A Foreign Employee Is Suing for Illegal Dismissal: Can the Company Cancel the 9G Meanwhile?

The core rule: report the visa truthfully, defend the case properly, trade neither

The short version: the labor case decides whether the dismissal was lawful and whether the company owes reinstatement or compensation. Visa cancellation addresses whether the company still employs and sponsors this person today. The two are connected, but neither can be traded for the other.

Once a dismissal decision has been made and carried out, employment has stopped as a matter of fact. Keeping the employee on the company's 9G and AEP after that means the company is telling the authorities it still sponsors someone who is no longer working there, which is itself inaccurate. On the other side, if the employee eventually wins and is ordered reinstated, the visa can be processed again; cancelling it does not strip him of the right to pursue his claims. Whether a foreigner may bring a claim before the NLRC, and the procedural points to watch, are explained in whether foreigners can bring labor arbitration cases.

Avoid both extremes. One is 'he is suing me, so I will cancel his visa at once and make it hard for him to stay'. The other is 'we are in litigation, so we will not touch the visa in case it looks like retaliation'. The first gives the employee an argument; the second leaves the company sponsoring a person who is not on duty, possibly for many months.

The right position is in the middle: handle the visa on the normal timetable, through the normal process, in normal language, and keep a record of each step so that anyone reviewing it later can see a routine administrative action rather than a reaction to the complaint.

Timing and wording: how to avoid looking like retaliation

The test is simple: would a neutral third party, looking at the timeline and the documents, conclude that the company was punishing someone for complaining?

• Timing. Cancellation or notice should follow the effective date of the dismissal and match the company's usual practice for every departing foreign employee. Ideally it has already started before any complaint is filed. If the dismissal came first and the complaint later, proceed as normal and keep evidence of when the process began.
• Wording. Documents sent to the agencies should state facts only: employment ended on a given date and the company no longer sponsors the person. Do not describe the employee as malicious or of poor character, and do not include the company's defense arguments from the labor case.
• Conditions. Never say, in any setting, that the cancellation will be withdrawn if the complaint is dropped, or that the company will help with a transfer if he settles. Exit arrangements can be discussed at conciliation, but only inside a formal written settlement signed by both parties with lawyers involved.
• Consistency. Treat this person exactly as the company treats other departing foreign employees. Speeding up or adding steps only for him is the easiest way to be found to have targeted him.

The employee-side channels against retaliation are described in what employees can do after retaliation for a complaint. Reading it from the employee's point of view helps the company see in advance how each of its actions is likely to be read by the people who decide the case, and adjust before acting rather than after.

Filing the cancellation, and whether to mention the case

The key point: the cancellation filing should state truthfully that employment has ended. Whether it must mention the labor case depends on what the counter asks. If asked, answer truthfully; do not hide it and do not dramatize it.

On the labor side, the company writes to the issuing DOLE regional office asking to cancel the AEP, attaching the dismissal decision and proof of service. On the immigration side, the company files a notice of termination of employment or a request to cancel the 9G. If the employee refuses to return the AEP card and ACR I-Card, say in the filing that they were requested in writing and not returned. This is the same general approach the company uses when any departing employee will not cooperate, described in how a company ends its sponsorship when a terminated employee won't leave.

Immigration is usually concerned with the person's current status and employment, not with whether the dismissal was lawful. If the counter asks whether there is a dispute, say that the employee has filed a labor complaint about the dismissal and that it is pending. Do not ask Immigration to 'send him away first'. That is not Immigration's role in these matters, and it would be seen as using an administrative process to interfere with a labor case.

Ask for a receiving stamp on every filing and keep copies in a dedicated folder. Those receipts are useful in the labor case as well, because they show the company was following procedure rather than applying pressure behind the scenes.

Can the employee stay to pursue the case, and should the company be involved?

How the employee remains lawfully in the country after cancellation is his own status question. The company does not need to arrange it, but it must not obstruct him from staying or attending hearings through proper channels.

He can downgrade, extend as a visitor under the applicable rules, or leave and continue the case through counsel; some proceedings allow online attendance or representation. Whether a pending case supports any special stay arrangement depends on the Bureau of Immigration's current position and is not something the company can decide or promise. The general downgrade process is described in how a 9G downgrade works.

The company should do two things. First, do not withhold anything he needs for the hearings or for his status, such as his passport, a certificate of employment or his last payslip, and provide them promptly when he asks in writing. Second, do not use uncertainty about his status as leverage in negotiation, for example by saying that his visa is about to expire so he had better settle soon. If such a remark is recorded, it will weigh heavily against the company before the arbiter.

If the final decision orders reinstatement, the company must cooperate in processing a new AEP and 9G. If it orders compensation, comply with it. The employee-side explanation of how awards are enforced is in enforcing a labor award, and reading it helps a company avoid the larger costs that come from delaying payment. In short, the company's posture toward the employee's status should be neutral: neither helping him stay nor making it harder, and always responding to written requests on time.

Defending the case itself: where employers usually lose

Employers rarely lose labor cases on the underlying facts. They lose on procedure and evidence. However clean the visa track is, a dismissal with a procedural defect will still lose.

Typical defects include not issuing a written notice to explain before the dismissal, not giving the employee a real chance to answer, giving reasons that change from one document to the next, relying on verbal accounts for key facts, and mixing up the end of a fixed-term contract with a dismissal. Cases involving foreign employees often carry an extra layer: whether the contract and the notices were written in a language the employee understands, and whether he actually received them.

When preparing, keep two separate files. One contains every document from the dismissal process and is used to show that the dismissal was lawful. The other contains the receipts from the cancellation or notice filings and is used to show that the company did not retaliate. The common points where employers lose ground in arbitration, and the documents they wish they had kept, are summarised in common pitfalls for employers in NLRC arbitration.

If both sides are willing to settle at conciliation, the exit arrangements, the return of documents and the visa timetable can all go into the settlement agreement. That is the only appropriate place to discuss the visa and the case together, and the agreement should be drafted by lawyers and signed by both parties. Until that agreement exists, keep the visa steps on their ordinary schedule and do not pause or speed them up as a bargaining move.

Where Yixing can help

In a case like this, Yixing can keep the visa track clean and explainable. We check the employee's current records at DOLE and Immigration, prepare the cancellation or notice documents in neutral wording that follows the company's usual practice for departing employees, file or accompany the filing and obtain the receipts, and organise the whole timeline into a checklist the company's labor lawyer can use in the case.

What we cannot do is decide whether the dismissal was lawful, represent the company in the labor case, or promise that Immigration will make any particular arrangement for the employee's stay. Please instruct a licensed lawyer for the labor case. The visa track can start with our visa and HR service, so that each track is handled by the right professional and the two support each other without being traded against each other.

A final reminder: once a complaint has been filed, every communication between anyone at the company and the employee should be restrained, in writing and about the facts only. Many cases that should have been won are lost during the proceedings because of a single emotional chat message sent by a manager who meant no harm but wrote in anger.

Yixing is a private consultancy registered with the Philippine SEC (Registration No. CS202009551), holding BI Accreditation No. CA-202624381-1 (valid to 2027-06-30) together with DOLE and PRA accreditation. We are not part of any government office and we do not promise the outcome of any application. For your specific case, consult a licensed lawyer; this article is not legal advice.