VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT Flashcards
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
A. Termination of Employment by Employer
1. Just Causes – Labor Code, art. 297; DOLE D.O. No. 147-15
Key Points on Legal Termination Procedures in the Philippines
This passage explains the legal steps an employer must follow to terminate an employee’s employment for cause (just cause) based on the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) regulations.
A)
Here are the Just Causes for Termination under Article 297 of the Philippine Labor Code, with brief explanations:
1. Serious Misconduct or Wilful Disobedience: Employee commits a grave offense or repeatedly refuses to follow lawful employer instructions.
2. Gross and Habitual Neglect of Duties: Employee consistently fails to perform their duties in a major way.
3. Fraud or Willful Breach of Trust: Employee deceives the employer or violates their trust through intentional actions.
4. Commission of a Crime or Offense: Employee commits a crime that reflects poorly on their work or the company.
5. Other Causes Analogous to the Foregoing: Actions similar to the above that significantly impact the employment relationship.
B)
Procedure:**
-
First Notice: The employer needs to provide the employee with a written notice containing:
- The specific reason for termination based on Labor Code provisions or company policies (e.g., serious misconduct, violation of a company rule).
- A detailed explanation of the situation and evidence against the employee.
- An opportunity for the employee to respond within at least five days.
- Employee’s Opportunity to Respond: The employer must give the employee a chance to defend themselves, either verbally or in writing, with the option of having a representative present. This doesn’t necessarily require a formal hearing unless requested by the employee or mandated by company policy.
-
Termination Notice (if justified): If the employer decides termination is justified after considering the employee’s response, they must issue a final written notice:
- Stating that all evidence has been reviewed.
- Confirming that the grounds for termination are valid.
- Notice Delivery: Both notices should be delivered personally to the employee or to their last known address.
Example (Using Current Event):
Imagine a news report about a factory worker who gets fired for allegedly stealing company property. Following these procedures, the company should first provide a written notice detailing the accusations and evidence (e.g., CCTV footage). The employee would then have a chance to explain their side of the story. Only after considering the employee’s response can the company decide on termination and issue the final notice explaining their decision.
Importance:
These regulations ensure fair treatment for both employers and employees. Employers have the right to address misconduct, while employees have the chance to defend themselves before losing their job.
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
A. Termination of Employment by Employer
- Authorized Causes – Labor Code, arts. 298-299; DOLE D.O. No. 147-15
Authorized Causes for Termination (Labor Code, Articles 298-299)
Authorized causes are reasons for termination where the employee isn’t necessarily at fault, but circumstances necessitate job loss.
- Installation of Labor-Saving Devices: The company introduces technology that makes certain positions redundant (e.g., a bank replacing cashiers with ATMs).
- Redundancy: A company restructures and eliminates certain roles due to economic reasons or changes in operations (e.g., a news company downsizing its print department due to a shift to online news).
- Retrenchment to Prevent Losses: The company lays off employees to avoid financial hardship, following specific retrenchment procedures (e.g., a factory retrenching workers due to a decline in product demand).
- Closure or Cessation of Operations: The company permanently shuts down or stops operating entirely (e.g., a restaurant closing due to a fire rendering the building unusable).
Important Note: Even under authorized causes, employers may still have obligations to provide separation pay or follow specific retrenchment procedures mandated by law.
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
A. Termination of Employment by Employer
- Due Process Requirements – Labor Code, art. 292 (b); DOLE D.O. No.
147-15
Key Points on Due Process Requirements for Termination (Philippines) - Easy to Remember!
This rule outlines the steps an employer must follow to ensure a fair termination process, protecting the employee’s right to security of tenure:
- Written Notice:
* The employer needs to provide the employee with a written notice stating the specific reasons for termination.
* This could be based on just cause (e.g., misconduct) or authorized cause (e.g., redundancy due to company restructuring). - Opportunity to Respond:
* The employee has the right to be heard and defend themselves, either verbally or in writing.
* They can choose to have a representative present during this process (e.g., a union representative or lawyer). - Company Policy:
* The opportunity to be heard may follow company procedures established according to Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) guidelines. - Burden of Proof:
* The employer must prove that the termination was justified based on a valid or authorized cause. - Legal Challenge:
* The employee can contest the termination by filing a complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). - Optional Suspension:
* DOLE can temporarily suspend the termination (with a “prima facie” finding) if it risks causing a serious labor dispute or is part of a mass layoff.
- Easy to Remember Breakdown:
- Notice: Tell the employee why they’re being fired (in writing).
- Chance to Explain: Let them defend themselves.
- Fairness: Follow company rules set by DOLE guidelines.
- Employer’s Burden: Prove the firing was justified.
- Fight It: Employee can contest the termination with NLRC.
- Possible Hold: DOLE might delay the firing in specific situations.
Example (Using Current Event):
Imagine a news report about a call center employee fired for allegedly violating company internet usage policies. Following due process, the company should first give the employee a written notice detailing the accusations and any evidence (e.g., website browsing history). The employee would then have a chance to explain their side of the story, perhaps claiming they were using the internet for legitimate work-related research. This ensures a fair process before termination.
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
B. Termination of Employment by Employee
1 . Resignation vs. Constructive Dismissal – Labor Code, art. 300
Resignation vs. Constructive Dismissal (Philippines) - 3 Key Differences
This rule protects government employees who are laid off due to the implementation of a new code. It also highlights the difference between resignation and constructive dismissal, which are crucial concepts in Philippine labor law. Here’s a breakdown of the key differences with relatable examples:
- Intent vs. Coercion:
* Resignation: Voluntary act by the employee to sever their employment with the company. They choose to leave for personal reasons, a new job offer, etc.
* Constructive Dismissal: Involuntary termination initiated by the employer through unreasonable actions that force the employee to resign.
Example:
A news report claims a group of teachers resign from a public school due to dissatisfaction with teaching conditions. This is likely a resignation as the teachers are voluntarily leaving. - Who Initiates the Separation?**
* Resignation: The employee formally submits a resignation letter expressing their intent to leave the company.
* Constructive Dismissal: The employer, through their actions, essentially forces the employee to resign, even though no formal termination notice is issued.
Example:
Imagine a government agency implements mandatory salary cuts for all employees. Some employees might feel this is a significant hardship and resign in protest. This could be considered constructive dismissal because the employer’s action (pay cut) indirectly compels them to leave. - Legal Implications:
* Resignation: Generally, no legal claims arise from a resignation. However, the employer might have to fulfil obligations like settling unused vacation leave.
* Constructive Dismissal: The employee can file a complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) claiming unfair labour practice and seek compensation for damages.
Example:
A factory worker resigns after the company starts requiring them to work excessive overtime without additional pay. If proven, this could be a case of constructive dismissal as the employer’s actions (excessive mandatory overtime) make continued employment unreasonable. The worker could file a complaint with the NLRC for unpaid overtime and seek separation pay.
- Important Note:
Determining whether a situation constitutes constructive dismissal can be complex and depends on the specific facts. If an employee feels forced to resign due to their employer’s actions, it’s advisable to consult a lawyer specializing in labour law.
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
B. Termination of Employment by Employee
2. Abandonment
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
C. Preventive Suspension (Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code, Book
V, Rule XIV, secs. 3-4)
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
D. Reliefs from Illegal Dismissal (Labor Code, art. 294)
Reliefs from Illegal Dismissal (Philippines) - Key Points with Current Events Example
This rule emphasizes the right to security of tenure and the remedies available to an employee who is illegally dismissed. Here’s a breakdown of the key points with a relatable scenario:
1) Reliefs Available:
* Reinstatement: The preferred remedy. The employee gets their job back without losing seniority rights or other privileges.
* Full Backwages: Includes salary, allowances, and other benefits the employee would have earned if not illegally terminated (calculated from the time of dismissal to reinstatement).
* Monetary Equivalent of Benefits: If reinstatement isn’t possible, the employee receives the monetary value of any lost benefits.
Current Event Scenario:
Imagine a news report about a delivery driver for a logistics company who is fired for allegedly violating company policies. The driver claims the termination was unfair and contests it.
2) How the Reliefs Apply:
* If the driver wins the case and the termination is deemed illegal, the court might order reinstatement. They would get their job back and receive full backwages for the period they were out of work (including allowances they would have received while employed).
* In some cases, reinstatement might not be feasible. If the driver prefers not to return to the company or the working relationship is irreparable, the court could award the monetary equivalent of benefits the driver would have earned if they had continued working (e.g., unused vacation leave pay).
3) Jurisprudence and Legal Reasoning:
Philippine courts prioritize reinstatement whenever possible. Landmark cases like National Labor Relations Commission vs. Goodwill Milling Company Inc. (G.R. No. 110026) highlight this preference. However, reinstatement might not be practical in all situations. The court’s decision considers various factors, and alternative remedies like monetary compensation ensure the employee receives just recompense for the illegal termination.
- Important Note:
The burden of proof lies with the employer to demonstrate a valid reason for termination (just cause or authorized cause). If they fail to do so, the dismissal is presumed illegal, and the employee becomes entitled to these reliefs.
VII. POST-EMPLOYMENT
E. Retirement (Labor Code, art. 302)
On termination: Just causes vs Authorized Causes
Challenging MCQs on Authorized Causes for Termination (Philippines)
Scenario: A large clothing retail chain, “Trendy Tops,” is facing declining sales due to increased competition from online retailers. The company announces a store closure in a major mall and plans to lay off employees working there.
Question 1:
In this scenario, can “Trendy Tops” terminate employees due to the store closure?
a) No, the company must find alternative placements for the employees within the chain.
b) Yes, store closure is considered an authorized cause for termination under the Labor Code.
c) The company can only terminate employees if they can prove financial hardship beyond the store closure.
d) The answer depends on whether the employees were offered severance pay.
Answer: (b) Yes, store closure is considered an authorized cause for termination under the Labor Code (Article 298).
Legal Reasoning:
- Closure or cessation of operations is a recognized authorized cause for termination. When a company permanently shuts down a branch, employee positions at that location become redundant.
- While the company doesn’t necessarily need to prove financial hardship in this specific case (closure itself is the justification), they might still have obligations under the law, such as providing separation pay based on the employee’s length of service.
Question 2:
Imagine “Trendy Tops” decides to keep the physical store open but automates the cashier positions with self-checkout kiosks. Can they terminate employees currently working as cashiers due to this change?
a) Yes, because automation renders the cashier positions redundant (authorized cause).
b) No, the company must retrain the cashiers to operate the self-checkout kiosks.
c) The company can only terminate employees if they offer voluntary early retirement packages.
d) The answer depends on the employees’ seniority and qualifications.
Answer: (a) Yes, because automation renders the cashier positions redundant (authorized cause).
Legal Reasoning:
- Installation of labor-saving devices (Article 298) is another authorized cause for termination. If self-checkout kiosks significantly reduce the need for cashiers, the company can argue that these positions are no longer necessary.
- However, the company should follow proper procedures, such as notifying employees beforehand and potentially offering them severance pay or other forms of assistance in finding new employment within the company (if possible).
Question 3 (Referring to a Landmark Case):
In the landmark case of Philippine Airlines Inc. vs. NLRC (G.R. No. 112403), the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the company’s retrenchment plan due to financial difficulties. What does this case highlight about authorized causes for termination?
a) Employers have complete freedom to retrench employees as long as they can show financial losses.
b) The company must prove financial hardship beyond a reasonable doubt to justify a retrenchment.
c) Retrenchment must be done in good faith and following fair and reasonable selection criteria.
d) Authorized causes for termination eliminate the need for providing separation pay to affected employees.
Answer: (c) Retrenchment must be done in good faith and following fair and reasonable selection criteria.
Legal Reasoning:
- The Philippine Airlines case emphasizes that while retrenchment to prevent losses is an authorized cause, it must be exercised in good faith and comply with procedural requirements.
- The company must demonstrate genuine financial difficulties and use fair criteria (e.g., seniority, efficiency) when selecting employees for retrenchment.
These MCQs test the understanding of authorized causes for termination beyond basic definitions and encourage applying legal principles to current events and landmark cases.
Challenging MCQs on Just Causes for Termination (Philippines)
Scenario: A social media influencer with a large following is employed by a clothing company to promote their latest activewear line. During a live stream, the influencer makes negative remarks about the quality of the clothing and criticizes the company’s labor practices.
Question 1:
Can the clothing company terminate the influencer’s contract based on this incident?
a) No, the influencer’s freedom of speech protects them from termination.
b) Yes, the influencer’s negative comments could be considered serious misconduct, a just cause for termination under Article 297.
c) The company can only terminate the influencer if they can prove the negative remarks were false.
d) The answer depends on whether the influencer has a fixed-term or open-ended contract.
Answer: (b) Yes, the influencer’s negative comments could be considered serious misconduct, a just cause for termination under Article 297.
Legal Reasoning:
- Article 297 of the Labor Code allows termination for “serious misconduct.” While freedom of speech is important, an employee’s actions can be considered misconduct if they damage the employer’s reputation or business interests.
- In this case, the influencer’s negative comments during a promotion could be seen as a breach of contract and a deliberate act harming the company’s image.
Question 2:
Imagine the influencer claims the negative comments were based on a genuine experience with a faulty product they received. Does this change the possibility of termination?
a) Absolutely not, the influencer’s motive doesn’t matter if the comments damage the company’s image.
b) The company can’t terminate the influencer as long as they claim a genuine experience, even if untrue.
c) The influencer’s motive (good faith vs. malice) might be considered when determining if the misconduct is “serious.”
Answer: (c) The influencer’s motive (good faith vs. malice) might be considered when determining if the misconduct is “serious.”
Legal Reasoning:
- The severity of the misconduct can be a factor. If the influencer genuinely believed the product was faulty and raised the issue to express concern, it might be seen as less serious than malicious comments intended to harm the company.
- The company would need to assess the situation and determine if the influencer’s actions constitute a justifiable reason for termination based on the specific details and contractual obligations.
Question 3 (Referring to a Landmark Case):
In the case of AMA Computer College vs. NLRC (G.R. No. 112227), a professor was fired for accidentally sending an unprofessional email to a student. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the professor, finding the termination excessive. How does this case relate to the concept of “serious misconduct”?
Answer:
The AMA Computer College case highlights that not all forms of misconduct automatically qualify for termination under Article 297.
Legal Reasoning:
- The case emphasizes that the seriousness of the misconduct needs to be evaluated in the context of the situation. A minor mistake or isolated incident might not warrant termination, especially if there’s no prior history of misconduct.
- The penalty should be proportionate to the offense. In the AMA case, the professor’s accidental email, while unprofessional, might not have risen to the level of “serious misconduct” justifying termination.
These MCQs test the understanding of just causes beyond basic definitions and encourage applying the concept to real-world scenarios and relevant court decisions.
