That is: individuals become victim of accident themselves or adoecem for occupational causes, being this sphere of the court of appeals of doctors and engineers. It is not problem for the company ….. The assumption of that the phrase above locks up the final truth is not total acceptable. Let us see: Encaminhamentos to the Providence with or without CAT is mediated by the department of human resources: generally it does not take knowledge of the causes and reasons of the encaminhamentos. The eventual concession of acidentrio benefit demands periodic and systematic consultations to the site of Providence for knowledge and plea of the same ones: it has here a hiato in the development of the reasoning, therefore this practical does not have a clear-cut administrator generally.
Retaking: who elaborates the leaf informs the removals for the encaminhamentos to the Providence through system SEFIP, by which the value is calculated to be collected for financial incubencies of FGTS and the Providence; this sector also, does not have nothing to see with events that can have impactado in the adjusted RAT, one of the constant item of the incubencies. To be collected value is paid for the financial department: equally, moved away from gnese of the removals. This exactly financial sector calculates the costs of the company to formulate prices, and nothing it knows regarding the adjusted RAT and of the possibility of reduction of the same, with which the prices could be lesser and the company would become more competitive in the market. For the legal department it remains to take care of the occurrence of an action for liability, that has in the initial a letter of concession of acidentrio benefit, or one action of reintegration for dismissed individual with occupational, recognized illness for the Providence, or same an action of return, moved for the INSS: as this department is unaware of the reality of SST of the company, all these prompt events are e, say, almost inevitable.