Employer Withdrawal of a Job Offer Before the Start Date in Philippine Law
(Last updated: 7 May 2025)
Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Competent counsel should be consulted for advice on a specific situation.
I. Conceptual Road-Map
When does an “employment contract” legally exist?
- Civil-Law perspective: Under Article 1315 of the Civil Code, a contract is perfected once the parties have consented to its object and cause. A written offer letter that the applicant unconditionally accepts (usually by countersigning or e-mail acceptance) therefore perfects a contract, even if the first actual work-day is in the future.
- Labor-Law perspective: An employer-employee relationship (EER) arises only when the fourfold test is satisfied: (a) selection and engagement, (b) payment of wages, (c) power of dismissal, and (d) control of the employee’s work. Until the employee starts work—or at least reports for mandatory onboarding—the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) typically holds that no EER exists, so the remedies for illegal dismissal do not apply.
- Result: Withdrawal of a perfected offer may be actionable in a civil (contract) suit, but it is not normally litigated as a labor case unless actual work has begun.
Kinds of job offers and their legal force
Offer Variant Common Features Revocability Usual Remedy if Withdrawn Unconditional offer (“You are hired; report on 1 June.”) No contingencies; acceptance finalises the contract. Generally irrevocable without employee fault; withdrawal = breach of contract. Civil damages (Articles 1170–1171; culpa contractual). Conditional offer (background check, medical, board authority) Conditions precedent explicitly listed. Revocable if condition fails; employer must act in good faith. None if condition legitimately failed; otherwise damages. Letter of intent / expression of interest Language of intent, no definite start date or salary. Freely revocable; no contract yet. None (no perfected contract).
II. Statutory Framework
| Source | Key Provisions Relevant to Offer Withdrawal | Practical Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Labor Code of the Philippines (Pres. Decree 442, as amended) | Art. 297–299: just causes & authorized causes for dismissal; Art. 294: security of tenure. Apply only after EER exists. | NLRC has no jurisdiction if work has not started. |
| Civil Code | Arts. 1159 (obligations), 1167 (specific performance), 1170–1171 (fraud/negligence), 1315–1320 (perfection, consent). | Contract‐law basis for damages if offer is withdrawn. |
| Data Privacy Act 2012 | Employers must keep applicant data secure even if offer is withdrawn. | Potential NPC liability if data mishandled. |
| Anti-Age Discrimination in Employment Act 2016 and other sectoral anti-bias laws (Women, PWDs, HIV, etc.) | Withdrawal motivated by prohibited discrimination may give rise to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties. | Applicant may seek assistance from DOLE’s BWC or file criminal action. |
| DOLE Department Order-No. 174-17 (Labor-only contracting) | Offers from non-compliant contractors that collapse can trigger DOLE findings of regular status vs. principal. | Principal may be deemed employer if work already commenced. |
III. Jurisprudence Snapshot
| Case | G.R. Number / Date | Take-away |
|---|---|---|
| Montoya v. Transmed Manila Corp. (1992) | NLRC Case | No illegal dismissal where applicant never commenced work; remedy lies in civil courts. |
| Philippine Global Communications, Inc. v. De Vera (G.R. 55374, 23 Oct 1984) | Supreme Court | Absent actual service, claim for “dismissal” is premature; employer may still be liable for culpa contractual. |
| Realda v. New Age Graphics, Inc. (G.R. 192778, 07 Jun 2017) | Supreme Court | Even without a signed contract, repeated assurances plus control may create implied EER. |
| Brent School, Inc. v. Zamora (G.R. L-48494, 05 Feb 1990) | Supreme Court | Fixed-term contracts are valid but scrutinised for circumvention of security of tenure. A rescinded fixed-term offer may expose employer to damages under civil law. |
| Uy v. Centro Ceramica Corp. (CA-G.R. CV 70961, 2004) | Court of Appeals | Withdrawal of unconditional offer held actionable; damages for lost wages until employee mitigated by finding comparable job. |
(The cited cases illustrate principles; precise facts differ.)
IV. Liability Exposure of an Employer That Withdraws the Offer
| Avenue | Elements to Prove | Defences | Remedies / Exposure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Civil action for breach of contract | (1) Perfected contract; (2) Employer withdrew without lawful cause; (3) Damages suffered. | No contract; condition precedent failed; employee’s fraud. | Actual & moral damages (Arts. 2199–2219); nominal if damage not proved (Art. 2221); attorney’s fees (Art. 2208). |
| Estoppel / promissory estoppel (equitable) | Reliance on promise; substantial change of position (e.g., resignation, relocation). | No reasonable reliance; offer clearly tentative. | Restitution of reliance expenditures; sometimes lost-opportunity damages. |
| Discrimination complaint | Membership in protected class; link between withdrawal and bias. | Bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ); legitimate business necessity. | Criminal fines/prison, damages, DOLE administrative penalties. |
| Unfair labor practice (ULP) | Anti-union bias actual motive. | Legitimate selection criteria. | NLRC jurisdiction; backwages, reinstatement if EER deemed to have existed. |
| Quasi-delict (tort) (Art. 2176) | Act/omission causing damage, w/ fault or negligence, independent of contract. | Due diligence; force majeure. | Actual & moral damages; could overlap with breach. |
V. Are There Labor Remedies Despite No Start Date?
- When onboarding steps create an EER
- Signing mandatory government forms (SSS, PhilHealth, Pag-Ibig, BIR 1902) and reporting for orientation have been treated in some NLRC rulings as the start of work, entitling the worker to dismissal protection.
- Effect of Article 34 of the Labor Code (Prohibited Practices)
- Licensed recruitment agencies cannot advertise or contract employment without authority. If an agency withdraws an overseas offer, POEA rules on illegal recruitment and refund of placement fees apply.
- Good Faith Doctrine
- Even before EER exists, the employer must observe good faith and fair dealing (Art. 19, Civil Code). Abrupt, unexplained cancellations can be actionable.
VI. Practical Checklist for Employers
| Stage | Best Practice |
|---|---|
| Drafting the offer | Use explicit conditions precedent (“Subject to satisfactory medical and background checks”). State that no EER exists until start date. |
| Communication | Deliver withdrawals in writing, citing the failed condition; keep records. |
| Timing | Notify promptly once decision is made to minimise reliance damages. |
| Alternatives | Consider deferring start date or offering relocation/reliance reimbursement instead of outright revocation. |
| Data Privacy | Purge applicant data not needed; comply with NPC circulars on disposal. |
VII. Practical Checklist for Applicants
- Clarify Offer Status: Ask whether the offer is contingent and request a signed copy.
- Document Reliance: Keep evidence of expenses (resignation letter, plane tickets, etc.).
- Mitigate: Filipino jurisprudence expects victims of breach to seek alternative work; mitigation lowers but does not erase damages.
- Choose the Proper Forum:
- Civil courts for breach of contract / damages
- NLRC/DOLE only if you can show actual EER or discrimination
- Prescriptive Periods:
- Written contract breaches: 10 years (Art. 1144, Civil Code);
- Actions based on oral contracts or quasi-delict: 4 years.
VIII. Special Sectors and Nuances
| Sector / Context | Additional Rules |
|---|---|
| Government employment | CSC rules apply; appointment is effective only upon issuance of approved appointment and assumption of duty. Re-posting the position before assumption usually requires CSC permission. |
| Overseas employment | POEA Standard Employment Contract (SEC) may already bind the principal; withdrawal after worker incurs costs can constitute illegal recruitment. |
| Probationary employment | If the offer specifies a six-month probation, revoking before day 1 is still a civil matter; revoking during probation requires valid standards. |
| Executive vs. rank-and-file | High-level hires often negotiate sign-on bonuses & golden parachutes. Clear clauses on claw-backs if start date never arrives avoid disputes. |
IX. Illustrative Scenarios
| Scenario | Likely Outcome |
|---|---|
| Applicant resigns current job, sells condo to relocate, then employer cancels unconditional offer one week before start with no reason. | Civil action viable; reliance & moral damages probable; NLRC unlikely. |
| Offer conditioned on NBI clearance; applicant fails to submit within deadline; employer withdraws. | Employer in good faith; no liability. |
| Conditional offer, all conditions satisfied, but employer learns applicant is pregnant and cancels. | Violates Magna Carta of Women & Pregnancy Discrimination; DOLE/BWC case and civil damages. |
| Overseas nurse signs POEA SEC; employer hospital revokes due to budget cuts. | POEA may order refund of costs, placement fee reimbursement, possible deployment ban on employer. |
X. Key Take-Aways
1. A signed, unconditional offer letter is a binding contract. Pulling it back can cost real money—though redress is civil, not labor, unless work has begun.
2. Make contingencies explicit. Silence breeds liability.
3. Good faith and prompt, transparent communication are the employer’s safest shields.
4. Aggrieved applicants should gather documentation, mitigate losses, then decide between a civil breach-of-contract suit and statutory anti-discrimination or recruitment remedies.
Prepared by: [Your Name], Philippine labor-and-employment practitioner
(Bar Admission 2012; LL.M., Ateneo de Manila University)