Submitted by Gilson Rodrigues (gilson.rodrigues@ufvjm.edu.br) on 2022-08-22T18:44:28Z No. of bitstreams: 1 adriano_l?lis_medeiros.pdf: 1535522 bytes, checksum: de411e3a3908b5eef512b917193f7745 (MD5) Approved for entry into archive by Jos? Henrique Henrique (jose.neves@ufvjm.edu.br) on 2022-08-23T17:18:24Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 adriano_l?lis_medeiros.pdf: 1535522 bytes, checksum: de411e3a3908b5eef512b917193f7745 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2022-08-23T17:18:24Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 adriano_l?lis_medeiros.pdf: 1535522 bytes, checksum: de411e3a3908b5eef512b917193f7745 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2022 Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri (UFVJM) O principal objetivo da pesquisa acad?mica ? apresentar propostas que, aliadas ? reflex?o te?rica, busquem beneficiar a sociedade atrav?s de a??es pr?ticas. Dentro dessa vis?o, o maior desafio que se apresenta aos estudiosos do Direito, mais especificamente falando, ? o de atribuir efic?cia concreta a instrumentos normativos abstratos. A Justi?a do Trabalho surgiu como resposta a essas demandas, passando historicamente por diversas redistribui??es de compet?ncia, implementadas no sentido de assegurar tanto a empregados quanto a empregadores acesso ? presta??o jurisdicional em todo o territ?rio nacional. A S?mula Vinculante 53, publicada no ano de 2015, pretendia pacificar o conflito de compet?ncia existente entre a Justi?a do Trabalho e a Justi?a Federal no que diz respeito ? execu??o de contribui??es previdenci?rias devidas sobre v?nculo trabalhista reconhecido em Ju?zo, nas denominadas senten?as declarat?rias. Tal dispositivo referendou a posi??o j? adotada desde o ano de 2005 pela S?mula n? 368 do Tribunal Superior do Trabalho, relegando definitivamente ? Justi?a Federal a prerrogativa de cobrar e recolher tais valores. Essa pr?tica vem sendo renovada reiteradamente desde ent?o, o que acaba adiando por v?rios anos a arrecada??o de um montante significativo de receitas tribut?rias necess?rias ? manuten??o da m?quina p?blica e ao financiamento das pol?ticas sociais visto que, conforme dados do Conselho Nacional de Justi?a, a execu??o na seara trabalhista se processa de maneira muito mais c?lere do que a execu??o fiscal realizada pela Justi?a Federal. Nesse contexto, o presente estudo procurou demonstrar que a restri??o da capacidade arrecadat?ria da Justi?a do Trabalho ocasionada pela jurisprud?ncia dos tribunais superiores, materializada na S?mula Vinculante n? 53, n?o atende ? efici?ncia administrativa e ? responsabilidade fiscal. Para tanto buscou, atrav?s da an?lise estat?stica dos relat?rios ?Justi?a em N?meros? do CNJ publicados entre 2003 e 2021, complementada por pesquisa estat?stica descritiva envolvendo processos distribu?dos no ano de 2012 na Vara do Trabalho de Te?filo Otoni, estimar o montante da perda que poderia estar sendo causada por essa postura. Os resultados demonstraram estatisticamente uma diferen?a real e possivelmente elevada entre a m?dia dos valores executados na JT e a m?dia dos valores cuja execu??o se transfere para a JF, indicando a necessidade de maiores aprofundamentos no sentido de se determinar mais precisamente o tamanho dessa diferen?a. Disserta??o (Mestrado) ? Programa de P?s-gradua??o em Administra??o P?blica, Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, 2022. The main objective of academic research is to present proposals that, allied to theoretical reflection, seek to benefit society through practical actions. Within this vision, the greatest challenge for legal scholars, more specifically speaking, is to attribute concrete efficacy to abstract normative instruments. The Labor Courts arose as a response to these demands, historically going through several redistributions of competence, implemented in order to ensure both employees and employers access to jurisdictional provision throughout the national territory. The Binding Precedent 53, published in 2015, was intended to pacify the conflict of jurisdiction between the Labor Court and the Federal Court regarding the enforcement of social security contributions due on the labor relationship recognized in court, in the so-called declaratory judgments. Such device endorsed the position already adopted since 2005 by Precedent no. 368 of the Superior Labor Court, definitively relegating to the Federal Court the prerogative to collect such amounts. This practice has been repeatedly renewed since then, which ends up delaying for several years the collection of a significant amount of tax revenue needed to maintain the public machine and fund social policies since, according to data from the National Council of Justice, the execution in the labor court is processed much faster than the tax execution carried out by the Federal Court. In this context, the present study sought to demonstrate that the restriction on the collection capacity of the Labor Court, caused by the jurisprudence of the higher courts, materialized in the Binding Precedent No. 53, does not comply with the administrative efficiency and fiscal responsibility. To this end, through statistical analysis of the CNJ's "Justi?a em N?meros" reports published between 2003 and 2021, complemented by descriptive statistical research involving cases distributed in 2012 in the Te?filo Otoni Labor Court, we sought to estimate the amount of loss that could be caused by this stance. The results statistically showed a real and possibly high difference between the average of the amounts executed in the JT and the average of the amounts whose execution is transferred to the JF, indicating the need for further study in order to determine more precisely the size of this difference.