Palace rejects 2-year probationary period

Published October 20, 2019, 1:18 PM

by Dr. Eduardo Gonzales

By Argyll Cyrus Geducos 

Malacañang sided with Labor Secretary Silvestre Bello III in rejecting the proposed bill in the House of Representatives seeking to extend the employment probation period from six months to two years.

Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo (PCOO / FILE PHOTO / MANILA BULLETIN)
Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo (PCOO / FILE PHOTO / MANILA BULLETIN)

Presidential Spokesman Salvador Panelo made the statement after Probinsyano Ako partylist Representative Jose Singson Jr. filed House Bill 4802 seeking to extend the said probationary period for employees.

Singson claimed that the current six-month period is insufficient for some employers to determine if a probationary employee is qualified for regular employment.

In a radio interview Sunday, Panelo said the Palace was one with Bello in rejecting the proposal.

“I agree with him kasi precisely nga kontra tayo sa ginagawang maniobra nila doon sa six months probational period tapos hahabaan mo pa (because we are even against some employers taking advantage of the six months probationary period and here comes a proposal seeking to prolong it),” he said.

According to Bello, the said House Bill violates a workers’ right to security of tenure. He, however, hoped that the Congress will not pass the proposed measure.

Panelo said that if Congress passes the measure, President Duterte would most likely veto it as it is against his stand against “endo” or the end of contract system.

“If that is the policy of the President then you don’t even need an assurance from him. It means, he will veto whatever law that goes against his pronounced policy,” he said.

In July this year, Duterte vetoed the Security of Tenure Bill because it “unduly broadens the scope and definition of prohibited labor-only contracting, effectively proscribing a form of contractualization that are not particularly unfavorable to the employees involved.”

Duterte said that while he stands by his firm commitment to protecting the workers’ right to security of tenure by eradicating all forms of abusive employment practices, legitimate job contracting should be allowed, provided that the contractor is well capitalized, has sufficient investments, and affords its employees all the benefits provided for under the labor laws.

Read more: DOLE rejects proposed extension of ‘probi’ period