capt-at-law
28th Jul 2011, 11:17
heard from the grapevine...
...after announcing expansion, an airline ALLEGEDLY started "retrenching" employees recently...
:ugh: :eek: :confused:
affected people, it may be worthwhile reading the Supreme Court decision on the PAL case (FASAP vs. PAL et al, GR 178083 promulgated in October 2009)...
G.R. No. 178083 (http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/october2009/178083.htm)
and a related article on the following link:
Retrenching workers? Don (http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/02/06/09/retrenching-workers-don’t-repeat-pal’s-mistake)
if the links do not work, please search it with the following key words "PAL or Philippine Airlines - retrenchment - GR 178083"
Remember that in order for a retrenchment to be valid, ALL of the following elements under Article 283 of the Labor Code of the Philippines must concur or be present, specifically:
(1) That retrenchment is reasonably necessary and likely to prevent business losses which, if already incurred, are not merely de minimis, but substantial, serious, actual and real, or if only expected, are reasonably imminent as perceived objectively and in good faith by the employer;
(2) That the employer served written notice both to the employees and to the Department of Labor and Employment at least one month prior to the intended date of retrenchment;
(3) That the employer pays the retrenched employees separation pay equivalent to one (1) month pay or at least one-half (½) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher;
(4) That the employer exercises its prerogative to retrench employees in good faith for the advancement of its interest and not to defeat or circumvent the employees’ right to security of tenure; and,
(5) That the employer uses fair and reasonable criteria in ascertaining who would be dismissed and who would be retained among the employees, such as status, efficiency, seniority, physical fitness, age, and financial hardship for certain workers.
Take note: ALL the above elements must be present. ALL.
Emphasis: Article 283, Labor Code of the Philippines; Supreme Court decision in FASAP vs. PAL, GR no. 178083
...after announcing expansion, an airline ALLEGEDLY started "retrenching" employees recently...
:ugh: :eek: :confused:
affected people, it may be worthwhile reading the Supreme Court decision on the PAL case (FASAP vs. PAL et al, GR 178083 promulgated in October 2009)...
G.R. No. 178083 (http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/october2009/178083.htm)
and a related article on the following link:
Retrenching workers? Don (http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/02/06/09/retrenching-workers-don’t-repeat-pal’s-mistake)
if the links do not work, please search it with the following key words "PAL or Philippine Airlines - retrenchment - GR 178083"
Remember that in order for a retrenchment to be valid, ALL of the following elements under Article 283 of the Labor Code of the Philippines must concur or be present, specifically:
(1) That retrenchment is reasonably necessary and likely to prevent business losses which, if already incurred, are not merely de minimis, but substantial, serious, actual and real, or if only expected, are reasonably imminent as perceived objectively and in good faith by the employer;
(2) That the employer served written notice both to the employees and to the Department of Labor and Employment at least one month prior to the intended date of retrenchment;
(3) That the employer pays the retrenched employees separation pay equivalent to one (1) month pay or at least one-half (½) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher;
(4) That the employer exercises its prerogative to retrench employees in good faith for the advancement of its interest and not to defeat or circumvent the employees’ right to security of tenure; and,
(5) That the employer uses fair and reasonable criteria in ascertaining who would be dismissed and who would be retained among the employees, such as status, efficiency, seniority, physical fitness, age, and financial hardship for certain workers.
Take note: ALL the above elements must be present. ALL.
Emphasis: Article 283, Labor Code of the Philippines; Supreme Court decision in FASAP vs. PAL, GR no. 178083