transfer of assignment labor code

Transfer of Employees

▪ Transferring of employees is a management prerogative.

▪ There are jurisprudential guidelines for a valid transfer.

▪ Non-compliance with requirements for a valid transfer may result in constructive dismissal.

2. Concepts

“Under the doctrine of management prerogative, every employer has the inherent right to regulate, according to his own discretion and judgment, all aspects of employment, including… transfer of employees…” ( Rural Bank of Cantilan, Inc. v. Julve , G.R. No. 169750, 27 February 2007)

A “transfer” – is a “movement from one position to another which is of equivalent rank, level or salary, without break in service.” ( Tinio v. CA, SMART Communications, Inc. , G.R. No. 171764, 08 June 2007)

Promotion is the “advancement from one position to another with an increase in duties and responsibilities as authorized by law, and usually accompanied by an increase in salary.” ( Ibid .)

Demotion involves a situation where an employee is relegated to a subordinate or less important position constituting a reduction to a lower grade or rank, with a corresponding decrease in duties and responsibilities, and usually accompanied by a decrease in salary. ( Ibid .)

3. Transfer of employees

The exercise of management’s prerogative concerning the employees’ work assignments is based on its assessment of the qualifications, aptitudes and competence of its employees, and by moving them around in the various areas of its business operations it can ascertain where they will function with maximum benefit to the company. ( Peckson v. Robinsons Supermarket Corporation , G.R. No. 198534, 03 July 2013)

It is the employer’s prerogative, based on its assessment and perception of its employees’ qualifications, aptitudes, and competence, to move them around in the various areas of its business operations in order to ascertain where they will function with maximum benefit to the company. An employee’s right to security of tenure does not give him such a vested right in his position as would deprive the company of its prerogative to change his assignment or transfer him where he will be most useful. When his transfer is not unreasonable, nor inconvenient, nor prejudicial to him, and it does not involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, benefits, and other privileges, the employee may not complain that it amounts to a constructive dismissal. ( Ibid .)

As a privilege inherent in the employer’s right to control and manage its enterprise effectively, its freedom to conduct its business operations to achieve its purpose cannot be denied. ( Ibid .)

4. Jurisprudential Guidelines

Concerning the transfer of employees, these are the following jurisprudential guidelines:

1) A transfer is a movement from one position to another of equivalent rank, level or salary without break in the service or a lateral movement from one position to another of equivalent rank or salary;

2) The employer has the inherent right to transfer or reassign an employee for legitimate business purposes;

3) A transfer becomes unlawful where it is motivated by discrimination or bad faith or is effected as a form of punishment or is a demotion without sufficient cause; and,

4) The employer must be able to show that the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial to the employee. ( Ibid. )

a. No grave abuse of discretion by the employer

The managerial prerogative to transfer personnel must be exercised without grave abuse of discretion, bearing in mind the basic elements of justice and fair play. Having the right should not be confused with the manner in which that right is exercised. Thus, it cannot be used as a subterfuge by the employer to rid himself of an undesirable worker. ( Ibid .)

b. Not unreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial to the employee

In particular, the employer must be able to show that the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient or prejudicial to the employee. ( Ibid .)

c. No demotion in rank or diminution of benefits

Nor does it involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, privileges and other benefits. ( Ibid .)

d. Burden of proof on the employer

Burden of proof is on the employer to show that: (a) the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient or prejudicial to the employee; and (2) it does not involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, privileges and other benefits. ( Ibid .)

4. Abuse of transfer results in constructive dismissal

Should the employer fail to overcome this burden of proof, the employee’s transfer shall be tantamount to constructive dismissal, which has been defined as a quitting because continued employment is rendered impossible, unreasonable or unlikely; as an offer involving a demotion in rank and diminution in pay. Likewise, constructive dismissal exists when an act of clear discrimination, insensibility or disdain by an employer has become so unbearable to the employee leaving him with no option but to forego with his continued employment. ( Ibid .)

When the transfer of an employee is not unreasonable, or inconvenient, or prejudicial to him, and it does not involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, benefits and other privileges, the employee may not complain that it amounts to a constructive dismissal. ( Ibid .)

In the resolution of whether the transfer of the respondents from one area of operation to another was valid, finding a balance between the scope and limitation of the exercise of management prerogative and the employees’ right to security of tenure is necessary. We have to weigh and consider, on the one hand, that management has a wide discretion to regulate all aspects of employment, including the transfer and re-assignment of employees according to the exigencies of the business; and, on the other, that the transfer constitutes constructive dismissal when it is unreasonable, inconvenient or prejudicial to the employee, or involves a demotion in rank or diminution of salaries, benefits and other privileges, or when the acts of discrimination, insensibility or disdain on the part of the employer become unbearable for the employee, forcing him to forego her employment. ( Chateau Royale Sports v. Balba , G.R. No. 197492, 18 January 2017)

In this case of constructive dismissal, the burden of proof lies in the employer to prove that the transfer of the employee from one area of operation to another was for a valid and legitimate ground, like genuine business necessity. ( Ibid .)

a. 3 conditions when transfer is deemed a constructive dismissal

A transfer is deemed to be constructive dismissal when three conditions concur:

1) When the transfer is unreasonable, inconvenient or prejudicial to the employee;

2) When the transfer involves a demotion in rank or diminution of salaries, benefits and other privileges; and,

3) When the employer performs a clear act of discrimination, insensibility, or disdain towards the employee, which forecloses any choice by the latter except to forego his continued employment. ( Tinio v. CA, SMART Communications, Inc. , supra. )

5. When employee consents

An employee has no valid reason to disobey the order of transfer given by management, especially if he has tacitly given his consent thereto when he acceded to the company’s policy of hiring sales staff who are willing to be assigned anywhere in the Philippines which is demanded by the employer’s business. ( Ibid .)

By the very nature of their employment, sales executives are expected to travel. They should anticipate re-assignment according to the demands of the employer’s business. Companies which rely heavily on sales are expected to assign their employees to areas where markets may be expanded or places where their sales could be improved. The right to transfer or reassign an employee is thus a reasonable exercise of management prerogatives and is recognized as an employer’s exclusive right in running its company. ( Ibid .)

/Updated: December 28, 2022

Philippine Labor Law Resource & Learning Site

Similar Posts

Time, Place, and Manner of Work

1. Summary ▪ Time, place, and manner of work is a management prerogative. ▪ Manner of work includes working methods and work assignments. 2. Concepts The time of work refers to the time when the work starts and ends, including work schedules and work shifts, among others. The place of work refers to the place…

Bonus or Special Incentives

A bonus is a gratuity or act of liberality of the giver which the recipient has no right to demand as a matter of right. It is something given in addition to what is ordinarily received by or strictly due the recipient. 1. Concept “Bonus” – refers to a gratuity or act of liberality of…

FAQ: Management Prerogative

Answers to frequently asked questions on management prerogative in the Philippines. What is management prerogative? Management prerogative is the bundle of rights inherent to the employer who gets to decide all aspects of employment, from pre-employment to post-employment, unless limited or regulated by labor law. What are examples of management prerogative? The exercise of management…

Mental Health Workplace Policy

1. Preliminary DOLE Department Order No. 53, Series of 2003 (“DO-53”) provides for the Drug-Free Workplace Policies and Programs Guidelines for the Implementation of a Drug-Free Workplace Polices and Programs for the Private Sector (the “Guidelines”) DOLE Department Order No. 208, Series of 2020 (“DO-208”)provides for the Guidelines for the Implementation of Mental Health Workplace…

Mandatory Workplace Policies and Programs

Summary ▪ Mandatory workplace policies and programs refers to policies and programs legally required by law or regulation to be developed and implemented in the workplace. ▪ In contrast to mandatory workplace policies and programs, company-initiated policies and programs are those developed and implemented by the employer as an exercise of its management prerogative. 1….

Promotion of an Employee

Summary ▪ Promotion is the advancement of a position with an increase in duties and responsibilities. ▪ Increase of salary is incidental, and not required. ▪ Acceptance by an employee is required for a promotion to be valid. 1. Concept Promotion – refers to the advancement from one position to another with an increase in…

ON TRANSFER OF EMPLOYEES

More on employees aside from transfer: Are Seasonal Employees Considered Regular Employees?

Transfer of employee is a management prerogative

Not every transfer of employee is valid, transfer of employee may amount to constructive dismissal.

M ovement is life; without movement, life is unthinkable. – Moshe Feldenkrais

The concept of management prerogative always comes in when talking about transfer of employees. Management prerogative is the inherent right of every employer to regulate, according to his own discretion and judgment, all aspects of employment. Among these aspects of employment is the transfer of employees.

In the first place, what is meant by “transfer”?

For a better understanding, let us take the case of Jenny F. Peckson vs. Robinsons Supermarket Corporation (G.R. No. 198534, July 3, 2013).

In this case, Jenny was holding the position of Category Buyer at Robinsons Supermarket Corporation (RSC) when Sarte (Assistant Vice-President for Merchandising) reassigned her to the position of Provincial Coordinator.

Claiming that her new reassignment was a demotion because it was non-supervisory and clerical in nature, Jenny refused to turn over her responsibilities to the new Category Buyer, or to accept her new responsibilities as Provincial Coordinator. RSC, through a memorandum issued to Jenny, demanded an explanation from her within 48 hours for her refusal to accept her new assignment despite written and verbal demands. Jenny ignored the 48-hour deadline to explain which led to the issuance of another memorandum reiterating the demand to explain within 48 hours why she persistently refused to assume her new position.

Jenny then explained that she could not accept the position of Provincial Coordinator since she saw it as a demotion. As it turned out, Jenny had already filed a complaint for constructive dismissal against RSC.

For their part, RSC maintained that her transfer was not a demotion since the Provincial Coordinator occupied a position like the Category Buyer, with the same working conditions, salary and benefits. Also, that the transfer was made in the exercise of management prerogative and sound discretion.

Is the transfer of Jenny amounts to a constructive dismissal?

The Supreme Court says:

The lateral transfer of Jenny from Category Buyer to Provincial Coordinator was not a demotion amounting to constructive dismissal, since both positions belonged to Job Level 5 and between them, there is no significant disparity in terms of the requirements of skill, experience and aptitude.

In addition, management may transfer an employee form one office to another within the business establishment provided there is no demotion in rank or diminution of salary, benefits, and other privileges, and the action is not motivated by discrimination or bad faith or effected as a from of punishment without sufficient cause.

Also, the Supreme Court issued the following guidelines concerning the transfer of employees:

• A transfer is a movement from one position to another of equivalent rank, level or salary without break in the service or a lateral movement from one position to another of equivalent rank or salary;
• The employer has the inherent right to transfer or reassign an employee for legitimate business purposes;
• A transfer becomes unlawful where it is motivated by discrimination or bad faith or is effected as a form of punishment or is a demotion without sufficient cause;
• The employer must be able to show that the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial to the employee.

In this case, it was sufficiently established by RSC that the transfer was not unreasonable or inconvenient to Jenny and that it was a valid exercise of RSC’s management prerogative.

Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices  specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries, you may reach us at [email protected], or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.

All rights reserved.

SUBSCRIBE NOW FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES!

[email-subscribers-form id=”4″]

3 thoughts on “ ON TRANSFER OF EMPLOYEES ”

Great….. a great case information. How about lateral transfer of employee to its affiliates, subsidiary or sister company. Is it Management Prerogative?

I am employed for 5yrs in my company. I was hired as teller then last feb 1, 2022 i was transfer as new accounts and i accept it without any written notice until feb 1, 2022 noticed sent to me that effective feb 1, 2022 is my new assigned position, my co worker Marketing assistant resigned and without prior written or verbal notice they are transferring me again to another position and already hired new employee to replace me even i refused to accept the new position. Due to heart broken i filed my resignation telling that i resign because of the option that is given to me. Accept or resign because i refused it i filled resignation when i saw the noticed served that there we’re newly hired to replace me. What is the best thing to do?

This is a great tip particularly to those fresh to the blogosphere. Brief but very precise info… Many thanks for sharing this one. A must read article!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Transfer of Employee Philippines: A Legal Guide for HR Practitioners

• December 29, 2022
• Blog | Labor | Uncategorized

Table of Contents

The transfer of employees in the Philippines is recognized as a valid management right under Philippine law.

However, the transfer of employees has also been extensively commented on in Supreme Court cases because transfers improperly done may prompt an employee to file a case for Constructive Dismissal .

We’ll discuss jurisprudence in this article so that you can see real-life examples of what you should and shouldn’t do as an HR.

It’ll also show you how the law plays out in real life, and the considerations we Labor Lawyers look at for this.

Is the Transfer of Employees in the Philippines legal?

Yes, the transfer of employees in the Philippines is legal and is one of management’s prerogatives.

In Tinio vs Court of Appeals , the Court stated:

“This Court has consistently recognized and upheld the prerogative of management to transfer an employee from one office to another within the business establishment, provided there is no demotion in rank or a diminution of salary, benefits and other privileges. As a rule, the Court will not interfere with an employer’s prerogative to regulate all aspects of employment which include among others, work assignment, working methods and place and manner of work. Labor laws discourage interference with an employer’s judgment in the conduct of his business.”

So, the court recognizes that transfers are done for business reasons.

Insofar as these transfers are done for a valid reason and are not prejudicial to the employee, a transfer is a valid transfer.

In the case above, Tinio was transferred from Cebu to Manila for business reasons. He did not suffer any diminution as a result of this, nor did the court find anything other than business reasons for the transfer.

Jurisprudential Guidelines on the Transfer of Employees

Transfer of employees in the Philippines is allowed by the law so long as certain guidelines are followed.

Transfer of Employee Philippines Guidelines as per G.R. 198534 :

• a transfer is a movement from one position to another of equivalent rank, level or salary without break in the service or a lateral movement from one position to another of equivalent rank or salary
• the employer has the inherent right to transfer or reassign an employee for legitimate business purposes
• a transfer becomes unlawful where it is motivated by discrimination or bad faith or is effected as a form of punishment or is a demotion without sufficient cause
• the employer must be able to show that the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial to the employee.

In other words, a transfer should simply be a transfer for a business reason, instead of punishment or demotion.

The Court supported a transfer in several situations.

I listed them down below, just to show you some examples. (This is not the complete list, just some I found).

Transfer of employee Philippines, list of transfers:

• An employee can be transferred to the night shift when the rotation of day and night shifts is a standard operating procedure (Castillo v. CIR, 39 SCRA 81).
• Rotations among different locations to prevent connivance (Cinema, Stage and Radio Entertainment Free Workers v. CIR, 18 SCRA 1071).
• Re-assignment of one from the position of a supervisor to that of engineer at the power-house (Interwood Employees Assn. v. Interwood, 99 Phil. 82)
• The transfer from messenger clerk in a hotel to purely office work and 2 other unionists from the position of hotel guard to line and elevator men, without diminution of pay or other employee’s rights (Bay View Hotel Employees Union v. Bay View Hotel, L-10393, March 30, 1960),
• Temporary assignment of a sales clerk to another section of the store (Marcaida v. PECO, 63 O.G. 8559).
• The transfer from category buyer to Provincial Buyer (G.R. 198534)
• The transfer from Cebu to Manila office GR 171764

In all these transfers, the Court found only genuine business reasons and no prejudice to any of the employees in their transfers.

Let’s take a look at a case in-depth to understand the valid transfer of employees.

The Valid Transfer of Employees

The transfer of employees for business reasons and without a reduction in pay, responsibilities or benefits is valid.

In GR 83239 , Philippine Japan Active Carbon corporation transferred employee Olga Quinanola from secretary to General Manager to Production Secretary.

Olga considered this a demotion and so filed a case for Illegal Dismissal.

However, the Court decided that this was a valid transfer.

The Court noted that there was no demotion in rank nor diminution in pay, benefits and privileges.

It further went on to note that it is an employer’s prerogative to move employees around based on its assessment of their qualifications to where they will function with maximum benefit to the company.

It further went on the say that when the:

“…transfer is not unreasonable, nor inconvenient, nor prejudicial to him, and it does not involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, benefits, and other privileges, the employee may not complain that it amounts to a constructive dismissal…”

In Olga’s case, the employer offered her first a position in Laoag and then one in Manila. The employer also sent her several notices to report to work.

The Court did not see any subterfuge on the part of the company nor any attempt to penalize the employee in the transfer and so found that there were legitimate reasons for the transfer.

Let’s look at another valid transfer.

In G.R. 198534, employee Jenny Peckson was transferred from Category buyer to Provincial coordinator in Robinsons Supermarket.

She refused this position saying that it was a demotion.

She also refused to turn over to the new buyer, refused to explain why, and refused further to report to work despite being called twice to report.

This was despite the salary structure and pay to be the same as her former position with like responsibilities.

In light of these facts, the court decided in favor of the company since all the facts showed that the transfer was not inconvenient or prejudicial to her.

The Invalid Transfer of Employees

The Transfer of Employees to punish or ease out an employee or one that has a reduction in pay, rank or benefits is not valid.

Let’s look at a case with an invalid transfer.

In G.R. 163091 , the Court decided in favor of the employee.

In this case, the Court discussed the events leading up to his Illegal Dismissal, including the transfer of the employee (We’ll zero in on this aspect of this case since this is what is pertinent to our discussion).

Employee Del Villar was transferred from Transportation Services Manager to Staff Assistant in the Purchasing Department.

He had a lower position in rank and in responsibility.

He was no longer a manager and he had much less work – so much so that Del Villar even complained that he was not given any meaningful work at all.

The Court also noted there was a diminution in benefits as Del Villar could no longer use the company car, gas allowance and foreign travel that his previous position offered.

The Court went on to note:

“The Labor Arbiter was correct in his observation that had Del Villar resigned immediately after his “transfer,” he could be said to have been constructively dismissed .  There is constructive dismissal when there is a demotion in rank and/or diminution in pay…”

So, transferring an employee should be done in consideration of these legal limits.

As Labor Lawyers, we find that working with HR is very important.

Labor Lawyers can best advise on the transfer of employees and the correct data for an employee’s file so that you can always properly defend your company in court.

The Transfer of Employees and Bad Faith

When the Transfer of Employees is done for reasons other than purely business reasons – for instance, to punish an employee – then this transfer is done in bad faith.

In GR 188269 , supervisor Baya was transferred to a sister company at a rank-and-file position.

Baya protested this.

He stated that his transfer was due to the fact that he did not want to transfer his loyalty to the new company-owned cooperative, and so his transfer was one of Constructive Dismissal.

The Court examined the records.

It noted that in Constructive Dismissal, the employer “…has the burden of proving that the transfer and demotion of an employee are for valid and legitimate grounds such as genuine business necessity…”

It found in this case that the company could not prove that and that the transfer was done to punish him.

The transfer was found to be in bad faith, and Baya was awarded Separation Pay, 13 th Month Pay, Moral Damages and Attorney’s fees.

How to Transfer an Employee the Right Way

If you are an HR trying to transfer an employee, the above cases should inform what you do so that you transfer an employee correctly.

To Transfer an Employee correctly do the following:

• Ensure it is for a business reason
• There is no diminution
• It is not prejudicial to the employee

The right to transfer an employee is respected by the Courts – in fact, there are several other cases that show that lateral transfers for business reasons are supported by the court.

But a transfer must be done correctly so that cases of Illegal Dismissal  or Constructive Dismissal  can be avoided.

As you can see above, an employee can claim that a transfer somehow “forced” him to resign – and it was the actions of the HR and management working together that cause these cases to fail.

If you are an HR contemplating transferring an employee, please contact a Labor Lawyer to do things right – it will save your company time and hassle.

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Helping Filipinos find answers to their Legal Questions

PROJECT JURISPRUDENCE

21 basic doctrines on employer's prerogative to transfer.

Popular Posts

Penalties for theft (Art 309)

The four-fold test in labor law

Elements of an obligation

Can mistress be held liable under RA 9262?

Elements of frustrated homicide

Sources of obligation

Homicide (Article 249)

DISPUTES RESOLUTION

• Corporate Disputes
• Civil and Commercial Contract Disputes
• Wills & Inheritance Disputes
• Labour & Employment disputes
• Marriage & Family Disputes
• Debt Recovery Negotiation And Dispute Resolution
• Real Estate Disputes
• Recognition and Enforcement in Vietnam of Foreign Arbitral Awards / Judgments / Decisions Of Foreign Courts
• Disputes Under Vietnamese and Foreign Commercial Arbitration Procedures In Vietnam and Foreign
• Maritime Disputes
• Liability for Compensation for Non-Contractual damage Disputes

OTHER SECTORS

• Legal Training
• Legal Advice on Investing in Vietnam
• Mergers and Acquisitions
• Monthly Legal Advice Service
• Labor and Employment Advice
• Intellectual Property Law Advice
• LEGAL SEMINAR
• Publications
• Special Alert

Transfer An Employee To Another Job In Accordance With The Law

The labor contract after being signed and sealed can still be changed by the will of one party or both parties. In fact, in the process of its non-stop movement, there are times when enterprises need to mobilize and transfer employees to ensure the progress of a certain job or contract. This transfer can take one of two forms: temporary transfer and permanent transfer.

Lac Duy & Associates will provide relevant legal information for employers and employees to have a more specific view on this issue.

Nội dung bài viết

Temporary job transfer

Article 31 of Labor Code 2012 specifies the transfer of employees to jobs other than labor contracts as follows:

• When meeting with sudden difficulties such as natural disaster, fire or epidemic, or taking measures to prevent and deal with a working accident, an occupational disease or an electricity or water supply incident, or when due to business and production needs, the employer may temporarily assign an employee to perform a job which is not stated in the labor contract provided that the assignment does not exceed 60 accumulated workdays within one year, unless otherwise agreed by the employee.
• When an employer temporarily assigns an employee to perform a job which is not stated the labor contract, the employer shall inform the employee at least 3 working days in advance, clearly stating the duration of temporary work and the assigned work which must be suitable to the health and gender of the employee.
• The employee who performs the job as stipulated in Clause 1 of this Article is entitled to a wage for the new job; if the wage for the new job is lower than the previous wage, he/she is entitled to the previous wage for 30 working days. The wage for the new job must be at least 85% of the previous wage but not lower than the regional minimum wage stipulated by the Government.

Decree 05/2015/ND-CP dated 12 January 2015 of the Government detailing and guiding the implementation of several contents of the Labor Code (“ Decree 05/2015/ND-CP “) also prescribe this case as follows:

Article 8. Temporary job transfer

Temporary transfer of employees to perform jobs which are not stated in employment contracts in Clause 1, Article 31 of Labor Code shall be prescribed as follows :

1. The employer shall be entitled to temporarily transfer the employee to perform jobs other than those in the labor contract in the following cases:

a) Natural disasters, conflagration, epidemics;

b) Application of preventive and remedial measures against occupational accidents and diseases;

c) Electricity and water supply failure;

d) Operating demands.      

2. The employer shall specify in the corporate rules that the employer may temporarily transfer the employee to jobs other than those in the labor contract due to production and business demands.

3. If employers have temporarily transferred their employees to perform jobs other than those in the employment contract for 60 cumulative working days in a year, and they continue to temporarily transfer the empl oyees to perform jobs other than those defined in the employment contract, the written consent shall be obtained from the employees.

4. If the employees do not agree to be temporarily transferred to the jobs other than those in the employment contracts as specified in Clause 3 of this Article and quit their jobs, the employers shall pay them salary for such quit as prescribed in Clause 1 of Article 98 of the Labor Code.

For this matter, the Labor Code 2019 has synthesized the contents of the provisions of Labor Code 2012 and Decree 05/2015/ND-CP, thus in general the provisions on the job transfer of Labor Code 2019 are more detailed and do not conflict with Labor Code 2012.

Permanent job transfer

Based on Point c, Clause 1, Article 23 of the Labor Code 2012 (corresponding to Point c, Clause 1, Article 21 of Labor Code 2019), the job and the workplace are one of the must-have contents of the labor contract. Therefore, when wanting to change job (change of job, workplace), the employer must amend and supplement the labor contract in accordance with Article 35 of Labor Code 2012 (similar provisions in Article 33 of Labor Code 2019).

The employer must notify the employee at least 3 working days in advance of the job transfer. If the two parties can reach an agreement, the amendment and supplement shall be carried out by signing the labor contract appendix or concluding a new labor contract. If the two parties do not come to an agreement, they will continue to perform the signed labor contract.

In addition, the law also stipulates cases of sanctioning employers when transferring jobs in contravention of the law, specifically:

• The employer may be fined from 1,000,000 VND to 3,000,000 VND if he / she temporarily transfers the employee to work other than the labor contract without notifying the employee in advance 03 working days or not clearly informing the temporary work duration or the job placement is not suitable for the health and gender of the employer.
• The employer can be fined from 3,000,000 VND to 7,000,000 VND if he/she transfers the employee to work other than the labor contract without suitable reasons, term or without a  consent of employees in writing in accordance with the law.

Therefore, employees and employers need to have a clear understanding of the rules and procedures for job transfer to protect their legitimate rights and interests. To better understand these contents or other information such as: unilateral labor contract termination disputes, labor discipline disputes, salary disputes, insurance disputes, labor transfer disputes, disputes about the dismissal … or information about excellent labor consulting lawyers, salary consulting lawyers, insurance consulting lawyers …. Readers can contact Lac Duy & Associates for timely advice and support.

More information: The Procedures For Settlement Of Individual Labor Disputes

• “Battle” against plastic carrier bags: Experience from England
• How To Recover Bad Debt
• The Procedures For Settlements Of Civil Contract Disputes

Transfer And Assignment Agreement

Jump to Section

What is a transfer and assignment agreement.

A transfer and assignment agreement is a legal document that outlines the terms and conditions of the transfer of an employee from one company to another. It also includes the assignment of all rights and obligations, including any IP or confidential information. This document can be used to protect both the employee and the employer in case of any disputes. When negotiating a transfer and assignment agreement, it is important to consider all potential risks and liabilities.

Common Sections in Transfer And Assignment Agreements

Below is a list of common sections included in Transfer And Assignment Agreements. These sections are linked to the below sample agreement for you to explore.

Transfer And Assignment Agreement Sample

Reference : Security Exchange Commission - Edgar Database, EX-10.7 10 dex107.htm FORM OF SALE, TRANSFER AND ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT , Viewed April 26, 2022, View Source on SEC .

Who Helps With Transfer And Assignment Agreements?

Lawyers with backgrounds working on transfer and assignment agreements work with clients to help. Do you need help with a transfer and assignment agreement?

Post a project  in ContractsCounsel's marketplace to get free bids from lawyers to draft, review, or negotiate transfer and assignment agreements. All lawyers are vetted by our team and peer reviewed by our customers for you to explore before hiring.

Meet some of our Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers

Matt Curry is a seasoned attorney specializing in real estate law and contract matters. With a deep understanding of contract law and extensive experience in negotiating and drafting contracts, Matt has earned a reputation for providing exceptional legal counsel to clients. As the founder and principal attorney at MPC LAW, Matt is committed to delivering tailored legal solutions. MPC LAW is renowned for its expertise in real estate transactions, lease agreements, contract negotiations, and dispute resolution. Matt's approach combines legal acumen with a client-centered focus, ensuring that every client receives personalized attention and strategic advice. Whether navigating complex real estate deals or resolving contractual disputes, Matt and his team at MPC LAW consistently achieve favorable outcomes for their clients. With a track record of success and a commitment to excellence, Matt Curry and MPC LAW are trusted partners for individuals and businesses seeking reliable legal counsel in real estate and contract matters.

Born in Cleveland, Ohio - 9/15/1974 Lived in Cleveland all my life went to college at Ohio Wesleyan University - graduated in 1996 went to law school at Cleveland Marshall College of Law - graduated in 2001 passed the OH bar exam in 2003 worked at the OH Atty General's office, at cuyahoga county prosecutor office and as a solo practitioner

I am a Swiss-American lawyer based in Florida and specialize in business, investments, and other civil matters. I have won many cases in both state and federal litigation, and arbitration. Before litigation or arbitration, however, I like to prevent these legal disputes by ensuring my clients base their business on strong concrete contracts that will protect them even decades down the road. My clients are my top priority, which is why they get my personal cell and can reach me anytime. My firm is also established on the extremely high standards of professionalism, transparent itemized billing, fast turnaround times and more. For more information, visit: https://www.transnationalmatters.com/

I am a Partner at Kashyap Partners (operating in California, New York and New Jersey), along with it's sister firm in India. I have been working as a technology, transactional and data privacy lawyer for 5 years with a specialisation in start-up law.

Ms. Melton-Mitchell is a seasoned executive that has obtained a law degree and is practicing law as a second career. She has spent over 25 years in the health care industry and is well versed in health law, contract law, financial law, trusts and estates, M&A and other types of transactional law. She maintains evening and weekend hours to allow clients flexibility in connecting with her around their schedule.

Robert McMillan Arthur is a collaborative attorney and mediator practicing across Wisconsin, with offices in the Metro Milwaukee area and Northeastern Wisconsin. He is a general practitioner, concentrating in Small Business Law, Entertainment Law, Intellectual Property Law, Nonprofit Law, Divorce and Family Law. Robert’s business law practice focuses on the needs of small, closely-held businesses and startups. As a veteran of a family owned business, Robert applies his extensive experience to advise his clients in a broad spectrum of legal issues, including contracts, licensing, trademark, copyright, employment, and business formation. With multidisciplinary qualifications and experiences, Robert chose his career in law to help people caught up in difficult situations in their personal or professional lives. His core principle of law practice is based on empowering and informing clients, advocating for their interests when appropriate, and guiding them in difficult problem solving.

I have practiced civil law for 13 years and have concentrated my practice serving the construction and real estate industries.

Find the best lawyer for your project

Quick, user friendly and one of the better ways I've come across to get ahold of lawyers willing to take new clients.

How It Works

Post Your Project

Get Free Bids to Compare

Hire Your Lawyer

Business lawyers by top cities

• Austin Business Lawyers
• Boston Business Lawyers
• Chicago Business Lawyers
• Dallas Business Lawyers
• Denver Business Lawyers
• Houston Business Lawyers
• Los Angeles Business Lawyers
• New York Business Lawyers
• Phoenix Business Lawyers
• San Diego Business Lawyers
• Tampa Business Lawyers

Transfer And Assignment Agreement lawyers by city

• Austin Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Boston Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Chicago Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Dallas Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Denver Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Houston Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Los Angeles Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• New York Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Phoenix Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• San Diego Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers
• Tampa Transfer And Assignment Agreement Lawyers

Contracts Counsel was incredibly helpful and easy to use. I submitted a project for a lawyer's help within a day I had received over 6 proposals from qualified lawyers. I submitted a bid that works best for my business and we went forward with the project.

I never knew how difficult it was to obtain representation or a lawyer, and ContractsCounsel was EXACTLY the type of service I was hoping for when I was in a pinch. Working with their service was efficient, effective and made me feel in control. Thank you so much and should I ever need attorney services down the road, I'll certainly be a repeat customer.

I got 5 bids within 24h of posting my project. I choose the person who provided the most detailed and relevant intro letter, highlighting their experience relevant to my project. I am very satisfied with the outcome and quality of the two agreements that were produced, they actually far exceed my expectations.

Want to speak to someone?

Get in touch below and we will schedule a time to connect!

Find lawyers and attorneys by city

• About the Authors

Demotion of Employee Philippines

Important rules on how to demote an employee in the Philippines

• The Philippine Guide on Employee Transfers and Demotions

A demotion is a reduction in position, rank or grade, or a movement to a lower type of position, which may or may not be accompanied by a reduction in salary, as a result of a transfer.

It is different from a reassignment or transfer which is a movement from one position to another which is of equivalent rank, level or salary, without interruption in service.

As a rule, changes in rank or position within the company are considered valid only when they are based on just and valid grounds such as genuine business necessity.

Even when a demotion is justified such as a reorganization to streamline operations, the employer must observe the proper procedure required of valid terminations.  Part of due process in effecting a demotion is the presence of just cause.  Without just cause, an unjustified demotion may constitute constructive dismissal, for which an employer may be held liable for backwages and damages.

What is constructive dismissal? How then should an employer go about transferring or demoting an employee in order to promote the goals of business?

These are just some of the things that the authors of “44 Rules of Employee Transfer and Demotion” answers in this practical guidebook.

The Labor Code hardly deals with transfers and demotions and you won’t find official set of rules to rely on to guide employers and employees alike.  Instead, lawyers rely on Supreme Court rulings which deal with certain aspects of demotion.  44 Rules is a compilation of these rules which are embodied in numerous cases decided in the past few years.

If you don’t follow these basic rules, you could end up in a labor court defending a decision that may seem appropriate but which may lack certain legal requirements.  Worse, you may be found liable for failing to meet these requirements and compelled to pay an employee not only backwages but also huge amounts as damages.

This guide will help you make informed decisions before it’s too late.

The authors (who are HR practitioners and lawyers at the same time) know how HR specialists and managers (even small business owners) struggle with documenting HR decisions.  So, they’re doing their readers a favor—they have included sample notices and forms to guide you in laying down the basis of  transfers and demotions the LEGAL WAY.

This is one guide you’ll want to keep as one of your tools for managing employees and your business!

Paperback copies of 44 Rules on Transfers and Demotions are now available at National Bookstore, Fully Booked and Powerbooks stores nationwide.  If you are the type of person who wants to get hold of your copy now, an ebook version in PDF format is also available for purchase and delivery online.  Get quick access to this guide with sample forms and notices in less than the time it will take you to head for the bookstore.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

• The First Written Guide on Employee Transfers and Demotions and Why You Should Learn the Rules

format_list_bulleted Topic Overview

Labor schedules and pay allocation.

Roles and responsibilities for administration of employee pay are set by each school or department. When an employee is hired by Stanford, their job-related data, such as type of job held, rate of pay, and the type of pay (salary or hourly) is entered into the PeopleSoft Human Resources Management system. This page describes how Oracle Financials labor schedules are used to establish the project-task-award (PTA) account or accounts to be charged for the employee's pay and how pay is allocated.

Employees Requiring Labor Schedules

Labor schedules are set up for the following types of employees:

• Bargaining unit
• Hourly-paid contingent and student employees

Graduate students and postdoctoral scholars are paid through the Graduate Financial Support (GFS) system and therefore do not require a labor schedule.

Creating Labor Schedules

Labor schedules are created for future payroll earnings using the Labor Schedules system in Oracle Financials. Labor schedules consist of one or more PTA, the salary expenditure type associated with the employee’s job classification code (JCC) or type of pay, the start date and end date for the allocation, and the percentage of funding by PTA and E (expenditure type). 

Labor Schedule Entry Considerations

• An assignment labor schedule determines how an employee’s pay is to be distributed.
• A pay code labor schedule determines how a supplemental payment and/or housing payment is to be distributed if it hasn’t already been specified in PeopleSoft. 
• Labor schedules can have multiple lines, each with a different PTA, start date, end date, and percentage of effort. 
• Labor schedules must be set up to account for 100% PTA allocation for each assignment, regardless of the employee’s FTE.
• For employees funded by non-sponsored PTAs , this field must be populated with the last day of the fiscal year (31-AUG-XXXX) unless the assignment ends before this date.
• For employees funded by sponsored PTAs , the end date should match dates from the sponsored agreement (possibly in future fiscal years).
• End dates on labor schedule lines will be used to create Salary Encumbrances (Commitments).
• At  fiscal year-end close, central administrative staff in Financial Management Services change all labor schedule lines on non-sponsored PTAs with end dates of 31-AUG of the current fiscal year to 31-AUG of the next fiscal year.

For detailed instructions, see How to: Create or Update Individual Labor Schedule  and How to: Create or Update Individual Labor Schedule with Salary Cap . For more instructions and information including access, training, reporting, and more, refer to Labor Schedules . 

Allocating Pay

The PTA account charged for a payroll payment depends upon the type of employee being paid and the type of payment. Payments are allocated to an Expenditure Type using logic determined by the combination of the payroll earn codes  used for the payment and the job classification code (JCC) associated with the employee's job record in PeopleSoft. For details, refer to Resource: Job Classification Codes (JCCs) Mapped to Salary Expenditure Type Codes .

Expenditure Type Codes drive the fringe benefit rate charged on the payment and the description of expense on OBI Consolidated Expenditure Reporting (CER)  dashboard reports.

Salaried Employees

Regular salary payments are allocated to the PTA indicated on the employee's Oracle Financials labor schedule. The Expenditure Type Code, and associated fringe benefit rate, is automatically applied based upon the combination of the payroll earn codes  and employee's JCC.

Hourly Employees

Hourly pay is allocated to the PTA indicated on the employee's Axess timecard or the labor schedule if the timecard so indicates (i.e., LD) . The Expenditure Type Code and associated fringe benefit rate is automatically applied based upon the combination of the payroll earn codes and employee's JCC.

Overtime Payments

Overtime payments are allocated to a PTA using the same logic as indicated above for salaried and hourly employee types. Overtime payments receive an Expenditure Type Code specific to overtime.

Other Payments

Payments for items that are not regular salary or regular hours are allocated to the PTA indicated on the payment request. Most payments receive the Expenditure Type Code, and associated fringe benefit rate, associated with the employee's regular job. Exceptions are payroll payments that are not considered part of base wages, such as bonus and housing payments, or payments charged directly to a benefits pool, such as vacation, disability or workers' compensation related to an illness and severance.

Impact of Invalid PTA Accounts on Pay Allocation

If the PTA indicated for a payment is not valid at the time of allocation in Oracle Financials, the charge is applied to the Organization Suspense Account (OSA) associated with the department (org) of the employee work assignment (job) in PeopleSoft. Payments charged to the OSA must be cleared by creating a labor distribution adjustment to move the charge to the appropriate PTA. Refer to Topic Overview: Organization Suspense Accounts  and How to: Clear Organization Suspense Accounts for Labor .

Labor Schedules Email Notifications

Departments and budget units receive Labor Schedules (LS) system-generated email notifications organized by org code when action might be required on an employee’s labor schedule. The following are the types of email notifications LS users might receive, which include a table of the impacted employee(s) and instructions on how to resolve the issue:

• No Labor Schedule: This notification is sent when an employee is missing a labor schedule in the current pay period.
• Labor Schedule Ending: This notification is sent when an employee has a labor schedule end date that is earlier than the current pay period end date.
• Invalid PTA: This notification is sent when an employee’s labor schedule has a PTA that is not valid for the current pay period.
• Assignment Transfer To: This notification is sent when an employee has transferred from one department to another within the same budget unit. This is sent to the new department to confirm the employee has transferred to this department.
• Assignment Transfer From: This notification is sent when an employee has transferred from one department to another within the same budget unit. This is sent to the former department to confirm the employee has transferred from this department.
• Budget Unit Assignment Transfer To: This notification is sent when an employee transfers from a budget unit to another. This is sent to the new budget unit to confirm the employee has transferred to this department.
• Budget Unit Assignment Transfer From: This notification is sent when an employee transfers from a budget unit to another. This is sent to the former budget unit to confirm the employee has transferred from this department.

Announcement Apr 12, 2024 Change Roadmap: Upcoming Projects and Enhancements

Announcement Feb 22, 2024 Continuous Improvements to Fingate

Newsletter Jun 22, 2023 Excellence in Financial Stewardship | Issue 8

S&RO (Systems and Reporting Operations) Email

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

ALEXANDER G. GESMUNDO Associate Justice

A T T E S T A T I O N

I attest that the conclusions in the above Decisionhad been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.

PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice Chairperson, Third Division

C E R T I F I C A T I O N

Pursuant to the Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution and the Division Chairperson’s Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.

MARIA LOURDES P.A. SERENO Chief Justice

1 Manalo v. Ateneo de Naga University, 772 Phil. 366, 369 (2015). [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].

2 Rollo, pp. 10-28.

3 Id. at 248-257. The Decision was penned by Associate Justice Edgardo T. Lloren and concurred in by Associate Justices Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob and Edward B. Contreras of the Twenty-Third Division, Court of Appeals, Cagayan de Oro City.

4 Id. at 266-268. The Resolution was penned by Associate Justice Edgardo T. Lloren and concurred in by Associate Justices Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob and Edward B. Contreras of the Twenty-Third Division, Court of Appeals, Cagayan de Oro City.

5 Id. at 180-184. The Decision, docketed as NLRC No. MAC-01-011835-2011, was penned by Presiding Commissioner Bario-rod M. Talon and concurred in by Commissioners Proculo T. Sarmen and Dominador B. Medroso, Jr. of the Eighth Division, National Labor Relations Commission, Cagayan de Oro City.

6 Id. at 204-205. The Decision was penned by Presiding Commissioner Bario-rod M. Talon and concurred in by Commissioners Proculo T. Sarmen and Dominador B. Medroso, Jr. of the Eighth Division, National Labor Relations Commission, Cagayan de Oro City.

7 Id. at 258-264.

8 Id. at 249.

9 Also referred to as "C. Josol" in some documents.

10 Rollo, p. 249.

11 Id. at 40-41 and 59-60.

12 Id. at 41 and 60.

14 Id. at 181.

15 Id. at 181 and 249.

16 Id. at 155.

17 Id. at l81.

18 Id. at 249.

19 Id. at 181.

20 Id. at 249.

22 Id. at 40-42.

25 Id. at 42.

26 Id. at 156.

27 Id. at 181.

28 Id. at 250.

31 Id. at 154-162. The Decision, docketed as NLRC RAB-XI-03-00352-2010, was penned by Labor Arbiter Merceditas C. Larida of Branch No. XI, National Labor Relations Commission, Davao City.

32 Id. at 158.

33 Id. at 130-135.

34 Id. at 128-129.

35 Id. at 130-134.

36 Id. at 158-159.

37 Id. at 180-184.

38 Id. at 183.

39 Id. at 184.

40 Id. at 254-255.

41 Id. at 258-264.

42 Cristobal v. Employees' Compensation Commission, 186 Phil. 324, 329 (1980) [Per J. Makasiar, First Division].

43 Manalo v. Ateneo de Naga University, 772 Phil. 366, 382 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division], citing Rivera v. Genesis Transport, 765 Phil. 544 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division], and San Miguel Brewery Sales Force Union v. Opie, 252 Phil. 27, 30 (1989) [Per J. Griño-Aquino, First Division].

44 392 Phil. 50 (2000) [Per J. Pardo, First Division].

45 Id. at 56-57. See Deles, Jr. v. National Labor Relations Commission, 384 Phil. 271 (2000) [Per J. Quisumbing, Second Division] and China Banking Corp. v. Borromeo, 483 Phil. 643 (2004) [Per J. Callejo, Sr., Second Division].

46 545 Phil. 619 (2007) [Per J. Sandoval-Guttierez, First Division].

47 Id. at 624, citing Baybay Water District v. Commission on Audit, 425 Phil. 326 (2002) [Per J. Mendoza, En Banc]; and Durban Apartments Corp. v. Catacutan, 545 Phil. 619 (2005) [Per J. Sandoval-Gutierrez, First Division].

48 574 Phil. 556 (2008) [Per J. Tinga, Second Division].

49 Id. at 569-570, citing Gustilo v. Wyeth Philippines, Inc., 574 Phil. 556 (2004) [Per J. Sandoval-Gutierrez, Third Division] and Coca Cola Bottlers, Phils., Inc. v. Kapisanan ng Malayang Manggagawa sa Coca Cola-FFW, 492 Phil. 570 (2005) [Per J. Callejo, Sr., Second Division].

51 LABOR CODE, art. 297 (282) provides:

Article 297. [282] Termination by Employer. - An employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes: (a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work; (b) Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties; (c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized representative; (d) Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the person of his employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly authorized representatives; and (e) Other causes analogous to the foregoing.

52 Orlando Farms Growers Association v. National Labor Relations Commission, 359 Phil. 693, 701(1998) [Per J. Romero, Third Division].

53 553 Phil. 108 (2007) [Per J. Velasco, Jr., Second Division].

54 Id. at 115.

55 Id. at 115-116.

56 638 Phil. 150 (2010) [Per J. Perez, First Division].

57 Id. at 160.

58 Maula v. Ximex Delivery Express, Inc., G.R. No. 207838, January 25, 2017 <http://sc.judiciary.gov .ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/january2017 /20783 8. pdt> 17 [Per J. Peralta, Second Division].

59 639 Phil. 449 (2010) [Per J. Perez, First Division].

60 Id. at 458-459, citing Challenge Socks Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 511 Phil. 4 (2005) [Per J. Ynares-Santiago, First Division].

61 Rodriguez v. Park N Ride, Inc., G.R. No. 222980, March 20, 2017 <http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/march2017 /222980.pdt> 7- 8 [Per J. Leonen, Second Division], citing Gan v. Galderma Philippines, Inc., 701 Phil. 612, 638-639 (2013) [Per J. Peralta, Third Division]; Portuguez v. GSJS Family Bank (Comsavings Bank), 546 Phil. 140, 153 (2007) [Per J. Chico-Nazario, Third Division]; and, Uniwide Sales Warehouse Club v. National Labor Relations Commission, 570 Phil. 535, 548 (2008) [Per J. Austria-Martinez, Third Division].

62 Manalo v. Ateneo de Naga University, 772 Phil. 366, 369 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].

63 Rodriguez v. Park N Ride, Inc., G.R. No. 222980, March 20, 2017 <http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/march2017 /222980.pdt> 8 [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].

64 Manalo v. Ateneo de Naga University, 772 Phil. 366, 383 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].

65 Rodriguez v. Park N Ride, Inc., G.R. No. 222980, March 20, 2017 <http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/march2017 /222980.pdt> 1 [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].

66 Rollo, pp. 255-256. The entirety of the Court of Appeals' ratio decidendi reads:

It is to Our observation that constructive dismissal is apparent in the case at bar. Constructive dismissal is defined as a quitting because continued employment is rendered impossible, unreasonable or unlikely; when there is a demotion in rank or a diminution of pay. The test of constructive dismissal is whether a reasonable person in the employee's position would have felt compelled to give up his position under the circumstances. It is an act amounting to dismissal but is made to appear as if it were not. Constructive dismissal is therefore a dismissal in disguise. The law recognizes and resolves this situation in favor of employees in order to protect their rights and interests from the coercive acts of the employer. At first glance, it would seem that petitioner was "invited to participate" in the investigation against Tan and Sobacio. But during said investigation, petitioner was made to admit the commission of the crime instead: . . . . Pelayo further narrated that during the investigation, those officers of Sulpicio forced her to admit the offense - the alteration on the check issued to C. Josol. Having no knowledge at all to (sic) the said transaction Pelayo stood firm of (sic) her lack of knowledge and participation whatsoever to (sic) the said transaction (thereof). Mr. Devin Go, on (sic) their one-on-one conversation once again forced her to admit her participation and even offered that if she admits the charge they will allow her to pay it on (sic) installment basis. Pelayo, who could no longer withstand the baseless and malevolent accusation of respondents, left Cebu City and upon her arrival in Davao City, she was immediately rushed to San Pedro Hospital and was confined because of depression and nervous breakdown. Not contented, on (the) same day, Mr. Devin Go even called up Pelayo and ordered her to come back to Cebu City which she vehemently opposed. Thru counsel, Pelayo sent a letter to Sulpicio dated March 10, 2010 reciting Pelayo's dismay over the way Sulpicio, thru its officers, conducted the investigation. Pelayo also manifested her intention to go on leave of absence for 6 months and to tum over all accounting documents to the company ....

As shown by the evidence at hand and the findings of the Labor Arbiter, petitioner was compelled to give up her employment due to [Sulpicio Lines'] unfounded, unreasonable and improper accusations, which made her employment unbearable. (Citations omitted)

67 Id. at 255.

68 Id. at 256.

69 Id. at 255.

70 Id. at 181.

71 RULES OF COURT, Rule 128, sec. 1.

72 DIANE E. PAPALIA, SALLY WNDKOS OLDS AND RUTH DUSKIN FELDMAN, HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 377 (9th ed. 1994).

73 Id. at 545.

75 Rollo, p. 158.

76 Id. at 181.

77 Id. at 128-134.

78 An Act Creating a Bureau of Investigation, Providing Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes (1947).

79 The National Bureau of Investigation Reorganization and Modernization Act (2016).

80 Rep. Act No. 157, Section l(b).

81 638 Phil. 150 (2010) [Per J. Perez, First Division].

82 Id. at 159.

Invention Assignment Agreements – How to Avoid Pitfalls

Related Insights

Dol increases compensation threshold for exempt employees, pwfa final rule is now published — it takes effect june 18, 2024, 2024 health care & life sciences top trends.

Trending News

Related Practices & Jurisdictions

• Labor & Employment
• Intellectual Property
• Administrative & Regulatory

On September 15, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law a new section of the New York Labor Law limiting the assignment of inventions by employees to their employers. Specifically, Section 203-f of the Labor Law renders unenforceable provisions in employment agreements that require employees to assign certain inventions to their employer which were developed using the employee’s own property and time. The new law became immediately effective upon Governor Hochul’s signing.

New Labor Law Section 203-f bans the enforcement of invention assignment agreements that entitle employers to intellectual property developed by employees entirely on their own time without using their employer’s equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information; unless the invention relates at the time of conception or reduction to practice of the invention to the employer’s business, or actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development of the employer, or if the invention results from any work performed by the employee for the employer. Section 203-f further provides that a requirement in an employment agreement that an employee assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention developed on his or her own time to an employer is against New York State public policy and shall be unenforceable. Notably, Section 203-f does not state that such a provision renders an entire employment agreement unenforceable if it contains such a provision and does not create a private right of action.

The new bill was originally sponsored by New York State Senator Jessica Ramos from the 13th Senate District. State lawmakers approved the legislation in June 2023 after other States, including California, Illinois, New Jersey, and Nevada approved similar protections.

In fact, the bill provides protections similar to California’s Labor Code Section 2870. However, the New York legislation differs from its California counterpart in that California Labor Code Section 2870 includes language that explicitly allows employers to require employees to disclose all inventions employees develop during the term of their employment. California also places a burden on employees to prove that their inventions are not covered by their employee invention assignment agreement.

As a result, employers should review their employment agreements in New York to ensure they comply with the new law and draft any new agreements accordingly. Jackson Lewis attorneys continue to monitor further developments. 

Current Legal Analysis

More from jackson lewis p.c., upcoming legal education events.

Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins

31 U.S. Code § 3727 - Assignments of claims

In subsection (a)(1), the words “or share thereof” and “whether absolute or conditional, and whatever may be the consideration therefor” are omitted as surplus. In clause (2), the word “authorization” is substituted for “powers of attorney, orders, or other authorities” to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsections (b) and (c), the word “official” is substituted for “officer” for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code.

In subsection (b), the words “Except as hereinafter provided” are omitted as unnecessary. The words “read and” are omitted as surplus. The words “to the person acknowledging the same” are omitted as unnecessary. The text of 31:203(1st par. last sentence) is omitted as superseded by 39:410. The words “Notwithstanding any law to the contrary governing the validity of assignments ” and the text of 31:203(last par.) are omitted as unnecessary.

In subsection (c), before clause (1), the words “bank, trust company, or other . . . including any Federal lending agency” are omitted as surplus. The words “of money due or to become due under a contract providing for payments totaling at least $1,000” are substituted for “in any case in which the moneys due or to become due from the United States or from any agency or department thereof, under a contract providing for payments aggregating $1,000 or more” to eliminate unnecessary words. The text of 31:203(2d par. proviso cl. 1) is omitted as executed. In clause (1), the words “in the case of any contract entered into after October 9, 1940 ” are omitted as executed. In clause (2)(A), the words “payable under such contract” are omitted as surplus. In clause (3), the words “true” and “instrument of” are omitted as surplus. The words “department or” are omitted because of the restatement. The words “if any” and “to make payment” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (d), before clause (1), the words “During a war or national emergency proclaimed by the President or declared by law and ended by proclamation or law” are substituted for “in time of war or national emergency proclaimed by the President (including the national emergency proclaimed December 16, 1950 ) or by Act or joint resolution of the Congress and until such war or national emergency has been terminated in such manner” to eliminate unnecessary words. The words “ Department of Energy (when carrying out duties and powers formerly carried out by the Atomic Energy Commission)” are substituted for “Atomic Energy Commission” (which was reconstituted as the Energy Research and Development Administration by 42:5813 and 5814) because of 42:7151(a) and 7293. The words “other department or . . . of the United States . . . except any such contract under which full payment has been made” and “of any moneys due or to become due under such contract” before “shall not be subject” are omitted as surplus. The words “A payment subsequently due under the contract (even after the war or emergency is ended) shall be paid to the assignee without” are substituted for “and if such provision or one to the same general effect has been at any time heretofore or is hereafter included or inserted in any such contract, payments to be made thereafter to an assignee of any moneys due or to become due under such contract, whether during or after such war or emergency . . . hereafter” to eliminate unnecessary words. The words “of any nature” are omitted as surplus. In clause (1), the words “or any department or agency thereof” are omitted as unnecessary. In clause (2), the words “under any renegotiation statute or under any statutory renegotiation article in the contract” are omitted as surplus.

Subsection (e)(1) is substituted for 31:203(4th par.) to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsection (e)(2), the words “person receiving an amount under an assignment or allotment” are substituted for “assignees, transferees, or allottees” for clarity and consistency. The words “or to others for them” and “with respect to such assignments , transfers, or allotments or the use of such moneys” are omitted as surplus. The words “person making the assignment or allotment” are substituted for “assignors, transferors, or allotters” for clarity and consistency.

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

2009 California Labor Code - Section 300 :: Chapter 2. Assignment Of Wages

Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. California may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.

Get free summaries of new opinions delivered to your inbox!

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials