Performance Review for Regularization

Hi,

I am working on a BPO company, last Month, I was advised that my performance didn't meet the standards set by the account.

However, when I checked the form presented to me, there are questionable ratings hence, I raised it to the person who presented it. Also the metrics that they said as the basis were not properly discussed to us, nor a documentation with our signature that we acknowledge those metrics.

Right now, I have not received any advice if I will be regularized or not, and my regularization date will be on 04/08/2017. I was just being told that HR is still reviewing my case.

Can you please advise me what would be the best course of action? Or if I raised this matter to NLRC, is there probable cause?

BTW, the account that I am in is down sizing.

you can but very hard to argue yan, especially since d ka pa regular

lukekyle wrote:you can but very hard to argue yan, especially since d ka pa regular

Like in what way po?

kasi ung line of business po ng account na napuntahan ko kakasimula lng, tpos part po kami ng wave 1, at nung time na un, di pa po concrete ung stats na pagbabasihan nila for our regularization, until the time po nung performance review, dun lang namin nalaman ung mga weight ng metrics at ung mga exact metrics na pinagbasihan nila.

In doubt nga rin po ako kasi alam ko rin naman na di pa ako regular, kaya lng po kasi, may mali at discrepancies po dun sa papel na ibinigay nila.

Tatanggapin ko naman po ung decision nila kung alang mali, un nga lng po meron kasi.

very hard to argue yung basis for a companies regularization. most used line sa ganyan ng employers is "the candidate does not fit our culture". you can argue with whatever metrics you like but unless mapakita mo or mapaamin mo ang employer (which they never do) usually the complaint has a very slim chance to prosper. but as i said pweede mo naman itry. maybe you can get a sympathetic arbiter to hear your case

jorrne18 wrote:Hi,

I am working on a BPO company, last Month, I was advised that my performance didn't meet the standards set by the account.

However, when I checked the form presented to me, there are questionable ratings hence, I raised it to the person who presented it. Also the metrics that they said as the basis were not properly discussed to us, nor a documentation with our signature that we acknowledge those metrics.

Right now, I have not received any advice if I will be regularized or not, and my regularization date will be on 04/08/2017. I was just being told that HR is still reviewing my case.

Can you please advise me what would be the best course of action? Or if I raised this matter to NLRC, is there probable cause?

BTW, the account that I am in is down sizing.

At the time of your engagement, we're you apprised of the standards under which you will qualify as a regular employee?

If you're answer to this question is in the negative, you are deemed as a regular employee. In Clarion Printing House, Inc. vs. NLRC, 461 SCRA 272, 298-295 (2005), it was held that standards under which a probationary employee will qualify as a regular employee shall be made known to him "at the time of engagement." Otherwise, he shall be deemed as regular employee.

It's a good thing that you did not sign the metrics used as guidelines for your performance evaluation or any document for that matter as this will bolster your claim that you were not informed of the standards under which you will qualify for regularization at the time of your engagement.

DO NOT SIGN, i repeat DO NOT SIGN any document pertaining to the standards for which you are to perform in order to qualify for regularization. If you can't avoid signing the document, DO NOT SIGN WITHOUT INDICATING THE DATE you signed such document in order to avoid any tampering or pre-dating by your employer of your signature as to make it appear that you were in fact advised of the standards to qualify for regularization AT THE TIME OF YOUR ENGAGEMENT.  Also, sign every page of the document to avoid any insertion of words, phrases, that were not included at the time you signed the document.

WHAT IS YOUR NEXT STEP

Send a letter to your HR questioning the performance evaluation. State that you were not aware of any standards that will qualify you for regularization nor were you ever informed of the matter at the time of your engagement.

IMPORTANT: Do not forget to include the phrase AT THE TIME OF MY ENGAGEMENT  This is very important. Why? Since you were not presented with and advised of the standards under which the company expects you to perform at the time of your engagement, you are not under probation when you were hired. In fact, you are hired as a regular employee.

Have the letter received by your HR, retain a copy and keep it. This will support your claim that you were not informed of the said standards at the time you were hired that's why you were surprised of the performance evaluation and hence, questioning the same.

Good Luck! and God speed!

Pls dont misconstrue that my position is that you shouldn't proceed with your case if you decide to file one.  Base on my experience this is an uphill battle.  

Firstly as per http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jun2004/149859.htm
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jun2004/149859.htm

Conversely, an employer is deemed to substantially comply with the rule on notification of standards if he apprises the employee that he will be subjected to a performance evaluation on a particular date after his hiring
SO AS LONG AS YOU WERE NOTIFIED THAT AN EVALUATION WOULD BE COMING, YOU ARE NOT A REGULAR EMPLOYEE


But we have also ruled in Manlimos, et. al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission[15] that this constitutional protection ends on the expiration of the probationary period. On that date, the parties are free to either renew or terminate their contract of employment. Manlimos concluded that (t)his development has rendered moot the question of whether there was a just cause for the dismissal of the petitioners xxx.[16] In the case at bar, respondent Middleby exercised its option not to renew the contract when it informed petitioner on the last day of his probationary employment that it did not intend to grant him a regular status.



Even assuming, arguendo, that petitioner was not informed of the reasonable standards required of him by Middleby, the same is not crucial because there is no termination to speak of but rather expiration of contract. Petitioner loses sight of the fact that his employment was probationary, contractual in nature, and one with a definite period. At the expiration of the period stipulated in the contract, his appointment was deemed terminated and a notice or termination letter informing him of the non-renewal of his contract was not necessary.

While probationary employees enjoy security of tenure such that they cannot be removed except for just cause as provided by law, such protection extends only during the period of probation. Once that period expired, the constitutional protection could no longer be invoked. Legally speaking, petitioner was not illegally dismissed. His contract merely expired

As per my experience, nag matter lang all these things IF you are terminated BEFORE matapos yung probationary period.  BUT if your contract ay natapos (nafullfill to the date) then the arbiter doesnt  even bother listening to you.

Again this is only based on my experience.  I wish you luck and would advise you to get a lawyer's advise before proceeeding.

Deleted...see next comment

In a more recent case (Tamson Enterprises, Inc. et. al., vs. Court of Appeals and Rosemarie L. Sy, G.R. No. 192881, November 16, 2011), the Supreme Court had the occasion to rule in this wise:

"The law is clear that in all cases of probationary employment, the employer shall make known to the employee the standards under which he will qualify as a regular employee at the time of his engagement. Where no standards are made known to the employee at that time, he shall be deemed a regular employee. The standards under which she would qualify as a regular employee not having been communicated to her at the start of her probationary period, Sy qualified as a regular employee. As held by this Court in the very recent case of Hacienda Primera Development Corporation v. Villegas,:

In this case, petitioner Hacienda fails to specify the reasonable standards by which respondents alleged poor performance was evaluated, much less to prove that such standards were made known to him at the start of his employment. Thus, he is deemed to have been hired from day one as a regular employee. Due process dictates that an employee be apprised beforehand of the condition of his employment and of the terms of advancement therein." (Emphasis supplied)

Distinction should be made between a probationary employee and an employee with a definite period. While an employer is not obligated under the law to notify the latter of the termination of his service in view of the expiration of his contract, a notice of non-regularization of probationary employee is important. Otherwise, if he was allowed to work after the  6 mos probationary period, he is considered a regular employee (Article 294 of the Labor Code).

In all cases of termination of employment, standards of due process should be substantially observed. One of the standard is-

If the termination is brought about by the completion of a contract or phase thereof, or by failure of an employee to meet the standards of the employer in the case of probationary employment, it shall be sufficient that a written notice is served the employee, within a reasonable time from the effective date of termination.

The pre-determined standards that an employer sets are the bases for determining the probationary employee's fitness, propriety, effeciency, and qualifications as a regular employee. Due process requires that the probationary employee be informed of such standards at the time of his engagement so he can adjust his character or workmanship accordingly. Proper adjustment to fit the standards upon which the employee's qualifications will be evaluated will increase one's chances of being positvely assessed for regularization by his or her employer (Sameer Overseas Placement Agency, Inc. vs. Cabiles, G.R. No. 170139, August 5, 2014).

With the foregoing, I find it prudent to write a letter to your HR questioning the standards and state that your were not notified, informed, advised of the same at the time of your engagement.

God bless!

mrs_scofield wrote:In a more recent case (Tamson Enterprises, Inc. et. al., vs. Court of Appeals and Rosemarie L. Sy, G.R. No. 192881, November 16, 2011), the Supreme Court had the occasion to rule in this wise:

"The law is clear that in all cases of probationary employment, the employer shall make known to the employee the standards under which he will qualify as a regular employee at the time of his engagement. Where no standards are made known to the employee at that time, he shall be deemed a regular employee. The standards under which she would qualify as a regular employee not having been communicated to her at the start of her probationary period, Sy qualified as a regular employee. As held by this Court in the very recent case of Hacienda Primera Development Corporation v. Villegas,:

In this case, petitioner Hacienda fails to specify the reasonable standards by which respondents alleged poor performance was evaluated, much less to prove that such standards were made known to him at the start of his employment. Thus, he is deemed to have been hired from day one as a regular employee. Due process dictates that an employee be apprised beforehand of the condition of his employment and of the terms of advancement therein." (Emphasis supplied)

Distinction should be made between a probationary employee and an employee with a definite period. While an employer is not obligated under the law to notify the latter of the termination of his service in view of the expiration of his contract, a notice of non-regularization of probationary employee is important. Otherwise, if he was allowed to work after the  6 mos probationary period, he is considered a regular employee (Article 294 of the Labor Code).

In all cases of termination of employment, standards of due process should be substantially observed. One of the standard is-

If the termination is brought about by the completion of a contract or phase thereof, or by failure of an employee to meet the standards of the employer in the case of probationary employment, it shall be sufficient that a written notice is served the employee, within a reasonable time from the effective date of termination.

The pre-determined standards that an employer sets are the bases for determining the probationary employee's fitness, propriety, effeciency, and qualifications as a regular employee. Due process requires that the probationary employee be informed of such standards at the time of his engagement so he can adjust his character or workmanship accordingly. Proper adjustment to fit the standards upon which the employee's qualifications will be evaluated will increase one's chances of being positvely assessed for regularization by his or her employer (Sameer Overseas Placement Agency, Inc. vs. Cabiles, G.R. No. 170139, August 5, 2014).

With the foregoing, I find it prudent to write a letter to your HR questioning the standards and state that your were not notified, informed, advised of the same at the time of your engagement.

God bless!

Thank you so much for that. I will double check again if the standards/metrics are stipulated in the contract, because as I can remember, there's none.

If I was able to confirm that there's none, then I will be giving them a letter and have them received it as you've suggested.

Yup, will be printing 3 copies just to be sure.

Hi please help

My case is still ongoing and is awaiting for the arbiter's decision from SENA (NLRC)


In this statement :

Probationary employees enjoy security of tenure. This is guaranteed under our law. As provided under Article 281 of the Labor Code of the Philippines in relation to Section 6 (c), Rule I, Book Six of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the Labor Code, the services of an employee who has been engaged on a probationary basis can only be terminated for a just cause or when authorized by existing laws, or when he fails to qualify as a regular employee in accordance with reasonable standards made known by the employer to the employee at the time of his engagement.

your employer may terminate your services prior to the last day of your six-month probationary period if you have committed any of the just causes mentioned under Article 282 of the Labor Code, to wit: (a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience to the lawful orders of your employer or his authorized representative in connection with your work; (b) Gross and habitual neglect of your duties; (c) Fraud or willful breach of the trust reposed upon you by your employer or his duly authorized representative; (d) Commission of a crime or offense against the person of your employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly authorized representatives; and (e) Other causes analogous to the foregoing.
Your employment may also be terminated within the probationary period for any of these authorized causes: (a) Installation of labor-saving devices; (b) Redundancy; (c) Retrenchment to prevent losses; (d) Closure and cessation of operation of the establishment or undertaking; and (e) Disease to which your continued employment is prohibited by law or is prejudicial to your health as well as to the health of your co-employees. (Articles 283 and 284, Ibid.)

Nevertheless, we wish to emphasize that procedural due process must be complied with in order to validly terminate the services of a probationary employee. Pursuant to Section 2 (d), Rule I, Book Six of the Labor Code’s IRR, for termination of employment based on just causes, (a) a written notice must be served on the employee specifying the ground/s for termination, and giving him reasonable opportunity within which to explain his side; (b) a hearing or conference must be conducted; and (c) a written notice of termination must also be served on the employee, indicating that upon due consideration of all the circumstances, grounds have been established to justify his termination. For termination due to authorized causes, due process is deemed complied with upon service of a written notice to the employee and the appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) at least 30 days before the effectivity of the termination, specifying the ground or grounds for termination



In My Case to make it short we were 13 people from batch 6 (composed of 40 people originally) was hired last October 10,2016, who were taken off of our work without any due process or admin hearing. They just served a notice on the last day of the week which is Friday November 11,2016 our fifth week to be exact. While on the said agreements says after the training period we will be assigned to our respective team, means we pass. And so we were. However company keep on insisting that we haven't reach the fifth week & also terminated us because of absences etc. My question here is is it not valid if you have certificates showing the reason of your absence. As for me my son got confined for a week and so I have to take an absence but I never fail to send a message and inform my supervisor about the reason of my absence. Same goes to my other workmate who was ill due to asthma And was confined.our supervisors never mentioned about our status being in dangered so we thought we were excused at that time since it is a valid reason, now ny question now is company failed to provide proper notice and out of a sudden provided a separation paper. Since we never had an HR talk. We never had Admin hearings too.



If it says: Probationary employees enjoy security of tenure. This is guaranteed under our law.

That procedural due process must be complied with in order to validly terminate the services of a probationary employee. Pursuant to Section 2 (d), Rule I, Book Six of the Labor Code’s IRR, for termination of employment based on just causes, (a) a written notice must be served on the employee specifying the ground/s for termination, and giving him reasonable opportunity within which to explain his side; (b) a hearing or conference must be conducted; and (c) a written notice of termination must also be served on the employee, indicating that upon due consideration of all the circumstances, grounds have been established to justify his termination. For termination due to authorized causes, due process is deemed complied with upon service of a written notice to the employee and the appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) at least 30 days before the effectivity of the termination, specifying the ground or grounds for termination



Then Does this mean company have terminated us in bad faith? Because the reasons we have also to counter them is



1. We never get any notice

2. There are people (colleagues with the same batch) who went on absent (for 2 & half days within the training period. REASON " his wife's uncle died" which is not valid at all since a bereavement is only being grant upon regularization or if is excused plus+ (IT MUST BE OF FIRST DEGREE RELATIVE) not by just your husband/wife relative so to speak is person wasn't taken off the work though they stated that a person who went in absent will be taken off during the training . while we were absent after the training period. (CAN YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE IF THE VALIDITY OF OUR REASON OF BEING ABSENT?) Still this colleague of ours never receive any sanction and still continue working even he got 2 & half absence.

3.another colleague who has been late everyday for an hour or two.



(WE HAVE A POINT SYSTEM)

.25 (15NINS LATE)

.50 (30MINS)

1.75( 1 & 30)

If you inccured 5points its for (termination)

So if this person is late everyday, why on earth she never inccure sanctions and have continue her work?

We still have a lot of reasons

Now please answer me if we have a points here!?

Specially we filed a cased with SENA since its been 3months they never gave our last salary unless we sign the separation paper which we never did.

Second when we got our salary , the company is forcing us to sign a quiclaim paper coming from them if not we won't be able to get our salary this is a form of Bribe. However to get our salary we asked the advice of the arbiter he told us that there is no problem signing the quit claim from NLRC since this case is different from another case that we will be filing. So we did sign the quitclaim however we also made a counter affidavit that is written in a paper which states we only signed becos of our salary but this doesn't mean we won't be filing another case. And we signed in it together with the company's HR, then we filed another case again. FYI: first cased file was regarding salary/wages , Now we have filed again for due process and moral exemplary. The company on their reply from the position paper we submitted says we have already signed a quitclaim after receiving a financial assistance ( Financial assistance which is actually our salary) and says that the paper we made as counter affidavit isn't valid since the respondent is not the one who signed? (If the HR signed it which is a part if the company isnt its valid?)



So all of e company stories are fabricated. Any advise please? As the attorney we got looks like doesn't know anything ;(