This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2012-11-21 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| One of the authorized causes for the dismissal of an employee,[20] redundancy exists when the service capability of the workforce is in excess of what is reasonably needed to meet the demands of the business enterprise.[21] A position is redundant when it is superfluous, and superfluity of a position or positions could be the result of a number of factors, such as the overhiring of workers, a decrease in the volume of business or the dropping of a particular line or service previously manufactured or undertaken by the enterprise.[22] Time and again, it has been ruled that an employer has no legal obligation to keep more employees than are necessary for the operation of its business.[23] For the implementation of a redundancy program to be valid, however, the employer must comply with the following requisites: (1) written notice served on both the employees and the DOLE at least one month prior to the intended date of termination of employment; (2) payment of separation pay equivalent to at least one month pay for every year of service; (3) good faith in abolishing the redundant positions; and (4) fair and reasonable criteria in ascertaining what positions are to be declared redundant and accordingly abolished.[24] | |||||
|
2011-08-03 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| With no other client aside from BGCC for the building management side of its business, we find that NHPI was acting well within its prerogatives when it eventually terminated Leynes' services on the ground of redundancy. One of the recognized authorized causes for the termination of employment, redundancy exists when the service capability of the workforce is in excess of what is reasonably needed to meet the demands of the business enterprise.[45] A redundant position is one rendered superfluous by any number of factors, such as overhiring of workers, decreased volume of business, dropping of a particular product line previously manufactured by the company or phasing out of service activity priorly undertaken by the business.[46] It has been held that the exercise of business judgment to characterize an employee's service as no longer necessary or sustainable is not subject to discretionary review where, as here, it is exercised there is no showing of violation of the law or arbitrariness or malice on the part of the employer.[47] An employer has no legal obligation to keep more employees than are necessary for the operation of its business.[48] | |||||
|
2009-08-14 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| The determination of the continuing necessity of a particular officer or position in a business corporation is a management prerogative, and the courts will not interfere unless arbitrary or malicious action on the part of management is shown.[25] It is also within the exclusive prerogative of management to determine the qualification and fitness of an employee for hiring and firing, promotion or reassignment.[26] Indeed, an employer has no legal obligation to keep more employees than are necessary for the operation of its business.[27] | |||||