You are on page 1of 2

44. Floralde v.

CA 8 August 2000 her that "nakakagigil ang batok mo, " and "masuwerte ka type kita, yung iba
may gusto sa akin di ko type." He would also pinch her at her side close to her
J. Pardo bust and when they met at the corridors respondent would make a motion as
though he would embrace her.
Yolanda Floralde, Nida Velasco and Normelita Alambra, all rank-and-file Velasco: "Habang binubuksan ko po ang pinto ng ref, bigla po niya akong
employees of the Agricultural Training Institute of the Department of niyakap at hinawakan niya ang maselang parte ng aking dibdib at bigla po akong
Agriculture, charged Officer-in-Charge Paulino Resma with grave misconduct in hinalikan sa bibig. Binantaan po niya ako na kapag nagsumbong ako ay hindi
office (sexual harassment) in 3 separate complaints filed with the CSC. niya irerenew ang aking appointment dahil casual lang po ako."

Resma specifically denied all the accusations against him. He argues that Resma would also often comment that "mamula-mula na ang iyong pag-aari at
1. he was not in the office on the days the alleged acts took place and fresh na fresh ka pa" and that she would answer back "lolo ka na eh, gago ka pa."
2. it was all a plot by Atty. Ola who was his rival for a promotion. Once she was watching a volleyball game when someone touched her buttocks,
3. Floralde et al. were unable to prove his guilt by the quantum of when she looked back it was Resma, and the latter said "nakakagigil ka ".
substantial evidence required in administrative proceedings.
Alhambra: Once after putting down her bag, Resma suddenly approached her
CSC: Resma is guilty of grave misconduct- Dismissed from service. and embraced her. In other instances, she testified that " tuwing maglalagay ako
CA: CSC resolution is reversed as it was not supported by substantial evidence. ng tubig sa baso sa loob ng CR biglang sumusulpot si Mr. Resma at dinadakma
ang puwit ko at sinasabing gustong-gusto niya ang malalaking puwit. "
WON there is substantial evidence to find Resma guilty of grave
misconduct. Also at one time Norshemelita testified that " nakasuot ako ng long sleeve na red
Held: YES at white maong pants galing ako sa CR ng bigla akong binangga ni Mr. Resma at
(1) Floralde et al., as rank-and-file employees, reported to their superior Resma dinakma ang aking dibdib.
at work. Their time records were signed by the latter. ---------
Sexual harassment in the workplace is not about a man taking advantage of a The evidence consists of the positive testimonies of Floralde et al. On the other
woman by reason of sexual desire; it is about power being exercised by a hand, Resma claimed that it was impossible for him to be at the office on the
superior officer over his women subordinates. days that the sexual harassment occurred. In other words, he merely presented
The power emanates from the fact that the superior can remove the subordinate an alibi.
from his workplace if the latter would refuse his amorous advances. This is the
situation at bar. Resma's contention that the complaints were instigated by Atty. Ola is
untenable. Unbelievable that all three women would prevaricate at the mere
(2) The testimonies of the victims: urging of Atty. Ola. Filing a charge for sexual harassment is not a trivial matter.
Floralde: Resma approached her and ask her "Ano yan, pagkatapos ako'y It entails having to go public with an incident that one is trying to forget. It
pinalapit sa kanyang kinaroroonan x x x nanatili akong nakatayo ngunit maya- means opening oneself to public ridicule and scrutiny.
maya ay bigla na lang siyang tumayo at dinakma ang puwit ko ng papisilpisil."
The preponderant evidence supported the CSC findings.
Floralde testified that this was not the only incident. Resma would often tell In determining where the preponderance or the superior weight of evidence on
the issues involved lies, the court may consider all the facts and circumstances
of the case. By preponderance of evidence is meant that the evidence as a whole
adduced by one side is superior to that of the other.

The concept of preponderance of evidence refers to evidence which is of greater

weight, or more convincing, that which is offered in opposition to it; at bottom,
it means probability of truth.

Consequently, the CA erred in reversing the resolutions of the CSC.

DECISION: SETS ASIDE the decision of CA, and REVIVES and AFFIRMS the
resolutions of the CSC dismissing Resma from office for grave misconduct.