legal Free Legal Advice

[ghetto_gospel]

The law gives an employer the right to terminate the services of its employees to obviate or to minimize business losses. This right, however, may not be exercised arbitrarily or whimsically. Article 283 of the Labor Code lays down the conditions for the exercise of right, thus:

 

"Art. 283. Closure of establishment and reduction of personnel. � The employer may also terminate the employment of any employee due to the installation of labor saving devices, redundancy, retrenchment to prevent losses or the closing or cessation of operation of the establishment or undertaking unless the closing is for the purpose of circumventing the provisions of this Title by serving a written notice on the workers and the Ministry of Labor and Employment at least one (1) month before the intended date thereof. In case of termination due to the installation of labor saving devices or redundancy, the worker affected thereby shall be entitled to separation pay equivalent to at least his one (1) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher. In case of retrenchment to prevent losses and in cases of closures or cessation of operations of establishment or undertaking not due to serious business losses or financial reverses, the separation pay shall be equivalent to one (1) month pay or at least one-half (1/2) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher. A fraction of at least six (6) months shall be considered one (1) whole year."

 

The requisites for valid retrenchment under the foregoing provision are:

 

(1) necessity of the retrenchment to prevent losses and proof of such losses;

 

(2) written notice to the employees and to the Department of Labor and Employment at least one month prior to the intended date of retrenchment; and

 

(3) payment of separation pay equivalent to one month pay or at least 1/2 month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher.

 

 

Hence, written notice to the affected employee as well as separation pay are a must. If your company does not follow the above requirements, the affected employee can file a case for Illegal Dismissal with the National Labor Relations Commission. One more thing, forcing an employee to resign is a way to circumvent the requirements of retrenchment. Resignation is not advisable for you will be deemed to have waived your separation pay.

 

thanks for the heads up....this will be very helpful.

 

does this apply to all kinds of companies, be it private or what not??

[mlpf]

thanks for the heads up....this will be very helpful.

 

does this apply to all kinds of companies, be it private or what not??

 

The Labor Code applies to all kinds of private companies doing business in the Philippines. It does not apply to employees of government corporations. One last thing, if an employee is forced to resign, he can also file a complaint for Illegal Dismissal under "constructive dismissal". A resignation should be voluntary. It must not be dictated or required by the company.

[ghetto_gospel]

The Labor Code applies to all kinds of private companies doing business in the Philippines. It does not apply to employees of government corporations. One last thing, if an employee is forced to resign, he can also file a complaint for Illegal Dismissal under "constructive dismissal". A resignation should be voluntary. It must not be dictated or required by the company.

 

i understand....thank you so much for shedding light!!! i really appreciate it!

 

more power!!!

[pogingpogi2x]

may question ako, may na litigate o na sheriff na ba sa Credit Card problem?

[Google]

may question ako, may na litigate o na sheriff na ba sa Credit Card problem?

 

imho, may mga alam ako na naganyan na, pero to tell you frankly, matagal na proseso yan.

[pogingpogi2x]

imho, may mga alam ako na naganyan na, pero to tell you frankly, matagal na proseso yan.

 

ano ano po ba ang grounds nila? example may work ka pero di mo afford makabayad?

[Google]

ano ano po ba ang grounds nila? example may work ka pero di mo afford makabayad?

 

before they will do that, they will first contact you and ask you if would want a restructuring or a repayment scheme. so that means, if may work ka, they will usually negotiate on what you can afford to pay based on your take home pay.

 

i would recommend you to do that. contact your card provider and talk with them muna.

[pogingpogi2x]

before they will do that, they will first contact you and ask you if would want a restructuring or a repayment scheme. so that means, if may work ka, they will usually negotiate on what you can afford to pay based on your take home pay.

 

i would recommend you to do that. contact your card provider and talk with them muna.

 

thanks bossing. And another may rights ba sila na puntahan ka sa office mo at kausapin ang management? or puntahan ka sa house?

[BSmithREINVENTED]

hi

 

i have some simple questions (but a long story is behind these questions, though)

the questions:

 

1. Can I sue my estranged husband for hacking my emails?

 

2. isn't that offense (if indeed it is) a form of invasion of privacy?

 

3. can he use the information he has illegally obtained from hacking my emails against me?

 

thanks in advance for your time and bother, which would be very much appreciated here

[rocco69]

Since you and your husband are estranged from each other, you could probably classify his acts as intimidation, stalking, and harassment, punishable under the "Violence Against Women and Children Act" (Republic ct No. 9262). Ang problema mo, how do you prove na siya ang naghack ng emails mo (this is going to be very difficult).

 

As to using the info he has obtained against you, mahirap din naman niyang magamit yan. First he has to prove na sa yo yung email addy, tapos he has to prove na tunay yung emails. mahirap mag-authenticate ng emails. Tapos, may constitutional issues pa ng violation of privacy and correspondence.

 

 

 

hi

 

i have some simple questions (but a long story is behind these questions, though)

the questions:

 

1. Can I sue my estranged husband for hacking my emails?

 

2. isn't that offense (if indeed it is) a form of invasion of privacy?

 

3. can he use the information he has illegally obtained from hacking my emails against me?

 

thanks in advance for your time and bother, which would be very much appreciated here

[rocco69]

I forgot to mention, under the Zulueta v. CA case (253 SCRA 699) the Supreme Court has already ruled that documents and papers obtained by one spouse without the consent of the other is inadmissible in court. It said:

 

"The intimacies between husband and wife do not justify any one of them in breaking the drawers and cabinets of the other and in ransacking them for any telltale evidence of marital infidelity. A person, by contracting marriage, does not shed his/her integrity or his right to privacy as an individual and the constitutional protection is ever available to him or to her.

 

The law insures absolute freedom of communication between the spouses by making it privileged. Neither husband nor wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse while the marriage subsists. Neither may be examined without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage, save for specified exceptions. But one thing is freedom of communication; quite another is a compulsion for each one to share what one knows with the other."

 

Kaya, di talaga niya magagamit ang emails na yun.

 

Since you and your husband are estranged from each other, you could probably classify his acts as intimidation, stalking, and harassment, punishable under the "Violence Against Women and Children Act" (Republic ct No. 9262). Ang problema mo, how do you prove na siya ang naghack ng emails mo (this is going to be very difficult).

 

As to using the info he has obtained against you, mahirap din naman niyang magamit yan. First he has to prove na sa yo yung email addy, tapos he has to prove na tunay yung emails. mahirap mag-authenticate ng emails. Tapos, may constitutional issues pa ng violation of privacy and correspondence.

[Pinoymale]

thanks bossing. And another may rights ba sila na puntahan ka sa office mo at kausapin ang management? or puntahan ka sa house?

 

They have no right to talk to your superiors since they have nothing to do with your credit situation. That's already harrassment. They, however, may visit your house to discuss the situation and possibly work out a solution.

 

About your original question, companies will only litigate a credit problem as a last resort since they know it will be costly in terms of manpower, time, and other resources. Companies also take into consideration the amount involved and the chances that they can collect if they win the case. Companies usually write off relatively small amounts rather than tie themselves up in legal cases.

[Pinoymale]

another follow up

 

are sheriffs authorized to take the vehicle's registration papers, even if they already have the vehicle in custody...

i'am just wondering why would the sheriff ask me to meet up with him outside of court to ask for the vehicle's registration that they already have in custody... he was asking for the original registration but i only gave him a copy of it..

 

I think they are allowed to ask for the papers since there's a chance that your car will be auctioned off to buyers, hence, the need for the papers. At any rate, at least he only took the copy, not the original.

[BSmithREINVENTED]

rocco69, please accept my appreciation for spending time to reply to my questions.

the information you have shared are well taken. thank you.

but i could only heave a heavy sigh out of exasperation with the way things have turned with my failed marriage.

being alone working stiff in a foreign land because my (ex)husband is incapable of supporting the family, and he wouldn't stop pestering me with his immaturity... i don't know what now...

 

but thanks very much ha

 

 

 

 

I forgot to mention, under the Zulueta v. CA case (253 SCRA 699) the Supreme Court has already ruled that documents and papers obtained by one spouse without the consent of the other is inadmissible in court. It said:

 

"The intimacies between husband and wife do not justify any one of them in breaking the drawers and cabinets of the other and in ransacking them for any telltale evidence of marital infidelity. A person, by contracting marriage, does not shed his/her integrity or his right to privacy as an individual and the constitutional protection is ever available to him or to her.

 

The law insures absolute freedom of communication between the spouses by making it privileged. Neither husband nor wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse while the marriage subsists. Neither may be examined without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage, save for specified exceptions. But one thing is freedom of communication; quite another is a compulsion for each one to share what one knows with the other."

 

Kaya, di talaga niya magagamit ang emails na yun.

[BSmithREINVENTED]

corollary to my predicament about my failed marriage, is it an option for me to file for annulment of marriage even when i am not in the philippines?

 

i've been hearing about non-appearance/non-presence or something of that sort, and still the annulment pushes through in as little as 6 months. is this reality?

 

if this is presently being practised, i wonder if you could give me an idea about the cost range and what are the steps which i should take if i should decide to choose this option.

 

 

such a pain, this failed marriage takes so much out of one.

 

please help me find a solution. i really would like to be happy again.