• Effective April 21, 2014, Philip Luis F. Marin (Marin, for short) was appointed Reservations Officer of Cathay Pacific Aiways Ltd (Cathay) for a probationary period of six months. A letter dated March 23, 2014 was given to him specitying his appointment wherein he is to receive a monthly salary including holidays and rest days, with a promise of a salary review upon satisfactory completion of the probationary period. The letter also stated that Cathay reserved the right to terminate (Marin) services during the probationary period if performance proves to be unsatisfactory, in which case will receive the salary due at the time of the termination of his services. Mr. Marin accepted those terms of employment and that he would be reconfirmed asa member of regular staff upon completion of the probationary period. Mr. Marin was briefed and counseled by virtue of a Memorandum which was released by M.A. Canizares (Administrative Supervisor) dated October 15, 2013. It was noted that Mr. Marin was not furnished with the set of regulations of Cathay and copies of his assessment. However, Marin admitted that he was briefed by Senior Supervisor Nenitha Montallana on April 28, 2014 on the rules regarding phone calls, breaktime and others. Marin also admitted that he received from Cathay copies of document to be used to evaluate his performance. There were occasions that Marin was briefed on his unsatisfactory performance assessment on July 23, 2014.Finally on September 21, 2014, Marin was briefed on his performance assessment and Cathay s decision not to regularize his employment upon expiry of the probationary period. Marin was finaly informed of the termination of his services in a letter dated October 2, 2014. • Is the decision of Cathay not to regularize Marin's employment upon the expiration of the probationary period valid considering that Marin was not furnished copies of the set of regulations of Cathay, as well as his assessment reports?
Extracted text: Effective April 21, 2014, Philip Luis F. Marin (Marin, for short) was appointed Reservations Officer of Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd (Cathay) for a probationary period of six months. A letter dated March 23, 2014 was given to him specifying his appointment wherein he is to receive a monthly salary including holidays and rest days, with a promise of a salary review upon satisfactory completion of the probationary period. The letter also stated that Cathay reserved the right to terminate (Marin) services during the probationary period if performance proves to be unsatisfactory, in which case will receive the salary due at the time of the termination of his services. Mr. Marin accepted those terms of employment and that he would be reconfirmed as a member of regular staff upon completion of the probationary period. Mr. Marin was briefed and counseled by virtue of a Memorandum which was released by M.A. Canizares (Administrative Supervisor) dated October 15, 2013. It was noted that Mr. Marin was not furnished with the set of regulations of Cathay and copies of his assessment. However, Marin admitted that he was briefed by Senior Supervisor Nenitha Montallana on April 28, 2014 on the rules regarding phone calls, breaktime and others. Marin also admitted that he received from Cathay copies of document to be used to evaluate his performance. There were occasions that Marin was briefed on his unsatisfactory performance assessment on July 23, 2014.Finally on September 21, 2014, Marin was briefed on his performance assessment and Cathay 's decision not to regularize his employment upon expiry of the probationary period. Marin was finally informed of the termination of his services in a letter dated October 2, 2014. • Is the decision of Cathay not to regularize Marin's employment upon the expiration of the probationary period valid considering that Marin was not furnished copies of the set of regulations of Cathay, as well as his assessment reports?