A promulgação da emenda constitucional que extingue a escala de seis dias de trabalho para um de descanso marca um novo capítulo da história das relações trabalhistas no Brasil. A mudança, que garante o direito a dois dias de descanso semanal, ocorre após mais de um século de reivindicações por limites à jornada de trabalho e por condições que assegurem aos trabalhadores tempo para atividades além do emprego.

Com base em informações históricas do Ministério do Trabalho e Emprego (MTE) e do Tribunal Superior do Trabalho (TST), a Agência Brasil fez um levantamento dos principais marcos da evolução da jornada de trabalho no país.

Herança escravista

Notícias relacionadas:

• Descanso de trabalhador não quebra empresas, diz Lula após fim da 6x1.
• Saiba quando começa a valer o fim da escala 6x1.
• Congresso promulga emenda de aposentadoria especial de agente de saúde.

Antes das primeiras leis trabalhistas, a economia brasileira foi sustentada por séculos pelo trabalho escravizado. Segundo o TST, a história do trabalho livre e assalariado é relativamente recente no país.

Durante 400 anos, a economia brasileira se apoiou no trabalho realizado por pessoas escravizadas. Já o período de trabalho livre e remunerado tem pouco mais de um século.

Essa herança ajuda a explicar por que a construção dos direitos trabalhistas ocorreu de forma gradual.

Primeiros passos

No início do século 20, trabalhadores passaram a se organizar para reivindicar direitos e limites para a jornada de trabalho. Naquele período, a ausência de regras gerais permitia jornadas extensas em diversos setores da economia.

Segundo o histórico do MTE, em 1912, a Confederação Brasileira do Trabalho (CBT), criada durante o 4º Congresso Operário Brasileiro, defendia uma pauta que incluía a jornada de oito horas diárias e a semana de seis dias de trabalho.

Também estavam entre as reivindicações a indenização por acidentes de trabalho, o salário mínimo, o seguro obrigatório para doenças e a pensão para velhice.

Ministério, Justiça e CLT

Poucos anos depois, em 1918, o governo federal criou o Departamento Nacional do Trabalho, uma das primeiras estruturas estatais voltadas à regulamentação das relações trabalhistas.

A institucionalização da proteção ao trabalho avançou em 1923, com a criação do Conselho Nacional do Trabalho. O órgão é apontado pelo TST como um dos marcos iniciais da estrutura que daria origem à Justiça do Trabalho brasileira.

Na década de 1930, com a criação do Ministério do Trabalho pelo governo de Getúlio Vargas, o direito do trabalho passou por um processo de ampliação, organização e regulamentação.

Segundo o TST, esse movimento culminou na instalação da Justiça do Trabalho, em 1941, e na consolidação da legislação trabalhista nos anos seguintes.

Um dos principais marcos desse processo foi a criação da Consolidação das Leis do Trabalho (CLT), em 1943, que reuniu e organizou a legislação trabalhista existente.

Da Constituição Federal ao fim da escala 6x1
 

Durante grande parte do século 20, a jornada semanal máxima prevista na legislação brasileira era de 48 horas.

A Constituição Federal de 1988 promoveu uma das mudanças mais importantes nesse modelo ao reduzir o limite para 44 horas semanais, mantendo o teto de oito horas por dia.

A promulgação do fim da escala 6x1 representa agora mais uma alteração relevante nessa trajetória.

Ao assegurar dois dias de descanso por semana, a nova regra modifica uma forma de organização do trabalho que permaneceu por décadas em atividades como comércio e serviços.

A medida amplia o período de descanso dos trabalhadores e se soma a uma série de mudanças que, ao longo da história brasileira, buscaram limitar o tempo dedicado ao trabalho e ampliar direitos dos brasileiros.

Linha do tempo

Até 1888 – A economia brasileira se apoia majoritariamente no trabalho escravizado, sem direitos trabalhistas

1912 – A Confederação Brasileira do Trabalho passa a defender a jornada de oito horas diárias e a semana de seis dias de trabalho

1918 – Criação do Departamento Nacional do Trabalho

1923 – Criação do Conselho Nacional do Trabalho

1930 – Criação do Ministério do Trabalho, Indústria e Comércio

1941 – Instalação da Justiça do Trabalho

1943 – Criação da Consolidação das Leis do Trabalho (CLT)

1988 – A Constituição Federal reduz de 48 para 44 horas o limite semanal de trabalho

2026 – Congresso Nacional promulga a emenda constitucional que extingue a escala 6x1 e garante dois dias de descanso semanal a todos os trabalhadores

This week, the Trump administration announced it's expanding its stake in semiconductor manufacturer GlobalFoundries. This brings the government's share of the company to over $2 billion, according to President Donald Trump, and it's only one of roughly three dozen companies in which this White House has acquired a piece of the action. This is a disturbing development for Americans who favor free enterprise and don't want the government to control the means of production.

While it may be a while before the opportunity arises to roll back state intervention in the economy, given the drift of both major parties away from faith in the marketplace, the Cato Institute has launched a project to get the process started.

---

$2 Billion Government Stake in One of 35 Once-Private Firms

"The U.S. Department of Commerce will receive equity in GF of approximately four percent, further enabling the American public to share in GF's growth," GlobalFoundries announced Monday in a press release about a U.S.–Japanese initiative to open two new semiconductor manufacturing facilities.

"This brings our total Investments to 1.63 Billion Dollars, and now, the U.S. Government's stake is worth over 2 Billion Dollars," Trump confirmed on Truth Social.

The announcement's triumphant tone isn't necessarily shared by people who wonder what the government's ownership stake in one company will do to regulation and investment in the industry. Will fully private firms challenging a state-backed player experience an even playing field?

In a July CNBC survey of 1,000 U.S. voters, 49 percent of respondents said it is "not appropriate for the federal government to own a portion of a U.S.-based company." Nineteen percent considered it appropriate, and 32 percent had no opinion.

"Washington's expanding involvement in the businesses it regulates threatens the competition and innovation that underpin American prosperity," warns the Cato Institute's Tad DeHaven on the launch of the Restoring Free Enterprise project. "Our project will examine the consequences of that involvement and chart a path toward getting Washington out of the boardroom."

Restoring Free Enterprise's Government Ownership Dashboard shows the U.S. government owning shares in 35 companies. The recent deal with GlobalFoundries comes on top of an earlier equity stake, giving the government 7 percent ownership of the firm. Other big deals include an 8.4 percent stake in Intel, a claim on 20 percent of distributions above $17.5 billion in Westinghouse, and an arrangement granting the U.S. government the right to appoint a director for U.S. Steel and to veto decisions over matters including investment and production.

Why might this be a problem?

---

When Government Enters the Market, Competition Is Undermined and Decisions Politicized

In an analysis for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Sujai Shivakumar, Charles Wessner, and Christina Tutino cautioned that direct government ownership could create "conflicts between the role of the government as an investor in a particular company and its role as a regulator (e.g., regarding export controls) of firms across the wider industry." They added that preferential treatment for state-linked forms could "distort competition, stifle innovation, and potentially lead to monopolies or market concentration in strategic sectors."

"Once government crosses the line into equity ownership, the game changes," agreed economist Vance Ginn in a 2025 piece for the American Institute for Economic Research. "It's no longer about setting fair rules of the road—it's about Washington joining the race as a participant. That undermines competition, politicizes corporate decisions, and exposes taxpayers to risks they never agreed to take."

Basically, when the government gets involved in any industry, it complicates matters for the companies in which shares are held, for competitors who must worry that regulators will put their thumbs on the scale to help favored firms, and for the market in general. Overall, government interference of any sort in market transactions does more harm than good, and direct ownership makes things even worse.

"Federal rate controls, excessive taxes, barriers to restructuring, and rigid labor rules weakened private railroads in the mid-20th century, just as automobiles, buses, trucks, and airlines were intensifying competition," Cato's Chris Edwards points out in a case study for the Restoring Free Enterprise Project. Congress then created Amtrak to maintain the passenger train service its red tape had helped strangle, but despite plans for the railroad to be self-sufficient, "it has never earned a profit and has received tens of billions of dollars in subsidies."

---

Proposals for Reform, but Is Anybody in D.C. Interested?

The project acknowledges the Trump administration's intention to encourage U.S. manufacturing and to meet strategic defense goals. But it points out that private, profit-seeking firms are what made the U.S. prosperous and dominant in so many fields to begin with. The government should get out of the way of the market if it wants the country to continue to thrive.

As alternatives to state ownership of companies, Restoring Free Enterprise proposes permitting and regulatory reforms that "shorten reviews, remove unnecessary requirements, reform the Jones Act, and recognize out-of-state licenses" for workers. The project also recommends free trade agreements that reduce barriers to international commerce, the removal of export and procurement barriers, tax reforms involving expensing, and immigration reforms that simplify processing and make it easier for foreign-born college graduates to remain in the U.S.

The obstacles to implementing these reforms are substantial. The administration, while criticizing the Democratic Party's growing affection for socialism, itself embraces government ownership of companies, mercantilism, and heavy state intervention in economic decisions and activities. The Democratic Party has long been less market-oriented than the Republicans, and despite the GOP's transformation, a growing share of Democrats are openly socialist advocates for state control.

"American political leaders on the left and right are rebelling against the market-first consensus that dominated Washington for four decades," concluded Axios's Courtenay Brown and Neil Irwin in July. "It's evident in everything from the Trump administration taking government stakes in dozens of private companies to socialist candidates winning Democratic primaries promising a more active government role in the economy."

U.S. politicians are happily adopting damaging policies that are at odds with the country's prosperity-building tradition of free markets. The Restoring Free Enterprise project would reverse that unfortunate trend, but it's not obvious that many people in D.C. are interested in joining the fight.

The post As D.C. Embraces State Economic Control, a Hopeful Project Seeks to Restore Free Enterprise appeared first on Reason Magazine.