Which dismissals must an employer warn about in advance, and in which situations does the provision say no warning or payment is due?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file of this kind, we read the employment contract and the papers showing when the worker began continuous service, since one exception turns on the length of that service. We also read the dismissal letter, the date it was given, and any business records showing what happened at the workplace, because a further exception turns on an unavoidable reason or on the worker's own conduct.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the duty as the rule for every dismissal: where an employer dismisses a worker, dismissal for managerial reasons being included within that word, the employer must give warning at least the period the provision sets beforehand, and if that warning was not given in time, the employer must pay ordinary wages for at least that period.
Another reading turns to the exceptions, under which the duty does not apply at all: where the worker's continuous service is shorter than the period item one sets, where a natural disaster, calamity or other unavoidable reason makes continuing the business impossible, or where the worker intentionally causes serious disruption to the business or property damage falling within grounds set by an ordinance of the Ministry of Employment and Labor.
Your judgment
When the length of continuous service is the point, what in the file could show when that service began and whether any break in it matters?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change the period of warning or the exceptions, or if an ordinance of the Ministry of Employment and Labor is made or revised defining the grounds in the third exception.