This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2015-01-28 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| The decision to close one's business is a management prerogative that courts cannot interfere with.[35] Employers can "lawfully close shop at anytime,"[36] even for reasons of their own. "Just as no law forces anyone to go into business, no law can compel anybody to continue in it."[37] In Mac Adams Metal Engineering Workers Union-Independent v. Mac Adams Metal Engineering,[38] this court said: It would indeed be stretching the intent and spirit of the law if [courts] were to unjustly interfere with the management's prerogative to close or cease its business operations just because [the] business operation or undertaking is not suffering from any loss or simply to provide the workers continued employment.[39] | |||||
|
2013-08-14 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Closure of business, on one hand, is the reversal of fortune of the employer whereby there is a complete cessation of business operations and/or an actual locking-up of the doors of establishment, usually due to financial losses. Closure of business as an authorized cause for termination of employment aims to prevent further financial drain upon an employer who cannot pay anymore his employees since business has already stopped. On the other hand, retrenchment is reduction of personnel usually due to poor financial returns so as to cut down on costs of operations in terms of salaries and wages to prevent bankruptcy of the company. It is sometimes also referred to as down-sizing. Retrenchment is an authorized cause for termination of employment which the law accords an employer who is not making good in its operations in order to cut back on expenses for salaries and wages by laying off some employees. The purpose of retrenchment is to save a financially ailing business establishment from eventually collapsing.[16] | |||||
|
2013-07-24 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Likewise, the case of Eastridge Golf Club, Inc. v. Eastridge Golf Club, Inc., Labor-Union, Super[24] stressed the differences: Retrenchment or lay-off is the termination of employment initiated by the employer, through no fault of the employees and without prejudice to the latter, during periods of business recession, industrial depression, or seasonal fluctuations, or during lulls occasioned by lack of orders, shortage of materials, conversion of the plant for a new production program or the introduction of new methods or more efficient machinery, or of automation. It is an exercise of management prerogative which the Court upholds if compliant with certain substantive and procedural requirements, namely: | |||||
|
2010-09-29 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Said provision is emphatic that an employee, who was dismissed due to cessation of business operation, is entitled to the separation pay equivalent to one (1) month pay or at least one-half (1/2) month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher. And it is jurisprudential that separation pay should also be paid to employees even if the closure or cessation of operations is not due to losses.[25] | |||||