Can the contracts and Regulations of the “S” System have innovations that inspire administrative contracts?
Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2025 5:20 am
Autonomous Social Services are entities with a legal personality under private law, non-profit, non-governmental, of a collective interest and of public utility, whose main competence is the execution of public policies that are not exclusive to the State [2] .
This model was conceived in the 1940s, in response to the need to promote quality professional education for the development of industry, as well as social well-being, in the face of post-war challenges.
In this context, the first entities of the so-called “S” System emerged: National Industrial Training Service (SENAI), created in 1942; Social Service of Industry (SESI), created in 1946; National Commercial japan telegram data Training Service (SENAC), created in 1946; and Social Service of Commerce (SESC), created in the same year, 1946.
With the advent of the Federal Constitution (in 1988) there was an expansion of these entities: Brazilian Service of Support for Micro and Small Businesses (SEBRAE), in 1990; National Rural Learning Service (SENAR), the following year, in 1991; Social Transport Service (SEST) and National Transport Learning Service (SENAT), both from 1993; National Cooperative Learning Service (SESCOOP), from 1998.
In a judgment handed down in Extraordinary Appeal No. 789,874/DF, the Supreme Federal Court distinguished between Autonomous Social Services linked to union entities (Sistema S) and others:
“Given this regulatory framework, it can be stated that the social services of the “S” System, linked to higher-level employer entities and sponsored, basically, by resources collected from the productive sector itself, received, both from the Federal Constitution of 1988 and from the legislation that created them, undeniable administrative autonomy, formally limited only to the finalistic control, by the Court of Auditors, of the application of the resources received.
The basic general characteristics of these autonomous entities can be stated as follows:
(a) they are engaged in private activities of collective interest whose execution is not exclusively attributed to the State;
(b) act in mere collaboration with the public authorities;
(c) have their own assets and income, consisting mainly of the proceeds of compulsory contributions that the law of creation itself establishes in their favor; and
(d) have the prerogative to self-manage their resources, including with regard to preparing their budgets, establishing priorities and defining their job and salary frameworks, according to their own political orientation.
4. It is important not to confuse these entities, nor to compare them with others created after the 1988 Constitution, whose legal configuration has its own peculiarities. This is the case, for example, of the Associação das Pioneiras Sociais – APS (social service responsible for maintaining the SARAH Network, created by Law 8.246/91), the Brazilian Export Promotion Agency – APEX (created by Law 10.668/03) and the Brazilian Industrial Development Agency – ABDI (created by Law 11.080/04).
Unlike what occurs with the autonomous services of the “S” System, these new entities (a) had their creation authorized by law and implemented by the Executive Branch, not by union entities; (b) are not intended to provide social benefits or professional training to certain categories of workers, but to act in the provision of qualified medical care and in the promotion of public policies for sectoral development; (c) are financed, mainly, by budgetary allocations allocated in the budget of the Union itself (art. 2, § 3, of Law 8.246/91, art. 13 of Law 10.668/03 and art. 17, I, of Law 11.080/04); (d) are obliged to manage their resources in accordance with the criteria, goals and objectives established in a management contract whose terms are defined by the Executive Branch itself; and (e) are subject to the supervision of the Executive Branch with regard to the management of their resources.
This model was conceived in the 1940s, in response to the need to promote quality professional education for the development of industry, as well as social well-being, in the face of post-war challenges.
In this context, the first entities of the so-called “S” System emerged: National Industrial Training Service (SENAI), created in 1942; Social Service of Industry (SESI), created in 1946; National Commercial japan telegram data Training Service (SENAC), created in 1946; and Social Service of Commerce (SESC), created in the same year, 1946.
With the advent of the Federal Constitution (in 1988) there was an expansion of these entities: Brazilian Service of Support for Micro and Small Businesses (SEBRAE), in 1990; National Rural Learning Service (SENAR), the following year, in 1991; Social Transport Service (SEST) and National Transport Learning Service (SENAT), both from 1993; National Cooperative Learning Service (SESCOOP), from 1998.
In a judgment handed down in Extraordinary Appeal No. 789,874/DF, the Supreme Federal Court distinguished between Autonomous Social Services linked to union entities (Sistema S) and others:
“Given this regulatory framework, it can be stated that the social services of the “S” System, linked to higher-level employer entities and sponsored, basically, by resources collected from the productive sector itself, received, both from the Federal Constitution of 1988 and from the legislation that created them, undeniable administrative autonomy, formally limited only to the finalistic control, by the Court of Auditors, of the application of the resources received.
The basic general characteristics of these autonomous entities can be stated as follows:
(a) they are engaged in private activities of collective interest whose execution is not exclusively attributed to the State;
(b) act in mere collaboration with the public authorities;
(c) have their own assets and income, consisting mainly of the proceeds of compulsory contributions that the law of creation itself establishes in their favor; and
(d) have the prerogative to self-manage their resources, including with regard to preparing their budgets, establishing priorities and defining their job and salary frameworks, according to their own political orientation.
4. It is important not to confuse these entities, nor to compare them with others created after the 1988 Constitution, whose legal configuration has its own peculiarities. This is the case, for example, of the Associação das Pioneiras Sociais – APS (social service responsible for maintaining the SARAH Network, created by Law 8.246/91), the Brazilian Export Promotion Agency – APEX (created by Law 10.668/03) and the Brazilian Industrial Development Agency – ABDI (created by Law 11.080/04).
Unlike what occurs with the autonomous services of the “S” System, these new entities (a) had their creation authorized by law and implemented by the Executive Branch, not by union entities; (b) are not intended to provide social benefits or professional training to certain categories of workers, but to act in the provision of qualified medical care and in the promotion of public policies for sectoral development; (c) are financed, mainly, by budgetary allocations allocated in the budget of the Union itself (art. 2, § 3, of Law 8.246/91, art. 13 of Law 10.668/03 and art. 17, I, of Law 11.080/04); (d) are obliged to manage their resources in accordance with the criteria, goals and objectives established in a management contract whose terms are defined by the Executive Branch itself; and (e) are subject to the supervision of the Executive Branch with regard to the management of their resources.