MTC HRD Thread

[Tokoy]

i cannot understand why leaves--especially sick leaves -- are forfeited when unused for a certain period of time. basically you can't consume your leaves bec there simply was no opportunity to do so because of workload. and because there is no program that would enable employees to use and enjoy their leaves.

 

as for sick leaves, they should not be forfeited but should be converted to cash. because forfeiture is like punishing an employee who was able to stay healthy all year round. he should be rewarded instead of punishing him--by converting his unused leaves into cash. in fact, many employees -- the martyr or committed ones -- go to work even when they are not feeling well just to attend to or finish important tasks. this itself is an act of sacrifice, foregoing their right to take sick leaves and showing concern for the company or organization.

 

i cannot understand this practice considering that we take pride of our country as being advanced in labor standards and rights and thus ahead of other countries. well, middle east countries-- which we thought are not labor friendly-- have fared bettter. they have allowed our ofws take their one-full month paid vacation per year. those who don't go on vacation are able to convert these vacation leaves to cash.

 

is their a provision in the labor code which says unused sick leaves shall be forfeited? what i know is that the labor code is clear about the right of the workers to be granted leave credits after a certain period.

 

i totally agree with you that sick leave should be converted to cash, as a positive reinforcement to those employees who went healthy for the entire previous year. im happy that my previous company back there is doing that and they're converting it 100% of the current employees rate. that's amazing isn't it? and you know what, it practically created a culture that employees wouldnt avail their sick leave and would rather have it unpaid or be charged to emergency which is VL deductible just to enjoy the conversion. whatever it is, there is always a downside of everything. that's normal.

 

is sick leave conversion in the labor code? NO its not. the labor code only states that a worker must enjoy a rest of (7) seven days and that's what we call SIL or Service Incentive Leave. only 7 days no more no less. which means that what employees are enjoying, those 15 or more days VL and SL are plainly company initiated benefit and whatever they would do with regards to the excess of these leaves (VL/SL) would be their prerogative. but like what i've said earlier, i totally agree with you.

[jayeina]

question po

 

1. does it necessarily follow that once an employee becomes a regular employee of the company will his compensation become monthly and not daily?

 

2. if monthly paid, how do we compute the ECOLA? is it multiplied by 30 days?

 

tnx!

[Tokoy]

question po

 

1. does it necessarily follow that once an employee becomes a regular employee of the company will his compensation become monthly and not daily?

 

Good Day!

 

Employee hired for a regular position - would received a monthly based compensation even if he/she is still under probation. Same thing will happen if this employee would become regular after the probation period.

 

Contractual/Casual employee - depending on the contract, these are mostly daily paid employees who would work only for a specific period of time.

[RECIDIVIST_21]

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

[nirvanana_q]

another matter: is non-attendance to a team-building seminar a valid ground for disciplinary action or suspension of an employee? what if the employee is a committed one and a team-player (he delivers and productive in the midst of a demoralizing situation) but does not believe in said activity would bring about positive change in the workplace? is his/her suspension or any DA ironic because it runs contrary to the purpose of team-building seminar which is to build a bridge between employees and management to improve productivity?

 

do you think team building seminars would create better team players and productive employees given the bad situation would remain unchanged after the seminar?

 

good day

 

allow me to focus on the purpose of a team-building seminar. ideally, this activity is intended to harmonize the existing forces (i would always use this term - force) within a particular organization or a team and to harness this to achieve greater goals or reach higher altitudes (to translate that it's productivity both individual and as a team). the program is composed of series of structured and non-structured activities that is geared to enhance the teamwork by focusing on the individual team member, each capacity to include strengths and weaknesses (forces) and how all these contributes to team success.

 

the participation of this activity should be 100% to achieve its purpose, meaning there should be an attendance of 100% among the committed/non-committed individuals. remember, the activity was done to unify both forces or shall i say to make a common ground for those committed and non-committed. question, can you call an employee a committed team player if he fails to attend this activity? yes or no? we should always remember that the success or failure of a team building program is primarily attributed to the participants itself. this is a tool an employee can use to air his/her concerns. change would not happen overnight especially from bad to good but if someone wants a change that someone needs to do something to achieve it. a team building seminar could be one of the step so missing it would mean foregoing a chance to change.

 

here is one thing i want to emphasize, we may have problem with personalities in the management but please be objective, the organization does not only speak of these people it encompasses everyone. i know how annoyed we are of these managers but like everyone they are still a signature away from termination. so think broadly, continue to do good and never give these people a basis to institute DA (failure to attend to company sanctioned activity could be one).

 

remember this "Tough times never last tough people do"

 

thanks

 

well, barely a week after the team building activity was conducted, the team started to break. a feud erupted among bosses; factions sprouted among the staff. to think that the organization (a development-work oriented one at that), which is on cost-cutting ways according to the boss but whose flamboyant ways contradict his decree to cut cost, spent thousands of pesos on such a meaningless activity. you know what they did? a couple of games, drinking and, of course, videoke. there's no problem with having fun and enjoyment. in fact, it was needed and i would be much into it if i joined it. but there's a problem with sidestepping the important aspect of the activity: which is to bring out the problems of the organization and find solutions to them. this was a golden opportunity to tackle the issues that hinder the building of the team. pinakawalan pa nila.

 

yes, there was some sharing and crying alright. but what did they cry about? well, about individual personal problems and experiences. there was no sharing and crying about problems in the office. it was said (in murmurs, of course) the facilitator was deliberately instructed to avoid "sensitive" matters. as for the office -- or should I say the organizational -- matters, the big boss monopolized the talking. She presented her own plan and direction with almost finality, as if the staff has nothing to say or contribute regarding what steps or plan their organization, which they are part of, should be taking or doing. It was a one-way street: the boss dictates, the staff obeys. To think that this is a development organization, and the norm in development organization is being consultative and participatory. The boss and staff plan and work together – that should be the set-up. In any organization, the rank-and-file are also important for they also have something to contribute in making their organization attain its objectives.

 

Well, our boss is relatively new, coming from a govt agency where he also called the shots, being one of the top officials. Its no secret how the system and people work in this sector. Sanay kasing nag-uutos at umaastang VIP. When they join the private sector, malas lang when they bring their bad habits and continue their pampered ways. Sa totoo lang, mas maganda pa kung galing private sector at lumipat sa gobyerno kasi dala ang husay at expertise kaysa galing gobyerno at lumipat sa private sector kasi dala ang masamang habit at pagka-spoiled.

 

This is the second time I observed a team-building activity became a heart-breaking outcome in its aftermath. I joined the first one and we faced the organizational and operational problems head-on. Basically there were two operational groups in the organizational structure. There was an eagerness on the part of both groups (at least on us staff) to resolve their differences. Since it involved organizational and management issues, the facilitator said he had to talk to the bosses of both groups. He tried to and nothing happened. He got his paycheck and we’re back to our old feuding and “silipan” ways.

 

I didn’t join this time because at first glance I was not able to see even a tinge of seriousness and sincerity of this activity. yet i never cease to work, and work hard, as a team player.

[myk_atok]

"1. does it necessarily follow that once an employee becomes a regular employee of the company will his compensation become monthly and not daily? "

 

Not unless you are working as an executive or a Sr. Manager you are mostly likely a daily paid employee.

 

Being paid every 15th or the 30th of the month does not make you a monthly paid employee. What determines salary depends on how many days in a year you are considered paid. For most company who have office from monday - friday we are considered paid for 262 days in a year or 21.83 days in a month.

 

" 2. if monthly paid, how do we compute the ECOLA? is it multiplied by 30 days? "

 

ECOLA are given regardless of you being paid daily or monthly. Again, if your company considered you paid for 364 days in a year, the computation is 30 days X ECOLA.

 

 

:mtc: :thumbsupsmiley:

[simple_denise]

Sa labor code po ba natin, ilang ang nakalagay na SL at VL na dapat ibigay ng isang company sa isang empleyado?

[Wyld]

Sa labor code po ba natin, ilang ang nakalagay na SL at VL na dapat ibigay ng isang company sa isang empleyado?

 

The only leave benefit mandated by the Labor Code is the Service Incentive Leave with Pay (SILP) :

 

An employee is entitled to (at least) 5 days of paid leave after one (1) continuous year of service.

 

Any other leaves (SL, VL, Birthday Leave, etc) granted to employees is upon the discretion of the employer as part of their benefits program.

 

[myk_atok]

The only leave benefit mandated by the Labor Code is the Service Incentive Leave with Pay (SILP) :

 

An employee is entitled to (at least) 5 days of paid leave after one (1) continuous year of service.

 

Any other leaves (SL, VL, Birthday Leave, etc) granted to employees is upon the discretion of the employer as part of their benefits program.

 

 

 

Service Incentive Leaves (SIL) are also considered as VL. an employee regardless of employement status, who have been working for a company for 1 yr of continous service are entitled to it.

[Wyld]

Companies MAY call the SILP a VL if they wish to. However, VLs do not exist per Labor Code. Its only the SILP - just depends on how the company wishes to package it.

 

 

Service Incentive Leaves (SIL) are also considered as VL. an employee regardless of employement status, who have been working for a company for 1 yr of continous service are entitled to it.

[VentureMaker]

What if your business experiences a downturn and you lay off some workers due to redundancy, will you be compelled to rehire them if business becomes good again? Is there is some legal time period wherein they must be rehired instead of looking for a new worker?

[maginoo]

on labor law:

to my understanding, the employer does not violate any articles in the labor law as long as the "benefits" they provide are not less than what is written. it is left to the employers whether they choose to being just and fair with employees.

 

to think that most lawmakers are maintaining businesses of their own and that they are also in a very convenient position to feed their greedy hearts desire using the gavel of the law, it is not surprising that alms received by employees are labeled to read as "benefits".

 

is it easy to imagine receiving "benefits" equivalent to what was written in the labor law while working in a huge corporation?

 

it is not easy to think about our labor law and not puke! (please excuse my manners.)

 

the aim of a true labor law should be one that makes employees getting paid according to the performance of their company.

 

 

on team-building training:

would it be ironic to say that an employee known to have a good reputation as team-player would not attend the team-building training?

 

the team-building training will surely fail should its goals are not made clear to each and every team members. team members may have different roles but they must have common goals. while common goals are clearly defined alright, their roles must also be clearly defined with the aim of having them all work hand in hand.

 

the success of a team-building training also depends in its success in finding common grounds to the following differences:

1. there are team members who are focused in the overall success of the team.

2. there are team members who are focused only in the success of a particular fellow team member?

3. there are team members who are focused only on his own success?

[wormyx]

Good noon to everyone. I'm currently employed in a distributor and importer company. And in our department, we are having a bit problem regarding merchandiser deployed sa mga supermarkets. To shorten my post, may mga merchandisers kaming matatagal na but under agency sila. Maraming beses narin nagchange ng agency ang company namin and sumasama naman itong mga lumang merchandisers. Ang querry lang namin is, magkakaroon ba ng labor issue ang company namin regarding sa mga matatagal ng merchandisers? Pero under agency sila hindi sila directly hired by our company.

[Dr Love]

Good noon to everyone. I'm currently employed in a distributor and importer company. And in our department, we are having a bit problem regarding merchandiser deployed sa mga supermarkets. To shorten my post, may mga merchandisers kaming matatagal na but under agency sila. Maraming beses narin nagchange ng agency ang company namin and sumasama naman itong mga lumang merchandisers. Ang querry lang namin is, magkakaroon ba ng labor issue ang company namin regarding sa mga matatagal ng merchandisers? Pero under agency sila hindi sila directly hired by our company.

 

The practice today and even for the last decade has always been to outsource promodizers to job agencies. This is a legit and cost effective practice since you dont need to worry about having an employee-employer relationship with them. However, the actual procedure or the actual working relationship of your merchandizer and your company's representative who is "supposed" to supervise them will play a big role in determining whether or not there a legal/labor issue is at hand.

 

Under the "legal" system, all supervision of this dizers are still under the agency and not under you. You dont have a right to hire and fire them directly. Its always through the agency. Normally, the agency even maintain their own supervisor so that its their supervisor with whom your supervisor can channel any directive to the dizers. This way, the probability of getting a negative decision against you is minimal. Why do I say that? No matter what you do, everyone can always file a case at the NLRC for contractualization and demand for a regularization.

 

If you have further queries, feel free to PM me.

[Dr Love]

What if your business experiences a downturn and you lay off some workers due to redundancy, will you be compelled to rehire them if business becomes good again? Is there is some legal time period wherein they must be rehired instead of looking for a new worker?

The process of separating employees by redundancy is contained in the labor code under authorized causes (Art 283). Moreover, separating employees by redundancy entails that the employer pay a corresponding separation pay to the worker. Such separation pay is equivalent to 1month salary for every year of service tax free (coz its involuntary). Under this scheme. the employer is required by law to inform DOLE of the redundancy and furnish them with pertinent information regarding the employees affected by it. If you follow all the procedures and the redundancy program is real and above board, there is no problem.

 

An employer is not obligated to "rehire" employees that were separated from the company either by redundancy or retrenchment. The power to rehire is a management prerogative. Moreover, if you rehire an employee, his/her tenure starts at 0 years again unless otherwise stipulated in his employment contract.