Can a Probationary Employee Be Terminated?

The rule is Article 296 of the Labor Code (Article 281 before the 2015 renumbering). The Supreme Court quoted it in C.P. Reyes Hospital v. Barbosa (2024). In simple words, it says:

• Probation "shall not exceed six (6) months" from the date the employee started working, unless it is covered by an apprenticeship agreement that sets a longer period.
• A probationary employee may be terminated for a just cause, or when he or she fails to qualify as a regular employee under reasonable standards made known by the employer at the time of engagement.
• An employee who is allowed to work after the probationary period is considered a regular employee.

So probation is a trial period, not a period without rights. The employer cannot end it for any reason it likes.

The implementing rules require the employer to tell you, at the start, what you must do to become regular. The rule quoted in Abbott Laboratories v. Alcaraz (2013) says that "where no standards are made known to the employee at that time, he shall be deemed a regular employee."

In Abbott, the Court said an employer meets this duty when it has made reasonable efforts to tell the employee what he or she is expected to do or accomplish during probation. It also named an exception: when the job is "self-descriptive in nature", for instance maids, cooks, drivers or messengers. For those jobs, what is expected is clear from the work itself.

In practice, standards often appear in the contract, the job description or the evaluation form you signed. Keep copies.

If the employer lets you keep working after the probationary period, you are regular by force of law. In C.P. Reyes, the Court said a probationary employee "who is allowed to work beyond the probationary period is, by force of law, considered a regular employee." You do not need a new contract or a letter of regularization.

The Court also said that the mere end of the probationary contract without an appointment as regular does not, by itself, end the employment relationship.

For a dismissal based on a just cause, yes. C.P. Reyes (2024) said the due process standards for regular employees, the "two-notice rule", "equally apply to probationary employees in cases of termination for just cause". That means a written notice of the charge with a chance to explain, a hearing or conference, and a written notice of termination. See Fired without notice?

For a termination because the employee failed to meet the standards, the same rule on proof applies as in other dismissals: in an illegal dismissal case, the employer must prove that the dismissal was valid (Aldovino v. Gold and Green Manpower, 2019). In Abbott, the Court upheld such a termination but ordered the employer to pay ₱30,000 in nominal damages because it did not follow its own company procedure for evaluating the employee.

Barbosa was hired as a training supervisor on a six-month probationary contract that started on September 4, 2013. Her contract required an average passing score of 80% in her evaluations. Her averages were 81.68% and 82.59%. The hospital still dismissed her before the six months ended, citing poor performance and absences.

The Court held that the dismissal was illegal. She had met the standard set in her contract. Her three days marked as absent without leave had been explained after a notice to explain, and the hospital relied on other absences for which it never asked her to explain. The Court said those were used "merely as an afterthought".

On the money award, the Court made an important ruling. An older case, Robinsons Galleria v. Ranchez, had limited backwages for a probationary employee to the end of the probation period. The Court departed from that ruling and held that illegally dismissed probationary employees, like regular employees, get backwages up to actual reinstatement. If reinstatement is not feasible, backwages run up to the finality of the decision. It also ordered separation pay in place of reinstatement and 6% interest per year from finality. See Illegally dismissed: what can you get?

These are made-up examples to show how the rules work. They are not advice for any real case.

Rhea starts as a probationary staff nurse on June 1. Her probation ends after six months. Her employer says nothing and she keeps working in December. She is now a regular employee by law.

Paolo is hired as an accounting assistant. His contract only says "probationary for 6 months". Nobody tells him how he will be rated. Under the rule quoted in Abbott, he is deemed a regular employee, because no standards were made known when he was hired.

Joy is hired on probation as a delivery driver for a hardware store. No written standards are given. Abbott named drivers as an example of a self-descriptive job, so the lack of written standards may not by itself make her regular.

Ivy is on probation at a store and is dismissed in her third month on vague grounds, with no notice to explain. If the labor tribunal finds the dismissal illegal, under C.P. Reyes her backwages run up to reinstatement, or up to finality if reinstatement is not feasible, not just to the end of month six.

Teachers in private schools are a special case. C.P. Reyes noted that the probation of teaching personnel is governed not only by the Labor Code but also by the Manual of Regulations for Private Schools or the Manual of Regulations for Private Higher Education.

Agency workers placed with a client on repeated short contracts raise a different question. See Endo and labor-only contracting. For a side-by-side view, see Probationary vs regular employee and Employee rights in the Philippines.

Talk to a lawyer if you were dismissed during probation without a clear reason, if you were never told the standards, or if you kept working past six months and were then let go. If you cannot afford a lawyer, see Free legal help in the Philippines for the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) and other options.