Home
Good Day Attorneys,
I, together with more than 30 more employees were made to sign an agreement by our company to be put on 'floating status'/Temporary Lay Off but it was specified on the agreement and on their notice to DOLE that it was ONLY for 3 months (dates specified). Before the end of the said 3-month 'floating period', we were informed by the company that it intends to extend the 'floating period' to the maximum of 6 months (expect another 3-month agreement) as allowed by the Labor Code (Article 283). Thing is, company served the notice to DOLE for the extension/another 3-month agreement ONLY 10 days before the intended date of implementation (end of the first 3-month agreement). Also, the notice to employees affected was also stamped by the Postal Service on the same day (also ONLY 10 days before date of implementation).
The company is insisting that since it is just an extension, the 1 month notice to DOLE and employees as required by Law (Article 283 Labor Code) need not be complied with. It said even a week's notice is enough. My question is: Is this claim that the provision regarding written notice to DOLE and employees need not be followed for 'extensions' valid? Is there a legal basis or jurisprudence for this claim? We contest that since the extension they filed is a new application to DOLE, it should still follow what is said in Article 283 of the Labor Code.
I would appreciate any enlightenment on this matter and I do apologize for a long explanation of the facts.
TIA!
I, together with more than 30 more employees were made to sign an agreement by our company to be put on 'floating status'/Temporary Lay Off but it was specified on the agreement and on their notice to DOLE that it was ONLY for 3 months (dates specified). Before the end of the said 3-month 'floating period', we were informed by the company that it intends to extend the 'floating period' to the maximum of 6 months (expect another 3-month agreement) as allowed by the Labor Code (Article 283). Thing is, company served the notice to DOLE for the extension/another 3-month agreement ONLY 10 days before the intended date of implementation (end of the first 3-month agreement). Also, the notice to employees affected was also stamped by the Postal Service on the same day (also ONLY 10 days before date of implementation).
The company is insisting that since it is just an extension, the 1 month notice to DOLE and employees as required by Law (Article 283 Labor Code) need not be complied with. It said even a week's notice is enough. My question is: Is this claim that the provision regarding written notice to DOLE and employees need not be followed for 'extensions' valid? Is there a legal basis or jurisprudence for this claim? We contest that since the extension they filed is a new application to DOLE, it should still follow what is said in Article 283 of the Labor Code.
I would appreciate any enlightenment on this matter and I do apologize for a long explanation of the facts.
TIA!
