The discussion regarding hazard pay in Brazilian labor law is an old one, but it remains extremely relevant, especially when it involves essential and historically undervalued activities, such as cleaning public restrooms.
Although often treated as a simple or routine task, cleaning public restrooms exposes workers to highly harmful biological agents that can compromise their health and dignity.
In recent years, labor law case law, especially that of the Superior Labor Court (TST), has consolidated the understanding that cleaning public restrooms or restrooms with high traffic entitles the worker to the maximum level of hazard pay.
This position has been reaffirmed in recent decisions, such as the one issued by the 1st Labor Court of Toledo (PR), which was widely reported by the specialized legal press.
Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the legal and jurisprudential foundations that justify classifying the cleaning of public restrooms as a highly hazardous activity, as well as to reflect on its practical impacts for workers, employers, and the Public Administration.
The additional payment for hazardous work conditions in the Brazilian legal system.
The additional payment for unhealthy working conditions is provided for in Article 7, item XXIII, of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees urban and rural workers the right to receive additional remuneration for arduous, unhealthy, or dangerous activities, as defined by law. At the sub-constitutional level, the matter is regulated by Articles 189 to 192 of the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT).
According to article 189 of the CLT (Consolidation of Labor Laws), an activity is considered unhealthy when, due to its nature, conditions, or methods of work, it exposes the employee to agents harmful to health above the tolerance limits established by the Ministry of Labor. The characterization and classification of unhealthy working conditions generally depend on a technical assessment, as per article 195 of the CLT.
Regulatory Standard No. 15 (NR-15), especially in its Annex 14, addresses exposure to biological agents and establishes the circumstances under which work is considered highly hazardous. It is within this regulatory context that the discussion about cleaning public restrooms takes place.
Cleaning public restrooms and exposure to biological agents.
The sanitation of public restrooms involves frequent contact with human waste, sanitary waste, bodily fluids, and surfaces potentially contaminated by viruses, bacteria, fungi, and other pathogenic microorganisms. This is an environment conducive to the spread of infectious diseases, which substantially differentiates this activity from cleaning homes or offices.
Labor law jurisprudence has emphasized precisely this distinction. Public restrooms, especially those located in schools, hospitals, transportation terminals, government offices, and large commercial establishments, are used daily by hundreds or thousands of people, making any comparison with restrooms for restricted or domestic use unfeasible.
In this scenario, habitual exposure to biological agents that cannot be neutralized by common personal protective equipment reinforces the need to recognize maximum-level hazardous working conditions as a form of minimum compensation for the risks assumed by the worker.
TST Precedent 448 and the consolidation of case law
The main legal precedent on this subject is Ruling No. 448, item II, of the Superior Labor Court. The ruling states that:
"The cleaning of sanitary facilities for public or collective use with high traffic, and the respective garbage collection, since it is not equivalent to cleaning in residences and offices, warrants the payment of a maximum level of hazard pay."
The publication of this summary represented a significant step forward in the protection of cleaning workers, by standardizing the understanding that it is not merely a quantitative assessment of the environment, but a qualitative recognition of the risks involved.
It is important to highlight that, according to repeated decisions of the TST (Superior Labor Court), the judge is not bound by the conclusions of the expert report when these are shown to be dissociated from the factual reality or consolidated jurisprudence. Thus, even if the technical expertise indicates a medium degree of unhealthiness, it is possible to classify it as a maximum degree when the cleaning of high-traffic restrooms is proven.
Recent case analysis: the decision of the Labor Court of Toledo (PR)
A prime example of this approach is the decision issued by Judge Fabrício Sartori, of the 1st Labor Court of Toledo (PR), which recognized the right to the maximum level of hazard pay for a worker responsible for cleaning bathrooms at a public school.
In this specific case, it was demonstrated that the cleaning lady performed the cleaning of seven bathrooms used by approximately 592 people twice a day. Although the expert report suggested payment of the additional compensation at a medium level, the judge directly applied Precedent 448, II, of the TST (Superior Labor Court), disregarding the technical conclusion.
According to the judge, the situation was not similar to cleaning domestic sanitary facilities, but rather to sanitizing restrooms with high traffic, which would justify the payment of the maximum additional compensation. The decision also recognized the joint liability of the outsourced company and the contracting municipality.
Practical implications for employers and public administration.
The recognition of maximum-level hazardous working conditions in the cleaning of public restrooms generates significant economic and legal implications. For employers, it implies the payment of an additional amount corresponding to 40% of the minimum wage, unless a more favorable provision exists in a collective bargaining agreement.
Within the scope of Public Administration, especially when there is outsourcing of cleaning services, case law has admitted the subsidiary or joint liability of the public entity, under the terms of Precedent 331 of the Superior Labor Court (TST), when a failure in the supervision of the contract is verified.
These impacts reinforce the need for adequate planning, strict compliance with occupational health and safety standards, and, above all, recognition of the professionals responsible for cleaning public spaces.
The closing thought
The consolidation of the understanding that cleaning public restrooms warrants maximum hazard pay represents more than just a matter of remuneration: it is a legal recognition of the dignity and social relevance of the work performed by these professionals.
By stating that the sanitization of high-traffic restrooms is not equivalent to domestic cleaning, labor jurisprudence reaffirms the constitutional commitment to protecting worker health and social justice.
Beyond the legal aspect, the topic invites reflection on the historical invisibility of certain professional categories and on the need for public and corporate policies that promote safer, more humane, and respectful work environments.
References
BRAZIL. Constitution (1988). Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil of 1988. Brasília, DF: Presidency of the Republic. Available at: https://www.planalto.gov.br. Accessed on: February 9, 2026.
BRAZIL. Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT). Decree-Law No. 5.452, of May 1, 1943. Brasília, DF: Presidency of the Republic. Available at: https://www.planalto.gov.br. Accessed on: February 9, 2026.
BRAZIL. Ministry of Labor and Employment. Regulatory Standard No. 15 (NR-15): Unhealthy Activities and Operations, Annex 14 – Biological Agents. Brasília, DF. Available at: https://www.gov.br/trabalho. Accessed on: February 9, 2026.
Superior Labor Court (TST). Summary No. 448. Hazardous work allowance. Cleaning of sanitary facilities for public or collective use. Available at: https://www.tst.jus.br. Accessed on: February 9, 2026.
BRAZIL. Regional Labor Court of the 9th Region. Case No. 0000805-29.2024.5.09.0068. 1st Labor Court of Toledo/PR. Judge Fabrício Sartori. Decided in 2025.
CONSULTANT JURIDICO (ConJur). Cleaning bathrooms with high traffic constitutes maximum level of unhealthiness. São Paulo, September 2, 2025. Available at: https://www.conjur.com.br. Accessed on: February 9, 2026.
Superior Labor Court (TST). Summary No. 331. Outsourcing. Liability of the service recipient. Available at: https://www.tst.jus.br. Accessed on: February 9, 2026.
