of free time that workers have to spend with their families and take care of themselves. “Moderation” – a characteristic of liberal progressives – emerges, however, in the defense of a gradual transition and the analysis of economic impacts (Schroeder, 2024).
Let us therefore analyze the economy and its laws to find out whether – in the words of the parliamentarian herself – the plan will backfire.
Criticism of the economy
The price of a commodity depends on (i) its production price, that is, on the capital invested in the production of the commodity, and (ii) on the social conditions of production, that is, on competition, which dictates the amount of profit the capitalist can obtain from his commodity. Within the cost of production are the wages paid to workers (Marx, 1986a, 288; 1986b, p. 24, 54).
Wages are paid on the basis of the commodities that the worker requires to maintain his life, that is, his daily reproduction through the consumption of the means of subsistence. However, he is not paid for what he produces in a day's work, since this was alienated to the capitalist in exchange for his subsistence. This implies, therefore, that the worker's daily product is appropriated by the owner of this day's work, the capitalist. However, since humanity does not need – and never has needed – to use all 24 hours of a day to produce everything it needs for its subsistence, there is always the possibility of producing more than the worker needs in a day and, as owner of his day's work, the capitalist takes possession of these surplus products (Marx, 1986a, pp. 288-290, 297, 304, 311).
This surplus product, which does not arise under capitalism, but accompanies humanity throughout its history, is what is called surplus labor.
The specificity of capitalism is that surplus labor is appropriated by the capitalist, who allocates it for sale on the market. This is the specificity of capitalism itself: what is produced is, in the vast majority of cases, for sale on the market, and not for one's own consumption. In this way, the immediate utility that one has of a product of labor ceases to be a limiting factor of production, since it is produced for the market, and not for the quantified need that society as a whole has for the product. The result, therefore, is the absence of brakes on the production of surplus labor (Marx, 1986a, p. 270-272, 303, 349).
This can be clearly observed in times of crisis, when the social need for certain products remains unchanged, but workers do not have the financial means to consume these products. Goods are often destroyed or spoiled. This is precisely because production is not aimed at social need, but rather at obtaining as much surplus labor as possible, which only becomes money when the products are sold. In short, this is a production that goes beyond what is possible given the way in which production is organized under capitalism (Marx, 1986b, p. 190-195).
Therefore, it is common to see food waste in commercial establishments, even in times of great social need, as they are not solvent and, therefore, cannot make the profit that is sought from those goods. This is exactly the case in Argentina, where the population's real income is increasingly insufficient for food. Because of this, many go to the disposal areas of commercial establishments in search of goods that would otherwise be discarded because they have not been consumed (Lo Bianco, 2024). Worldwide, food waste by these establishments reaches 39% of global waste (UNEP, 2021, p. 70).
In short, “there is no production of too many means of subsistence in relation to the existing population. On the contrary. Too few are produced to suffice the mass of the population in a decent and humane manner. […] Not enough means of production are produced to occupy the part of the population capable of working. On the contrary. First, too large a part of the population is produced, which is in fact not capable of working […]. Second, not enough means of production are produced for the entire population capable of working to work under more productive conditions, so that their absolute working time is therefore shortened. […] But periodically too many means of labor and means of subsistence are produced to make them function as means of exploiting the workers at a given rate of profit” (Marx, 1986b, p. 194).
The way in which this surplus production grows more and more is the increase in labor productivity. This is driven by the capitalist mode of production precisely because it is a production that increasingly seeks to reduce the labor time necessary for the production of the workers' means of subsistence and, thus, increasingly increase the time in which it produces for the capitalist, who bought his working day (Marx, 1986a, p. 435-436).
This working time is thus appropriated by a class – the capitalist who buys the working day – and can dedicate his time to leisure. In a similar way – but not identical, since here physical coercion is used, which is dispensed with in capitalism – the slave owner appropriates the time of his slaves, and can dedicate himself to leisure (Marx, 1986c, p. 157; 1986d, p. 272-273).
The increase in productivity that capitalism operates is twofold: (a) through the concentration of workers in the same establishment, thus developing the social force of labor, but also the social division of labor among these workers; and (b) the increase in labor productivity through the use of tools and machines, which resulted in the Industrial Revolutions. However, this implies an ever-increasing need for concentration of capital to invest in machinery and raw materials. As a result, competition eliminates smaller producers, as they do not have the capital necessary to invest in innovations, which makes them inefficient compared to other capitalists (Coggiola, 2010; Marx, 1986a, p. 439-474; 1986b, p. 164-166; 1986c, p. 7-26).
This same process is clearly visible in the history of Brazilian agriculture. In the 1960s and 70s, productivity was low, requiring imports to meet social needs. Due to investments in research and development, Brazil is now one of the largest exporters of these products. Although land use has increased, production growth has outpaced this expansion, that is, production has become even more productive; productivity has been growing steadily and has even surpassed the population growth rate (Alves; Contini; Gasques, 2008, p. 77-78, 82; Embrapa, 2018, p. 15-17).
“In aggregate terms, while production increased 4,5 times, the use of inputs increased by just over 15%, which can be explained by the evolution of total factor productivity (TFP), which grew almost four times between 1975 and 2015. […] technology is responsible for 59% of the growth in the gross value of production, while land and labor explain 25% and 16% […]. Specifically in the period between 1995/1996 and 2005/2006, the importance of technology is even greater, which explains 68% of the increase in the value of production” (Embrapa, 2018, p. 15-16).
This process of increased productivity is not only seen in agriculture, but also in livestock farming. An illustrative example was the possibility of shortening the production time in poultry farming, which previously required 49 days to reach 1,7 kg, while today it only takes 35 days to reach 2,6 kg: slaughter occurs earlier and the total amount of product per bird has increased, in addition to increasing the feed conversion rate, reducing production costs. The same phenomenon occurred in pig farming and beef cattle farming (Embrapa, 2018, p. 19-21).
The increase in productivity is due to the expansion of genetic improvement and mechanization of production, technologies that save labor, that is, labor productivity increases. Many activities in production that were previously performed predominantly by workers are now performed by machines, as can be seen by the incorporation of harvesters and milking machines into production. This was accompanied by the need for qualified labor to use these technologies, which have a higher training cost. The use of these technologies was driven by the increasing competition that the sector was facing with foreign capital (Alves; Contini; Gasques, 2008, p. 83, 92; Staduto; Shikida; Bacha, 2004, p. 62-65).
In short, “the new technologies adopted for traditional Brazilian crops are labor-saving; they operate in this direction regardless of the relative prices of production factors, since they would currently be favorable to human labor, motivated by very low wages. […] The composition of the labor force changes in response to the new technological cycle underway in the agricultural sector” (Staduto; Shikida; Bacha, 2004, p. 68).
One of the results of this was the reduction of workers in the sector between 1985 and 1995/96 despite the constant growth in production (Staduto; Shikida; Bacha, 2004, p. 65).
Another effect of this phenomenon is the fact that small producers have increasingly faced problems. They all revolve around the lack of capital to invest in new technologies and qualified labor. In addition, workers are increasingly scarce in the countryside, but these small producers do not have the capital that would allow them to employ new technologies that save the labor necessary for production (Embrapa, 2018, p. 24, 57-59; Sposito, 1988).
What we wanted to show with this table is the progress of the productive forces in Brazil in recent decades. In this way, we can see that working time can be reduced with the use of new technologies.
In Brazil, however, a large part of the population is employed in the urban service sector. A striking example of the productive revolution that has reached this population is the electronic judicial process, whose implementation began mainly in the first half of the 2010s (Brasil, 2017, p. 11-12).
Sousa (2018) describes the advances in this technology in the following terms:
“With the adoption of PJe [Electronic Judicial Process] technology, several manual activities performed by several civil servants are eliminated. In a single electronic act, several tasks can be performed. […] This occurs when the Judge determines the designation of a hearing and, in a single act, the warrant can be issued and signed, documents linked to the warrant can be linked, it can be distributed to the Warrant Center, published in the Electronic Gazette and the Public Defender's Office can be accessed, and each step is automatically reported […]. It can therefore be inferred that PJe contributes to the reasonable duration of the process, at the time in which it eliminates the bureaucratic and manual tasks necessary to attach petitions and documents to the process. Internally, it is important to highlight the speed provided by PJe with the automation of the communication of procedural acts”.
The use of this new technology has shortened the time taken to complete legal proceedings, which rarely last more than four years, while more than half of physical proceedings exceed this mark (Brazil, 2017, p. 27).
The effect also extended to lawyers, the vast majority of whom reported a reduction in the amount of time they spent on each case, especially by eliminating the need to go to court to carry out procedural acts (Silva; Santos, 2020, p. 265-266).
In short, what we sought to show with the data on agriculture and the adoption of digital technologies in the judicial process is that capitalism continues to innovate and reduce the working time required for economic activities. However, as stated above, this time does not revert to the worker.
The limits of the working day – yesterday and today
The establishment of an eight-hour working day is a product of the second half of the 1986th century (Marx, 413a, p. XNUMX). Therefore, even with the increase in productivity over almost two centuries, nothing has been done to shorten the working day. It is thus shown that these improvements are not intended to alleviate the workload of employees, but only to make them provide even more products to the capitalist.
The only way in which the first limits on the working day were established was through the organization of workers and their collective demand for a reduction. This impulse came about because of the physical and mental harm that long working hours caused to workers. In addition to the pressure that industrialists put on the English government to block the factory laws, they violated the limits on the working day – and paid tiny fines for doing so, which made the practice profitable – and exerted their influence over judges to avoid being convicted (Coggiola, 2010; Marx, 1986a, pp. 353-356, 405).
In exchange for some limits on working hours, the capitalists made legislative demands for the end of other labor rights, such as the reduction of the minimum working age; all this in the name of “compensation”. Another tactic they employed was to reduce wages in order to pressure workers into demanding the repeal of the laws, but the vast majority of workers did not give in. In view of this, they had to go to the press and parliament “to speak on behalf of the workers”. Workers who demonstrated were also subjected to attacks in the name of protecting a supposed public order (Marx, 1986a, p. 392-399).
Here, then, are some of the attacks that will be used against workers who demand the end of the 6x1 work shift today. Some of them can already be observed – at least in the form of speeches.
Parliamentarian Nikolas Ferreira raised, for example, the threat of unemployment – which had also been invoked in the first half of the 2024th century – due to rising costs (Carlucci, XNUMX).
Some industrialists also expressed their “losses.” The Federation of Industries of the State of Rio de Janeiro reported a figure of R$115,9 billion per year; the Federation of Industries of the State of Minas Gerais (Fiemg) reported a figure of R$8 billion. The president of Fiemg, Flávio Roscoe, stated that the reduction in working hours is serious because there are not enough workers to offset this “loss” of hours, which would ultimately impoverish all workers due to the lack of goods (Barros; Nakamura, 2024). Industrialists have already gone to the media to “speak on behalf of the people”!
The Minister of Industry and Commerce, Geraldo Alckmin, presented the answer inherent to capitalism, but which all these spokesmen for capital fail to mention: “it is a trend all over the world. As technology advances, you can do more with fewer people, you have [sic] a shorter journey” (Alckmin apoud Mazui, 2024). However, the reason for this silence is known: this technology is not aimed at reducing work.
This contradiction is evident even to right-wing parliamentarians, such as Senator Cleiton de Azevedo. His criticism, however, is directed at the political class, which does not work half as much as the average worker, but is paid almost 30 times more than the average worker, according to his calculations. Another point worth highlighting is that he recognizes the worker as the source of wealth, but places the mythical figure of the “entrepreneur” in the same position (Azevedo, 2024).
The first clarification that must be made is in relation to the mythical entrepreneur, who has been linked to small producers and, thus, reached the mark of 67% of the Brazilian population, according to Sebrae (2023a).
Sebrae (2023b) also defines it as follows: “Entrepreneurship is the ability a person has to identify problems and opportunities, develop solutions and invest resources in creating something positive for society. It can be a business, a project or even a movement that generates real changes and impacts people's daily lives”.
Economically, however, this definition does not clarify much, since it encompasses producers in general. All of them perform the same function through their work: they identify a field in which their work generates products that are useful to society and begin producing in it; they invest their resources, which mainly include their time and technical knowledge.
However, the articles produced by an individual producer are intended for obtaining his livelihood, and not for obtaining the average profit of the sector nor for capitalist accumulation (Marx, 1986a, p. 267-271).
This is nothing more than the erroneous application of the elements of capitalist production to other forms of production: “if an independent worker […] works for himself and sells his own product, then he is first considered as his own employer (capitalist), who employs himself as a worker […]. Because a form of production that does not correspond to the mode of production is thus […] assimilated and reduced to its forms of income [wages, profit, interest and rent], the illusion is all the more consolidated that capitalist relations are natural relations of each mode of production” (Marx, 1986d, p. 310).
In this way, they make the producer identify with the capitalist despite the difference in the scope of their activities. This is a reflection of the principle of abstract equality that has reigned since the French Revolution; when, in fact, this equality is only an illusion, since access to all the benefits of society does not reach everyone. However, this is the value of this idea: to make people with different functions in production identify with each other, as if they performed the same function (Hegel, 1991, §243; Marx, 1986a, p. 293).
Finally, through some individual successes – which are very rare – of some workers, they strengthen their discourse of equality: “an unwelcome series of new knights of fortune strengthens the rule of capital itself […]. Exactly like the circumstance that the Catholic Church, in the Middle Ages, formed its hierarchy with the best minds of the people […], which was one of the main means of consolidating the rule of the clergy and oppressing the laity. The more a ruling class is able to welcome into its ranks the most valuable men of the dominated classes, the more solid and dangerous is its rule” (Marx, 1986d, p. 112).
Despite all these issues, it can be said that Cleiton Azevedo had in mind a vision much closer to reality than most vulgar speeches. His indignation is justified precisely because it concerns the perception that there is a portion of society that works little and receives exorbitant incomes, paid for by the time producers work.[I]
However, as has already been explained, it is not only the political class that is responsible for this, but also an entire class of owners, who derive their income merely from the ownership of some means of production. The function attributed to the capitalist in the popular imagination is the management of production and, thus, he receives compensation for his work as if he were a worker. However, it is seen that this is increasingly less the case, as capitalists become more and more mere bearers of property rights, employing workers to manage production, as can be seen in joint-stock companies (Marx, 1986c, p. 284, 289; 1986d, p. 269, 290).
Therefore, management work – the owner’s eye that fattens the cattle – is no longer part of the capitalist’s arsenal.
It is important to note here that the individual producer and the owner of small businesses are both workers, not capitalists. Their production is geared towards their own consumption, towards their subsistence. This producer cannot compete with true capitalists because he does not have the monstrous capital required for production at current levels.
The ideology of faith
Another counterpoint to the reduction of working hours was presented by parliamentarian and pastor Marco Feliciano: “in countries like the USA and Japan 'all people work until exhaustion to see prosperity'” (Feliciano […], 2024).
This prosperity theology – whose knight of faith we see here – is one of the echoes of the Protestant worldview. Work ceases to be a Humanity-Nature relationship that seeks to meet material needs and becomes autonomous as an end in itself, that is, it becomes an ethical precept that must be sought at all costs. Work is thus mystified because it begins to be seen as a sign of salvation (Weber, 2012, p. 23-24, 31, 115).
Theology was one of the foundations of the formation of ethos capitalist. Therefore, capitalist ideology is not averse to religion, sometimes taking its form. This process is even more evident in moments of heightened class struggle, as religious “irrationalism” appears alongside economic rationalism to maintain the foundations of the mode of production (Coelho; Sung, 2019).
This is precisely because there is an affinity between certain religious forms and the capitalist lifestyle. For example, there is a strong connection between English Puritanism and the drive for accumulation, as both rely on asceticism and self-sacrifice for the eternal search for treasure. Capitalism thus becomes the religion of everyday life, which demands its constant offerings (Löwy, 2016, p. 37, 53).
As a secular theological belief, capital demands sacrifices in order to function properly: workers are sacrificed in the name of “economic progress,” which, as already discussed, does not benefit those sacrificed. The benefits are distributed only to the priests of capital, which they embody as its agents and orators.
Pastor (of capital) Marco Feliciano merely demonstrates how capitalism reproduces itself constantly and through various means as an ideology. In the religious field, salvation is promised – with its respective earthly effects – through a sacrifice: work until exhaustion. “When one kills a human being and destroys the world believing that one is doing a service to humanity, one needs a criterion for judging this theology as idolatry” (Coelho; Sung, 2019, p. 670).
Still regarding the appeal made for prosperity, the association between money and salvation has its origins in the Calvinist Theory of Double Predestination, whose hermeneutical basis includes Romans 8:28-30 and Ephesians 1:4-5. It is “double” because: “He [God] did not wish to create everyone in the same condition; on the contrary, He predestined some to eternal life, and others to eternal damnation. Therefore, since each one was created for one or the other of these two destinies, we say that one was predestined either to life or to death” (Calvin, p. 388).
Money became an end in itself from the moment it became the sign of predestination to salvation, since, in the very wording of Romans 8:28: “all things work for the good of those who love him.” The two effects of this were: (1) the exaltation of excessive work and (2) the contempt of those who, according to the signs (money), were not predestined to salvation.
It is no surprise, therefore, that this most holy parliamentarian presented the Pension Reform as a great success. But, in celebrating it, he was more transparent than in his condemnation of limits on working hours. The main objective was to please the financial market; no mention was made of the needs of the population (Podemos, 2019).
The effects of this Reform were extremely damaging to workers, who not only had their contribution time increased, but the benefits they received were reduced (Silva, 2017, p. 68-69).
Here is prosperity: “the result is socially catastrophic: considering that the majority of Brazilian workers are able to make, on average, only 05 or 06 contributions to social security per year – due to the high rate of informality and job turnover – the 25 years of contribution time actually convert into 50 years of work in the formal market, […] to obtain a retirement worth a minimum wage” (Silva, 2017, p. 69).
At the same time, the increase in the Union Revenue Unlinking (DRU) was approved – from 20% to 30% –; that is, the social security budget can be unlinked from its purpose to finance other State attributions (Martins, 2018, p. 91).
How can this be justified in light of the talk of “social security collapse”? It is already known: such a situation never actually existed. Workers’ resources were usurped even further in the name of the financial market.
Marco Feliciano followed the trend of his holy office, which had been evident since the 1856th century: “in 1986, through the blessed Wilson-Patten – one of those pious people whose religious exhibitionism is always willing to do the dirty work for the pleasure of the gentlemen of the moneybags – they managed to pass a law in Parliament” (Marx, 70b, p. XNUMX); the result of which was an increase in work accidents, since the law removed the obligation to install means in industries to increase worker safety.
Work, progress and freedom
In short, what is advocated here is not the end of work nor absolute leisure, since the latter is practiced by those who oppose the limitation of the working day – precisely because it is through the appropriation of other people's work that they can dedicate themselves to absolute leisure. Work is a natural and eternal condition of human life (Marx, 1986a, p. 303).
What we want is to limit the work that everyone needs to do more and more in view of the growing increase in labor productivity, but also to meet all social needs, which is possible due to the increase in productivity.
“The realm of freedom only begins, in fact, where labor determined by necessity and by adaptation to external ends ceases; therefore, by the very nature of the matter […]. Just as the savage has to struggle with Nature to satisfy his needs […], so must the civilized man do so, and he must do so in all forms of society and under all possible modes of production. With his development, this realm of natural necessity expands, for needs expand; but at the same time, the productive forces that satisfy them expand. In this field, freedom can only consist in the fact that social man, the associated producers, rationally regulate this metabolism with Nature, bringing it under their communal control […]; that they do so with the minimum expenditure of force and under conditions most worthy and suited to their human nature” (Marx, 1986d, p. 273).
Finally, the following question remains, the answer to which can be found throughout this text: why do we still work the same number of hours as in the second half of the 150th century despite the monstrous increases in productivity over these XNUMX years?
*Antonio Barsch Gimenez He is a graduate student at the Faculty of Law at USP.
*Thiago Feliciano Lopes is a lawyer.
References
THE BIBLE. New International Version. Available at: https://www.bibliaonline.com.br/NVI
ALVES, B. Who is Rick Azevedo, elected councilor who founded movement against 6×1 scale. CNN, São Paulo, November 12, 2024. Available at: https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/politica/quem-e-rick-azevedo-vereador-eleito-que-fundou-movimento-contra-escala-6×1/.
ALVES, ER de A.; CONTINI, E.; GASQUES, JG Evolution of production and productivity in Brazilian agriculture. In: ALBUQUERQUE, ACS; SILVA, AG da (eds.). Tropical agriculture: four decades of technological, institutional and political innovations. Volume 1. Brasília, DF: Embrapa Information Technology, 2008, p. 67-101.
AZEVEDO, LF Pro-Bolsonaro senator calls for 'revolution' to end 6x1 scale: 'Source of wealth is the worker'. O Globo, Rio de Janeiro, November 13, 2024. Available at:https://oglobo.globo.com/politica/noticia/2024/11/13/senador-bolsonarista-pede-revolucao-pelo-fim-da-escala-6×1-fonte-de-riqueza-e-o-trabalhador.ghtml >.
BARROS, HS; NAKAMURA, J. Employer will have transition time if 6x1 scale ends, Erika Hilton tells CNN. CNN, São Paulo, November 15, 2024. Available at:https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/politica/entrevista-erika-hilton-pec-escala-6-x-1/>.
BIMBATI, AP; GUIMARÃES, SP Protesters gather in SP, Rio and BH against 6×1 work schedule. UOL, São Paulo, November 15, 2024. Available at:https://noticias.uol.com.br/politica/ultimas-noticias/2024/11/15/manifestacao-escala-trabalho-6×1.htm>.
BRAZIL. National Council of Justice. Executive Summary Justice Research Public Policies of the Judiciary: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of the Impact of the Implementation of the Electronic Judicial Process (PJe) on the Productivity of the Courts. Brasília, DF: National Council of Justice, 2017.
CARLUCCI, M. Discussion is whether unemployment will increase, says Nikolas about the end of the 6×1 scale. CNN, São Paulo, November 12, 2024. Available at:https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/politica/discussao-e-so-se-vai-aumentar-o-desemprego-diz-nikolas-sobre-fim-da-escala-6×1/>.
CALVINO, L. The Institutes or Treatise of the Christian Religion. Volume 3. Available at:https://www.poramoraosalvador.com.br/livros/joao_calvino_institutas3.pdf>.
COGGIOLA, O. The beginnings of workers’ organizations. Aurora Magazine, v. 3, n. 2, p. 11-20, 2010.
EMBRAPA. Vision 2030: the future of Brazilian agriculture. Brasília, DF: Embrapa, 2018.
FELICIANO defends work 'until exhaustion' in the Chamber committee. Terra, June 06, 2024. Available at:https://www.terra.com.br/noticias/educacao/carreira/videos/feliciano-defende-trabalho-ate-a-exaustao-em-comissao-da-camara,b1a6acfbed908be6f0cf4613a0e03db081ewgbdz.html>.
HEGEL, GWF Elements of the Philosophy of Right. Translated by HB Nisbet. CambridgeUniversity Press, 1991.
JOLY, J. et al. Four-day week: Which countries are embracing it and how is it going so far? Euronews, February 02, 2024. Available at:https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/02/02/the-four-day-week-which-countries-have-embraced-it-and-how-s-it-going-so-far>.
LENIN, VI The State and Revolution. Paris: Foreign Languages Press, 2020.
LO BIANCO, M. Argentines scavenge for discarded food to survive amid rising prices. CNN, March 12, 2024. Available at:https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/internacional/argentinos-buscam-alimentos-descartados-para-sobreviver-em-meio-a-alta-de-precos/>.
LÖWY, M. What is Liberation Christianity?: Religion and Politics in Latin America. São Paulo: Editora Expressão Popular, 2016.
MARTINS, DLL Delimitation and developments of the constitutional option for the organization of social security policy in Brazil. In: BATISTA, FR; SILVA, JL Social security for public servants: law, policy and budget. Curitiba: Kaygangue, 2018, p. 79-98.
MARX, K. Capital: Critique of Political Economy. Volume 1, Volume 1. Translated by Regis Barbosa and Flávio R. Kothe. Editora Nova Cultural Ltda., 1986a.
MARX, K. Capital: Critique of Political Economy. Volume 1, Volume 2. Translated by Regis Barbosa and Flávio R. Kothe. Editora Nova Cultura Ltda., 1986c.
MARX, K. Capital: Critique of Political Economy. Volume 3, volume 1. Translated by Regis Barbosa and Flávio R. Kothe. 2nd ed. São Paulo: Nova Cultural, 1986b.
MARX, K. Capital: Critique of Political Economy. Volume 3, volume 2. Translated by Regis Barbosa and Flávio R. Kothe. 2nd ed. São Paulo: Nova Cultural, 1986d.
MAZUI, G. Scale 6×1: Alckmin says that reducing working hours is a 'trend' worldwide and defends debate. G1, Brasília, November 12, 2024. Available at:https://noticias.uol.com.br/politica/ultimas-noticias/2024/11/12/alckmin-declaracao-escala-6-1-durante-cop-29.htm>.
PLASDON, K.; WREDE, I. Germany explores 4-day workweek amid labor shortage. Deutsche Welle, 31 Jan 2024. Available at:https://www.dw.com/en/germany-tests-four-day-workweek-amid-labor-shortage/a-68125506 >.
Podemos. Deputy Pr. Marco Feliciano celebrates the approval of the pension reform in the first round. Podemos, July 30, 2019. Available at:https://www.podemos.org.br/deputado-pr-marco-feliciano-comemora-a-aprovacao-da-reforma-da-previdencia-em-primeiro-turno/>.
SAFATLE, V. Book reviews prove that the left is dead. Folha de São Paulo, March 13, 2024. Available at:https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/ilustrissima/2024/03/safatle-criticas-a-livro-comprovam-que-esquerda-morreu.shtml.>.
SEBRAE. More than 93 million Brazilians are involved in entrepreneurship. Sebrae, May 10, 2023a. Available at:https://agenciasebrae.com.br/cultura-empreendedora/mais-de-93-milhoes-de-brasileiros-estao-envolvidos-com-o-empreendedorismo/>.
SEBRAE. But after all, what is entrepreneurship? Sebrae, Nov 08, 2023b. Available at:https://www.sebrae-sc.com.br/blog/o-que-e-empreendedorismo#:~:text=Empreendedorismo%20%C3%A9%20a%20capacidade%20que,impacto%20no%20cotidiano%20das%20pessoas.>.
SCHROEDER, L. End of the 6×1 scale: Tabata Amaral signs PEC, but makes reservations about the project. CNN, São Paulo, November 12, 2024. Available at:https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/politica/fim-da-escala-6×1-tabata-amaral-assina-pec-mas-faz-ressalvas-ao-projeto/>.
SILVA, APF; SANTOS, LFB Electronic judicial process: context, implementation and its impacts on society. Technology and Society Magazine, Curitiba, v. 16, n. 42, p. 260-268. Jul/Sept. 2020.
SILVA, JL Reform to exclude? Consequences of increasing contribution time in the main retirement modalities of the RGPS. Revista do Tribunal Regional Federal da Terceira Região, v. XXVIII, p. 65-75, 2017.
SOUSA, RR de. The impact of the implementation of the Electronic Judicial Process in the Civil and Family Judicial Units of the Federal District and the reflection on the pace of procedural processing. 2018 Available at:https://www.tjdft.jus.br/institucional/imprensa/campanhas-e-produtos/artigos-discursos-e-entrevistas/artigos/2018/o-impacto-da-implantacao-do-processo-judicial-eletronico-nas-unidades-judiciais-civeis-e-de-familia-do-distrito-federal-e-o-reflexo-no-ritmo-da-tramitacao-processual-roberto-rodrigues-de-sousa>.
SPOSITO, M. Capitalism and Urbanization. São Paulo: Contexto, 1988.
STADUTO, J. A. R; SHIKIDA, PFA; BACHA, C. J. C. Changes in the Composition of the Salaried Labor Force in Brazilian Agriculture. Agriculture in São Paulo Journal, São Paulo, v. 51, n. 2, p. 57-70, Jul./Dec. 2004.
SUNG, JM; COELHO, A. da S. Capitalism as religion: a theoretical review of the relationship between religion and economy in modernity. Horizonte – Journal of Studies in Theology and Religious Sciences, v. 17, n. 53, p. 651-675, 2019.
UNEP. Food Waste Index Report 2021. Nairobi, 2021.
WEBER, M. The Protestant Ethic & The Spirit of Capitalism. Translated and introduced by Stephen Kalberg. New York: Routledge, 2012.
Note
[I] Ironically, this political and bureaucratic class, which is so condemned for its exorbitant costs to the public coffers, has remained unchanged throughout history. The only time this changed was during the Paris Commune, when the bureaucracy and “politicians” received the same salaries as other workers (Lenin, 2020, p. 42-45).
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
