Can an Employer Cancel a Job Offer After Acceptance?

Last materially reviewed: August 17, 2026

In April 2025, the Supreme Court answered a question that comes up constantly in Philippine hiring: once a candidate signs and accepts a job offer, can the company still cancel it? In Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation, the Court said no — a signed and accepted job offer is already a binding employment contract, and “an offer, once accepted, cannot be withdrawn.” An employer that rescinds it after acceptance is not cancelling a mere proposal; it is terminating an employee, and it must prove a valid cause the same way it would for anyone already on payroll.

This guide explains the ruling, when an employer can still legally withdraw an offer, what a rescinded candidate can claim, and what evidence both sides should keep.

Direct Answer

Once a job applicant signs a certain, unconditional job offer and communicates acceptance to the employer, Philippine law treats the employment contract as perfected — even before the reporting date and even if no separate employment contract is later signed. The Supreme Court held this squarely in Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation (G.R. No. 251736, April 2, 2025), ruling that a job offer “once accepted, cannot be withdrawn.” A later reporting date is ordinarily a suspensive period — a date that merely postpones the start of work — not a suspensive condition that lets the employer walk away if business needs change. Once the contract is perfected, the employer must treat withdrawal as a dismissal and prove a just or authorized cause with substantial evidence, or face liability for illegal dismissal.

Decision Snapshot

Question	Practical answer
Who this applies to	Any job applicant in the Philippines who signed a certain, unconditional written job offer and communicated acceptance back to the employer — most relevant to professional and managerial hires with a signed offer letter and a fixed future start date.
Core rule	A job offer is a contract proposal that ripens into a binding employment contract the moment acceptance is communicated to the employer (Civil Code, Arts. 1305, 1315, 1318, 1319). After that moment, the offer “cannot be withdrawn,” and cancelling it is legally a dismissal, not a lawful non-hire.^[1][2]
Principal exception	If the offer itself made hiring genuinely conditional on a future uncertain event — e.g., passing a licensure exam, clearing a background check, or securing a work permit — and that condition is not met, no contract is perfected and there is nothing to “dismiss” from. A fixed start date alone is not this kind of condition.^[3]
Evidence to retain	The signed offer letter, the applicant’s acceptance (email, signed copy, or messages), proof of resignation from a prior employer made in reliance on the offer, and the employer’s written notice of cancellation or “rescission,” including its stated reason.
First action	Request the cancellation reason in writing, preserve every document above, and calculate the working days lost between the promised start date and the present before deciding whether to pursue a claim.

Key Takeaways

Acceptance, not the start date, is what matters. A Philippine employment contract is generally perfected the moment the applicant’s acceptance reaches the employer — not on the applicant’s first day of work.
“Rescinding” a signed offer is legally a dismissal. After Aragones, an employer that cancels a perfected offer is terminating an employee and needs a just or authorized cause.
A future start date is usually a period, not a condition. The Court distinguished a certain future date (which only delays when the contract is demandable) from a genuine condition (an uncertain event that, if unmet, prevents the contract from arising at all).
Redundancy still has to be proven. Alltech tried to justify the cancellation as redundancy from a restructuring. The Court rejected it: a single general affidavit, without a staffing pattern, feasibility study, or job-description analysis, does not meet the employer’s burden.
The four-fold test did not apply here. That test decides whether an employment relationship exists at all. It does not apply where the employer admits an agreement was reached and then unilaterally cancelled it — that is a dismissal question, not an existence question.
Remedies followed ordinary illegal-dismissal rules. The Court awarded backwages and separation pay in lieu of reinstatement (since the employee no longer sought it), plus attorney’s fees and legal interest — but declined moral and exemplary damages because it found no bad faith.
Not every rescinded offer wins. A true condition that genuinely fails, or an offer withdrawn before the applicant ever accepted it, is not covered by this doctrine.

Jump to a Section

Legal basis
The case: Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation
The doctrine: when a Philippine job offer becomes binding
Applicability: does your situation fit the rule?
When an employer can still validly cancel an offer
Evidence and documentation
Remedies if a perfected offer is illegally withdrawn
What to do next
Boundaries: what this ruling does not establish
Practical hypotheticals
Terminology
Frequently asked questions

Legal Basis

Authority	Classification	Rule supported	Binding effect
Civil Code, Arts. 1305, 1318	Statute (suppletory to labor contracts)	A contract requires consent, object certain, and cause; consent is the meeting of offer and acceptance.	Binding law
Civil Code, Arts. 1315, 1319	Statute	A contract is perfected by mere consent, from the moment acceptance is made known to the offeror.	Binding law
Civil Code, Art. 1324; Marcos v. National Labor Relations Commission, 318 Phil. 172 (1995)	Statute / jurisprudential doctrine	The specific rule that an offer, once accepted, generally cannot be withdrawn — the authority the Court cited directly for its central holding in Aragones.	Binding law / persuasive precedent
Civil Code, Arts. 1179, 1181, 1193	Statute	Distinguishes an obligation subject to a period (a certain future event, which only defers demandability) from one subject to a condition (an uncertain future event, which affects the very existence of the obligation).	Binding law
Civil Code, Art. 1186	Statute	A condition is deemed fulfilled when the party obligated to perform voluntarily prevents its fulfillment.	Binding law
Labor Code, Art. 294 (formerly Art. 279)	Labor Code provision	Security of tenure; an employee may be dismissed only for a just or authorized cause and with due process.	Binding law
Labor Code, Art. 298 (formerly Art. 283)	Labor Code provision	Redundancy is an authorized cause for termination, but the employer bears the burden of proving it.	Binding law
Labor Code, Art. 224 (formerly Art. 217)	Labor Code provision	Labor Arbiters have original and exclusive jurisdiction over termination disputes and money claims arising from an employer-employee relationship, including one formed by a perfected but not-yet-commenced job offer.	Binding law
Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation, G.R. No. 251736, Apr. 2, 2025	Jurisprudential doctrine	A signed, accepted job offer perfects an employment contract; withdrawing it after acceptance is a dismissal requiring a proven just or authorized cause.	Controlling Supreme Court precedent
Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc., G.R. No. 162419, Jul. 10, 2007	Jurisprudential doctrine	Source of the period-versus-condition framework the Court applied to the July 1, 2016 start date.	Controlling Supreme Court precedent

The Case: Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation

Facts

On April 1, 2016, Alltech Biotechnology Corporation offered Paolo Landayan Aragones the position of Swine Technical Manager – Pacific, with a starting date of July 1, 2016. Aragones signed the offer letter on April 18, 2016, and emailed the signed copy back to Alltech the same day. On April 25, 2016, relying on the accepted offer, he resigned from his existing employer, Cargill Philippines, Inc.^[1]

In May 2016, Alltech’s head office implemented a global restructuring that, according to the company, made the Swine Technical Manager – Pacific position redundant. On June 10, 2016 — before Aragones’ scheduled start date — Alltech told him the position had been abolished and offered him PHP 140,000, equivalent to one month’s salary, as a goodwill payment. Aragones did not accept this and filed a labor complaint.^[1]

Procedural history

Level	Ruling
Labor Arbiter	Found illegal dismissal and ordered reinstatement, backwages of PHP 600,250.00, nominal damages of PHP 50,000.00, and 10% attorney’s fees. Held that the employment relationship began upon Aragones’ acceptance of the offer, that the elements commonly used to test an employment relationship were present, and that Alltech’s redundancy claim was unsubstantiated. (This award was later superseded by the Supreme Court’s own computation, below.)
NLRC	Reversed on appeal and dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, holding that no employer-employee relationship existed because employment was conditioned on the July 1 start date and no separate signed employment contract existed.
Court of Appeals	Denied Aragones’ certiorari petition and affirmed the NLRC, reasoning that a perfected contract is not the same as an existing employment relationship, and that the position’s abolition before the start date prevented the relationship from arising.
Supreme Court	Granted the petition, annulled the Court of Appeals’ ruling, and held that Aragones was illegally dismissed effective the perfection of the contract on April 18, 2016.

Issue and ruling

The central issue was whether an employer-employee relationship existed at all — and, if it did, whether Alltech’s cancellation of the offer was a valid exercise of business judgment or an illegal dismissal. The Supreme Court held that the contract was perfected on April 18, 2016, when Aragones’ signed acceptance reached Alltech, and that the July 1 start date was a period, not a condition, so its non-arrival did not erase the relationship the parties had already formed. Because Alltech could not adequately prove the redundancy it invoked, the cancellation was an illegal dismissal.^[1][2]

The Doctrine: When a Philippine Job Offer Becomes Binding

Consent, object, and cause

The Labor Code does not itself define when an employment contract is perfected, so the Court applied the general law on contracts under the Civil Code. A contract requires consent, a certain object, and a cause, and it is perfected by mere consent — the moment acceptance is made known to the person who made the offer.^[2] Applied to hiring: Alltech’s offer letter was a certain offer; Aragones’ signature was an unqualified acceptance; and emailing the signed copy back the same day communicated that acceptance to Alltech. All three elements were present on April 18, 2016 — well before Aragones’ scheduled first day of work.

Period versus condition

Alltech’s stronger argument was that the July 1 start date, and the requirement to sign a separate employment contract on the first day, made the whole arrangement conditional — so that abolishing the position before July 1 meant no contract ever took effect. The Court rejected this by drawing on the Civil Code’s distinction between an obligation subject to a period and one subject to a condition:

	Suspensive period (term)	Suspensive condition
Nature of the future event	Certain — it will happen (e.g., a calendar date)	Uncertain — it may or may not happen
Effect on the obligation’s existence	None; the obligation already exists	The obligation does not arise until the condition is met
Effect on demandability	Merely postpones when performance can be demanded	No obligation to demand unless and until the condition occurs
Applied in Aragones	July 1, 2016 start date — a period	Not present on these facts

Because July 1, 2016 was a date that was always going to arrive, it functioned as a period, not a condition. The Court added that even treating it as a condition would not have saved Alltech’s position, because Article 1186 of the Civil Code treats a condition as fulfilled when the party obligated to perform voluntarily prevents its fulfillment — and Alltech’s own cancellation is what prevented Aragones from ever reaching his start date.^[3]

Why the four-fold test did not decide the case

Philippine tribunals ordinarily use the four-fold test — selection and engagement, payment of wages, power of dismissal, and control — to decide whether an employer-employee relationship exists when a company denies one ever existed. The Court held that test was the wrong tool here, because Alltech did not deny reaching an agreement; it admitted a Job Offer existed and that it unilaterally cancelled it. Where the facts show a completed hiring agreement that the employer later repudiates, the question is whether the resulting dismissal was valid — not whether a relationship existed in the first place.^[2]

Applicability: Does Your Situation Fit the Rule?

Use these questions to gauge whether an offer withdrawal in your own situation would likely be analyzed the way Aragones was decided. None of them substitutes for a case-specific legal opinion.

Was there a certain, complete offer? A specific role, compensation, and material terms — not a vague expression of interest or a “we’d like to move forward” email.
Did you unconditionally accept it? A signature, a clear written “I accept,” or an unqualified acceptance email. A counter-offer or “let me think about it” is not acceptance.
Was your acceptance actually communicated back to the employer? Signing alone is not enough under Philippine contract law — the offeror has to receive notice of the acceptance.
Was the delay before your start date a fixed date, or a real contingency? A calendar date is normally a period. A stated contingency — passing a background check, securing a visa or PRC license, clearing a medical exam the offer expressly conditioned hiring on — is different and is analyzed separately.
Did the employer cancel after your acceptance, or before it? Aragones protects an offer already accepted. An employer can still withdraw a mere proposal before anyone has accepted it.
What reason did the employer give? If it is redundancy, retrenchment, or another authorized cause, the employer still has to prove that cause with substantial evidence — the same as any dismissal.

When an Employer Can Still Validly Cancel a Job Offer

Aragones does not mean every rescinded job offer is illegal. The ruling narrows, rather than removes, an employer’s ability to walk away.

Situation	Generally lawful?	Why
Employer withdraws the offer before the applicant accepts it	Yes	No contract has been perfected; an unaccepted offer is not yet binding on either party.
Offer was expressly conditioned on a real contingency (e.g., passing a licensure exam, medical clearance, background check, work-permit approval) and the contingency genuinely fails	Generally yes	No contract arises if a true suspensive condition is not fulfilled, provided the employer did not itself prevent the condition from being met.
Employer cancels after acceptance, citing redundancy, retrenchment, or another authorized cause, and can actually prove it	Possible, but treated as a dismissal	The contract is already perfected; the employer must meet the same evidentiary burden as any authorized-cause termination — staffing studies, financial records, or equivalent proof, not a general affidavit.
Employer cancels after acceptance with no cause offered, or an unsubstantiated one	No	This is what happened in Aragones — an unproven redundancy claim did not excuse the withdrawal, and the cancellation was an illegal dismissal.
Applicant obtained the offer through fraud or misrepresentation	Employer may have grounds to rescind	Consent obtained through fraud can vitiate a contract under general Civil Code principles, though this was not the fact pattern in Aragones.

Evidence and Documentation

What an applicant should preserve

The complete written offer, including any attachments describing compensation, benefits, and the reporting date;
Proof of acceptance — a signed copy, a return email, a text or portal confirmation, with timestamps;
Proof that acceptance was communicated back to the employer (sent email, delivery or read receipt, or an acknowledgment reply);
Records connecting the acceptance to actions taken in reliance on it — a resignation letter and its date, forfeited notice pay, relocation costs, or a declined competing offer;
The employer’s written cancellation notice and its stated reason; and
Any settlement, goodwill payment, or release document the employer offers — read before signing, since accepting and cashing it may be treated as a settlement of the claim.

What an employer must be able to produce if it invokes redundancy or another authorized cause

The old and new staffing patterns or organizational charts;
A feasibility study, cost analysis, or similar business record supporting the reorganization;
A job-description comparison showing genuine overlap or elimination of the role;
Fair and reasonable criteria used to decide which positions were affected; and
Management approval or board action authorizing the restructuring.

In Aragones, Alltech’s only evidence was a single affidavit from a vice president describing a shift “from a regional to local coverage” focus. The Court found this too vague and general to prove that the restructuring actually required abolishing the specific position offered to Aragones — distinguishing it from cases where a detailed affidavit tied to concrete operational changes was accepted as sufficient proof of redundancy.^[1]

Remedies If a Perfected Offer Is Illegally Withdrawn

Because the Court treated the cancellation as an illegal dismissal, it applied the ordinary remedies for illegal dismissal rather than inventing a separate “broken promise” remedy. In Aragones, the Court’s dispositive portion directed Alltech to pay:

Backwages, computed from July 1, 2016 — the promised start date, the point from which Aragones could demand work and pay — until the decision becomes final. The Court based the computation start date on C.P. Reyes Hospital v. Barbosa (G.R. No. 228357, April 26, 2024), noting it as the Court’s standing doctrine on how far backwages and separation pay run for an illegally dismissed employee;
Separation pay in lieu of reinstatement — one month’s salary for every year of service — because Aragones no longer sought reinstatement to a position he had never actually started;
Attorney’s fees equivalent to 10% of the total monetary award, consistent with Article 2208 of the Civil Code, which allows fee awards in actions for the recovery of wages; and
Legal interest on the total award from finality of the decision until fully paid.

The Court denied moral and exemplary damages, finding no bad faith — Alltech had genuinely, if wrongly, believed no employment relationship existed and that it was rescinding an offer rather than terminating an employee.^[1]

These figures illustrate the framework the Court applied; they are not a guaranteed formula for every case. The exact computation in any dispute depends on the offered salary, length of the delay, whether reinstatement is sought, and the specific record presented. See How to Calculate Backwages in the Philippines for the general computation method.

What to Do Next

If your accepted job offer was cancelled

Request the employer’s reason for cancellation in writing, and keep the response.
Gather the offer letter, your acceptance, and proof it was sent to the employer.
Do not sign a release, quitclaim, or waiver connected to a “goodwill” payment before understanding what it settles.
Compare the employer’s stated reason against what it would need to prove — for redundancy, that means staffing and business records, not a general statement.
Consider the Single Entry Approach (SEnA) or a complaint before the appropriate Labor Arbiter if the matter is not resolved directly with the employer.
Consult a Philippine labor lawyer where the amounts involved, the employer’s justification, or the facts are disputed.

If you are an employer reconsidering a signed offer

Treat a signed and accepted offer as an employment relationship, not a proposal you can freely withdraw.
If business conditions genuinely require withdrawing it, build the same evidentiary file required for any authorized-cause termination before communicating the decision.
Where possible, offer redeployment to another role instead of outright cancellation.
Document the reorganization decision, the specific positions affected, and the selection criteria before, not after, a dispute arises.
Have HR and legal review any pre-employment contingency clauses so that genuine conditions are clearly distinguished from a mere start date.

Boundaries: What This Ruling Does Not Establish

It does not mean every candidate who loses a job offer has an illegal-dismissal claim — the offer must have been certain and unconditionally accepted, with that acceptance actually communicated to the employer.
It does not disturb an employer’s right to impose genuine pre-employment conditions (licensure, medical clearance, background checks, permits) and decline to proceed if those conditions are not met through no fault of the employer.
It does not fix a universal formula for backwages or separation pay in every rescinded-offer case; the amount depends on the facts and record of each dispute.
It does not resolve when a probationary period would be deemed to begin in a rescinded-offer scenario — the Court found that question moot on these facts because the dismissal occurred before the scheduled start date, and treated it as an open question rather than deciding it.
It does not extend to offers withdrawn before acceptance, or to non-binding expressions of interest that never ripened into a certain, accepted offer.
It is not legal advice for a specific dispute; the classification of a start date as a period or a condition, and the sufficiency of any cause offered, depend on the specific wording of the offer and the evidence available.

Practical Hypotheticals

Example 1: Signed offer, restructuring before day one

Facts: A finance manager signs and returns an offer letter with a start date six weeks out. Two weeks later, the company undergoes a merger and emails her that the role “is no longer available,” offering two weeks’ pay.

Analysis: Following Aragones, the contract was likely perfected on signing and return of the offer. The merger-driven cancellation is analyzed as a dismissal; the employer would need to prove redundancy or another authorized cause with staffing and business records, and pay the statutory one-month notice or its equivalent, not an arbitrary “two weeks’ pay.”

Missing facts that would matter: Whether the offer contained an express condition tied to the merger’s completion, and whether the company can produce a real reorganization study.

Example 2: Offer conditioned on a licensure exam

Facts: A hospital offers a nursing position expressly “subject to passing the board examination and PRC licensure.” The applicant signs, then fails the exam.

Analysis: This is a genuine suspensive condition tied to an uncertain future event outside the employer’s control. If the condition is not fulfilled, no employment contract arises, and Aragones would not apply the same way — because the offer was never unconditional in the first place.

Example 3: Verbal “you’re in” before a written offer

Facts: A hiring manager tells a candidate over a call that “you’re in, we just need to finalize paperwork,” then the company goes silent and hires someone else.

Analysis: Without a certain written offer and a clear, communicated acceptance, it is harder to show the elements the Court relied on in Aragones — a signed offer letter and an emailed acceptance the same day. A verbal assurance can still be evidence, but the case is weaker without the documentary trail the Court examined.

Terminology

Term	Meaning in this context
Perfected contract	A contract that has satisfied all requisites for its formation — here, consent, object, and cause — and is therefore already binding, even if performance has not yet begun. See the glossary entry on the employment contract.
Suspensive period (term)	A future event certain to occur (like a calendar date) that only delays when an already-existing obligation can be demanded.
Suspensive condition	A future uncertain event whose non-occurrence prevents an obligation from arising at all.
Four-fold test	The traditional test (selection/engagement, wages, dismissal power, control) used to determine whether an employer-employee relationship exists when its existence is disputed.
Redundancy	An authorized cause for termination under Article 298 of the Labor Code, arising when a position becomes superfluous to the employer’s actual requirements; the employer bears the burden of proving it.
Substantial evidence	The evidentiary standard in labor proceedings — relevant evidence a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.
Separation pay in lieu of reinstatement	A monetary award substituting for reinstatement when reinstatement is no longer sought or is no longer feasible, typically one month’s pay per year of service.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it legal for an employer to cancel a job offer after I accept it in the Philippines?

Generally, no — once you sign and communicate acceptance of a certain job offer, the Supreme Court in Aragones v. Alltech treats the resulting employment contract as perfected. Cancelling it afterward is legally a dismissal, and the employer must prove a valid just or authorized cause.

Can an employer cancel a job offer at all?

Yes, before it has been accepted, or where the offer was genuinely conditional and the condition failed through no fault of the employer. After an unconditional offer is accepted and that acceptance is communicated back, cancellation is treated as a dismissal rather than a simple non-hire.

Can I revoke my own acceptance of a job offer?

This guide addresses employer withdrawal, not an applicant’s own change of mind. An applicant who backs out after accepting may face separate contractual questions (for example, over reliance costs the employer incurred), though Philippine labor tribunals rarely pursue applicants for declining to report.

What happens if I already resigned from my old job because of the offer?

Resignation made in reliance on the accepted offer, as in Aragones, is relevant evidence of detrimental reliance and strengthens a claim, but it is not itself what makes the contract binding — perfection happens through offer and communicated acceptance, independent of the resignation.

Can I file a case if my job offer is rescinded?

If the offer was certain and accepted, and the employer cannot show a valid, proven cause for cancelling it, you may have an illegal-dismissal claim before a Labor Arbiter, generally after the required SEnA conciliation step.

Do I have to return a “goodwill” or severance-style payment if I pursue a claim?

It depends on what the payment document actually says and whether you signed a release or quitclaim. Read any settlement document carefully — and ideally have it reviewed — before accepting or cashing it, since it may be treated as a waiver of further claims.

How common is it for Philippine employers to rescind signed job offers?

No verified, current statistic on Philippine offer-rescission rates is available from an official source as of this review. Treat any specific percentage you see elsewhere as unverified unless it cites a named study.

Does this rule apply to probationary employees?

The offer in Aragones included a probationary period, but the Court did not need to decide when that period would have begun, because the dismissal happened before the scheduled start date. When a probationary clock starts in a similar rescinded-offer scenario remains an open question under current jurisprudence.

Conclusion

Aragones v. Alltech settles a question Philippine hiring practice had long treated as an employer’s prerogative: a signed and accepted job offer is not a proposal an employer can freely cancel. Once acceptance is communicated, the employment contract is perfected, and a later cancellation is legally a dismissal that must be justified with a real cause and real evidence — a generic restructuring affidavit is not enough. A genuinely conditional offer, or one withdrawn before acceptance, is treated differently. Applicants who lose an accepted offer should preserve the offer, their acceptance, and any resignation or reliance losses; employers reconsidering a signed offer should build the same evidentiary record they would need for any other authorized-cause termination before acting.

Sources and Legal Citations

Jurisprudence

[1] Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation, G.R. No. 251736, April 2, 2025, Supreme Court of the Philippines (Third Division). Supports the facts, procedural history, and the Court’s holding on contract perfection, redundancy’s evidentiary burden, and the remedies awarded. Status: verified directly against the official Supreme Court slip opinion (Third Division; Caguioa, J., ponente and Chairperson; concurred in by Inting, Gaerlan and Dimaampao, JJ.; Singh, J., on leave; certified by Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo). Full text (LawPhil) | Official Supreme Court PDF.

[2] Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation, same citation as [1]. Supports the specific holding that “an offer, once accepted, cannot be withdrawn,” and the contract-perfection and four-fold-test analysis. Same sources as [1].

[3] Santiago v. CF Sharp Crew Management, Inc., G.R. No. 162419, July 10, 2007, Supreme Court of the Philippines. Supports the period-versus-condition framework applied in Aragones. Status: cited in Aragones; independent pinpoint verification pending. Decision (LawPhil).

Civil Code and Labor Code

[4] Civil Code of the Philippines, Republic Act No. 386, Arts. 1179, 1181, 1186, 1193, 1305, 1315, 1318, 1319, 1324. Supports the general contract-law rules on perfection by consent, offer and acceptance, and the period-versus-condition distinction applied to the employment contract. Official text (LawPhil).

[5] Labor Code of the Philippines, Presidential Decree No. 442, as renumbered, Arts. 224, 294, 298. Department of Labor and Employment. Supports Labor Arbiter jurisdiction, security of tenure, and the authorized-cause redundancy rule and its burden of proof. Official source.

Disclaimer

This article is for general educational and legal-information purposes only. It is not legal advice or a legal opinion. Whether a specific job-offer cancellation is legally a dismissal depends on the exact wording of the offer, the facts of acceptance and communication, and the evidence available. Figures described here illustrate the framework the Supreme Court applied in Aragones v. Alltech Biotechnology Corporation and are not a guaranteed outcome or computation for any other case.

Readers may need assistance from a Philippine labor lawyer, DOLE, the NLRC, NCMB or another proper authority. LaborCode.ph is an independent information platform and is not a government website, tribunal or law firm.