Fernanda Ribas of the Federation of Industries of the State of Minas Gerais said the transition period for ending the 6x1 work schedule is too short.

The proposal to eliminate the six-days-on, one-day-off shift represents a significant shift in Brazilian labor dynamics. Industry leaders argue that a rushed implementation would force companies to increase hiring rapidly or risk operational collapse, potentially driving up the cost of goods for the public.

Ribas said the lack of a sufficient window prevents companies from reorganizing teams or adapting internal processes. This failure to adapt, she said, results in additional costs and increased pressure on the final consumer through inflation. She also noted that such constraints could lead to a rise in informal employment as businesses struggle to maintain formal contracts under new constraints.

There is significant disagreement regarding the actual length of the transition period outlined in the Proposed Amendment to the Constitution (PEC). Some reports indicate the transition is as short as 60 days [1]. This timeline has led some observers to say they are "não está acreditando" (cannot believe it) [2].

Other sources provide a different timeline. Alexandre Motta said the transition provided for in the PEC is 14 months [3]. This longer window is intended to allow for a 40-hour work week without salary cuts [3].

The discrepancy between a two-month window and a 14-month window creates uncertainty for employers in Minas Gerais and across Brazil. Ribas said that without a realistic timeframe, the economic burden shifts from the employer to the consumer.

“The transition period for ending the 6x1 work schedule is too short.”

The conflict over the transition timeline highlights a tension between labor rights advocates and industrial viability. If the 60-day window is accurate, the sudden shock to payroll and scheduling could trigger short-term inflation and a surge in unregulated labor. Conversely, a 14-month window suggests a more managed phase-in, though industry groups like FIEMG remain concerned that any rapid shift without systemic support will destabilize the service and manufacturing sectors.