1) Why this topic matters

Probationary employment is meant to test whether an employee is fit for regular employment under reasonable standards. Because probation is time-limited and often ends without much documentation, disputes commonly arise when an employer terminates a probationary employee without any clear performance evaluation, feedback trail, or proof that standards were communicated and fairly applied.

In the Philippines, the legality of terminating a probationary employee does not hinge on the label “probationary” alone. It hinges on (a) the lawful ground, (b) the employer’s communicated standards, and (c) observance of due process. A missing performance evaluation can be a major weakness in the employer’s case—sometimes even fatal—depending on what else exists.

2) Core legal framework for probationary employment

A. What makes employment “probationary”

Under the Labor Code framework (commonly cited as Article 296 [formerly 281] in many references), probationary employment:

Must not exceed six (6) months, unless covered by special rules (e.g., teaching personnel) or unless the job’s nature reasonably requires a different period and it is properly stipulated and consistent with applicable regulations.
Must be governed by reasonable standards for regularization made known to the employee at the time of engagement.

B. The “standards must be made known” rule

A central doctrine in Philippine labor law: If the employer fails to inform the employee of the regularization standards at the time of engagement, the employee may be treated as regular from day one, and termination becomes subject to the stricter “regular employee” framework (i.e., termination only for just/authorized causes with full procedural requirements and employer’s burden of proof).

“Standards” are not limited to a generic statement like “meet company expectations.” They should be job-related, measurable or observable, and communicated (contract, job description, handbook, KPIs, performance plan, onboarding materials, etc.).

3) Lawful grounds for terminating a probationary employee

An employer may terminate a probationary employee for either:

(1) Just causes (misconduct-type grounds)

Examples include serious misconduct, willful disobedience, gross and habitual neglect, fraud, commission of a crime against the employer or co-workers, and analogous causes. These require substantive basis + procedural due process (the “two-notice rule” and opportunity to be heard).

(2) Failure to qualify as a regular employee under reasonable standards

This is the “probationary-specific” ground: the employee did not meet the standards for regularization that were made known at engagement.

Even for this ground, the employer must be able to show:

the standards existed,
they were communicated on time,
they were reasonable and job-related, and
the employee failed to meet them based on evidence.

(3) Authorized causes (business/economic grounds)

Redundancy, retrenchment, closure, disease, etc. These have their own rules (including 30-day notice to employee and DOLE, plus separation pay when required). The fact that someone is probationary does not automatically remove these requirements.

4) Where “no performance evaluation” fits in legally

Key point: A written performance evaluation is not always explicitly required by statute

Philippine labor law does not universally mandate a specific form called a “performance evaluation.” However, when the reason is failure to meet standards, the employer must prove the employee’s failure, and a performance evaluation (or equivalent evidence) is one of the most common ways to do that.

So the absence of any evaluation is often important not because “evaluation is mandatory,” but because:

It suggests the employer may have no reliable basis to claim failure.
It may indicate the standards were not defined or not communicated.
It supports an inference of arbitrariness, bad faith, or pretext.
It weakens the employer’s claim that the employee was given a fair chance to qualify.

What can count as “evaluation evidence” besides a formal rating sheet

Employers sometimes prove probationary failure using other documentation, such as:

written coaching memos,
emails with performance issues and targets,
KPI dashboards,
QA scores (BPO/call centers),
error logs, incident reports,
customer complaints with investigation results,
attendance/tardiness records,
training assessments or certification outcomes.

If none of these exist—and the employer simply says “did not meet expectations”—that is usually a red flag.

5) The two most powerful legal angles in “no evaluation” cases

Angle A: Standards were not properly communicated

Ask: Were the regularization standards clearly provided at the time of engagement?

Common problems:

Contract only says “probationary for 6 months,” but no standards.
Standards were given later, after hiring, or only verbally.
Standards are vague (“must be competent,” “must meet expectations”).
Standards are in a handbook not actually provided or acknowledged.

If standards were not communicated at engagement, you may argue:

You were effectively regular from the start; or at minimum,
Termination for “failure to qualify” is defective because the standards requirement was not satisfied.

Angle B: Employer cannot prove actual failure to meet standards

Even if standards exist, the employer must show you failed them. Without evaluation records or other objective proof, the employer may not meet the burden of evidence.

Indicators that the “failure” claim is questionable:

No written evaluation, no coaching, no corrective plan, no metrics.
No contemporaneous records showing poor performance.
Termination happens suddenly near the end of probation without prior feedback.
You received praise/messages suggesting acceptable performance.
You were assigned normal workloads like regular employees without documented deficiencies.

6) Due process: what procedure is required for probationary termination

A. If the ground is just cause

The employer generally must observe:

First written notice (charges/grounds + supporting facts),
Opportunity to explain (hearing/conference if requested or necessary),
Second written notice (decision to dismiss + reasons).

Failure here can make the dismissal procedurally defective, with monetary consequences and sometimes a finding of illegal dismissal depending on the circumstances and rulings applied.

B. If the ground is failure to meet probationary standards

Philippine practice strongly expects at least:

Notice of the reason and
A fair opportunity to respond or improve, especially where the standards involve performance that can be corrected.

Many employers also provide written notice of non-regularization on or before the end of probation. If the employer gave no written notice and no basis, that often supports a challenge.

C. If the ground is an authorized cause

The employer must comply with:

30-day written notice to the employee and DOLE (for many authorized causes), and
Separation pay where required.

7) Burden of proof and how labor tribunals usually view these cases

In illegal dismissal cases, the employer bears the burden to prove:

the dismissal was for a valid cause, and
due process was observed.

In probationary “failure to qualify” cases, the employer’s burden commonly includes showing:

proof that standards were made known at engagement, and
proof of the employee’s failure based on evidence.

“No performance evaluation” matters because it often means the employer’s proof is weak or purely conclusory.

8) Typical employer defenses—and how “no evaluation” interacts

Defense: “Probationary employees can be terminated anytime.”

Response: Not “anytime for any reason.” Termination must be for a lawful cause (just cause, authorized cause, or failure to meet communicated standards) and must comply with due process.

Defense: “Standards are in the handbook.”

Key questions:

Did you actually receive it at engagement?
Did you sign an acknowledgment?
Are the standards specific to your position?
Are they reasonable and measurable?

Defense: “We gave verbal feedback.”

Verbal feedback may be considered, but tribunals often prefer contemporaneous written records. Purely verbal claims are easier to contest, especially if the employee can show contrary evidence (messages, outputs, awards, lack of memos, etc.).

Defense: “We don’t do formal evaluations during probation.”

Even if true, the employer still must prove a factual basis for “failure.” If their own system produces no records, they may struggle to meet evidentiary burdens.

9) Evidence checklist for employees challenging termination without evaluation

A. Documents to gather

Employment contract and any annexes (job description, KPIs, standards).
Employee handbook/code of conduct + acknowledgment forms.
Emails/chats about performance, targets, praise, complaints, coaching.
Work outputs: reports, tickets closed, QA scores, productivity logs.
Attendance records, schedules, timekeeping summaries (if relevant).
Training materials, test results, certifications, endorsements.
Memo/notice of termination or non-regularization (or proof none was served).
Payslips, company IDs, onboarding documents.

B. Witness and narrative evidence

Co-workers who observed your work quality or lack of coaching.
Team leads who gave positive feedback.
Timeline of events: onboarding, assignments, feedback, sudden termination.

A clean, dated timeline can be as important as documents.

10) Where and how to challenge the termination (Philippines)

A. SEnA (Single Entry Approach) at DOLE

Most employment disputes begin with SEnA, a mandatory conciliation-mediation mechanism designed to settle quickly. If unresolved, the matter proceeds to the appropriate forum.

B. NLRC/Labor Arbiter: Illegal dismissal complaint

For termination disputes, the usual route is a complaint for:

Illegal dismissal (or illegal termination/non-regularization), plus money claims.

The case typically involves:

Filing of complaint,
Mandatory conferences,
Submission of position papers with evidence,
Decision by the Labor Arbiter,
Possible appeal to the NLRC, and further review to higher courts on limited grounds.

C. Remedies if you win (typical)

Depending on findings:

Reinstatement (or separation pay in lieu in some situations),
Full backwages from dismissal up to reinstatement/finality (subject to the rules applied in the decision),
Payment of unpaid wages, 13th month pay differentials, etc.
In certain cases, damages/attorney’s fees if bad faith or oppressive conduct is shown (case-specific).

11) Common fact patterns and how tribunals tend to analyze them

Pattern 1: No standards in contract + no evaluation

This is one of the strongest employee scenarios. The argument often becomes:

Standards were not made known at engagement → probationary termination for failure to qualify is defective.

Pattern 2: Standards exist but are generic + no metrics/evaluation

Case often turns on whether standards were “reasonable” and sufficiently communicated. Generic standards plus no records of failure can still favor the employee.

Pattern 3: Metrics exist (e.g., QA scores) but no formal evaluation sheet

Employer may still win if it can show objective performance data and communication of targets. The lack of a formal evaluation is less damaging if other evidence is strong.

Pattern 4: Termination for “attitude” or “culture fit” with no incidents documented

This is frequently challenged as vague or pretextual unless backed by incident reports, written warnings, or specific behavioral standards communicated early.

12) Practical litigation strategy in “no evaluation” cases

A. Build the case around 3 pillars

Standards communication failure (if applicable),
No proof of failure (lack of evaluation/records),
Procedural defects (no notice/opportunity to respond).

You do not need all three to win, but having multiple strengthens the case.

B. Focus your position paper on provable points

Quote the contract portions showing absence/vagueness of standards.
Show the absence of memos/coaching and present your outputs/metrics.
Provide a clear timeline and attach documents as numbered annexes.

C. Anticipate what the employer will present

If the employer suddenly produces evaluation forms created near termination, scrutinize:

dates,
signatures/acknowledgments,
whether you were given a copy,
consistency with your actual tasks,
whether the standards were provided at engagement.

13) Special notes for specific sectors

A. Private school teachers

Probation and regularization rules may be affected by education regulations (often involving longer probation/tenure evaluation systems than the standard 6 months), and the standards and evaluation framework may be more formalized. The absence of required evaluations can be especially significant in these contexts.

B. Fixed-term and project employment confusion

Some employers mix labels (project/probationary/fixed-term). The real nature of employment depends on:

the work,
the contract terms,
actual practice,
and legal criteria for project/fixed-term engagements.

Misclassification can change the legal analysis dramatically.

14) What to write in a well-structured complaint narrative (conceptually)

A strong narrative is typically factual, chronological, and avoids conclusions unless supported:

Date hired; position; probationary clause.
What standards (if any) were provided at hiring—attach proof or note the absence.
Work assignments; training; outputs; any praise or lack of negative feedback.
Absence of performance evaluation/coaching and absence of warnings.
How termination was communicated; what reason was stated; whether you were given notice/opportunity to respond.
Damages and relief prayed for (reinstatement/backwages or separation pay in lieu, plus money claims if any).

15) Key takeaways

Probationary status does not allow dismissal at will.
For “failure to qualify,” the employer must show reasonable standards that were made known at engagement and prove actual failure.
A missing performance evaluation is often powerful because it highlights a lack of proof and can support arguments of non-communication of standards, arbitrariness, and procedural unfairness.
The employer generally bears the burden to prove the dismissal was valid and procedurally compliant.
The usual path is SEnA then NLRC/Labor Arbiter if unresolved, with remedies that can include reinstatement and backwages depending on findings.

Reference points commonly cited in Philippine labor disputes on probationary termination (non-exhaustive)

Labor Code provisions on probationary employment (commonly referenced as Art. 296 [formerly Art. 281] in many materials)
Labor Code provisions on just causes and authorized causes
Jurisprudence emphasizing that standards must be made known at the time of engagement (often associated with leading Supreme Court rulings on probationary employment standards and burden of proof)

If you want, describe your fact pattern (dates, what your contract says about standards, what reason was written in the termination notice, and what records exist). I can turn it into a structured issue-spotter and argument outline aligned with NLRC-style position papers.