By Juliane Judilla
ILOILO CITY — More than a hundred employees of TTEC, formerly known as TeleTech, under the Verizon account have filed an illegal dismissal complaint before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) Sub-Regional Arbitration Branch (SRAB) VI in Iloilo City since May 25, alleging that they were terminated without due process and for unjust reasons.
The workers were accompanied by the BPO Industry Employees Network (BIEN), an independent organization that advocates for the rights and welfare of business process outsourcing (BPO) employees.
According to BIEN, the affected workers were dismissed after being accused of “survey manipulation” through excessive appointment settings. However, the organization said the company failed to provide clear details, explanations, or concrete evidence to support the allegations.
“After dedicating their hard work to hit company targets, these employees were suddenly terminated without clear details, explanation, or due process,” BIEN said in a statement.
The organization also alleged that the dismissed workers are now facing difficulties securing new employment after their records were reportedly flagged with “fraud,” causing their job applications with other companies to remain pending.
“Worse, these workers now face employment blacklisting. Their applications with other companies are placed on ‘pending’ because TTEC flagged their profiles with ‘fraud,’ severely damaging their livelihoods and future careers,” BIEN added.
Workers’ Testimonies
Several of the affected employees, whose identities are being withheld for their protection, shared their experiences and frustrations regarding the termination process.
Complainants Jen and Den said they were not given an opportunity to defend themselves against the allegations before being dismissed.
“Tinanggal kami sa trabaho without any prior or proper explanation,” Den said.
(We were removed from our jobs without any prior or proper explanation)
Jen echoed the sentiment, saying the workers were denied due process.
“Hindi fair na walang prior notice kasi wala kaming chance na idefend yung sarili namin. After 30 days of preventive suspension, terminated na,” she said.
(It was unfair because we were not given prior notice and had no chance to defend ourselves. After 30 days of preventive suspension, we were already terminated)
She added that the dismissal has made it difficult for them to secure new employment.
“Ang negative impact sa amin is naho-hold yung application namin. Hindi kami makapag-start ng new job. Gusto namin makahanap ng replacement,” she added.
(The negative impact on us is that our job applications are being put on hold. We are unable to start new jobs, and we just want to find replacement employment)
Another employee, identified as Alex, said the allegations have negatively affected his job prospects. He noted that he would have accepted the company’s decision had sufficient evidence been presented to support the accusations.
“Dapat pinadaan sa magandang proseso, hindi yung bigla-biglaan,” he said.
(The matter should have gone through a proper process instead of being handled so abruptly)
“Maybe if the company can present sufficient data of my alleged violations, then that would be enough to consider. But the company has not issued a single piece of evidence to support its claims,” he added.
Alex also shared the financial challenges brought about by his dismissal.
“Nakakastress kasi may anak ako, eight months old. Siyempre wala akong income, saan ako kukuha ng panggatas?” he said.
(It is very stressful because I have an eight-month-old child. Of course, I have no income now, so where am I supposed to get money to buy milk?)
Piolo, who said he had worked for the company for five years, expressed disappointment over how the situation was handled.
“Gusto lang namin siguro na managot si TeleTech. Being in TeleTech for five years, parang unfair and unjust sa side namin na hindi nasagot yung allegations nila against us,” he said.
(We simply want TeleTech to be held accountable. After working at TeleTech for five years, it feels unfair and unjust on our part that the allegations against us were never properly addressed)
Meanwhile, Ema said the company failed to provide assistance or remedies to the affected employees.
“Nakakainsulto lang kasi wala silang offer, wala silang remedy sa amin,” she said.
(It is insulting because they did not offer us any assistance or remedy)
The workers are encouraging other employees who may have experienced similar circumstances to come forward and join their efforts as they seek accountability and pursue their labor claims against the company.
Case Timeline
In the first week of May 2025, reports began emerging from employees of TTEC who were assigned to the Verizon account. According to the workers, many employees were suddenly placed under a 30-day preventive suspension. The reports were not isolated incidents affecting only a few individuals; instead, numerous employees claimed they had been suspended, placed on floating status, or were facing possible termination. The stated reason for the suspensions was allegedly “excessive appointment setting,” referring to the practice of setting store appointments for customers during calls.
Workers alleged that this appointment-setting practice had been encouraged or tolerated within the workplace as a way to reduce the likelihood of customers completing post-call surveys that could negatively affect customer satisfaction metrics. According to the employees, they were not aware that the practice could be considered a violation of company policy. When Verizon reportedly questioned the practice, workers claimed that responsibility was shifted from management to frontline employees. As a result, many employees were placed under preventive suspension and immediately lost access to their work systems and tools.
Throughout May 2025, affected employees sought clarification and requested evidence regarding the allegations against them. They claimed that neither TTEC nor Verizon provided sufficient documentation demonstrating how their appointment-setting activities constituted fraud, survey manipulation, or excessive appointments. Employees reported that the number of appointments cited against them varied significantly, ranging from single-digit figures to more than forty appointments, yet all were allegedly categorized as excessive.
As the 30-day suspension period neared its end, many employees reportedly received Notices of Decision informing them that their employment had been terminated. In response, affected workers began filing complaints for alleged illegal dismissal through the Single Entry Approach (SENA) process before the NLRC in Iloilo. According to reports received by BIEN, some of the earliest filings took place on May 25, 2025. BIEN representatives accompanied workers to the NLRC, where they also encountered other employees filing similar complaints. Even workers who remained on preventive suspension or floating status reportedly began preparing legal actions because they anticipated that they would eventually face termination as well.
The workers involved were not limited to customer service agents. According to BIEN, coaches, team leaders, and operations managers were also among those who had been dismissed. On June 1, 2025, a SENA hearing was held, attended by legal representatives of both TTEC and the affected workers, including workers represented by Attorney Kenneth Alba. However, according to BIEN, the hearing ended without a settlement because TTEC allegedly declined to offer a compromise or counterproposal. In subsequent hearings involving other workers, BIEN similarly claimed that no settlements were reached and that the company continued to reject liability for the dismissals.
Beyond the TTEC case, BIEN reported that workforce reductions were also occurring in other BPO companies handling Verizon accounts. The organization argued that when clients such as Verizon decide to reduce workforce requirements, workers employed through third-party BPO providers are often among the first to lose their jobs. BIEN further alleged that affected workers were not receiving separation pay based on their length of service and that some were being labeled as having committed fraud, which could potentially affect their eligibility to work on Verizon-related accounts in the future.
According to BIEN, the TTEC-Verizon case reflects broader systemic issues within the BPO industry. The organization contends that, instead of implementing proper redundancy programs and providing corresponding separation benefits, some companies place workers on floating status for extended periods, sometimes up to six months, without pay. BIEN advocates for stronger protection of workers’ rights, including security of tenure, fair compensation in cases of workforce reduction, and reassignment to available accounts without loss of pay or benefits whenever possible. The organization maintains that workers should be treated with dignity and provided appropriate support when business decisions result in job losses.
BIEN, meanwhile, called on government agencies to uphold workers’ security of tenure and strengthen labor protections in the BPO industry.
“We urge the government to uphold the security of tenure and enforce stricter labor protections. Mass layoffs without due process must end. The BPO industry must stop treating hard-working employees as disposable numbers,” the group said./PT
