Notice to Explain Generator for Employers
Prepare the NTE you will send to an employee. Enter the alleged conduct and supporting facts, then review the draft before downloading, printing or serving it. Built on Article 292(b) and 297 of the Labor Code, DOLE D.O. 147-15 and King of Kings Transport v. Mamac.
Employee who received an NTE? Use the NTE Response Builder for employees to prepare your answer.
What happened?
Who is involved?
Deadline and process
Sample Notice to Explain: what you will get
Not sure what to enter? Here is a completed example for a BPO agent charged with habitual tardiness. Names and company are fictional.
NOTICE TO EXPLAIN
Date: September 24, 2026
To: Juan Dela Cruz (Employee ID 2024-0187)
Position: Customer Service Representative, Telco Support Account
From: Maria Santos, HR Manager
Subject: Notice to Explain — Habitual tardiness
Dear Juan Dela Cruz:
This notice informs you of the charge of habitual tardiness against you, which, if proven, may constitute gross and habitual neglect of duties under Article 297(b) (formerly Article 282(b)) of the Labor Code of the Philippines, and a violation of the Code of Conduct, Section 4.2 (Attendance and Punctuality).
Facts and circumstances
You reported late for work on the dates listed below, despite a written warning for tardiness issued to you on July 15, 2026 and coaching on the attendance policy. Your scheduled shift starts at 10:00 PM. The late logins below are based on the WFM adherence report and biometric records of the company.
The specific incidents are:
- August 4, 2026, 10:14 PM — logged in 14 minutes late
- August 11, 2026, 10:32 PM — logged in 32 minutes late
- August 18, 2026, 10:21 PM — logged in 21 minutes late
- August 25, 2026, 10:47 PM — logged in 47 minutes late
- September 1, 2026, 10:19 PM — logged in 19 minutes late
- September 8, 2026, 10:38 PM — logged in 38 minutes late
Records on file
The charge is based on the following records, which you may examine upon written request:
- Attendance / biometric records
- WFM or system login logs
- Prior warnings or coaching logs
Your written explanation
You are directed to submit a written explanation within 5 calendar days from your receipt of this notice, or on or before September 29, 2026 if you receive it today, stating why no disciplinary action, which may include dismissal from employment, should be imposed on you. Please submit your explanation to the HR Department, 5th Floor, or by email to hr@samplebpo.ph.
In your explanation you may present your side, attach any documents or evidence, and name witnesses who have personal knowledge of the incidents. You may also ask for copies of the records listed above.
Opportunity to be heard
If you wish to be heard in person, or if there are facts that need clarification, an administrative conference will be scheduled after your written explanation is received. Please state in your explanation if you request a conference. You may be assisted by a representative or counsel of your choice.
This notice is not a finding that you committed the acts charged. No decision will be made until your explanation has been received and considered, or the period to submit it has lapsed. If you do not submit an explanation within the period given, management will decide on the basis of the records available.
Please sign below to acknowledge receipt of this notice. Signing does not mean you agree with the charge.
Very truly yours,
______________________________
Maria Santos
HR Manager
Sample BPO Solutions, Inc.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT
Received by: ______________________________ Date: ____________ Time: ________
If the employee refused to receive or sign: Witness 1: ____________________ Witness 2: ____________________
What every Notice to Explain must contain
| Required element | Why it matters | How the generator handles it |
|---|---|---|
| Specific causes or grounds for termination | The employee must know exactly what is charged | Charge title plus the matching Article 297 ground |
| Detailed narration of facts and circumstances | A general description of the charge is not enough | Incident rows with dates, times and a narration |
| Company rule violated | Connects the act to a known, published rule | Dedicated rule field printed in the charge paragraph |
| At least five calendar days to respond | Time to study the charge, consult a union official or lawyer and gather evidence | Deadline auto-computed; fewer than 5 days is not allowed |
| Opportunity to be heard | A conference is required if requested, if facts are disputed, or if company rules require it | Conference paragraph, scheduled or on request |
Elements drawn from King of Kings Transport, Inc. v. Mamac, G.R. No. 166208, June 29, 2007, and Perez v. Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Co., G.R. No. 152048, April 7, 2009.
How to use the NTE after you download it
- Review every line. Replace highlighted placeholders and confirm each date against your records.
- Serve it properly. Hand it to the employee and have them sign the acknowledgment. If they refuse, have two witnesses sign, then send a copy by registered mail or courier to the last known address and by official email.
- Count the deadline from receipt. If the employee receives it later than the notice date, the five days run from the actual receipt.
- Do not decide before the deadline. Read the written explanation, hold the conference if requested or needed, and never schedule the hearing on the same day the NTE is served.
- Issue a separate Notice of Decision. State that all circumstances were considered, your findings on each charge, and the penalty.
Frequently asked questions
Is the NTE from this generator valid?
How many days should an employee get to answer an NTE?
Can one NTE cover several incidents?
Is a hearing always required after an NTE?
When can I include preventive suspension in the NTE?
What if the employee refuses to receive the NTE?
Is my data saved or sent anywhere?
Related guides and tools
Legal authority
Labor Code, Article 292(b) [277(b)] (notice and ample opportunity to be heard) and Article 297 [282] (just causes); Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code, Book VI, Rule I, as amended by DOLE Department Order No. 147-15; Book V, Rule XIV on preventive suspension; King of Kings Transport, Inc. v. Mamac, G.R. No. 166208, June 29, 2007; Perez v. PT&T, G.R. No. 152048, April 7, 2009.
Last reviewed: September 24, 2026. This generator gives general Philippine labor-law information and a document draft. It does not decide whether a charge is valid, and it is not a substitute for advice on a specific case.
