A former employee with 10 years of service must be retained in the plan

The worker is entitled to continue to enjoy the corporate health insurance plan if he has been a beneficiary for more than ten years. The company must compensate him if it excludes him from coverage even though he has indicated a desire to remain in the plan after leaving his job.

Based on this understanding, Civil Court No. 31 in Rio de Janeiro has ordered Bradesco Saúde to retain a former employee associated with Banco Bradesco’s business plan. In addition, it decided that the operator pays compensation for moral damages in the amount of R$5,000.

The banker represented by the office Stamato, Saboya and Rocha Advogadus Associates, asked to remain in Bradesco Saúde, indicating that he was an employee of Banco HSBC and that for more than ten years he contributed his monthly share, prior to the acquisition of the company by Bradesco, which began offering the plan in joint form. -to share.

Bradsko Seide, in turn, has argued that Law No. 9656/1998 does not qualify joint participation as contribution. Therefore, it does not guarantee such persons the right to remain in the business plan after leaving the company.

However, Judge Paulo Roberto Campos Fragoso stated that Article 31 of Law No. 9656/1998 states that a former employee who contributed to the monthly health plan, as a result of a working relationship, for a period of not less than ten years, is entitled to alimony from the life plan as a beneficiary, given The same terms of assistance coverage he enjoyed when the employment contract was in effect, provided he bears full reimbursement.

For the judge, the fact that the form for providing the service and the form of financing has been changed does not mean the interruption of the ten-year period stipulated by law. Fragoso realized that the banker had been shown to have made the contribution within the statutory period. Therefore, he received the right to maintain coverage as a beneficiary.

The judge also noted that the former banker’s refusal to stay on the plan was illegal. Thus, it is the duty of the insurance company to compensate you.

click over here To read the decision
Processing 0089434-60.2021.8.19,0001