I. Introduction

“Job Order” (JO) workers in the Philippine government are a long-standing feature of public administration. They are engaged to perform specific tasks, often of a temporary or intermittent nature, and are paid based on outputs or services rendered rather than through plantilla items. Because of their unique employment status, habitual absences by JO workers raise a different set of legal issues compared to regular government employees.

This article explains the governing legal framework, what “habitual absence” means in practice for JO engagements, the available sanctions, and the procedural limits agencies must observe.

II. Legal Nature of a Job Order Engagement

A. Not part of the career civil service

Under Philippine civil service doctrine, JO workers are not considered government employees in the traditional sense. They are engaged through a contract for services and generally fall outside the scope of:

the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure for civil servants,
the Civil Service Law and rules on administrative discipline,
standard government leave benefits.

This point is reinforced by executive and joint circulars that define JO/Contract of Service (COS) engagements as non-employee contractual relationships rather than appointments to the civil service.

B. Governing instruments

A JO relationship is ruled primarily by:

The written Job Order contract (terms of reference, scope of work, duration, deliverables, reporting, attendance expectations, termination clauses).
DBM-COA-CSC Joint Circular No. 1, s. 2017 (and related updates), which harmonizes rules for COS/JO workers, emphasizing their non-employee status and payment based on services actually rendered.
COA rules on disallowances and payment documentation (especially no work, no pay, and audit requirements for DTRs or similar proof of service).
Agency internal policies that may require attendance systems for JOs to validate service delivery, so long as these do not contradict the contract or circulars.

III. Distinguishing JO Habitual Absence from Regular Employee Habitual Absence

A. Regular government employees

For plantilla employees, “habitual absenteeism” is a defined administrative offense under Civil Service Commission (CSC) rules. It is prosecuted through administrative cases and may lead to suspension or dismissal with accessory penalties.

B. JO workers

Because JOs are not civil servants, CSC disciplinary offenses do not automatically apply to them. They cannot, as a rule, be charged administratively under CSC procedures for attendance violations alone.

Instead:

absence is a contractual compliance issue, and
sanctions come from contract law + agency procurement/engagement rules, not from the civil service disciplinary system.

IV. What Counts as “Habitual Absence” for JO Workers

There is no single statutory definition for “habitual absence” in JO settings. Agencies typically rely on:

Contract stipulations, e.g.
- required workdays or hours,
- deliverable-based attendance,
- reporting obligations,
- maximum allowable unexcused absences.
Agency policy analogies, often mirroring CSC attendance standards as benchmarks (even if not directly binding), such as:
- repeated unauthorized absences,
- frequent tardiness/undertime that effectively becomes abandonment,
- failure to report for work without valid reasons.
Audit and payroll validation practice, which treats inability to show proof of service as non-entitlement to payment.

Practical meaning: A JO worker is “habitually absent” when their absences are repeated, unjustified, and materially affect performance or delivery of outputs, as shown by DTRs, supervisor logs, or failure to meet deadlines.

V. Core Rules on Attendance and Pay for JOs

A. “No work, no pay”

JO workers are paid only for services actually rendered. Unexcused absences result in:

automatic deduction for days/hours not worked, and
possible denial of payment for the relevant billing period if output is not delivered.

This principle is vital because COA may disallow payments where there is no proof of actual service.

B. Proof of service

Even though JOs are output-based, agencies usually require attendance proofs such as:

Daily Time Records (DTR),
accomplishment reports,
certification of service rendered by the supervisor,
attendance in mandated activities (meetings, fieldwork).

These are driven by audit necessity and contract supervision, not by civil service employment norms.

VI. Sanctions for Habitual Absences of JO Workers

Sanctions are anchored in the contract and general law on obligations and contracts. Common sanctions include:

A. Deductions / withholding of pay

Absences without service = non-billable.
Repeated absences may justify withholding payment until work is completed or validated.

B. Contract termination

Most JO contracts contain termination clauses such as:

termination for cause (including chronic non-performance or unauthorized absences),
termination for convenience with notice,
or non-renewal at contract end.

Habitual absence can be framed as:

breach of obligations,
gross neglect of duties under the TOR,
failure to meet expected outputs.

C. Non-renewal / blacklisting (limited)

Because JO work is discretionary and time-bound, agencies may:

refuse renewal, or
decline future engagement.

A formal “blacklisting” regime is more typical in procurement of goods/services; for individual JO workers, the safer legal route is recorded non-renewal based on documented breach, rather than punitive blacklisting absent explicit rules.

D. Liquidated damages or refund (rare but possible)

If the contract provides, an agency may impose:

liquidated damages for delay/non-performance, or
demand refund of advance payments.

Without a clear clause, recovery is harder and must rely on proof of unjust enrichment or breach.

VII. Due Process and Procedural Requirements

Even without CSC administrative jurisdiction, government agencies must still observe basic procedural fairness, because:

the government is a party to public contracts, and
arbitrariness may expose the agency to claims.

A. Minimum due process

Best practice (and often required by contract/policy) includes:

Notice of absences/breach
- written memo or email specifying dates and violations.
Chance to explain
- a short period to submit justification or medical proof.
Evaluation and decision
- supervisor recommendation + approving authority decision.
Written termination/non-renewal notice
- citing contract clause, facts, and effectivity.

B. No need for full CSC trial-type proceedings

Agencies do not need to convene formal disciplinary boards or follow CSC case procedures unless:

the JO worker is performing functions involving the exercise of sovereign authority and
the agency’s own rules explicitly extend CSC-like discipline to such cases.

Even then, it remains safer to proceed through contract enforcement.

VIII. Special Situations

A. Hybrid roles / de facto employment issues

If a JO worker is treated like a regular employee—full-time continuous work, supervision identical to plantilla staff, tasks that are core and permanent—courts may scrutinize the relationship.

While jurisprudence often still recognizes JO status as contractual, agencies should avoid using attendance discipline in a way that implies an employer-employee relationship, because it can fuel claims for regularization or labor-law coverage.

B. Unauthorized absences vs. valid absences

Because JOs do not have statutory leave credits, “valid absences” usually depend on:

express contract allowance,
humanitarian consideration, or
supervisor approval.

Agencies may accept:

medical emergencies (with documentation),
force majeure events (calamities, transport stoppages),
approved personal leave without pay.

But approval should be documented, because approval affects billing and audit trail.

C. Absence amounting to abandonment

Extended unexcused absence (e.g., several consecutive workdays without contact) can be treated as:

abandonment of contract,
implied resignation,
ground for immediate termination under a breach clause.

IX. Relationship with Labor Law

JO workers in government are generally not covered by the Labor Code’s security of tenure and disciplinary framework, because:

their engagement is not an employer-employee relationship in the civil service sense, and
government JO/COS rules explicitly define it as a contract for services.

However, if a JO worker files a labor complaint, agencies typically defend using:

the written JO contract,
Joint Circular classification,
proof of output-based engagement and non-plantilla status.

Habitual absence disputes then become contractual/labor-relation hybrid issues, but still usually resolve under public contract rules.

X. Agency Best-Practice Clauses on Habitual Absence

To avoid ambiguity, agencies should include clauses such as:

Attendance or availability requirement
- defined workdays/hours, field schedules, or deliverable-based reporting.
Definition of unauthorized / habitual absence
- e.g., “three (3) or more unexcused absences in a month” or “repeated absences causing delay or failure to deliver outputs.”
Progressive response
- written warning → final warning → termination.
Termination for cause
- explicit listing of habitual absence as breach.
Documentation rules
- DTR/accomplishment reports as conditions for billing.

These clauses align supervision needs with audit compliance while remaining within the JO’s contractual nature.

XI. Summary of Key Points

JO workers are not regular civil service employees; they are engaged through contracts for services.
CSC administrative offenses (including habitual absenteeism) do not automatically bind them.
Habitual absence for JOs is evaluated as a contractual breach or non-performance, not as an administrative offense.
Primary sanctions: no work no pay deductions, withholding of billing, termination for cause, and non-renewal.
Agencies must still observe basic due process—notice and opportunity to explain—before termination.
Clear contract drafting and proper documentation are essential for legality and audit defensibility.

If you want, I can draft a model JO contract section on attendance/habitual absence or a template notice-to-explain + termination memo tailored to your agency style.