30 days preventive suspension

I was working in a call center. I already had final warning for call avoidance before dated October 2011 and was given a Final warning as stated in our company rules. I got second call avoidance dated January 25, 2012 which was for endorsement to HR already and they gave me a 30 days preventive suspension and I was not allowed to go the company premise. Is this legal? I filed a case in NLRC when I was suspended dated Feb 3, 2012 for illegal suspension, and later on, I was terminated for the second violation of company policies for the said call avoidance last Feb 10, 2012.

yes, it is legal, if it is shown that it was based on substantial evidence. in the cases i handled, we challenged the evidence provided for call avoidance, and we are still awaiting decision.

attyLLL wrote:yes, it is legal, if it is shown that it was based on substantial evidence. in the cases i handled, we challenged the evidence provided for call avoidance, and we are still awaiting decision.

We also challenged what they call "concrete substantial evidence" which is the call recording details wherein my call splitted into two recordings and the second recording was tagged as outbound call. According to the evidence the call recording is a perfect tool and never stops recording until one contact ended. The evidence didn't show the customer's number as the dialed number but it was the other department number where I was connecting the customer to. And when I dialed that other department number, the customer was already on the other line and I made it a conference a call by pressing flash again. This is when the second recording started, when I was dialing the second department number. We were saying that if it is an outbound call, why is it the customer suddenly appeared on the line when I dialed the other dept number and did it in conference. And the second recording did not start with the spiel "May I speak with the customer please". It is the continuation of my call that just spplitted into 2 recording.

The scenario is the customer didnt hung up and waited for 25 minutes being on hold unknowingly that the customer was still there. I was not receiving calls for 25 minutes and they checked my status and they said I was at on-hold status, I was able to talk to the customer while the customer was on hold when I pressed flash once again on the phone and finished the call with troubleshooting resulted to customer being transferred for another support.

The evidence they presented was only from a QA specialist saying that the recording tool is a perfect tool. She is not even a programmer to say that. They didnt even present the call copy of the call also from QA specialist where you could see the status of the customer like: on-hold, in a call, available, with corresponding time that the call came in and out if they really want to know the truth.

What can you say about the situation attorney.?

what i can say is the better one who can effectively communicate the techno mumbo jumbo to the arbiter will have the advantage