LaborCode.ph uses a structured review process to improve the accuracy, clarity and reliability of its legal content. The level of review may vary according to the complexity, risk and purpose of the material.
Pre-publication review
Before publication, content should be checked for legal basis, source quality, citation accuracy, internal consistency, readability and alignment with the article’s stated scope. Key provisions, case holdings, procedural steps and time-sensitive information receive particular attention.
Risk-based review
Pages involving termination, monetary claims, filing periods, legal remedies, compliance duties or active government procedures may require a higher level of review than general definitions or historical background.
Reviewer roles
A reviewer may verify sources, challenge unsupported conclusions, identify missing exceptions and check whether the article distinguishes binding law from commentary. Reviewer attribution is used only when the person’s identity, role and contribution are accurate and authorized.
Ongoing review
Published content may be revisited after legislative amendments, new regulations, major court decisions, agency updates, reader reports or scheduled editorial checks. Priority is given to pages that receive significant traffic or could affect important legal decisions.
Review limitations
Editorial review reduces errors but does not guarantee that a page is complete, current or suitable for every factual situation. Readers should always consult the full official sources and obtain professional advice where necessary.
Documentation
Review records should identify the page, the claim or calculation checked, the official source and version, the source-check date, the change made and any unresolved issue. A source check verifies the stated material against a source; it is not a claim that the entire page has received legal review. A legal-review credit should identify the reviewing lawyer, the specific page and scope reviewed, the completion date and authorization to display the credit. A site consultant’s role does not by itself establish article-level review. For calculators, the record should also identify the formula or rate version and the cases used to test it. Material corrections should be described in a reader-visible note. These records support accountability and future maintenance.