RE: Contractual employment but nature of work is necessary and desirable to the nature of business

Good am. I have a very urgent query somebody please respond.

I am currently employed in Toyota Alabang as a HR Labor Relations Staff, contract of which commenced last June 3, 2013. Nature of my work is of great significance to the company as I am responsible for the ff:
• Assists in updating company policies.
• Investigates P/HRD issues for the purpose of ensuring that effective discipline and complaints resolutions are arrived in a timely manner.
• Prepares memorandums for TAI and affiliates’ Team members.
• Disseminates memorandum to team members.

The problem is, my contract states that I am a "CONTRACTUAL" employee for a period of 6 months. Since the expiration of my contract is fast approaching, I am already evaluated and in the form it states "FOR REGULARIZATION." Problem now is, I haven't signed any contract for regularization and expiration is already nearing.

QUESTION: In lieu of the foregoing, am I really a contractual employee or a PROBATIONARY employee hiding under the mantle of a contractual employee? In case of conflict, what shall govern, the stipulations of the contract which state that I AM CONTRACTUAL, or the nature of the work and evaluation which is for 6 months?

AND LASTLY, in my case, am I afforded the same protective mantle mandated by the Labor Code to probationary employees that when my services exceed 6 months, I am already a regular employee by operation of law?

Please please please. Thanks.

yes, after 6 months, if they don't terminate you, you are considered regular employee

so that means I am afforded the same protective mantle under the labor code that I shall become a regular employee? today is Nov. 29. My contract expires on December 3. So on December 4, without me signing a contract, I am already a regular employee sir?

yes as per labor law.

Don't worry, you're considered probationary during 6 months because you become regular after probationary. Consider it as a good points for your career. Relax and be good employee.

sirs thank you so much for your immediate responses! really appreciated it. I'm a freshman law student in San Beda College of Law. Though I am already aware of these "gimmicks" na probationary employment hiding beneath the mantle of a "contractual employee" by virtue of stipulations in the contract, I needed affirmations from you already licensed lawyers. Lalo ako ginanahan to protect other's rights pag lawyer na ko, muntik na ko mabiktima dito. THANK YOU PO ULIT!

mam di po ako lawyer.. HR manager lang po.

ay, sorry. hehe thanks anyway!

good afternoon po!

question lang po...yesterday was my final interview with the president of the company..i am currently employed right now at the same field and position im applying but thru agency. sinabi ko sa kanya ang reason kung bakit gusto ko mag resign sa current job ko at mag apply sa company nila. ang offer kc based on their job ads ay direct hiring sila. maganda naman po usapan namin.. at sinabi pa nya na sana daw sa company na ko tumanda at mag retire..he even told me that the company really needs someone like me.dahil ang business nila ay tugma sa qualifications ko. pero nung ipinasa na ko sa HR,binigyan ng lists of requirements..project based employee daw ako. its confusing lang...bakit ganun ang outcome..pagkatapos nang maayos na interview..na i will start as probationary going to regular after ng evaluation..gagawin nila project based na. which i understand.. no assurance and security of work. tama po ba?anyway..they want me to start asap.. bakit ganun po..ang work to be assign to me naman ay talagang nature of work sa company nila..fyi po, ang company nila ay involved sa advertising thru electronic led billboard..and im a technical staff. bakit po naging project based kung yun naman tlaga nature ng business nila? thank you po

dapat don mo tinanong sa HR yan.. kung yun ang ni o offer sayo and you think iba don sa pinag usapan nyo.. then don't accept it.

i agree. it sucks, but it's up to you if you will accept it.

On Aug 2013, my wife was told that she passed the interviews with AIG and will be offered a "job offer". AIG said that they're still setting up their branch in Cubao and that she is expected to work starting Nov 15, 2013 ( more than 2 months after being told that she passed), but she will be called up 1-2 weeks before said date to sign the job offer.

She waited until then only to be told that AIG Cubao will hire less than originally planned, and that she did not make the cut. This is being done not only by AIG, but some other companies. I think companies are verbally promising a job offer even if they don't have the business yet so that they'll have a pool of ready hires in case they do get the business.

This is unfair and unethical, but I'm not sure if it's illegal. I think there should be an acceptable time period (not 2+ months) where the job offer should be offered and signed by the applicant. Is this practice illegal?

unless the job offer is presented and signed, whatever is promised remains just that.. just a promise so don't take it as being final. Wala naman silang nilabag na batas.. they promised you a job offer.. pag available na yung position.. kaso hindi nga.. unless it is presented to you in black and white and signed.. don't believe it.