CHANGE OF BUSINESS OWNERSHIP

I've been teaching in my current workplace for 12 years. Recently, the owner sold the school to our school principal and her investors without consulting the regular employees. Is the principal's argument that the regular employees will not be given separation pay because everybody will be absorbed by the new management valid? She added that since no one is terminated and the school will not suspend operation or closed shop, indeed no one deserves to get a separation pay. what if i don't want to work with the new management, can i demand separation pay from the outgoing owner? If I am entitled to a separation pay, should it be computed as current monthly salary times no. of years in service? please reply asap.
Thanks.

alcariaso

if the school is incorporated, then there is continuity of business and you are not entitled to separation pay. better to check first.

Yes sir, i believe our school is incorporated because there is "inc." in its name. Does it mean that the regular employees whether they like it or not have no choice but to work with the new management? There is an additional information regarding the sale: the partial payment was given during the two-week break of the teachers and that we, the employees were not properly informed nor consulted regarding the sale. I am only a teacher, and my knowlege about my rights as a worker is limited to how I understand the labor code, to your intelligent advice and legal opinion. Kindly advice me on the repercussions should I choose not work with the new management. Can i still ask for the P22 salary increase ordered by the Wage Board/DOLE last July 2010? At present, I believe I am still under contract with the original owner who required each employee even if with regular status to sign on a school year basis, meaning from June 2010 to May 2011. I've been teaching in this school for twelve years and you're saying that i will not get anything. Do I understand you correctly? I highly appreciate your prompt response. Thanks a lot.

it is the company which is the employer. the law allows change in ownership of the company. the employees do not have to be consulted.

there should be no diminution of salaries and benefits enjoyed previously from the past management

Are you sure?I read somewhere in the labor code that the employer must notify the employees should she plan to sell the business. What I'm having trouble researching is a provision on the law or court rulings that directly say "employees are entitled to separation pay not only because of the owner's failure to inform them of the sale but also the change in ownership of the business."
However, I found a Supreme Court ruling that may convince my employer that I am entitled to separation pay. Thank you very much.
G.R. No. 85867 May 13, 1993
E. RAZON, INC. [formerly known as Metro Services, Inc.], Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT (DOLE) and MARINA PORT SERVICES, INC. (MARINA)

you won't find one because there is none.

in the case you cite, ERI was held liable for severance because it suddenly closed down and the employees were hired by Marina.

in your case, there was no change in your employer, it remains to be the same company, or at least that is what is gathered from the facts you mention. a change of stockholders does not mean a change in employer.