Brazilian Government Pushes to Abolish 6x1 Work Schedule Amid Political and Coalition Tensions

Lula’s government seeks to abolish the 6x1 work schedule amid coalition divisions and legislative challenges ahead of the 2026 elections, balancing political strategy and public support.

    Key details

  • • Lula’s government plans to abolish the 6x1 work schedule with a bill favoring 40 weekly hours and two days off.
  • • Division exists within the governing coalition over legislative strategy, particularly regarding Hugo Motta’s support for a constitutional amendment.
  • • The government considers submitting a regular bill to expedite passage and allow presidential vetoes, but negotiations are ongoing to avoid political friction.
  • • Public opinion supports ending the 6x1 schedule, but the productive sector warns of economic risks and unemployment impacts.

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's administration is advancing a legislative proposal to abolish the controversial 6x1 work schedule, which mandates six consecutive working days followed by one day off. The government aims to establish a work regime with a maximum of 40 hours per week and two days off, while preserving current salary levels. This initiative has ignited division within the governing coalition, particularly concerning how to approach the legislative process and avoid conflict with Chamber of Deputies President Hugo Motta (Republicanos-PB).

The proposal is critical for the government in the 2026 election year but faces challenges both politically and legislatively. The current draft is a Proposed Constitutional Amendment (PEC), which requires a qualified majority (three-fifths of votes in both chambers) and does not allow presidential vetoes. To navigate this, the government is considering submitting a regular bill (PL) instead, which demands a simple majority, facilitates executive veto power, and could be accelerated through a request for urgent consideration, forcing legislative deliberation within 45 days. However, government negotiators are cautious about potentially provoking Motta, who favors advancing the PEC process and expects the special committee to approve it by May.

Meanwhile, debates in the Chamber of Deputies also include other work-hour reform proposals such as reducing the weekly hours from 44 to 36 and even a four-day work week. Deputy Paulo Azi (União-BA), rapporteur for these initiatives, stresses the importance of public hearings to balance economic viability with workers' quality of life. The productive sector has voiced concerns about negative economic impacts and potential job losses if the 6x1 scheme is abolished. Public support for ending 6x1 is strong: a recent Datafolha survey found 71% of Brazilians favor its abolition.

This labor reform debate is tightly interwoven with Brazil’s broader political landscape ahead of the presidential election. The government aims to avoid delays that could reduce the reforms’ electoral significance, while opposition and coalition dynamics complicate swift legislative action. Discussions on public security reforms further reflect ideological divides but also highlight areas of potential compromise among key parties. The fate of the 6x1 abolition proposal remains uncertain, hinging on negotiation outcomes within Congress and the government’s strategy to manage coalition relations and legislative hurdles.

This article was translated and synthesized from Brazilian sources, providing English-speaking readers with local perspectives.

Source comparison

Proposal format

Sources report different formats for the proposal regarding the 6x1 work schedule.

valor.globo.com

"the current format of the proposal in the Chamber is a Proposed Constitutional Amendment (PEC)"

correiobraziliense.com.br

"the government is contemplating introducing a law with constitutional urgency"

Why this matters: One source states the proposal is a Proposed Constitutional Amendment (PEC), while the other discusses a law with constitutional urgency. This discrepancy affects how the proposal will be processed and the potential for presidential vetoes.