1) Why this issue exists: the “6-month myth” and the reality of security of tenure

In Philippine labor law, regularization is not something an employer “grants” at will after a calendar date. It is often a legal consequence that happens by operation of law when the facts fit the Labor Code’s definitions of employment status—especially regular employment.

Many disputes arise from workplace practices like:

repeated 5-month or 6-month contracts;
repeated “probationary” contracts;
“end of contract” termination followed by re-hiring;
short breaks inserted between contracts; and
labeling people as “project,” “seasonal,” “fixed-term,” “casual,” or “agency” workers even when the nature of work suggests otherwise.

The Constitution and the Labor Code strongly protect security of tenure: an employee who is regular cannot be dismissed except for just cause or authorized cause and with due process.

2) The core legal rule: Regular employment under Article 295 (formerly Article 280)

Article 295 [Regular Employment] of the Labor Code (formerly Article 280) is the central provision. It provides two main paths to regular status:

A. Regular by nature of work (“necessary or desirable”)

An employee is generally regular when hired to perform activities usually necessary or desirable in the employer’s usual business or trade—unless the employee is:

a project employee (employment tied to a specific project/undertaking with a determinable completion), or
a seasonal employee (work tied to a season), or
otherwise validly employed under a recognized category (e.g., a truly valid fixed-term arrangement under jurisprudence).

This is often the strongest basis against repeated short-term contracting: if the job is core to the business (e.g., cashier in retail, line cook in a restaurant, warehouse picker in a distribution firm), repeatedly contracting it short-term does not change the nature of the work.

B. Regular by length of service (one-year rule for casuals)

Even if someone starts as casual (work not usually necessary/desirable), the Labor Code provides that a casual employee who has rendered at least one year of service—whether continuous or broken—with respect to the activity they are engaged in becomes regular with respect to that activity.

3) Probationary employment: the 6-month rule that’s often abused

Probationary employment is covered by Article 296 (formerly Article 281). Key points:

A. Maximum period is generally 6 months

The general rule: probationary employment shall not exceed six (6) months from the date the employee started working, unless an apprenticeship/learnership arrangement or specific rules justify a different period.

B. Standards for regularization must be made known at hiring

A classic requirement: the employee must be informed of the reasonable standards for becoming regular at the time of engagement. If the employer fails to do so, probationary status becomes legally vulnerable.

C. What happens after 6 months

If the employee is allowed to work after the probationary period, the employee is deemed regular.

D. “Resetting” probation via repeated probationary contracts

A common scheme is issuing a second “probationary” contract after the first ends, as if the employee is back to day 1. Courts typically look at the substance over the label. If the work and role continued and the arrangement appears designed to avoid regularization, it is legally risky for the employer and often favorable to the employee’s claim of regular status.

Important nuance: Employers may terminate a probationary employee for (1) failure to meet standards, or (2) just/authorized causes, with due process. But using successive probationary contracts to keep someone perpetually on trial contradicts the protective purpose of probation.

4) Fixed-term employment: legally possible, but heavily policed

Philippine jurisprudence recognizes fixed-term employment (often associated with Brent School, Inc. v. Zamora). A fixed-term contract is not automatically illegal. However, courts scrutinize it to ensure it is not used to defeat security of tenure.

Indicators that a fixed-term arrangement may be upheld:

The fixed period was knowingly and voluntarily agreed upon (no coercion, no disguised compulsion).
The employee and employer dealt on more equal footing (not always literal equality, but the employee wasn’t forced into it as the only way to work).
The fixed term was not imposed specifically to avoid regularization.

Red flags that can make fixed-term contracts vulnerable:

The work is clearly necessary and desirable to the business, performed continuously, and the employee is repeatedly rehired on back-to-back fixed terms.
The employer uses standardized short-term contracts across rank-and-file roles as a system.
The “end of contract” termination is followed by routine renewal, suggesting the job is ongoing and the term is merely a device.

Practical consequence: Even if a contract says “6 months only,” the real question is whether the arrangement is a genuine fixed-term engagement or a workaround against regular employment.

5) Project employment: common label, strict evidentiary requirements

Project employment is valid when employment is tied to a specific project or undertaking and ends when the project ends or the phase is completed.

What employers must generally show for a valid project employee classification:

The employee was informed at hiring that they are project-based.
The project and its scope are defined.
The employment is coterminous with the project or phase.
(Common in disputes) documentation supports project assignment and completion.

How “project” becomes doubtful:

The employee performs roles that are ongoing and not genuinely project-limited (e.g., regular production line work in a factory).
The employee is continuously rehired for “projects” that look like ordinary business operations.
There is no credible linkage between termination and actual project completion.

Repeated engagements can still be valid in real project industries (construction, EPC, certain IT implementations), but courts look at whether the “project” is authentic or a label pasted onto regular work.

6) Seasonal employment: repeated seasons can still mean regular—regular seasonal

Seasonal work (e.g., sugar milling season, harvest-related operations) can be legitimate. However, jurisprudence recognizes the concept of a regular seasonal employee: a worker repeatedly engaged every season for the same work may acquire a form of regularity tied to that seasonal cycle.

Key idea: the recurring need every season can evidence that the worker is part of the employer’s regular seasonal workforce, even if not continuously working year-round.

7) The “5-5-5” / “endo” pattern: how the law looks at repeated short contracts

A common pattern:

Contract for 5 months (or sometimes 6 months framed as “probationary” or “fixed-term”),
Terminate at “end of contract,”
Rehire after a short break, repeat.

A. Labels don’t control; the nature of work and reality do

Philippine labor law is substance-driven. If the employee performs tasks that are necessary and desirable, repeated contracting may not prevent regular status.

B. “Breaks” between contracts may be disregarded if used to evade rights

The law recognizes that service may be continuous or broken in certain contexts (notably for the one-year rule for casuals). Even outside that, tribunals often examine whether breaks were inserted to avoid regularization rather than for legitimate operational reasons.

C. Expiration of a contract is not a magic shield

“End of contract” is not automatically a valid termination defense if the contract type itself is found to be a device. If the worker is deemed regular, ending the relationship because the paper contract ended can amount to illegal dismissal.

8) Contracting/subcontracting and agency arrangements: who is the employer, and can regularization happen?

Many repeated 6-month arrangements appear through manpower agencies or contractors.

A. Legitimate job contracting (generally allowed, regulated)

Under DOLE rules (commonly associated with Department Order No. 174, series of 2017), legitimate contracting requires the contractor to be a real business with:

substantial capital or investment,
control over the manner and means of doing the work (not merely supplying warm bodies),
and compliance with labor standards.

In legitimate contracting:

the worker is typically an employee of the contractor, not the principal,
but the principal may have obligations as an indirect employer in certain respects.

B. Labor-only contracting (prohibited): leads to “regularization” with the principal

If an arrangement is deemed labor-only contracting (e.g., contractor lacks substantial capital/investment and the workers perform tasks directly related to the principal’s business and the principal exercises control), the law treats the principal as the true employer. This can result in the workers being recognized as employees—often regular employees—of the principal.

C. “In-house agency” or schemes to prevent regularization

DOLE policy has long targeted arrangements that exist mainly to defeat security of tenure—such as using contractors as a revolving door for workers doing core business functions under the principal’s control.

9) What “regularization” legally changes: rights and protections

Once an employee is deemed regular, key consequences include:

A. Security of tenure

Termination must be for:

Just causes (e.g., serious misconduct, willful disobedience, gross and habitual neglect, fraud, loss of trust and confidence—subject to standards, especially for rank-and-file vs managerial), or
Authorized causes (e.g., redundancy, retrenchment, installation of labor-saving devices, closure not due to serious losses, disease), with required notices and separation pay when applicable.

B. Due process requirements

For just causes: the “two-notice rule” and opportunity to be heard.
For authorized causes: statutory notices (typically to the employee and DOLE) and separation pay where required.

C. Access to full statutory benefits and company benefits

Regular status itself does not invent benefits out of thin air, but it strengthens claims tied to:

wage-related entitlements,
13th month pay eligibility (based on rules),
holiday pay/rest day pay/OT differentials where applicable,
service incentive leave (if covered),
and benefits promised by policy/CBA/practice.

10) Typical scenarios and likely legal outcomes (illustrative, fact-dependent)

Scenario 1: Retail cashier on repeated 5–6 month contracts for 2 years

Cashiering is usually necessary and desirable in retail.
Repeated short-term contracts strongly indicate a regular role. High risk for employer; strong basis for regularization and illegal dismissal if terminated via “end of contract.”

Scenario 2: Construction worker hired per identified project phases with clear project documents

Construction commonly uses project employment legitimately.
If the worker is properly documented per project and termination matches project completion, classification may stand. Outcome depends on documentation and actual project linkage.

Scenario 3: Seasonal packer rehired every peak season for many years

Can be a regular seasonal employee.
Not necessarily year-round regular, but enjoys security tied to seasonal recall and established pattern. Likely regular seasonal recognition.

Scenario 4: BPO agent repeatedly rehired after short breaks; same account, same KPI system, same supervisor

The work is integral to the BPO’s business.
Breaks may be seen as circumvention depending on facts. Often favorable to regularization arguments, but details matter.

Scenario 5: Worker supplied by agency; principal directs day-to-day work, sets schedule, disciplines, and agency looks like a mere recruiter

Strong indicators of labor-only contracting/control by principal. Possible finding: principal is employer with attendant regularization/security of tenure consequences.

11) Evidence that usually matters in disputes

Because these cases turn on reality rather than labels, the following are commonly important:

Employment contracts and renewals (including gaps and dates)
Payslips, payroll records, time records, schedules
Company IDs, email accounts, system access
Memos, notices, performance evaluations, KPI reports
Organizational charts, reporting lines, supervision proof
Job descriptions, manuals, standard operating procedures
Proof of continuous operational need for the role
For project/seasonal: project contracts, completion certificates, season calendars, recall patterns
For contracting: contractor registration, capital/investment proof, service agreements, control indicators

12) Remedies and where claims are usually filed

A. Regularization + benefits (labor standards and labor relations overlap)

Claims can include:

declaration of regular status,
payment of wage differentials/benefits,
damages and attorney’s fees (when warranted).

B. Illegal dismissal (common when employment is ended as “end of contract”)

If the worker is deemed regular (or the contract type is invalid), termination can be illegal, with typical remedies such as:

reinstatement and full backwages, or
separation pay in lieu of reinstatement in certain circumstances (fact- and jurisprudence-dependent).

C. Forums and process (typical route)

Many cases go through SEnA (Single Entry Approach) for mandatory/initial conciliation.
Unresolved termination disputes generally proceed to the NLRC (Labor Arbiter).
Labor standards enforcement may involve DOLE inspection and compliance powers (but termination disputes are typically NLRC territory).

D. Prescriptive periods (general guide)

Money claims arising from employer-employee relations: commonly treated as 3 years under the Labor Code’s prescriptive rule.
Illegal dismissal/claims based on injury to rights: often treated as 4 years under Civil Code principles applied in labor cases. (Exact characterization can be case-dependent, but these are the standard reference points used in practice.)

13) Practical compliance takeaways (what the law is pushing employers toward)

Employers who want enforceable arrangements generally need to align contracts with reality:

If the role is core and ongoing: use regular employment with a properly managed probationary period if applicable.
If truly probationary: inform standards at hiring and evaluate within the 6-month period.
If truly project-based: define the project, document assignment, and ensure termination matches project completion.
If fixed-term: ensure voluntariness and legitimate purpose—not a systematic device to defeat tenure.
If contracting: ensure the contractor is legitimate and avoid control patterns that create labor-only contracting.

14) Bottom line

Repeated “6-month” (or 5-month) contracts in the Philippines are legally risky when they are used to keep workers performing regular, necessary, and desirable work in a permanent state of insecurity. The Labor Code and jurisprudence prioritize the true nature of the work, the continuity and necessity of the role, and the realities of control and supervision over what the paperwork calls the arrangement.