Workplace Harassment Against Public Servants: State Liability

This page is a translation of the original Portuguese text, provided for convenience. It deals with Brazilian law. If there is any discrepancy, the Portuguese version prevails. Read the original in Portuguese

Workplace harassment (assédio moral) against a public servant triggers the State’s strict liability. The State must compensate the victim for the moral (non-economic) and material (financial) damages caused by the abusive conduct.

What Workplace Harassment Means in the Public Sector

Workplace harassment in a public-sector job is marked by repeated, prolonged exposure of a public servant to humiliating, embarrassing, and degrading situations while performing their duties. It differs from isolated conflicts or the ordinary disagreements of any workplace because it is systematic and intentional. The harasser’s conduct aims to destabilize the victim emotionally, undermining their dignity, health, and professional performance.

In the public service, harassment can take many forms: assigning tasks that are incompatible with the employee’s position, isolating the employee, removing duties without justification, imposing unattainable targets, and spreading disparaging rumors. This conduct violates the principles of Public Administration, especially morality and impersonality.

Law No. 8.112/1990 guarantees federal public servants adequate working conditions, and workplace harassment directly violates those rights. Although there is no specific federal law on workplace harassment in the public service, many states and municipalities already have their own rules that define and punish this conduct.

The State’s Strict Liability

Article 37, paragraph 6, of the Federal Constitution establishes the State’s strict liability for damage caused by its agents while performing their duties. When a superior or a coworker harasses a public servant in a public workplace, the State answers directly to the victim, regardless of whether the public entity itself was at fault.

The victim only has to show the harm suffered and a causal link between the harassing conduct and the injury. There is no need to prove the harasser’s intent or the Administration’s negligence in monitoring the workplace. This easier standard of proof is essential to effectively protecting public servants who are victims of harassment.

After compensating the victim, the State has a right of recourse against the harasser, as the Federal Constitution itself provides. In that recourse action, the State must prove that the employee who committed the harassment acted with fault or intent. The purpose is to hold the wrongdoer personally accountable without compromising the compensation owed to the victim.

In that recourse action, the State must prove that the employee who committed the harassment acted with fault or intent.

Courts have set compensation amounts that vary with the severity of the harassment, how long it lasted, and the harm the victim actually suffered. In 2026, awards typically range from R$ 10.000,00 to R$ 100.000,00, and they can be higher in extremely serious cases that result in medical leave or an inability to work.

Evidence of Workplace Harassment in the Public Service

Gathering evidence is a crucial step toward a successful lawsuit for workplace harassment. The public servant should collect every piece of evidence of the abusive conduct they can, including e-mails, electronic messages, memoranda, work orders, and any document that shows discriminatory or humiliating treatment.

Testimony from coworkers is important evidence, although it is often hard to obtain because of fear of retaliation. Medical and psychological reports showing that the public servant became ill because of the harassment are also essential to establishing both the harm and the causal link.

Courts have allowed the burden of proof to be shifted in certain situations, especially when the public servant presents solid indications of harassment and the Administration offers no legitimate justification for the challenged conduct. Complaints to the ombudsman’s office, formal reports, and administrative proceedings that have been opened all strengthen the body of evidence.

Administrative and Judicial Remedies

A public servant who is a victim of workplace harassment can pursue remedies both administratively and in court. Administratively, you can file a complaint with the agency’s ombudsman’s office, submit a formal report to the harasser’s superior, and ask for an administrative inquiry (sindicância) or a disciplinary administrative proceeding against the offender.

In court, the damages lawsuit must be filed against the public entity (the Federal Government, a state, or a municipality), which is strictly liable for the harm caused. The statute of limitations is five years, counted from the date of the last act of harassment. You can request urgent preliminary relief to have the harasser removed immediately or to have the victimized public servant transferred to another department.

Disciplinary proceedings against the harasser can lead to penalties ranging from a warning to dismissal, depending on the seriousness of the conduct. The sanctions are set out in Law No. 8.112/1990 for federal public servants and in state and municipal legislation for other public servants. Repeat offenses and the seriousness of the consequences for the victim are aggravating factors when the penalty is determined.

Prevention and Institutional Policies

Preventing workplace harassment in the public service depends on putting effective institutional policies in place. Public agencies should offer training on interpersonal relations at work, create safe channels for reporting, and establish permanent committees to monitor the work environment.

CNJ (Brazil’s National Council of Justice) Resolution No. 351/2020 established the Policy for the Prevention and Handling of Workplace Harassment within the Judiciary, and it serves as a reference for other agencies. The rule calls for prevention committees, organizational climate surveys, and protective measures for those who report harassment.

Brazil’s Public Labor Prosecutor’s Office (Ministério Público do Trabalho) has also been active in monitoring and combating workplace harassment in the public service. It enters into conduct adjustment agreements with public agencies and files public civil actions when necessary. This work helps build a healthier and more respectful workplace.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who can be held liable for workplace harassment in the public service?

The State is strictly liable for the harm caused to a public servant who is a victim of workplace harassment, and it must compensate the victim whether or not the public entity itself was at fault. After paying the compensation, the State may exercise its right of recourse against the harasser, who will be held personally liable for the unlawful conduct. The harasser may also face administrative and criminal liability.

How should a public servant document workplace harassment?

You should collect e-mails, messages, memoranda, and work orders that show the abusive conduct. It is important to record the dates, times, and witnesses of each episode of harassment. Medical and psychological reports showing illness caused by the harassment are essential. Formal complaints to the ombudsman’s office and entries in meeting minutes also strengthen the body of evidence.

What is the deadline for filing a lawsuit for workplace harassment?

The statute of limitations for a damages lawsuit for workplace harassment against the public treasury (Fazenda Pública) is five years, under Decree No. 20.910/1932. The period starts running from the last act of harassment. You should seek legal advice as soon as possible to protect your rights and make it easier to gather evidence.

As informações deste artigo são de caráter informativo e não substituem consulta jurídica individualizada. Cada caso possui particularidades que exigem análise específica.