Flour Daniel Cebu

[shryock]

Art. 281. Probationary employment. Probationary employment shall not exceed six (6) months from the date the employee started working, unless it is covered by an apprenticeship agreement stipulating a longer period. The services of an employee who has been engaged on a probationary basis may be terminated for a just cause or when he fails to qualify as a regular employee in accordance with reasonable standards made known by the employer to the employee at the time of his engagement. An employee who is allowed to work after a probationary period shall be considered a regular employee.

Pataka raman kag yawit nga ang "Probationary Employee" pwede mo exceed ug 6 months or more para ma regular siya.

Lahi raman na sa "Project Based Employee" nga "co-terminus" ang imong employment sa allotted project. Kung "Project Based" ka, bisan 1-5 years paka employed sa company, walay obligasyon ang company nga e regular ka.

Unlike if ang imong ge pirmahan "PROBATIONARY", 6 months ra jud imong limit.... whether ma regular ka or dismissed ka sa work. Or else pwede ka mo file ug kaso sa DOLE.

I was giving an example of a future case, since the "No Contractualization" is also but an idea for now.
Like I said, it can be one of the compromises.
It can also be one of the amendments to the Labor Code if the "No Contractualization" realizes.
We don't know yet until it is set in motion.

For you pataka, but its my view.

[tsunade]

Art. 281. Probationary employment. Probationary employment shall not exceed six (6) months from the date the employee started working, unless it is covered by an apprenticeship agreement stipulating a longer period. The services of an employee who has been engaged on a probationary basis may be terminated for a just cause or when he fails to qualify as a regular employee in accordance with reasonable standards made known by the employer to the employee at the time of his engagement. An employee who is allowed to work after a probationary period shall be considered a regular employee.

Pataka raman kag yawit nga ang "Probationary Employee" pwede mo exceed ug 6 months or more para ma regular siya.

Lahi raman na sa "Project Based Employee" nga "co-terminus" ang imong employment sa allotted project. Kung "Project Based" ka, bisan 1-5 years paka employed sa company, walay obligasyon ang company nga e regular ka.

Unlike if ang imong ge pirmahan "PROBATIONARY", 6 months ra jud imong limit.... whether ma regular ka or dismissed ka sa work. Or else pwede ka mo file ug kaso sa DOLE.

yeah we are all aware of Art. 281, but consider that during his probationary period the employee is still under evaluation and so if he didnt satisfy any evaluation requirement, then he get another 6 months for probationary.
"The services of an employee who has been engaged on a probationary basis may be terminated for a just cause or when he fails to qualify as a regular employee in accordance with reasonable standards made known by the employer to the employee at the time of his engagement."

[St_Michael]

Sakto si shryock. If base sa current labor law, dile pwede lapas 6 months ang probee. Either e regular ka or taktakon ka. Pero if mu introduce ka ug modification sa labor law such as no contractualization, dile ka maka assume na current provisions of the law will still be in effect. It might be modified to balance the changes.

Personally I prefer no contractualization. Job is stable. Kaso, if maayo ka mu trabaho, every time mag renew ka contract, naa ka chance to negotiate your pay and benefits. Or you do what I do, go job shopping.

[Scott Bernard]

yeah we are all aware of Art. 281, but consider that during his probationary period the employee is still under evaluation and so if he didnt satisfy any evaluation requirement, then he get another 6 months for probationary.
"The services of an employee who has been engaged on a probationary basis may be terminated for a just cause or when he fails to qualify as a regular employee in accordance with reasonable standards made known by the employer to the employee at the time of his engagement."

This is the catch where labor disputes win against companies. IF you have reached 6 months then you are deemed unfit by the company therefore you will be released.... Then IF you are unfit by company standards, you cannot be re-hired as PROBATIONARY anymore... So if the company repeats the cycle of the PROBATIONARY period, this is a form of grievance.

Anyway, better consult to a lawyer or a DOLE employee if you know your rights of Justice. But for employees who think they cannot find another better company for lack of qualification, Just-Tiis nalang jud ang choice.

I was giving an example of a future case, since the "No Contractualization" is also but an idea for now.
Like I said, it can be one of the compromises.
It can also be one of the amendments to the Labor Code if the "No Contractualization" realizes.
We don't know yet until it is set in motion.

For you pataka, but its my view.

You are speaking of a non-existent law, therefore it is ILLEGAL... be careful on what you say here since you are carrying the name "Fluor Daniel". People might think you are speaking on the managements behalf. Do not post threatening explanation towards the public or your co-employees.

A big core of your company are experienced professionals even prior their employment with Fluor. They will have not a hard time finding another job just in case.

[shryock]

You are speaking of a non-existent law, therefore it is ILLEGAL... be careful on what you say here since you are carrying the name "Fluor Daniel". People might think you are speaking on the managements behalf. Do not post threatening explanation towards the public or your co-employees.

A big core of your company are experienced professionals even prior their employment with Fluor. They will have not a hard time finding another job just in case.

No Contractualization is also a non-existent law.
Prolonging of the probationary period can be a one of its side effects if realize in the future.

I did say "my view".
That's a very simple disclaimer that my views are my own and not of the Company.
I am sharing what i think are future possibilities. Nothing was imposed.
I see no "threat" there.

[boyq]

I don't know why the issue of probationary to regularization was brought up here as that is already clearly defined in the labor code. Anyways...

'Fixed-term employment' has been widely practiced by companies which in itself is validated by the Supreme Court in the Brent School v. Zamora case (G.R. No. 48494, 5 February 1990, 181 SCRA 702) so long as (1)the "fixed period of employment was agreed upon knowingly and voluntarily by the parties, without any force, duress or improper pressure being brought to bear upon the employee and absent any other circumstances vitiating his consent" and (2) "where it satisfactorily appears that the employer and employee dealt with each other on more or less equal terms with no moral dominance whatever being exercised by the former over the latter". In short, if you freely signed let's say a one-year contract, then it is legal. However, the current presidentiables vowed to end contractualization in their last debate, thus raising the issue.

I can understand that your employment status depends on the nature of business your employer is engaged in. Although we have the freedom, but in reality, most don't have enough choices and just take risks. The latter has it's rewards but the drawbacks are evident when economy is down. Ultimately, the employee is at the disadvantage because you are alienated from a more preferred type of employment, being regular. You perform like regular/probationary employees but you don't have the security of tenure. You don't have the financial security for you and your family. It is still the company's business interests that will prevail in the end. That's why, in general, I'm against contractualization. That is my personal view.

[pepponeskie]

OT lng ni gamay:

It's very easy for us to say "Kung wala ka kauyon sa kompanya, pwede ra ka mangita ug lain." Pero dili ra ba ingana ka sayun pod mangita ug lain, labe na sa atoa nga oversupply ug palakasay system ang panarbaho.

It's ok to have contractual employees in the company, as long as they are paid higher than the regular employees.

I myself worked in the oil industry (dili nuon sa pilipinas), and worked as a contractual but I had a high salary than those regular employees in the company. But, I applied for another job as a regular employee and got a lower salary than contractual employees.

There are pros and cons between regular and contractual...american, european companies did the same but not in the Philippines.

So, my take, it's ok and no problem to contractualitize employees, as long as they have higher salaries than regular employees.

[Scott Bernard]

OT lng ni gamay:

It's very easy for us to say "Kung wala ka kauyon sa kompanya, pwede ra ka mangita ug lain." Pero dili ra ba ingana ka sayun pod mangita ug lain, labe na sa atoa nga oversupply ug palakasay system ang panarbaho.

It's ok to have contractual employees in the company, as long as they are paid higher than the regular employees.

I myself worked in the oil industry (dili nuon sa pilipinas), and worked as a contractual but I had a high salary than those regular employees in the company. But, I applied for another job as a regular employee and got a lower salary than contractual employees.

There are pros and cons between regular and contractual...american, european companies did the same but not in the Philippines.

So, my take, it's ok and no problem to contractualitize employees, as long as they have higher salaries than regular employees.

I think the issue here is not really contractualization but SALARY.

Parehas anang mga seaman... wala silay problema contractual ra ilang employment pero nag binuwan man pod ug pinakagamay 60,000 pesos and average of 100,000 to 200,000 pesos sa mga junior officers (Tax Free).

Okay ra siguro nako ug contractual ko, bisan binuwan pa unya akong sweldo kay 100,000 per month tax free.

Pero ang nahitabo sa pilipinas, 10-30k contractual... luoy kaayo if 5 years mo sa company unya e retrench mo, wala moy magukod by Labor Code Law. Mag agad nalang sa hinabang sa company.

[dickron]

mao bah nuh..mo apply tani ko manager diha

[pepponeskie]

I think the issue here is not really contractualization but SALARY.

Parehas anang mga seaman... wala silay problema contractual ra ilang employment pero nag binuwan man pod ug pinakagamay 60,000 pesos and average of 100,000 to 200,000 pesos sa mga junior officers (Tax Free).

Okay ra siguro nako ug contractual ko, bisan binuwan pa unya akong sweldo kay 100,000 per month tax free.

Pero ang nahitabo sa pilipinas, 10-30k contractual... luoy kaayo if 5 years mo sa company unya e retrench mo, wala moy magukod by Labor Code Law. Mag agad nalang sa hinabang sa company.

mao nay sakto...as I have said, US, and European companies knows about that. But, they are not doing it in the Philippines.