Short answer. Yes. Article 278 of the Labor Code states that the provisions on termination apply to all establishments or undertakings, whether for profit or not. A foundation, an NGO, a charity or a church-run institution owes its staff the same security of tenure as any commercial company.
What the law says
The provisions of this Title shall apply to all establishments or undertakings, whether for profit or not.
Labor Code, Article 278 — Who This Title Covers. Read the full provision →
The Code disposes of the argument in one line
Coverage is dealt with before anything else in the Title, and it is dealt with absolutely. The rules apply to all establishments or undertakings, whether for profit or not. There is no threshold of size, no exemption for charitable purpose, no carve-out for institutions funded by donation rather than by revenue. The sentence exists because the argument was foreseeable: an organisation that makes no money will say it cannot be treated like one that does. The drafters answered that in advance, and an employer raising it today is arguing against express words.
Why 'undertaking' is the wider word
The provision covers establishments or undertakings, and the second term does the heavy lifting. An undertaking need not be a business at all. A foundation running a single programme, an association with three staff, a school or clinic operated by a religious institution, a co-operative, a project office funded entirely by a grant — each is an undertaking whose workers fall within the Title. Nor does the source of your salary matter. Being paid out of a donor's grant rather than out of sales says something about the organisation's finances and nothing about your status.
What is genuinely a separate question
Non-profit status being irrelevant does not mean every other objection is. Whether your engagement was genuinely for a fixed term or a specific project, whether an authorised cause such as redundancy or closure truly exists when the funding stops, and whether the ground and the procedure were properly observed are all live questions, and they are decided the same way they would be for a company. The point of Article 278 is narrower but decisive: none of those questions may be answered against you merely because your employer is not in business for gain.
The dispute is often about employee status instead
In this sector the real fight is frequently whether you are an employee at all, because roles are so often labelled volunteer, fellow, consultant or grant-funded associate. That is settled on substance, not on the label — who engaged you, who pays you, who can end the engagement, and above all who controls how the work is done day to day. So keep your appointment letter, your payslips or vouchers, the reporting lines you were given, and any instruction telling you when and how to work. Those documents decide the threshold question.