tcidenebj wrote:Hello, mrs_scofield. Thank you for the advice. Well, mistakenly, we did not ask about the terms and agreement of the Training Contract and even the copy of it since it was our first day, we were pressured to sign it anyway kasi first job at sayang yung pagasikaso ng mga requirements sa kanila. Is it legal to make your applicants sign their Job Agreement exactly on their first day. Ayon po kasi sa iba, sa ibang company, magsisign ka muna ng Job Offer/Agreement before ka magstart.
No, we were not sent abroad.
For the conditions of the Training Contract, we will be having a 4 to 8 weeks of Training, and after successfull completion of the training, we will be bonded for two years with an amount of 65,000.00. Which is yes, we have undergone a training pero medyo questionable po 'yong 65,000.00. Kasi mismong employees din nila mga nagtrain at sa office din nila po ginanap. Although, I know, pwede nila sabihin na may bayad 'yong room at employees nila na nagtrain samin. At isa pa, hanggang ngayon, di pa nila binibigay yung copy ng Training Contract namin. We even ask for it pero sabi nila binigyan daw kami ng copy.
Additionally, yung said training contract was given after two weeks and exactly on the first salary distribution pay, kaya medyo napressure po kami pirmahan kasi sumahod na kami at nagwork already for two weeks. Feel ko po naabuso kami kasi first job namin lahat at tinake advantage kami.
I stated some of the reasons why I want to leave the company on my previous post if you do not bother to read po. Thank you po so much.
WITH REGARDS TO TRAINING ACTUALLY GIVENSince we do not have a copy of your Training Contract and we do not know what are the sets of 'training" that the company will provide you under the said contract, we will assume that the training provided to you is part of the training package.
Please take note that you are only required to pay for the training cost actually incurred by the company for the training you actually received. The issue of whether or not the P65k is exorbitant or excessive is for the court to determine. Of course, the company needs to provide proof to justify the said amount.
But bear in mind also that in most cases, especially like this, the court applies the policy of social justice where the law bends backward to accommodate the interests of the working class on the humane justification that those with less privilege in life should have more in law.
WITH REGARDS TO THE JOB AGREEMENT WITH TRAINING CONTRACTUnder the Civil Code, we have this what we call as voidable contracts. And a contract is said to be voidable or annullable when:
1. One of the parties is incapable of giving consent to a contract; or
2. The consent of one of the parties is vitiated by mistake, violence, intimidation, undue influence, or fraud.
Your case falls under paragraph 2. Your consent is vitiated by fraud. Now, there is fraud when through insidious words or machinations of one of the contracting parties, the other is induced to enter into a contract which, without them, he would not have agreed to.
Fraud refers to all kinds of deception; whether through insidious machination, manipulation, concealment or misrepresentation that would lead an ordinarily prudent person into error after taking the circumstances into account.
In contracts, a fraud known as
dolo causante or causal fraud is basically a deception used by one party prior to or simultaneous with the contract, in order to secure the consent of the other. Needless to say, the deceit employed must be serious. In contradistinction, only some particular or accident of the obligation is referred to by incidental fraud or
dolo incidente, or that which is not serious in character and without which the other party would have entered into the contract anyway.
TAKE NOTE, however, that a voidable contract although annullable can be ratified. And ratification extinguishes the action to annul a voidable contract.
When did you learn that the Training Contract provides for payment of a bond? When you learned of the same did you question it or lodge a complaint with the HR?
When you learned of the cash bond, did you make a protest? Or you did not do anything and instead go on with your work and voluntarily attended the training?
I am asking you these questions to determine first if your cause of action have not yet prescribed. In case of fraud, the action for annulment should be brought within four years from the time of the discovery of the same.
And whether your acts after you found out about the cash bond under the Training Contract constitute a ratification of the same. It is understood that there is an express or tacit ratification when, with knowledge of the reason which renders the contract voidable and such reason having ceased, the person who has the right to invoke it should execute an act which necessarily implies an intention to waive his right.
WHAT ARE THE STEPS TO BE TAKENYou send a letter to your HR, raising the following:
1. The matter of its failure to provide you with a copy of the Training Agreement;
2. Inquire about the cash bond which you only came to know about just now and ask for clarifications;
3. Should they reply, make it a point to record your protest.
4. Demand for the payment of overtime pay and reimbursement of the medical expense incurred
Make sure to have your letter(s) received by the HR. Keep the receiving copy. Please remember that once you have done all this, make it a point to register your protest if you are required to attend training/s.
And if you are at the point of quitting your job, I suggest you negotiate with your employer to have your cash bond cancelled or at least reduced. Your bargaining chip is its failure to pay your authorized overtime work rendered during regular and rest days and its failure to reimburse the medical expenses you incurred when you suffered a work-related injury. You can ask them that you can offset these payments due to you against the cash bond.
If negotiation fails, wait for the agreed period to expire before resigning but lodge your monetary claims with the NLRC immediately.
All money claims arising from an employer-employee relation are covered by the three-year prescriptive period mandated by Article 305 of the Labor Code, and not by Article 1144 of the Civil Code which provides for a ten-year prescriptive period for written agreements.
If the employee does not make a claim within 3 years, it is possible that he/she will lose his monetary claims.
Now this 3 year prescriptive period starts to run from the time the cause of action accrued. I will no longer discuss the elements of a cause of action but what you must remember is that it will start to run from the moment your employer denied your monetary claim.
Hence, the need for you to send them a letter demanding for the payment of the overtime pay to establish that your claim is still within the prescriptive period.
I hope I have helped you with your predicament. Good luck and may the force be with you! God speed!
Home
