Termination Without a Contract: Legal Considerations and Recourse Under Philippine Law

Letter to a Lawyer

Dear Attorney,

I am seeking legal advice regarding my situation at work. I have been employed by a supplier starting on August 24. However, I was not given a formal employment contract. Despite this, I have been working since that date. Yesterday, I was dismissed without any prior discussion or notice. Given that I had already been performing my duties, I want to know if I have any legal grounds to contest this termination. What are my rights under Philippine labor laws in a case like mine, where there is no written contract, but I had already started working? Do I have a valid claim against the employer?

Thank you for your guidance.

Sincerely,
An Aggrieved Worker


Philippine Labor Law: Legal Recourse for Workers Dismissed Without a Contract

Under Philippine law, employment relationships are not solely defined by the existence of a written contract. The absence of a formal contract does not strip an employee of their legal rights. In fact, workers who have rendered services under an employer can still be entitled to the same protections and benefits as those who have formal employment agreements, including protection against unjust dismissal.

This article aims to explore the legal protections afforded to workers who find themselves in a situation where they have been terminated without a contract, and the steps they may take to enforce their rights.

1. The Employment Relationship and the Concept of a Contract Under Philippine Law

In the Philippines, the Labor Code recognizes the concept of an employment relationship even in the absence of a formal, written contract. Article 82 of the Labor Code defines an employee as any person who performs work or renders service to an employer, provided that the employer controls both the result of the work and the means and methods used to achieve that result. This definition highlights that the existence of an employment relationship depends on the nature of the working arrangement rather than on the presence of a formal document.

Thus, even in cases where an employee has not signed a contract, as long as they have already started performing their duties, an employment relationship is presumed to exist. This means that the employer is still bound by the duties and obligations imposed by law on all employers, regardless of whether a contract has been signed.

2. The Doctrine of Constructive Employment

In situations where no formal contract exists, the doctrine of constructive employment becomes applicable. This principle emphasizes that an employment relationship may be implied from the actual work performed by the employee and the acceptance of that work by the employer. By allowing the employee to work and accepting the fruits of that labor, the employer is effectively acknowledging the existence of an employer-employee relationship.

This principle is supported by several Supreme Court rulings, which have reiterated that an employer cannot evade labor law obligations by refusing to provide a formal contract. What matters most is the performance of work, the receipt of wages, and the control exercised by the employer over the worker.

For instance, in the landmark case of Samson vs. NLRC (G.R. No. 121035, 1997), the Supreme Court ruled that the lack of a written contract does not preclude the existence of an employment relationship, so long as the employer exercised control over the employee’s work. Therefore, if an employee works without a written contract, the law still affords them the rights and protections granted to all employees under the Labor Code.

3. Security of Tenure and Termination of Employment

A fundamental principle enshrined in Philippine labor law is the right to security of tenure. Article 279 of the Labor Code provides that an employee cannot be dismissed without just cause or due process. This protection applies to all employees, whether or not they have a written contract, as long as they are already performing their job duties.

In cases of termination, employers must satisfy two essential requirements:

  • Just Cause: The employer must have a valid reason for dismissing the employee. Under Article 282 of the Labor Code, just causes include serious misconduct, gross and habitual neglect of duties, fraud, willful disobedience of lawful orders, and commission of a crime against the employer or a co-worker, among others.

  • Due Process: The employer must follow the proper procedural steps before terminating an employee. This includes giving the employee a written notice specifying the cause of termination and allowing them to respond to the allegations in a hearing or conference.

In cases where an employer terminates an employee without just cause or without following due process, the dismissal is considered illegal. An illegally dismissed employee is entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights, and payment of full back wages, among other remedies.

4. Termination Without a Contract: Possible Legal Recourse

In the situation described, where an employee has been dismissed without a written contract, but after having rendered work since August 24, the employee may have a solid basis to file a complaint for illegal dismissal. The following legal avenues are available:

a. Filing a Complaint for Illegal Dismissal

If the employee believes they were unjustly dismissed, they may file a complaint for illegal dismissal with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) or the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). The complaint must allege that the termination was without just cause and that due process was not followed.

The employee can seek reinstatement to their former position without loss of seniority rights and full back wages from the time of dismissal until the date of reinstatement. Alternatively, if reinstatement is no longer feasible due to strained relations or other factors, the employee can opt for separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, plus back wages.

b. Compensation for Lost Benefits

In addition to reinstatement or separation pay, the employee may also seek compensation for any benefits they would have been entitled to had they continued working. This could include unpaid wages, pro-rated 13th-month pay, service incentive leave, and other monetary benefits.

The absence of a written contract does not exempt the employer from complying with the statutory requirements regarding employee compensation. An employer is required by law to pay wages, grant 13th-month pay, and provide other benefits, regardless of whether these are explicitly stated in a contract.

c. Claiming Unjust Dismissal Without Due Process

Even if the employer has just cause for termination, the failure to observe due process in dismissing an employee can render the dismissal illegal. In the case of Agabon vs. NLRC (G.R. No. 158693, 2004), the Supreme Court ruled that a dismissal, even if for just cause, would still be illegal if procedural due process was not followed.

If due process was not observed in the employee’s dismissal, they could claim damages in addition to back wages or separation pay. Nominal damages may be awarded to compensate for the employer’s failure to comply with procedural due process requirements.

5. Employer’s Perspective: Defense Against Claims of Illegal Dismissal

From the employer’s side, the key defense in a claim of illegal dismissal is the presence of just cause for terminating the employee. Employers may argue that the dismissal was due to one of the just causes enumerated in Article 282 of the Labor Code. They must present evidence supporting the allegations, such as performance records, disciplinary notices, or other documentation that demonstrates the employee’s misconduct, negligence, or violation of company policies.

However, the employer must also prove that the proper due process was observed. This involves showing that the employee was given notice of the charges against them and afforded the opportunity to be heard. Failure to observe due process, even if there is just cause, could still lead to the employer being liable for damages or compensation.

6. Absence of Contract and Probationary Employment

If the employee had been working for less than six months, the employer might argue that the employee was under probationary employment. Probationary employees can be dismissed for failing to meet the standards set by the employer, provided these standards were made known to the employee at the time of hiring. However, even probationary employees are entitled to due process, and they cannot be dismissed arbitrarily.

In the case of Carvajal vs. Luzon Development Bank (G.R. No. 186169, 2010), the Supreme Court ruled that probationary employees, just like regular employees, are entitled to security of tenure and cannot be dismissed without just cause or due process.

Conclusion

In summary, even without a written contract, an employee who has rendered work is protected under Philippine labor law. If they are dismissed without just cause or without due process, they can file a complaint for illegal dismissal and seek remedies such as reinstatement, back wages, or separation pay. Philippine labor laws are designed to ensure that employees are not deprived of their rights, even in the absence of formal agreements, as long as an employment relationship exists.

The employee in this case has a viable claim and should consider seeking legal counsel to pursue the appropriate legal action.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.