Pagtanggal ng "probitionary employee"

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | August 8, 2024

Dear Chief Acosta,

Nang tanggapin namin ang aming probationary na empleyado, malinaw sa pinirmahan niyang kontrata ang kanyang mga tungkulin at pananagutan, pati na rin ang mga makatwirang pamantayan para siya ay maging regular na empleyado. Ngunit, pagkatapos ng pagsusuri ng kanyang trabaho sa nakalipas na limang buwan, hindi niya nakamit ang mga pamantayang ito. Dahil dito, napagpasyahan namin na tanggalin siya sa trabaho. Kailangan pa bang bigyan siya ng abiso at pagkakataon na magpaliwanag hinggil dito?

-- Jimae

---

Dear Jimae,

Sa loob ng nakatakdang panahon, ang isang probationary na empleyado ay inoobserbahan at sinusuri upang matukoy kung siya ay kuwalipikado o hindi sa permanenteng katayuan. Ang isang probationary employment ay nagbibigay sa employer ng pagkakataon na obserbahan ang kasanayan at kakayahan ng kanyang empleyado sa trabaho. Habang inoobserbahan ng employer ang kaangkupan at kahusayan ng empleyado, ang nasabing empleyado ay naglalayong patunayan sa kanyang employer na siya ay may mga kuwalipikasyon upang matugunan ang mga makatwirang pamantayan para sa permanenteng trabaho. 

Sa gayon, ang konsepto ng probationary employment ay ipinakilala para sa kapakinabangan ng employer upang mabigyan siya ng sapat na oras na obserbahan at matukoy kung ang isang bagong empleyado ay may kakayahan at kapasidad na gampanan ang mga nakaatas na tungkulin. 

Kapag nabigo ang probationary employee na maging kuwalipikado bilang isang regular na empleyado, alinsunod sa mga makatwirang pamantayan na itinakda ng employer, maaari siyang tanggalin sa trabaho.

Kaugnay nito, sa kasong Enchanted Kingdom vs. Miguel J. Verzo, G.R. No. 209559, 09 Disyembre 2015, pinasyahan ng ating Kagalang-galang na Korte Suprema, sa pamamagitan ni Kagalang-galang na Kasamang Mahistrado Jose C. Mendoza, na: 

“In Aberdeen Court, Inc. v. Agustin it has been held that the rule on notifying a probationary employee of the standards of regularization should not be used to exculpate an employee who acted in a manner contrary to basic knowledge and common sense in regard to which there was no need to spell out a policy or standard to be met.  In the same light, an employee's failure to perform the duties and responsibilities which had been clearly made known to him would constitute a justifiable basis for a probationary employee's non-regularization. x x x

Whether or not Verzo was afforded the opportunity to explain his side is of no consequence.  Under Section 2 Rule I, Book VI of the Implementing Rules of the Labor Code:

Section 2. Security of tenure, (a) In cases of regular employment, the employer shall not terminate the services of an employee except for just or authorized causes as provided by law, and subject to the requirements of due process.

(b)The foregoing shall also apply in cases of probationary employment; Provided however, that in such cases, termination of employment due to failure of the employee to qualify in accordance with the standards of the employer made known to the former at the time of engagement may also be a ground for termination of employment x  xx

(d) In all cases of termination of employment, the following standards of due process shall be substantially observed:xxx

If the termination is brought about by the completion of a contract or phase thereof, or by failure of an employee to meet the standards of the employer in the case of probationary employment, it shall be sufficient that a written notice is served the employee, within a reasonable time from the effective date of termination.

In Philippine Daily Inquirer v. Magtibay, the Court stressed that notice and hearing are not required in case a probationary employee is not retained for failure to comply with the reasonable standards set by his employer. Thus:

x x x Due process of law for this second ground consists of making the reasonable standards expected of the employee during his probationary period known to him at the time of his probationary employment.  By the very nature of a probationary employment, the employee knows from the very start that he will be under close observation and his performance of his assigned duties and functions would be under continuous scrutiny by his superiors.  It is in apprising him of the standards against which his performance shall be continuously assessed where due process regarding the second ground lies, and not in notice and hearing as in the case of the first ground.”  

Alinsunod dito, ang abiso at pagdinig (notice and hearing) ay hindi kinakailangan kung sakaling ang probationary na empleyado ay tatanggalin dahil sa pagkabigo niyang matugunan ang mga makatwirang pamantayan na itinakda ng kanyang employer. 

Sa sitwasyong ito, ang angkop na proseso ng batas o due process of law ay binubuo ng paggawa ng mga makatwirang pamantayang inaasahan sa empleyado sa panahon ng kanyang probationary period na ipinaalam sa kanya nang siya ay matanggap sa trabaho.  

Kaya naman, sa inyong sitwasyon, sapat na ang pagbibigay ng nakasulat na abiso sa inyong probationary na empleyado na hindi na siya makapagpapatuloy pa dahil hindi siya pumasa sa mga panuntunan upang maging isang regular na empleyado. 

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa iyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.