After Palace, senators reject 2-year proby period

    101

    A HOUSE bill seeking to prolong the probationary employment period to two years from the current six months will be “dead on arrival” at the Senate, minority leader Franklin Drilon said yesterday.

    “I will oppose its passage. If the House passes it, consider it DOA in the Senate. Hindi ito makatarungan. hindi makatwiran (This is not just, not fair),” Drilon told reporters
    Labor committee chair Sen. Joel Villanueva said the six-month probationary period under the Labor Code is enough to assess the fitness of an employee for regularization.

    “The six-month probationary period is the window of opportunity for employers to vet if the skills of the applicant meet their requirement. It is up to the employer to set performance indicators to determine if the applicant is the right fit for the job,” he said.

    Sen. Francis Pangilinan said the proposal may open the floodgates to greater abuse by employers, at the expense of the employees’ constitutional right to security of tenure.

    “Security of tenure of labor is a right recognized and protected by our Constitution.

    Lengthening the probationary period threefold prevents the worker from enjoying such a right under our Charter,” he said.

    To recall, Probinsyano Ako party-list Rep. Jose Singson Jr., filed House Bill No. 4802, in which he claimed the six-month period is no longer enough because of “the advent of technological advances in various industries” that require more training and assessment.

    He said the six-month period “limits the right of the employer to secure quality employees.”

    The Employers Confederation of the Philippines said it was still studying the proposal.

    Labor groups like Kilusang Mayo Uno, Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino, Nagkaisa, and Defend Job Philippines condemned Singson’s bill for being anti-worker.
    Malacañang on Sunday also rejected the proposal.