has an employee who didn't show up for work May 1 until May 11 without any leave or notice. He showed up May 12 and wanted to resume work. My friend refused to accept him back because he went on AWOL and considered to have abandoned his job. Is he correct?
My answer is the employer is not correct. Just because an employee is absent for a prolonged time does not constitute abandonment of work. The two notice rule is still in effect even in case of an AWOL employee.
The first notice is to require the employee to require him to show up for work and explain why he was absent for an extended period. If the employee comes back and has a valid excuse, then there is no abandonment. If the excuse is invalid, but since he came back, he also cannot be accused of abandonment, but he can be disciplined for neglect of duty.
In case he fails to respond, or refuses to show up for work, then the second notice is to inform him that he is considered to be on AWOL and have abandoned his job.
The notices must be sent to the employee either personally or by registered mail with return card. It is important to send to the right address. This is because his receipt of such notice is required to complete the due process requirement.
Many employers cannot understand why this rule is in effect. They must understand that the labor law is there to protect the laborers, not management. If you can't beat them, join them. Just follow the rules.
No comments:
Post a Comment