Home
what remedies can we, employees ask from management if the number of days leave have been decreased? in 1989, employees enjoy 10 days vacation leave and 5 days incentive leave. in 2000, this was decreased to just 10-days (inclusive of service incentive leave). in september of 2007, the employee manual was revised with this stipulation: that those who were employed before 2000 are to enjoy a 10-day service incentive leave while those employed in 2000 and thereafter would enjoy just a 5-day incentive leave. the printed employee manual was presented to the employees only in may of 2008 but the stipulation was implemented immediately. the decreasing of number of days leave from 1989 to 2000 was likewise without consulting employees. a co-employee who was regularized in 2002 already enjoyed the 10-day VL and so do others. but this was cut to just 5 days in 2007 and when she asked why she was just answered that the manual was revised.
the club officers have had a meeting in 2012 to propose revisions to the current employee manual coz we noticed some irregularities in some of its provisions like: unused service incentive leave is not commutable to cash, double charging of absence before and after a holiday even with available leave credits, etc. (note: we don't have each a copy of our employee manual. it just so happened we were able to take hold of one). a copy of the minutes of the said meeting was given to the HR but it was only last october 2013 that management finally met with us after several follows up, to discuss some of the proposed revisions which included the foregoing. unfortunately, feedback was given us only first week of this month (april 2014) again, after many follows up and yet, no concrete answer was given us regarding the issues. further, minutes of the meetings were not furnished us as of date.
we are requesting that those who were regularized and employed before the employee manual was formally presented to us in 2008 be given back the 5-days with pay which we believe we are entitled to. as well as those days which were double charged. and the remedy that they need to give regular employees who were made to undergo a 3-month fixed term contract which lengthened their probationary period to 9 months instead of just 6. the HR said she has consulted the company lawyer on this and the lawyer said that "nothing" is to be done for those who are already regular. ganun na lang ba yon?. in truth and in fact, there are a lot of issues, so to speak, but these are i believe the most compelling.
we are somewhat distressed over the matters. we don't have a union and we don't plan to organize one. my co-employees are mostly breadwinners of their families so that they are afraid. can you please advise us? is the matter really a case of diminution of benefits and unfair labor practice? if so, what could we possibly do or ask from management? thanks a lot.
the club officers have had a meeting in 2012 to propose revisions to the current employee manual coz we noticed some irregularities in some of its provisions like: unused service incentive leave is not commutable to cash, double charging of absence before and after a holiday even with available leave credits, etc. (note: we don't have each a copy of our employee manual. it just so happened we were able to take hold of one). a copy of the minutes of the said meeting was given to the HR but it was only last october 2013 that management finally met with us after several follows up, to discuss some of the proposed revisions which included the foregoing. unfortunately, feedback was given us only first week of this month (april 2014) again, after many follows up and yet, no concrete answer was given us regarding the issues. further, minutes of the meetings were not furnished us as of date.
we are requesting that those who were regularized and employed before the employee manual was formally presented to us in 2008 be given back the 5-days with pay which we believe we are entitled to. as well as those days which were double charged. and the remedy that they need to give regular employees who were made to undergo a 3-month fixed term contract which lengthened their probationary period to 9 months instead of just 6. the HR said she has consulted the company lawyer on this and the lawyer said that "nothing" is to be done for those who are already regular. ganun na lang ba yon?. in truth and in fact, there are a lot of issues, so to speak, but these are i believe the most compelling.
we are somewhat distressed over the matters. we don't have a union and we don't plan to organize one. my co-employees are mostly breadwinners of their families so that they are afraid. can you please advise us? is the matter really a case of diminution of benefits and unfair labor practice? if so, what could we possibly do or ask from management? thanks a lot.
