Can company monitor everything the employee does on the work computer?

There is a history. If the software is understood as a working tool, it is the same as a telephone, and its monitoring does not constitute a violation of articles X and XII of art. 5 of the Federal Constitution.

However, employees should be aware of the fact through a work contract or subsequent communication.

If the company fails to report the fact, it may be a violation of the articles of the constitution.

Source: Rite summary 6914820135020 SP

A work contract is a service contract between an employer and a contractor.

I've been through it a couple of times and I've already turned on my lawyer with this question. What happens is that there are very subjective questions. The company has the right to monitor what travels on its network on the grounds that it is taking care of your information. Even this is just cause:

  

According to Item 7 of Art 482 of the CLT, disclosure will only characterize breach if it is made to a third party, capable of causing harm to the company, or the possibility of causing it appreciably.

The company can do this to re-guard, but it is important that this is in contract duly signed by both parties.

By accepting the agreement you agree to the company policy. Do not accept it gives the company the right not to contact you or to repeat the contract if it is an update on the internal policy.

Unfortunately, I am giving you practical knowledge, as I am an analyst, not a lawyer. For a more grounded answer I suggest you look for a Labor Lawyer.

EDIT

The response from OnoSendai is more grounded than this. I'll leave here just to get rich.

Just by complementing OnoSendai's response, the Higher Labor Court has come to understand that email > staff can not be monitored, but that corporate email, all traffic on the company's computer and / or any other program attached to the company, yes.

See a decision of 2014 (very recent, jurisprudentially speaking):

  

In this respect the author is right. In fact, by   documents of fls. 86/91 and 94/96, it is found that these are   between the claimant and her first witness. Yet,    there is no indication that such conversations were made possible by   through the use of corporate email or any other program   linked to the company claimed.

     

Therefore, considering that the content of these documents   originate from the author's personal e-mail, there is no doubt that her   use by the claimed company violates the constitutional principles   privacy and intimacy, as well as the confidentiality of the   correspondence provided for respectively in items X and XII of   Constitution of the Republic, in verbis :

     

'X - intimacy, privacy, honor and image are inviolable   of the persons, assured the right to compensation for material damage or   moral arising from its violation; '

     

'XII - the secrecy of correspondence and communications is inviolable   telegraphic, data and telephone communications, except in the case   case, by court order, in the cases and in the form that the law   establish for purposes of criminal investigation or procedural instruction   criminal;