The type of employment relationship is not an obstacle to labor protection

  After making a count of several precedents on the topic of reinforced labor stability, the Constitutional Court affirmed that the type of employment relationship has not been an obstacle to grant the protection of that stability. On the contrary, it accepted that it comes in contracts for the provision of independent services. The Court held that it is better to say fundamental right to reinforced occupational stability, because it is a broader and more comprehensive denomination, while the term "reinforced labor stability" nominally refers as a rule to dependent labor relations.
Thus, the Court reiterated that this protection applies to those who are in conditions of manifest weakness, even if they do not have a qualification of loss of work capacity.