An employee has had a job for 5 years. He is unhappy and wants to resign. The company tells him that if he resigns, he will not get the "liquidacion". He was not 'liquidated" yearly.
Is it legal? Do you have to be laid off to get liquidacion?
Thanks,
Barnab?
To the best of my knowledge, you do need to be laid off in order to qualify for "liquidacion"...In fact, the word means more or less that, liquidacion de contrato de trabajo....Do you have to be laid off to get liquidacion?
To the best of my knowledge, you do need to be laid off in order to qualify for "liquidacion"...In fact, the word means more or less that, liquidacion de contrato de trabajo....
On a related note, it is legal in the DR for a firm to "fire" and immediately rehire an employee, if the firm pays the corresponding "prestaciones" to the affected employee(s)...some firms do it as a matter of routine...to most everybody, every year.
To the best of my knowledge, you do need to be laid off in order to qualify for "liquidacion"...In fact, the word means more or less that, liquidacion de contrato de trabajo....
On a related note, it is legal in the DR for a firm to "fire" and immediately rehire an employee, if the firm pays the corresponding "prestaciones" to the affected employee(s)...some firms do it as a matter of routine...to most everybody, every year.
In the link below, an expert seems to address this issue in the Hoy newspaper, and appears to indicate that the Supreme Court decision in fact confirmed the legality of the fire/rehire practice, without risks. It seems he was answering a question from someone who had received the fire/rehire liquidacion and apparently wanted to get more as if the first had not occurred (in Spanish, though):Yes,, they do, but at great risk. ...One day an employer doing this may have a smart employee enjoying his annual payment as well as the total liquidation due him.
Liquidation is intended to give an employee who loses the job that he wants to continue in some money while he looks for another job. An employee who quits his job does not get liquidation. He gets paid for unused vacation and a portion of the Christmas bonus, but he does not get the liquidation benefits paid to employees who are terminated.
Dominican employees know this
In the link below, an expert seems to address this issue in the Hoy newspaper, and appears to indicate that the Supreme Court decision in fact confirmed the legality of the fire/rehire practice, without risks. It seems he was answering a question from someone who had received the fire/rehire liquidacion and apparently wanted to get more as if the first had not occurred (in Spanish, though):
CONSULTORIO LABORAL - Hoy Digital
It may be unclear but I'll tell you one thing that is certain.
The courts and the judges in RD are VERY pro-employee..... especially against Sr Gringo but even w/ Dominicans
Horror stories abound.
MOST OFTEN THAN NOT, even if the employee leaves because he wants to leave, he gets liquidation. It's just not worth the hassle going through the labor courts (labor lawyers cost money, you know...)... the employee can become a real PITA then. He can be rude to customers, do FB all his day on his computer, etc...at the end, he will be FIRED (and that is what he wants) and then even if "legally" not entitled to liquidation if he does not do his job as he should and causes his employer a loss, it is known that courts will side with such fired employee anyway....Otherwise you may end up with a PITA employee who causes you huge reputation damage (just imagine such employee telling a customer that he is a stupid SOB)...or he is repairing something for a customer and makes a huge mess and f***d up work that is even worse off than in the beginning, etc....I mean, do you want THAT to happen in your business?
I would check the legality part., it is legal in the DR for a firm to "fire" and immediately rehire an employee, if the firm pays the corresponding "prestaciones" to the affected employee(s)...some firms do it as a matter of routine...to most everybody, every year.
I would check the legality part.
Don't see any contradiction...the employers who routinely terminate and rehire employees at the end of each year are technically firing them (laying them off) without fault on the employees' part...even if the employees are willing participants they have neither resigned nor done anything wrong and therefore are entitled to liquidacion...perhaps you meant that they had a one-year contract...the law does not see it that way...they are just being terminated (or laid off) for no fault of their own and hence are entitled to liquidacion even if they are offered their old jobs back, under a new contract.As stated by posters above, it is a widespread practice to liquidate the employees annually. But supposedly, the workers are entitled to liquidacion only if they are fired without valid reason; there is an obvious contradiction here between the law and the practice: why do you liquidate an employee if he is not entitled to?
Don't see any contradiction...the employers who routinely terminate and rehire employees at the end of each year are technically firing them (laying them off) without fault on the employees' part...even if the employees are willing participants they have neither resigned nor done anything wrong and therefore are entitled to liquidacion...perhaps you meant that they had a one-year contract...the law does not see it that way...they are just being terminated (or laid off) for no fault of their own and hence are entitled to liquidacion even if they are offered their old jobs back, under a new contract.
