NR-16, Annex V, and motorcyclists: hazard pay, technical report, and PGR in 2026

Executive TL;DR

NR-16 Annex V now explicitly addresses, within the OHS regulatory framework, hazardous activities on motorcycles and mopeds while traveling on public roads open to traffic, with characterization criteria and exclusions that directly impact HR, SESMT, and labor law. The change was consolidated by MTE Ordinance No. 2.021 of December 3, 2025, published in the Official Gazette of the Union on December 4, 2025, which includes Annex V in Regulatory Standard No. 16. For payment of hazard pay under the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), art. 193, technical proof through an inspection report issued by a qualified occupational safety engineer or occupational physician remains indispensable, subject to legal competence — the Annex V and NR-16 texts define hypotheses and exclusions that must be matched to the reality of the role, schedule, and routes.

Table of contents

1. Legal framework: Ordinance 2.021/2025 and Annex V
2. CLT, NR-16, and the role of the technical report
3. What usually distinguishes "habitual exposure" from occasional use
4. PGR, NR-1, and traffic risk as an organizational variable
5. Logistics, platforms, and outsourcing: where the company still responds
6. Frequent mistakes in high-volume operations
7. FAQ
8. References consulted

Legal framework: Ordinance 2.021/2025 and Annex V

MTE Ordinance No. 2.021 of December 3, 2025 amended NR-16 (Hazardous Activities and Operations) to include Annex V — Hazardous Activities on Motorcycles and Mopeds. The normative text must be read in full in the Official Gazette of the Union and on official Ministry of Labor and Employment channels; 2025 institutional communications reinforce the goal of providing technical predictability for exposure characterization, including in litigation over the additional pay.

Points requiring side-by-side reading with the official text (we do not replace the standard in this article):

• Prescriptive nature of Annex V regarding qualification hypotheses and express exclusions — for example, situations where hazardous activity does not apply for annex purposes (detail is in the annex itself; always cite current wording when updating internal policy).
• Adaptation deadline: the ordinance itself provides for effectiveness 120 days from DOU publication. Such provisions set the clock for adjusting procedures, contracts, and OHS documentation, not payroll alone.

Any company operational schedule (fleet training, PPE update, route review) must be aligned to that date, or it risks operating with internal policy outdated relative to legal text.

CLT, NR-16, and the role of the technical report

CLT art. 193 establishes hazard pay for work in permanent activities not specified in art. 192 (unhealthiness), in habitual and permanent contact with flammables, explosives, electrical energy under certain conditions, among other legally defined hypotheses. NR-16 details hazardous activities and operations and serves as the basis for safety engineering and occupational medicine to structure technical evidence.

Important: the final decision on payment obligation in litigation involves legal interpretation of proof — but on the OHS side the company must produce compatibility between:

1. Job description and actual routine (not just the job title on the org chart).
2. Hazard characterization report, issued by a legally qualified professional, covering the activity per NR-16.
3. Report update when routes, base, service type, time on public roads, or third-party contract change.

NR-1, in turn, requires the Risk Management Program (PGR) to address all relevant occupational risks, including — beyond flammables and electricity — scenario analysis for falls, run-overs, route violence, and target pressure when it impacts safety. This is not about "psychologizing" a traffic accident, but recognizing that work organization (targets, delivery windows, breaks) is an exposure variable in urban logistics.

What usually distinguishes "habitual exposure" from occasional use

Technical literature and labor case law often revolve around habituality and permanence. In motorcycle delivery or motorcycle courier operations, concrete questions help HR and SESMT theses avoid collision:

• Is the motorcycle a habitual work tool or does it appear in occasional situations?
• Does the role require continuous paid travel on public roads or are there long periods off route?
• Does the employer organize routes, schedules, and volume in ways that alter risk (targets per hour, penalties for delay)?

These answers change the exposure profile and therefore control design: defensive driving training, PPE compatible with NR-6, vehicle inspection, integration with health (PCMSO) for repetitive trauma or demand stress, and protocols for urban violence.

Annex V, as a technical-legal instrument, concentrates the list of situations where activity qualifies as hazardous for standard purposes — and brings exclusions where, even with a motorcycle, that annex rule does not apply. Corporate policy therefore cannot "copy union/competitor thesis": it must derive from documentary proof by company.

PGR, NR-1, and traffic risk as an organizational variable

In distribution centers and omnichannel operations, a PGR traditionally dominated by forklift, docks, and machinery must absorb last-mile risk. ACSMT recommends, in enterprise diagnostics, cross-referencing:

• Operational indicators: average stop time, hours on road, distance, claims by region.
• Health indicators (when legal and ethical): leave related to traffic accidents, voice/body support use (handlebar ergonomics).
• Near-miss channel (near collisions) — frequently underreported without reporting culture.

This topic appears in the risk inventory with metrics and owners. It is not enough to record "traffic" as a generic risk; controls must be tied (for example, route hour limits, thermal break, rain rules).

Logistics, platforms, and outsourcing: where the company still responds

Subcontracted delivery contracts do not, by themselves, transfer the buyer's responsibility for labor enforcement in cases of illegal outsourcing or shared risk in the production chain. From an OHS perspective, combine:

• Minimum clauses on training, PPE, accident reporting, compatible insurance.
• Periodic audit of operator bases and vehicle conditions when the contract allows.
• PGR interface: critical third-party risk must appear in the buyer's inventory with governance criteria.

Frequent mistakes in high-volume operations

1. Uniform hazard pay without a report segmented by route category (urban, periphery, night).
2. Registering the motorcycle as a means but not registering public-road exposure with method.
3. Demanding targets incompatible with regulated breaks and then treating a claim as "worker's exclusive fault."
4. Disconnecting PCMSO from trauma when schedule design increases fatigue.
5. Not revising the PGR after ERP routing change — optimization logic changes real risk.

Minimum documentation auditors and litigation usually request

Maintain a package per critical worker or base: updated job description, work orders with typical route segments, pre-use vehicle inspection checklists, defensive driving and first aid training record when applicable, and dated versions of report and PGR matching the litigated period. Technical defense often fails when there is a date mismatch between report, commercial policy change, and target extract.

FAQ

Does Ordinance 2.021/2025 replace the need for a report?

No. The ordinance updates NR-16 and brings Annex V; technical proof in the labor sphere remains supported by CLT and NR-16, including report requirements and qualified professional, as applicable to the case.

Are Annex V "exclusions" automatic in the company?

Not without analysis. Normative exclusion must be matched to fact and eventually legal counsel, because copying the job title literally may not reflect actual exposure.

Does the PGR replace fleet traffic policy?

They are different instruments. The PGR records risks and controls; fleet policy defines how to operate. Both must be consistent.

Are app delivery workers always covered by the same classification?

Employment relationship and contractual chain vary. This article does not define employment category; it addresses the OHS layer when there is a relationship or contractual responsibility to map.

What is the occupational safety engineer's role here?

Issue or guide report/activity compatible with NR-16, integrate with PGR, and participate in control decisions (route design, bases, training).

Does ACSMT replace legal counsel?

No. We provide OHS engineering, methodology, and auditable documentation; litigious decisions are legal.

Executive conclusion

NR-16 Annex V is the technical milestone for motorcycles and mopeds in hazardous activities, formalized by MTE Ordinance No. 2.021/2025. Logistics and omnichannel retail companies must align report, PGR, route policy, and third-party governance to reduce liability and protect workers in one of the most sensitive urban risk modalities. ACSMT supports exposure mapping, PGR adaptation, and integration with occupational health and safety — talk to the team at /contato.

Related reading in the series

• NR-1 and psychosocial risks — enterprise view
• PGR 2026 and psychosocial factors
• eSocial: S-2210, S-2220, and S-2240

---

References consulted

1. Brazil. Official Gazette of the Union. MTE Ordinance No. 2.021, December 3, 2025 (DOU publication 12/4/2025) — inclusion of Annex V in NR-16. Reference: https://www.in.gov.br/web/dou/-/portaria-mte-n-2.021-de-3-de-dezembro-de-2025-672988675.
2. Brazil. Presidency of the Republic. Law No. 13.467/2017 — CLT text (art. 193 and following on hazard pay and additional payments). Reference: http://www.planalto.gov.br.
3. Brazil. Ministry of Labor and Employment. NR-16 (consolidated and amendments). Reference: https://www.gov.br/trabalho-e-emprego/.
4. Brazil. Ministry of Labor and Employment. Institutional news on NR-16 update and protection for motorcycle workers (December/2025). Reference: gov.br/trabalho-e-emprego (search for "NR 16 motocicletas").
5. International Labour Organization (ILO). Resources on road safety and work accidents (international prevention context). https://www.ilo.org.
6. World Health Organization (WHO). Information sheets on injuries and traffic accident prevention (general epidemiological reference, not a substitute for your case-specific national statistics). https://www.who.int.

Editorial note: exhaustive exclusion lists and exact characterization limits appear only in the legal text of Annex V and must be cited with DOU excerpts in internal materials. We do not reproduce full wording here to avoid outdated content in case of correction.

Post-publication checklist (ACSMT)

• Reload DOU HTML if there is a correction to Ordinance 2.021/2025.
• Insert specific academic citation (e.g., national study on motorcycle courier accidents) if the client wants scientific reinforcement beyond WHO/ILO.