Employee Redeployment Policies: Last-In First-Out vs. Performance-Based in the Philippines

Employee Redeployment Policies: Last-In First-Out vs. Performance-Based in the Philippines
In the Philippine setting, employers have the prerogative to manage their workforce in a way that promotes operational efficiency, business viability, and compliance with labor laws. Situations often arise—due to economic downturns, organizational restructuring, automation, or other business exigencies—that compel an employer to downsize or reassign personnel to different roles or departments. In these cases, employee redeployment (or even retrenchment) policies come into focus. Two common criteria in such discussions are the “Last-In, First-Out” (LIFO) principle and performance-based (or merit-based) selection.

This article explores the legal bases, practices, and jurisprudence surrounding LIFO and performance-based redeployment (or selection for redundancy/retrenchment) in the Philippines.

1. Legal Framework for Workforce Reduction and Redeployment

1.1. The Labor Code of the Philippines

  • Authorized Causes for Termination
    The Labor Code (Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended) provides that an employer may validly terminate employment for “authorized causes,” which include redundancy (Art. 298, formerly Art. 283), retrenchment to prevent losses (Art. 298), closure or cessation of business operations (Art. 298), and installation of labor-saving devices (Art. 298).
  • Substantive Requirements
    To ensure that a termination is lawful, the employer must show (a) the existence of a valid or authorized cause and (b) that the dismissal or chosen method of workforce reduction is made in good faith and is not used to circumvent labor laws.
  • Procedural Requirements
    The Labor Code requires that both the employee(s) concerned and the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) be furnished with a written notice of termination at least 30 days before the intended date of effectivity. Separation pay must be given in accordance with the Labor Code’s prescriptions (e.g., one month’s pay or at least one month’s pay for every year of service, depending on the authorized cause).

1.2. DOLE Issuances

  • Department Order No. 147-15
    DOLE Department Order No. 147-15 outlines guidelines on the termination of employment, emphasizing due process. While it does not prescribe specific ranking mechanisms (like LIFO or performance-based criteria), it reiterates the need for good faith, a clear basis for selection, and avoidance of discrimination or unfair labor practices.

1.3. Supreme Court Jurisprudence

  • The Supreme Court has consistently held that while employers enjoy management prerogatives—including the right to choose who among employees shall be retained, separated, or reassigned—this prerogative is not absolute. The chosen scheme for selecting employees to be let go or redeployed must:
    1. Be based on fair and reasonable criteria.
    2. Be applied consistently and in good faith.
    3. Avoid targeting employees for illegal or discriminatory reasons (e.g., union activity, whistleblowing).

2. The “Last-In, First-Out” (LIFO) Principle

2.1. Definition

The “Last-In, First-Out” or LIFO principle posits that the most recently hired employees are the first to be let go or redeployed in the event of workforce reduction or reorganization. The underlying rationale is that employees with longer tenure presumably have:

  • More experience and institutional knowledge, and
  • A greater “equitable” claim to job security due to their length of service.

2.2. Legal and Practical Considerations

  1. Simplicity
    LIFO provides a straightforward, objective standard to determine who remains and who goes, minimizing disputes regarding favoritism or bias.
  2. Tenure Recognition
    Philippine labor laws and jurisprudence generally favor the protection of seniority and security of tenure. LIFO is therefore often seen as aligned with that principle.
  3. Potential Downsides
    • Performance Irrelevance: A purely LIFO-based approach may fail to account for individual performance, skill sets, or productivity levels.
    • Skill Retention: Employers may lose top-performing newer hires simply because they joined last.

2.3. Jurisprudential Support

  • The Supreme Court has recognized LIFO as a valid criterion in redundancy or retrenchment situations, provided it is not arbitrarily or selectively applied.
  • If an employer adopts LIFO, they must implement it consistently. Inconsistency or exceptions that single out certain employees for reasons unrelated to valid business concerns can be construed as bad faith.

3. Performance-Based Redeployment or Selection

3.1. Definition

Under a performance-based or merit-based approach, employees are assessed on objective performance metrics, such as productivity, output quality, disciplinary records, or specialized skill sets. Those deemed less productive or less critical to operations are typically the first to be considered for termination, re-assignment, or redundancy.

3.2. Legal and Practical Considerations

  1. Promotion of Meritocracy
    • By focusing on skills, competencies, and outcomes, an employer can potentially keep the best contributors, maintain operational efficiency, and mitigate losses in productivity.
  2. Objective Criteria
    • Employers must show that their performance metrics or selection standards are established, transparent, and consistently applied.
  3. Documentation and Good Faith
    • Employers must keep detailed records (e.g., performance evaluations, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)) to justify the selection and to defend against any allegation of unlawful discrimination or hidden motives.
  4. Risk of Legal Challenge
    • If the performance appraisal system is vague, inconsistently applied, or retroactively changed, employees may claim that the approach is a mere pretext for targeted dismissals.

3.3. Common Methods of Implementation

  • Performance Ratings and Appraisals: Employers often rely on formal evaluation systems, measuring employees’ performance over a set period.
  • Skills Inventory: A review of whether an employee’s skill set is deemed necessary or redundant in a restructured organization.
  • Behavioral and Disciplinary Records: Past sanctions or disciplinary actions can be taken into account, provided they are well-documented and relevant.

3.4. Jurisprudential Guidance

  • The Supreme Court has upheld performance-based selection if the employer can prove the process is rational, fair, and in good faith.
  • Poorly documented performance systems or systems introduced solely to justify immediate layoffs may be invalidated.
  • Discrimination based on protected traits (e.g., gender, union membership, age, disability) is prohibited, even if couched in “performance-based” language.

4. Balancing LIFO and Performance-Based Approaches

In practice, many Philippine employers adopt a hybrid approach, using tenure as one factor among many. For instance:

  1. Ranking System: Employers might use a composite score made up of performance ratings, years of service, skill relevance, and behavioral records.
  2. Restructuring Committees: Some companies create committees or working groups (with representatives from management, HR, and sometimes labor) to develop fair, transparent criteria and avoid legal pitfalls.
  3. Legal Consultation: Employers often consult labor lawyers or DOLE for guidelines on how best to structure a rational and good-faith selection process.

5. Notice Requirements and Separation Benefits

Whether an employer chooses LIFO or a performance-based method, the key statutory duties remain:

  1. Notice to the Affected Employees and DOLE
    • At least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice detailing the grounds for termination or redeployment.
  2. Separation Pay
    • For redundancy or retrenchment:
      • At least one month pay or one month pay for every year of service, whichever is higher (in redundancy cases).
      • The amounts differ depending on whether it is redundancy, retrenchment to prevent losses, or closure of business.
  3. Good Faith and Non-Discrimination
    • Good faith is paramount. The chosen policy must be free from arbitrariness, personal biases, or ulterior motives.

6. Potential Pitfalls and Best Practices

6.1. Pitfalls

  1. Arbitrary Application
    • Adopting LIFO but making exceptions without clear justifications can expose the employer to illegal dismissal claims.
  2. Lack of Objective Criteria
    • Using a performance-based system without adequate documentation or established metrics can undermine the employer’s position in labor disputes.
  3. Discrimination Allegations
    • If an employee belongs to a protected group (e.g., pregnant women, union officers) and is selected for termination, the employer must show the selection was not motivated by discriminatory reasons.
  4. Poor Communication
    • Vague or contradictory announcements about why certain employees were selected can cause mistrust and legal challenges.

6.2. Best Practices

  1. Develop Clear, Written Policies
    • Whether adopting LIFO, performance-based selection, or a hybrid model, outline the methodology in an internal policy manual or memorandum, ensuring consistency and transparency.
  2. Maintain Comprehensive Records
    • Keep performance appraisals, attendance records, and other relevant documents organized and readily available.
  3. Apply Policies Consistently
    • Apply the selected method uniformly to all employees within the scope of the redeployment or reduction, absent a valid, documented reason for exceptions.
  4. Conduct Trainings and Orientations
    • Educate both management and employees on the criteria, processes, and ramifications of the chosen policy.
  5. Consult with Stakeholders
    • In unionized workplaces, engage in collective bargaining or dialogues with the union to ensure the policy is acceptable and clearly understood by employees.

7. Dispute Resolution and Remedies

  1. Filing of Illegal Dismissal Complaints
    • Employees who believe they have been unjustly terminated or redeployed may file a complaint before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).
  2. Relief Granted by Labor Arbiters
    • If the dismissal is found illegal, employees may be entitled to reinstatement, backwages, and other damages, depending on the circumstances.
  3. Voluntary Arbitration / Mediation
    • The Labor Code encourages alternative dispute resolution. Parties may opt for mediation or voluntary arbitration to settle disputes amicably.

8. Conclusion

In the Philippines, employers retain broad but not unfettered discretion in deciding how to handle redundancy, retrenchment, and redeployment. The “Last-In, First-Out” approach and the performance-based approach are both acceptable, provided they are:

  1. Consistently applied,
  2. Supported by fair and objective criteria, and
  3. Implemented in good faith without violating labor standards.

Employers who choose LIFO typically highlight the importance of protecting senior employees, whereas those who opt for performance-based selection emphasize merit and operational efficiency. In many cases, a hybrid method—combining tenure, performance, and skill-based factors—may be the most equitable and defensible approach. Ultimately, clear documentation, transparent policies, and sincere adherence to good faith in implementation are the cornerstones for ensuring compliance with Philippine labor laws and jurisprudence.

Disclaimer

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific concerns or cases, it is always best to consult a licensed Philippine labor law practitioner or seek guidance from the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE).

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login