I didn't swallow that loss. I'm stubborn.
Por décadas, o senador Paulo Paim persegue uma ideia simples e profunda: que o tempo de um trabalhador tem valor, e que a lei deve reconhecê-lo. A PEC 148, aprovada esta semana na comissão do Senado, propõe eliminar a jornada 6x1 e reduzir gradualmente a semana de trabalho para 36 horas até 2027, sem corte de salários. É uma batalha que começou na Constituinte de 1988 e que, a cada derrota, ensinou Paim algo sobre paciência, resistência e o ritmo lento da mudança social.
- Milhões de trabalhadores brasileiros vivem sob a jornada 6x1 — seis dias de trabalho para um único dia de descanso — um ritmo que corrói o tempo livre e o equilíbrio da vida.
- A PEC 148 avançou pela comissão do Senado, mas o verdadeiro obstáculo está à frente: a resistência do setor empresarial é significativa e o prazo para aprovação no Congresso é 2026.
- Paim responde à resistência não com confronto, mas com diálogo — cinco audiências públicas realizadas em 2024 para ouvir trabalhadores, empresários e movimentos sociais.
- A proposta é gradual por design: 44 horas caem para 40 em 2027, depois uma hora a menos por ano até chegar a 36 — uma arquitetura pensada para tornar a mudança palatável e irreversível.
O senador Paulo Paim passou décadas perseguindo um único objetivo legislativo: reduzir a jornada de trabalho no Brasil. Esta semana, a aprovação da PEC 148 na comissão de constituição e justiça do Senado o colocou mais perto do que nunca — mas ele sabe que a batalha mais difícil ainda está por vir.
A proposta eliminaria a jornada 6x1, que obriga milhões de trabalhadores a trabalhar seis dias para descansar apenas um. A partir de janeiro de 2027, a semana padrão cairia de 44 para 40 horas, no modelo 5x2. Depois, uma hora a menos por ano, até chegar a 36 horas semanais no formato 4x3. Sem redução de salário — essa é a promessa central.
A história de Paim com essa causa começa na Assembleia Constituinte de 1988, quando ele defendeu a semana de 40 horas e perdeu. O acordo que emergiu reduziu a jornada de 48 para 44 horas — um avanço, mas não o suficiente. "Não engoli aquela derrota", disse ele à Folha de S. Paulo. Tentou novamente em 1994, em 1995, em 2003. Cada proposta morreu na comissão. Cada fracasso o ensinou algo sobre a política brasileira — e sobre sua própria teimosia.
O que diferencia este momento é a estratégia. Paim realizou cinco audiências públicas e um debate no plenário, abrindo espaço para trabalhadores, empresários e movimentos sociais. Ele reconhece a resistência do setor produtivo, mas aposta que o diálogo genuíno pode mudar o cálculo político. O Congresso precisa aprovar a emenda até 2026 para que ela entre em vigor em 2027. Essa é a janela.
Paim também faz questão de dividir o crédito com a deputada Erika Hilton e o vereador Rick Azevedo, ambos do Partido Socialista, que ajudaram a reacender o debate. "O tempo da ação real chegou", afirmou. "Um acordo é possível." Se o Congresso vai concordar, ainda é a pergunta em aberto.
Senator Paulo Paim has spent decades chasing a single legislative goal: to shrink Brazil's working week. This week, his constitutional amendment clearing the Senate's legal committee brought him closer than ever. But he knows the real fight is just beginning.
Paim's proposal would dismantle the grueling 6x1 schedule—six days of work, one day off—that governs millions of Brazilian workers. The amendment, known as PEC 148, would compress the standard workweek from 44 hours to 40 hours starting January 1, 2027, shifting the rhythm to five days on, two days off. Then it would keep shrinking: one hour per year until the workweek bottoms out at 36 hours, arranged as four days on, three days off. No wage cuts. That's the promise.
But Paim didn't wake up one morning with this idea. His push traces back to Brazil's 1988 Constitutional Assembly, when he fought to set the workweek at 40 hours outright. He lost that battle. The compromise that emerged cut the standard from 48 hours down to 44—a victory, yes, but not the one he wanted. "I didn't swallow that loss," he told the Folha de S. Paulo this week. "I reintroduced the proposal several times. I'm stubborn."
The record bears him out. In 1994 and 1995, he tried again. In 2003, he filed another constitutional amendment, PEC 75/2003, which also died in committee. Over the decades, roughly eight similar proposals have circulated through Congress, authored by Paim and other lawmakers. Each one stalled. Each one taught him something about the machinery of Brazilian politics—and about his own capacity to endure rejection.
What's different now is the architecture of support. Paim has held five public hearings this year and staged a floor debate, creating space for workers, business owners, and social movements to be heard. He's not pretending the business community will embrace this easily. "I know there's significant resistance from parts of the business sector," he acknowledged. But he's betting that dialogue, sustained and genuine, can shift the calculus. The amendment needs congressional approval by 2026 to take effect in 2027. That's the window.
Paim frames this as the culmination of a much longer arc. The 48-hour workweek itself dates to Getúlio Vargas, Brazil's mid-century strongman. The 44-hour standard came from constitutional negotiation. Now, Paim argues, it's time to move again. He's careful to credit others—deputy Erika Hilton of the Socialist Party and city councilman Rick Azevedo, also Socialist, both from São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro respectively—for helping to reignite the conversation. This is collective work, he insists. That's how it has to be.
"The time for real action has come," Paim said. "An agreement is possible." Whether Congress sees it that way remains the open question. The amendment has cleared one hurdle. The harder ones lie ahead.
Citações Notáveis
I didn't swallow that loss. I reintroduced the proposal several times. I'm stubborn.— Senator Paulo Paim, reflecting on his 1988 Constitutional Assembly defeat
The time for real action has come. An agreement is possible.— Senator Paulo Paim, on the current push for the amendment
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why has this taken so long? A 40-hour week isn't a radical idea.
Because it touches the bottom line. Every hour you remove from the workweek is an hour the employer either has to hire someone else to cover, or accept lower output. That's not abstract—it's money.
But he's saying no wage cuts. How does that math work?
That's the gamble. The theory is that productivity gains, better-rested workers, and maybe some efficiency improvements offset the lost hours. Whether that's true in practice is what the business sector is skeptical about.
He's been fighting this since 1988. Why didn't he give up?
Some people don't. He saw the 48-to-44 shift happen once, which proved it was possible. That made him believe it could happen again. Stubbornness, yes, but also evidence.
What does a 4x3 schedule actually look like in practice?
Four days of work, three days off. It's been tested in some Brazilian companies and in other countries. Longer workdays, but genuine time away. For someone working six days a week, it's a different life.
If Congress approves this in 2026, what happens to workers immediately?
They get the first cut right away—from 44 to 40 hours, starting January 2027. Then it's one hour per year after that. So it's not overnight, but it's real and it's scheduled.