I will rule in favor of Giselle since she is now regular employee.

Under the rule, control is the most important

element of employer-employee relationship, which refers to the means and methods by which the result is to be
accomplished. In this case, Giselle entered into a contract that she was required to meet a monthly quota, were to
be personally supervised by the AVP of PPIC and was given her own personal office in PPIC's main branch. The PPIC
has full control of Giselle since she is now a regular employee therefore, due process must be observed.

The control test means that the employer controls or has reserved the right to control the employee not only as to
the result of the work to be done but also as to the means and methods by which the same is to be accomplished.
The three (3) terms are means, methods and results are the critical elements of the control test. The absence of
control test means there is no employer employee relationship

Yes, this falls under sexual harassment because of advancements. The act of CEO was committed in a workplace.
Mr. Tony Shark, as the CEO of Thea, has authority, influence and moral ascendancy over her. Given the specific
circumstances mentioned in the question like Mr. Tony treated Thea for Dinner and made several advances
through lewd jokes directed to Thea was requesting a sexual favor from her for a favorable recommendation
regarding the latter's employment

Yes, my answer would be the same. Under the Safe Space Act, it is sexual harassment affecting the dignity of a
person which is unwelcome, unreasonable and offensive to the person whether verbally, physically or through the
use of technology such as text messaging or electronic email and any other forms of communication systems. In
this case, the CEO made several advances to Brad through lewd jokes directed towards therefore, this is under the
Safe Space Act since it affected the dignity as a person.

The contention of the Philippine Basketball Coaches Union will not prosper. Under the Labor Code, foreign
workers are allowed to work in the Philippines provided that they have the necessary work permit and their
skills are highly needed for the job. In this case, Jim Tone, an American citizen can replace Choke REynes as he is
qualified for the job and his skills are already tested. Jim Tone should be allowed to act as the head coach of the
national basketball team.

Ferdi is incorrect that there is no employee-employer relationship. Under the law, the control test is the most
important test of determining if there is an existing employer-employee relationship. In this case, even though
there is boundary system, still there is element of control to jeepney driver Mar since Ferdi has control on the
route where the former will go therefore, there is employee-employer relationship.

Yes it will prosper. Under the Migrant Worker’s Act, it states that, it is punishable when a person acts to
induce or attempt to induce a worker already employed to quit his employment in order to offer him
another unless the transfer is designed to liberate a worker from oppressive terms and conditions of
employment. In this case, there was inducement on the part of Kath inducement to resign and to apply to
another job howver, the said job was not given to her, therefore, this is a case on illegal recruitment under the
Migrant Worker’s Act.

Answer: Yes, the Labor Code provides that paternity can be availed by the father, provided that he is married to
the mother of the child. In the present case, Pete is the father of the child but he is not married to Jane, therefore,
Pete will not be able to avail the paternity leave.

No, my answer would be different. The employer is incorrect. Under the law, a female employee can claim
Maternity Leave benefits from the SSS if she have remitted to the SSS at least 3 monthly contributions in the 12th
month period immediately after the semester of her childbirth or miscarriage. The female employee may allocate
the seven days of Maternity Leave to his partner if he is not entitled to Paternity Leave because they are not
married. In this case, Jane can allocate her seven days of Maternity Leave to Pete since he is the father of the child
and since he is Jane’s partner.

Answer: I will rule in favor of Elle. According to the Labor Code, the employer can take measures in protecting
the confidential matters and information that pertain to the company. In the present case, Gene and Elle are
both baristas of the competing companies Coffee Lean and Scarbox. As baristas, they do not have access to their
companies’ confidential information therefore, the policy of the Scrabox company on prohibition of dating the
competitor’s employee is illegal since the prohibition is applicable only to confidential jobs holding trade secrets.

I will rule in favor of the POGO company. Under the rule, while the Secretary of Labor have the opportunity to visit
regarding their compliance and inspect however, they cannot issue a search warrant or a warrant to seize evidence
in relation to Labor Code. Furthermore, the Secretary of Labor have the power to seize the documents however,
only Judges can issue warrant of arrest therefore, the Secretary of Labor acted unconstitutionaly.

There is no ground for Rice Tanda to file a case. Under the law, on screen talents are independent contractors and
the control test is the most important test to apply in distinguishing an employee from an independent contractor. In
this case, Rice is an onscreen talent and the scripts are beyond the control of the TV network therefore, there is no
element of control under the employer-employee relationship.

No. Under the Labor Code, the description of managerial employee is not based on the position title but on the
work performed. Managerial employees have the power to hire and fire employees and to make decisions for the
company. In this case, Harvey with his position title as a Floor Manager does not satisfy the requirements to be
considered as a managerial employee. He is then classified to be a rank and file employee and is therefore entitled
to night shift differential pay, holiday pay, overtime pay and other benefits as provided by law.

A situation where the application of a mandated wage increase results in the elimination or severe contraction of
existing salary differentials among employee groups in an establishment. The elements of this principle are the
existing hierarchy of positions with corresponding salary rates, significant change in the salary rate of a lower pay
class without a an increase in the salary rate of a higher one, elimination of the distinction on the two levels and
existence of the distortion in the same region of the country.

No, there is no wage distortion. Under the law, wage distortion is a situation where the application of a mandated
wage increase results in the elimination or severe contraction of existing salary differentials among employee
groups in an establishment . In this case, although there is an increase of 15,000.00 there is still a significant gap on
the wages. Have there been considerable payment gap between supervisory and rank and file employees, then I
will now argue that there is a wage distortion.

No, Mas Ter is incorrect. Under the rule, the definition of domestic servant or house helper contemplates one who
is employed to employers who minister exclusively to the personal comfort and enjoyment of the employer’s
family. In a case at bar, the Honorable Supreme Court held that the mere fact that the house helper is working in
connection to his business warrants that the domestic servant should be considered as regular employee. In this
case, Kat was hired as a house helper therefore, she is considered a regular employee and entitled to the right
salary and benefits of an employee.

No, I will rule in favor of labor. As a lawyer, you have to correct your client as well that under the law, not in all
cases does that works, general rule, labor tribunals rule according to the merits of the case, however if there is
ambiguity with regard to the application of the law or ambiguity as to the questions being raised during labor case
and that particular ambiguity should be ruled in favor of labor or in favor of the employee.

No, Reth’s case will not prosper. Under the law, a government employee is not allowed to strike against the
government. The State shall afford full protection to Labor, Local or Overseas, organized or unorganized. And
promote full equality and employment opportunities for 3 5 all. It shall guarantee the rights of workers to self-
organization, collective bargaining, negotiations and including the right to strike in accordance with law (a
government employee is one of the exceptions of the law with regard to the right to strike). They shall be entitled
to security of tenure, humane conditions of work and a living wage, they shall also participate in policy and
decision making processes affecting their rights and benefits as maybe provided by law. In this case, Reth is an
MMDA – government employee therefore, he is not allowed to take part of any strike against the government.

THE CASE OF RET WILL NOW PROSPER UNDER THE LABOR CODE OF DOLE. labor code applies to those under EER of
the private section, it does not apply to government employees or employees of GOCCs with original charter. But if
it is a gocc without original charter, labor code will apply. PICC is a gocc without original charter is within the ambit
of DOLE and under the Labor Code.

The accepted test to determine the existence of an employer employee relationship is the Four-Fold Test, which
are the selection and engagement of the employees, the payment of wages, the power of dismissal and the power
to control the employees conduct. The control test is the most important test of all the four.

NO, there is failure of election. Under the rule, in election rule, there has to be at least a majority of the number
of eligible voters present and those who casted votes during that election 251 employees should have
participated in that certification

NO, if there is failure on election, another election may proceed immediately after. Under the law, there is no
rule that bar or hold an election if there is a failure of election. In certification election, the election has to be
ordered by DOLE and consent election, if the election is a voluntary endevour by members of management and
the employees.

No, The RUN OFF ELECTION or DOUBLE MAJORITY RULE should apply. Under he rule, A run-off
election refers to an election between the labor unions receiving the two highest number of votes in a
certification or consent election with three or more choices, where such a certified or consent election
results in none of the three or more choices receiving the majority of the valid votes cast; provided that
the total number of votes for all contending unions is at least fifty percent of the number of votes cast. In
this case, there are 500 employees in which Union 1 – has 102 votes , Union 2 has 101 votes, Union 3 has 50
votes, Union 4 has 50 votes. To sum it up, total of 303 employees have voted. The first majority is satisfied
since the majority of 500 employees is 251. However, if we follow the double majority rule, the 102 votes did
not meet the majority votes from all of the 303 votes then the holding of a run-off election between Union 1
and Union 2 is in order.

The strike should be valid if prior to the conduct of strike, there is a notice filed by the Union to DOLE, 30 days
prior to the execution of strike if it is a traditional type of strike. On the other hand, if it pertains to unfair labor
practice, the notice should take place 15 days prior to the strike. During the 30 days and 15 days ay cooling off
period , the employers will have the opportunity to look for what is the ground for strike, they will have time to
assess what can be the effect of the strike in the company’s publicity and financial aspect of the company.
Furthermore, during the cooling off period, the union will notify their members to vote if they will still continue
the strike or not. If the majority decides to proceed with the strike, the union will now submit to the decision or
the result of their vote to DOLE. The submission of report should be given at least 7 days before the intended
date of strike. If later than the said period then the strike should take place 7 days after submission.

If the strike is not approved by majority of the members of the Union but still submitted to DOLE, then the
strike is illegal. If the strike is done 30 days prior to submission of notice to DOLE then, that is also illegal. If they
did not submit 7 days before the intended date of strike, then that will be illegal also. If there is an illegal
strikes, may affect whoever conducted that said illegal strike. If officer had participated in illegal strike, the said
officer can be dismissed. If a worker participated in strike and was dismissed, that is illegal on the part of the
employer. An employer cannot dismiss the services of an employee because of mere participation in a lawful
strike.

One the DOLE Secretary or the President assumes jurisdiction over that particular strike, it means the end of the
strike. The employees who participated in the strike will have to return to work. Those that would be
continuing the strike would then be conducting now an illegal strike and this can be a ground to dismissal. If the
employer refuse to accept the employees, that’s also a violation of the assumption of power of the DOLE
secretary and the President.

No. Under the rule of Employer-Employee Relationship, if the jeepney drivers conducted strikes,the Secretary of
Labor cannot assume jurisdiction over the strike, therefore, it’s not within the ambit of labor relations or it is
not under the Labor Code. If the DOLE Secretary assumes jurisdiction over that particular strike, it does not
enjoin the parties from conducting the strike after the DOLE secretary assumes jurisdiction therefore if the
jeepney drivers continue the strike, it’s not an illegal strike since there is no EER between the members of the
driver’s union with the government since they are not government employees.

No Glaxo has a right to guard its trade secrets, manufacturing formulas, marketing
strategies and other confidential programs and information from competitors,
especially so that it and Astra are rival companies in the highly competitive
pharmaceutical industry. Under the law, it recognizes the right of enterprises to
adopt and enforce such a policy to protect its right to reasonable returns on
investments and to expansion and growth. Furthermore, the law recognizes that
management has rights which are also entitled to respect and enforcement in the
interest of fair play. In this case, petitioner's transfer to another place of assignment
was merely in keeping with the policy of the company in avoidance of conflict of
interest, and thus valid

Project employee are seasonal. There is a gap in the hiring of a project employee whenever necessary and
desirable to the employer. Under the rule, to be valid, there must be just cause to terminate an employee.
Meaning there is serious misconduct, willful disobedience, gross and habitual neglect of duties, fraud, willful
breech by the employer to trust impose upon them, commission of crime and offence. With regard to the
termination by the employer

NO. under article 279 , there has to be a just cause since an employee has security of tenure. When we say cause
( art 282-283 284) there has to be grounds for you to be removed from your employment. If the employer will
illegally dismiss the employee, the Labor Arbiter will be issuing a decision which entitles you to 3 basic remedies 1.
Re-instatement without lost of seniority rights 2. You will be entitled to the backwages from the moment the
person was dismissed until the finality of the case 3. Entitled to other benefits.

3. Probationary employee – hindi pa regular pero hindi pwedeng anytime tatanggalin. Can only be removed if
there is ground. TWIN NOTICE RULE. The employer must notice the due process. There is an opportunity to be
heard.

First notice, regular notice, you are giving the employee the opportunity to know what is being charged against the
employee pagdating sa Code of Conduct, under the notice to explain, the employee should be given ample time to
respond to whatever is being charge of them, to explain themselves. Ample time is anything beyond 24 hours after
the notice to gather his thoughts, to gather evidence . he may submit his written explanation or he may ask for an
administrative hearing. Pwede bang parehas, gawa ng letter and administrative hearing? The answer is YES. Pwede
yan accoding sa due process clause under the labor code.

Second notice , with regard to the notice of decision with regard to the case. Notice of termination

First is the notice to explain

Second is the notice for termination

Pag kulang, there is illegal dismissal

1.. security of tenure – means that you cannot be dismissed form your employment unless there is just or
authorize causes , so ano ang ibig sabihin niyan,

example you are an employee right now and then nalate ka lang or absent ka without permission, ang ginawa ng
employer mo instead na magcall ng memo instead na mag issue ng notice to explain ang ginawa niya ay tinanggal
ka niya. Is it valid?

Answer :

2. Question; pending case, andun ka lang sa bahay, if you are an ordinary person since you are looking for a job. If
nanalo ang client ang nanalo ang reinstatement while he is employed. Possible pa din na hindi reinstate but must
be paid whatever he is entitled to. There are other factors, EErelationship, nagsara ang business, is no longer
viable, dismissed employment declared by the employee that he does not want to be employed anymore.

4. security of tenure

burden of proof on the employer –employee relationships –it is the employee who has the burden of proving that
there is EER.

Burden of proof as to rightful dismissal – the employer is the who has the burden of proving that there is a rightful
dismissal of the employee. Article 79

4. Artcle 280

Regular – anyone who is engage to perform activity usually desirable to reg

1. automatic regular employee regardless on tenure – performs necessary work for employer

2. not necessary but because of tenure, they are deemed regular employees

Example taga linis lang, while it is not necessary regular office, but because matagal na silang employee, 12 months
it now becomes necessary.

Project employee- a need to feed the particular role to make a project, once it finishes, considered cessated na

Project employer repeatedly hire a project employee

Example employee of strawberry farmer and hires during the harvesting season only. Question is, the repeated
hiring makes them regular employee or project employee.

serious misconduct, - improper or wrong conduct, transgression of some established rule in relation of duty with
wrongful intent. Simple misconduct is not counted( hindi pumasok, cutting of work time) they have an intent to
do whatever misconduct there is

4. *****question: what if a teacher or professor marries the student. If the 2 fell in love despite disparity, their
ages and academic levels this is the true substance that the heart has reasons on it’s own (EVELYN CHUA-
QUA vs. HON. JACOBO C. CLAVE,) If the two eventually fell in love, despite the disparity in their ages
and academic levels, this only lends substance to the truism that the heart has reasons of its own which
reason does not know. So sabi ng SC, actually there is no misconduct here kasi the fact that the
preofessor falls in love with the student despite the difference in age and their knowledge , academic level
that means that actually they do love each other. So it is not a serious misconduct under a-Article 282
5. willful disobedience – there has to be an intent and perverse mental attitude by the employee against
the LAWFUL instruction of the employer or the representative of the employer. Kelangan may kinalaman
sa order ng employer

SC said yung employee binato ng stapler ang employer. It’s not willful disobedience since there is no
transgression , should have something to do with the responsibilities or duties of the employee . if the
responsibility of the employee is to throw the staplers at someone else, eh instead na ibinato niay sa
iabng tao, sa employer niya binato , that could be willful disobedience . pero kung ang duty ng employee
ay clerical work or a researcher siyempre throwing of staplers is not part of their duties , so its not willful
disobedience . the supreme court said in order for it to be willful disobedience , it has to be part of their
duties and it also has to be a violation of a legal or lawful order of the employer or the representative of
the empoyer

6. gross and neglect of habitual duties *********PRIOR TO NEGLECT OF DUTIES – hindi pwedeng
simple, ordinary, it has to be gross and habitual, amount to wreckless disregard of the standard that is
being required to that person, habit is more than once. Let say hindi nameet ang number of duties, it can
fall under 282 but not gross and habitual neglect of duties it has reach those numbers.

The SC also said that tardiness will be considered gross and habitual if it is habitual and hindi lang ilang
minutes. Has to be hour or 2 hours late can also fall under abandonment under gross and habitual
neglect of duties , if an employee abandons their post from day 1 to day 15 it becomes habitual and gross
since the lack of care or diligence that is required from that employer at least to let the employer know
that he will not be coming to work since there is corresponding monetary value as well. Abandonment,
before you terminate a person, due notice must also be noted.

****** WHEN IT COMES TO ABANDONMENT – you always have to send the necessary return to work
order, it it’s a requirement under the labor practice. If they fail to come to work, saka papasahan ng notice
to explain ang notice of dismissal. So this is gross and habitual neglect of duty

7. FRAUD OR BREECH OF CONFIDENCE BY THE EMPLOYEE- look whetehr or not the employe holds
a position of trust and they break or breech that trust willfully or fraudulently , then that is a ground for the
employer to dismiss the services of the employee, requisites, first, it should not be simulated, second, the
causes must be illegal, improper or unjustified, third, should be arbitrarily ascertive.

Art 296 (formerly 282) of the Labor Code allows the termination of an employee for loss of confidence.
(c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized
representative;
Loss of confidence has been defined by jurisprudence and occurs when:
1. The employee concerned must be holding a position of trust and confidence and
2. There must be an act that would justify the loss of trust and confidence.
You’ll find that the Supreme Court has elaborated on the first requirement before [G.R. 118506, Apr 18,
1997] and that this has continued to be cited.
It stated that there are 2 classes of employees:
1. Employees who occupy positions of trust and confidence are managerial employees, i.e., those
vested with the powers or prerogatives to lay down management policies and/or to hire, transfer,
suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees or effectively recommend such
managerial actions;
 2. Employees who are routinely charged with the care and custody of their employer’s money or
property are cashiers, auditors, property custodians, etc., or those who, in the normal and routine
exercise of their functions, regularly handle significant amounts of money or property.
The Court has also discussed what kind of act falls under the second requirement.
1. It must be related to his duties
For breach of trust and confidence to become a valid ground for the dismissal of an employee, the cause
of loss of trust and confidence must be related to the performance of the employee’s duties. [G.R. No.
169564, Apr 6, 2011]
2. Willful breach of trust and founded on clearly established facts
Such breach is willful if it is done intentionally, knowingly, and purposely, without justifiable excuse, as
distinguished from an act done carelessly, thoughtlessly, heedlessly or inadvertently. Moreover, it must be
based on substantial evidence and not on the employer’s whims or caprices or suspicions otherwise, the
employee would eternally remain at the mercy of the employer. [G.R. 198620, Nov 2014]
You should note that in cases such as this, the Court specifically doesn’t allow separation pay.
Well-settled is the rule that separation pay shall be allowed only in those instances where the employee is
validly dismissed for causes other than serious misconduct or those reflecting on his moral character.
Inasmuch as the reason for which the petitioner was validly separated involves his integrity, which is
especially required for the position of the purser, he is not worthy of compassion as to deserve at least
separation pay for his length of service. [G.R. 148410, Jan 17, 2005]
Now that you’ve got a bird’s eye view of what the law considers, let’s look at each in a bit more detail.

Article 282 (c) of the Labor Code allows an employer to terminate the services of an employee for loss of
trust and confidence. Certain guidelines must be observed for the employer to terminate an employee for
loss of trust and confidence. We held in General Bank and Trust Company v. Court of Appeals, viz.:

[L]oss of confidence should not be simulated. It should not be used as a subterfuge for causes which are
improper, illegal, or unjustified. Loss of confidence may not be arbitrarily asserted in the face of
overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It must be genuine, not a mere afterthought tojustify earlier action
taken in bad faith.

The first requisite for dismissal on the ground of loss of trust and confidence is that the employee
concerned must be one holding a position of trust and confidence.

There are two classes of positions of trust: managerial employees and fiduciary rank-and-file employees.

Managerial employees are defined as those vested with the powers or prerogatives to lay down
management policies and to hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge,assign or discipline
employees or effectively recommend such managerialactions. They refer to those whose primary duty
consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or a
subdivision thereof, and to other officers or members of the managerialstaff. Officers and members of the
managerial staff perform work directlyrelated to management policies of their employer and customarily
and regularly exercise discretion and independent judgment.

The second class or fiduciary rank-and-file employees consist of cashiers, auditors, property custodians,
etc., or those who, in the normal exercise of their functions, regularlyhandle significant amounts of money
or property. These employees, though rank-and-file, are routinely charged with the care and custody of
the employer’s money or property, and are thus classified as occupying positions of trust and
confidence.22

xxxx

The second requisite of terminating an employee for loss of trust and confidence is that there must be an
act that would justify the loss of trust and confidence. To be a valid cause for dismissal, the loss of
confidence must be based on a willful breach of trust and founded on clearly established facts.23

To summarize, the first requisite is that the employee concerned must be one holding a position of trust
and confidence, thus, one who is either: (1) a managerial employee; or (2) a fiduciary rank-and-file
employee, who, in the normal exercise of his or her functions, regularly handles significant amounts of
money or property of the employer. The secondrequisite is that the loss of confidence must be based on a
willful breach of trust and founded on clearly established facts.

8. Commission of a crime of the employee, - no need to prove in a court of law that there was actually a
crime involving thr eemployee, due process must be observed

9. if the labor code says that you can dismiss a person with this offence or if there is a law of conduct that
expounds, then you can also use that to dismiss an employee

10. ****MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVE – the right of employer to control or to manage , should be used
in tandem with social justice and the policies of labor code.

Example: defenses. if you are the lawyer of the employee, you will be arguing now , is there EER
relationship, whether or not valid ang dismissal and management prerogative.

Defenses, if the gravity is not hard pagdating sa employment status, then it should not be grounds for
dismissal of the client , it can be written warning, verbal warning or final written warning, disnmissal

Defense – if the employee holds a position in the management or supervisory level or difffrent level ang
disciplinary action if the manager or supervisor, pwedeng taasan, pwedeng writeen warning or
suspension or dismissal , the

Defense - third one is length of service , if the employee is with the company for 20 years and simple
infraction lang ang nangyari sa kanya but was merited dismissal then parang hindi commensurate yung
naging punishment. You have to take into consideration, kung first offence.

Totality of infractions – last month several simple infractions. Issue a harsher penalty against that
particular employee.

11. *********Nature of business. No smoking policy , usually verbal warning or written warning, in case of a
gasoline station, ku g nahuliahn ang aisan g boy na naninigarilyo within the perimeter of the gasoline
station, base on the nature of the business, highly dangerous ang ginawa niya.

12. gravity of the offence and the proportionality of the disciplinary action

13*****. example: Arival of AI. There are businesses that rely on AI . if an employer installs Ai for labor
saving devices. Can the employees file a complaint kapag dim=nismiss ng employer
Yes. If hindi nasunod ang article 283. Written notice to Dole and employees 30 days before. Give
separation pay amounting to 1 onth or 1 month for every yer of service.

14. there is an excess to the number of employees compared to the job. Yung 200 na sobra the employer
will place the employee under the redundancy and have a written notice tot the DOLE and the employee
and must give a separation pay equivalent to 1 month of salary or 1 month for every year of service. ****
take note, in redundancy there has to be a genuine reason, o we will place you in a redundancy position
of junior associate, an then after a week may bago ng nakaupo sa pwesto mo, or naghire ulit ng junior
associate. So that is not a redundancy after all, that is just the employer, circumventing the labor code ,
that’s illegal

15. retrenchment to prevent loses – cutting down employees para hindi magsara bases on loses

Example: nung Covid, there are companies who downsized or retrenchment , bakit nila ginawa yun?
Instead of keeping on every employee and risking the closure of the company or there will be cessation
of operation, what they chose was to retrench yung mga tao to prevent loses for the closure of their
business, requisites niyan is that loses should be substantial , it should be reasonably immenent. Must be
proven by convincing evidence like financial support. Sepration 1 month or half a month per year of
service.

16. closure of company – if because of brancruptcy, the company is not required to give separation pay
pero kung they closed it . if because gusto lang nila.isara, must inform give a letter sa DOLE and
employee, they it its equivalent sa retrenchment Sepration 1 month or half a month per year of service.

17. 284 the employer may terminate an employee besause of the disease. If the disease is Prejudicial to
the health of other employees. The labor code requires that the employer should pay separation pay of ½
month month for every year of service. Valid. Continued employment should be prejudicial to health, with
findings of a public physician that that particular ailment cannot be treated within 6 months.

If can be treated for 6 months, leave of absence within 6 months.

18. resignation – the law says that there should be a month notice on the part of the employee which is to
resign. Has to be voluntary. There are personal reasons. Separation pay. The law does not provide any
separation pay. CBA pwede na bayaran ng separation pay. Company policy after a person resigns. The
general rule is that if a person resigns there is no separation pay.

17.286 suspension of EER particulary if there is temporary closure of business for 6 months or the
employee will servce military service , the employee is in floating status.

Preventive suspension notice of suspension 30 days before

Floating status – limit is 6 months

Suspension of operation of business – limit is 6 months

Military duty- depends on how long the service is needed.

******what if the prevention suspension or the floating status has

If the person if placed under prevention suspension and that prevention supensione exceeds 30 days ang
that floating status exceeds 6 months, then that employee will be dismissed. Illegal dismissal na siya.. to
prevent that siyempre hindi mo ipapaexceeed 30 days or 6 months so kelangan mo silang irecall within
those 30 days or 6 months , pabalikin na sila satrabaho ara hindi magexceed

****what if the business suspended their operations pero lumampas na ng 6 months. 283 would fall on
closure or redundancy.

18. retirement 287 – 60 years old an employee, may opt to retire but if they reach 65 years old. Magiging
mandatory na siya. Early retirement. With benefit plan by the BIR and the employee has served the same
employer for 10 years.. 1 time only. Retirement pay equivalent of 12 month for every year of service and
served the employer for 5 minimum of 5 years with the same employer.

19. *******3 years entirety of labor code prescription of offenses

1 year - under book 5 unfair labor practice prescription

3 years ang prescription kapah money claims from the cessation of EER.