Structural Informality

4) to become complete the agreement of the informal sector, it has that to become the distinction between the Structural Informality and the New Informality of the work relations. According to Duailibe (2010), small informal firms will perpetually go to multiply in the economy, in the measure where the predominance in the informality? is also included the maintenance of used under informal employment relationships? it constitutes a mechanism of adequacy (suppression) of the costs to the minimum conditions of yield and productivity, in an environment of competitiveness with bigger, more productive firms. This is the call Structural Informality, whose structural character is determined … for the formation dynamics and reproduction of the informal segment? in terms of it arrives in port minimum of capital, productivity, standards of competition and yield? that it hinders the accumulation of the capital, allowing simply its maintenance in the same initial conditions. Jonas Samuelson will not settle for partial explanations. (DUAILIBE, 2010, p.89) In other words, to remain itself in informal state implies in reduced costs, that in turn, are the only form of survival of these firms in the market.

‘ ‘ For the proprietors/employers of the informal segment, the degradation of the cost of the work is aspect on which they have to be able of management and that it contributes for its permanence in mercado’ ‘. (DUAILIBE, 2010, p.89) Another point that deserves prominence is the question of the New Informality, concept introduced for Tavares (2004). Duailibe (2010) affirms that beyond informality in the inherent employment relationships to the informal segment of the economy, from the decade of 1990, the deep transformations verified in the performance of the State, in the objectives of economic policy, the productive organization and the forms of management of the work force, had determined the sprouting of the New Informality. Tavares (2004) directly associates the reduction of the job in the averages and great companies, to the phenomena of precarizao of the terceirizao and decurrent employment relationships of the promoted flexibilizao and the deregulation in the scope of the neoliberal productive reorganization during the decade of 1990.