A ruling currently under review with binding effect at TRT-18 (Goiás) could redefine which union companies operating in both the wholesale and retail food sectors, the so-called “atacarejo” model belong to, and the resulting uncertainty is already affecting groups headquartered outside Goiás.
The underlying problem is structural, not local: there is no CNAE code or specific economic category for “atacarejo.” The classification of a single retail chain currently varies depending on the criteria used (declared CNAE or the activity that is actually predominant), and since the issue has not yet been settled by the TST or the STF, the ruling established in Goiás is likely to serve as a reference for similar disputes nationwide, wherever the business model combines both activities.
The main risks for companies in the sector, regardless of their headquarters, are:
1. Incorrect collective bargaining agreement: Wholesale and retail have distinct unions, minimum wages, and additional pay; an incorrect classification results in retroactive claims for wage differences and union dues.
2. Mass exposure: Because this involves union classification, rather than individual cases, the dispute lends itself to class-action lawsuits and bulk enforcement of judgments.
In light of this, it is recommended that companies immediately map out the primary activity of each unit (revenue by sales channel, CNAE code, and articles of incorporation) and review the collective bargaining agreement currently in effect, before the legal precedent solidifies their liability.
