Another way to stitch up employers!!

Firstly i would like to know if this is indeed true, I recently fired an employee who has been with us for two years and as he previously worked and behaved very well i gave him a 100% payrise six months ago.

I pay my employees per show, basically we have two circus shows that perform in hotels in Punta Cana almost everyday and i pay per show from 200-1000 pesos depending on their experience and capabilities.

Anyway, a visit to the secreteria de trabajo to calculate his liquidation (even though he was fired with cause, we have found this law to be a waste of time and money and to just pay them) resulted in me being told that i have to pay the liquidation for the whole two years based on what he has been paid for the last 3 months.

So if an employee has been paid for an example a salary of 4,500 a month for 21 months and 9,000 for the last three months, the employer has to pay liquidation based on the 9,000 salary for the total 2 years!!

I have been told that allthough i pay for each service and not a salary i still have to treat them as employees, even though esentially they are self employed. But what i would like to know is as i pay per show if this 3 month law is effective?

Has anyone else also had problems firing for cause, as i certainly seem too. As far as i can see the employees can refuse to do their jobs, steal and be verbally and sometimes physically abusive and still be rewarded for it.

Sigh.

ExtremeR said:

I love employers whining about paying liquidation when they are paying substandard wages in the first place, you guys should be thankful that you are not paying a minimum of US$7.15 like in the States. Pay him the liquidation to avoid future problems. He being verbally abusive (which is the reason you don't want to liquidate him) is not grounds for you to avoid your employer obligation.

And SKY is right, that law is for everybody, Dominicans and Gringos, I know a lot of Dominican businessman that had to pay RD$200,000 in the end because they tried to avoid paying liquidation of a lower quantity.

Click to expand...

Firstly, have a mentioned anywhere in my post about being foreign/gringa and "them" being dominican?????????????

I have spoken purely as employer and employee, correct me if i am wrong!

Secondly the wages i spoke about were an example hence the "for example" so not as to give exact financial information to strangers for the perpose of an enquiry.

Thirdly i have many young adults under the age of 21 earning in excess of 30,000 per month!! How many people on here can say they pay the same especially to young adults that have almost zero education, some of them that cant even read or write!! We trained them am have given them pay and oppurtunities that very few get here.

I sometimes think maybe there are a few here that struggle to read properly as i said I went to the secreteria de trabajo to calculate his liquidation even though he had been fired for cause and i did not give the reason why either. He stole a very expensive piece of Dj equipment form a hotel and was caught and thrown out of the hotel by security!! Do you not think this was a "cause" to be fired without liquidation. I said it was a waste of time and was going to pay his liquidation anyway!!

What i wanted to know is if anyone does know if the "3 month" rule is infact the case and if it applies to employees on salary only?

No do you actually have anything productive to say or would you like to read the original post again?

Conchman said:

There is a formula for the liquidation, I think you can get it from a government website, probably the dept. of labor. I do believe it is based on the money earned, not on the salary of the last 3 months.

My suggestion here, is to hire a good labor lawyer that can assist you on these matters. You should also have a 'discarga' or whatever its called, handy, so that when you pay out the liquidation to any employee, the employee signs it which is a release of liability and any future claims or lawsuits. Your lawyer can help you prepare these forms.

Firing people 'on cause' exists in theory, but not in practice. We have had many instances where the Dept. of Labor has recommended that we fire the employee on cause, or that we are justified in doing so, only to be sued and lose that case later.

The big problem with the liquidation laws is that it creates a culture of employees who want to be fired. Or when they want to resign, to take another job for example, they will start causing problems on purpose, in order to get fired. This presents a tricky situation because if you start paying full liquidation to these employees, than all other know all they have to do is yell at you or show up late a few times, in order to receive the full liquidation. In these cases we have settled for half the liquidation money before, if they resign.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much, that does help and only confirms what i already thought.

The reason i ask is because i feel some of these laws especially this recent one will infact stop employers from giving people pay rises and paying peanuts, which does not benefit the employee.

I pay well to people who have little or no education when in fact i shoot myself in the foot when it comes to liquidating which i usually do with no problems, but this recent law which i had never come across before really seemed quite unfair, as rewarding the employee with a 100% payrise for loyal service and good work only came back on me when he decided to thieve from a hotel and put the business at huge risk at loosing not one but all three Dream hotels on our programme and now i have to reward him with liquidation calculated on the last 3 months pay for two years work!

Thank you for your advice.

SKY said:

A friend of mine has a lot of Banca Desportes. He had a worker just take the day's receipts, about 40,000 rd and leave with it.

He contacted the guy, who of course denied it. So he fired the guy.

Forget liquidation, the employee had an attorney approach my friend and tell him he was getting sued for Deformation of Character.

My friend, who is Dominican, by the way. And lived here all his life ended up paying 120,000 rd to settle the whole matter.

So it is not only Gringos that get this treatment.

Click to expand...

Yes i dont even try argueing anymore really, i just pay but was surprised mainly by the new or at least new to me 3 month rule.

I would just like to reiterate that i did not mention in my post about "us" the gringos and "them" the dominicans. I am aware that all employers are in the same boat.

ExtremeR said:

Now reading the WHOLE STORY, I apologize and I agree with you, the problem is that I sensed you complaining about paying liquidation for firing someone with a cause (trivial stuff like getting to work late, being confrontational). But if he indeed tried to steal an expensive equipment and the Labor Department still force you to liquidate him in full, then there is something really wrong with the Labor Law.

One question though: Did you report him to the police? have a querella denouncing his attempted heist?? That's really important.

Click to expand...

I have a report form the hotel, had i been there i would have insisted they call the police. Maybe i can go to the police with the report.

In any case we have had things very similar in the past and we get advised to forget and just pay up, which yes i agree is wrong.

Its sad, as i do genuinely try to reward with good wages and payrises when appropriate, but my partner who is Dominican now says any new employess will be paid much less and recieve lower increases in salary. In my mind you pay peanuts you get monkeys, but recent events with many employees have taught me that paying young adults an excellent wage doesnt make them loyal nor stop them stealing etc either, so maybe he is right.

I recently gave (off my own back, without request by the employee) a 16 year old a 50% payrise from 500-750 per show, which means he now earns on average 21,000 a month. He was neither grateful and actually moaned about it. I told him to find me another 16 year old who does not work for me that earns the same money, working from 4pm till 12pm a day!!

Something someone did suggest is change the pay structure so they do not get paid per show, but indeed a salary plus incentive/propina which means they still earn good money but when they are liquidated it is based on the salary only, then being fair to everyone.

It seems i am my own worst enemy

ExtremeR said:

Now reading the WHOLE STORY, I apologize and I agree with you, the problem is that I sensed you complaining about paying liquidation for firing someone with a cause (trivial stuff like getting to work late, being confrontational). But if he indeed tried to steal an expensive equipment and the Labor Department still force you to liquidate him in full, then there is something really wrong with the Labor Law.

One stupid question though: Did you report him to the police? have a querella denouncing his attempted heist?? That's really important.

Click to expand...

Sorry to answer your question again, i was told by the secreteria that even a police report is a waste of time and to pay up!! So i didnt bother!! If we didnt we would loose in court!! :ermm:

bob saunders said:

My wife just fired someone for a trivial thing ( being late 17 days per month on average, as well as complains from parents that the children were not learning anything) Being reliable is very important for a teacher. Why would you think being late is trivial?

Click to expand...

I realize not quite the same thing but there is a law that if an employee misses more than 3 days work with out consent and or failure to inform the employer or produce a certificate from a doctor you can fire them without the need to pay liquidation.

I had an employee that missed 15 days in one month and had good evidence that they were indeed monnlighting for a rival show, but still was advised to pay in full and forget even trying to not pay up.

Like a previous poster added, its not the money as such allthough i do begrudge having to reward someone financially for irresponsible behavior, but it means that all employees know that if they want to leave rather than handing in the notice all they have to do is do something to be fored and they are in the money!

i remember reading in a post a long time ago someone suggested we just save 30% of the company profits purely for liquidation purposes........30%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

pyratt said:

It's a circus...I read another post that you say he stole...feed him to the LIONS and be done with it! (If your circus does not have LIONS, feed him to whatever animals you keep) Thieves ugh!

Click to expand...

The only animals i have are my employees!

PrincessaDR said:

the salary is calculated into the cost of the liquidation on a proportional basis. So the raise will average up the earnings.

Even if you pay them by the show they are most likely employees. Just pay.

Click to expand...

I have been told that the salary is calculated on the last three months of earnings.

So if he earned 9,000 pesos for first 21 months but then 18,000 for last three months, they will calculate it based on 18,000 per month for over entire 2 years!!

Thats what i dont think is fair, Ive never heard it until recently but it will certainly make me think twice about giving anyone a payrise at least a substancial one.