You are on page 1of 6


PEDRO A. TECSON, petitioners, Whether Glaxo’s policy against its employees marrying employees
from competitor companies is valid, and whether said policy violates
vs. the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
The case involves the validity of the policy of a HELD:
pharmaceutical company prohibiting its employees The Court finds no merit in the petition.
from marrying employees of any competitor company. The prohibition against personal or marital relationships with
employees of competitor companies upon Glaxo’s employees is
reasonable under the circumstances because relationships of that
FACTS: nature might compromise the interests of the company. In laying
Pedro A. Tecson was hired by respondent Glaxo Wellcome down the assailed company policy, Glaxo only aims to protect its
Philippines, Inc. as medical representative. As stipulated in the interests against the possibility that a competitor company will gain
contract signed and agreed by Tecson, The Glaxo provides that an access to its secrets and procedures. Glaxo possesses the right to
employee is expected to inform management of any existing or future protect its economic interests. The law also recognizes that
relationship by consanguinity or affinity with co-employees or management has rights which are also entitled to respect and
employees of competing drug companies. If management perceives a enforcement in the interest of fair play.
conflict of interest or a potential conflict between such relationship The company policy does not violate the equal protection clause. In
and the employee’s employment with the company, the management the contractual provision and the policy in its employee handbook,
and the employee will explore the possibility of a “transfer to another Glaxo does not impose an absolute prohibition against relationships
department or preparation for employment outside the company after between its employees and those of competitor companies. Its
six months. employees are free to cultivate relationships with and marry persons
Subsequently, Tecson entered into a romantic relationship with of their own choosing. What the company merely seeks to avoid is a
Bettsy, an employee of Astra Pharmaceuticals, a competitor of Glaxo. conflict of interest between the employee and the company that may
In 1998,Tecson married Bettsy, whilst constantly reminded by the arise out of such relationships.
District Manager regarding the conflict of interest which his Petition is denied.
relationship with Bettsy might engender. When Tecson failed to
resolve the conflicting issue, Glaxo offered Tecson a separation pay or
to be transferred from Camarines to Butuan-Surigao-Agusan sales
area to which the former refused to abide. Aggrieved, Tecson filed a
petition to the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB)
which affirmed Glaxo’s policy as valid. CA affirmed NCMB’s decision,
hence, this petition.
. (3) The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or
offensive environment for the employee.
Domingo vs. Rayala (596 SCRA 90)
even if we were to test Rayala’s acts strictly by the standards set in
Domingo vs. Rayala Section 3, RA 7877, he would still be administratively liable. It is true
546 Scra 90 that this provision calls for a “demand, request or requirement of a
sexual favor.” But it is not necessary that the demand, request or
Facts: requirement of a sexual favor be articulated in a categorical oral or
Ma. Lourdes T. Domingo (Domingo), then Stenographic Reporter III at written statement. It may be discerned, with equal certitude, from the
the NLRC, filed a Complaint for sexual harassment against Rayala, acts of the offender. Holding and squeezing Domingo’s shoulders,
the chairman of NLRC. running his fingers across her neck and tickling her ear, having
She alleged that Rayala called her in his office and touched her inappropriate conversations with her, giving her money allegedly for
shoulder, part of her neck then tickled her ears. Rayala argued that school expenses with a promise of future privileges, and making
his acts does not constitute sexual harassment because for it to exist, statements with unmistakable sexual overtones – all these acts of
there must be a demand, request or requirement of sexual favor. Rayala resound with deafening clarity the unspoken request for a
sexual favor.
Whether or not Rayala commit sexual harassment.


The law penalizing sexual harassment in our jurisdiction is RA 7877.

Section 3 thereof defines work-related sexual harassment in this
Sec. 3. Work, Education or Training-related Sexual Harassment
Defined. – Work, education or training-related sexual harassment is
committed by an employer, manager, supervisor, agent of the
employer, teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any other
person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over
another in a work or training or education environment, demands,
requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other,
regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for
submission is accepted by the object of said Act.
(a) In a work-related or employment environment, sexual harassment
is committed when:
(1) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the
employment, re-employment or continued employment of said
individual, or in granting said individual favorable compensation,
terms, conditions, promotions, or privileges; or the refusal to grant
the sexual favor results in limiting, segregating or classifying the
employee which in a way would discriminate, deprive or diminish
employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect said
. (2) The above acts would impair the employee’s rights or privileges
under existing labor laws; or
directed to the personnel office and handed a memorandum
that stated that she was being dismissed for immoral
STARPAPER VS. SIMBOL conduct. Estrella was asked to submit an explanation but she
was dismissed nonetheless. She resigned because she was in
G.R. No. 164774, April 12, 2006 dire need of money and resignation could give her the
Facts: thirteenth month pay.
At bar is a Petition for Review on Certiorari of the Decision of On May 31, 2001, Labor Arbiter Del Rosario dismissed the
the Court of Appeals dated August 03, 2004 in CA-G.R. SP No. complaint for lack of merit.
73477 reversing the decision of the National Labor Relations On January, 11, 2002, NLRC affirmed the decision of the Labor
Commission (NLRC) which affirmed the ruling of the Labor Arbiter.
Arbiter. The following facts were presented: On August 8, 2002, NLRC denied the respondents’ Motion for
(a) The respondents were all regular employees of the company; Reconsideration through a Resolution.
(b) On October 27, 1993, Simbol was hired by the On August 3, 2004, the CA reversed the NLRC decision and
company. He met Alma Dayrit, also an employee of the declared that:
company. He married her on June 27, 1998. Prior to the (a) The petitioners’ dismissal from employment was illegal:
marriage, Ongsitco advised the couple that should they decide (b) The private respondents are ordered to reinstate the
to get married, one of them should resign pursuant to a petitioners to their former positions without loss of seniority
company policy promulgated in 1995. Simbol resigned on rights with full backwages from the time of their dismissal
June 20, 1998. until actual reinstatement; and
(c) On February 5, 1997, Comia was hired by the (c) The private respondents are to pay petitioners’ attorney’s
company. She met Howard Comia, a co-employee whom she fees amounting to 10% of the award and the cost of the suit.
married on June 1, 2000. Ongsitco likewise reminded them Hence, this petition.
pursuant to the aforementioned company policy. Comia Issues:
resigned on June 30, 2000. The issues raised by this petition are:
(d) Simbol and Comia alleged that they did not resign (1) Whether or not the CA erred in holding that the subject
voluntarily; they were compelled to resign in view of an illegal 1995 policy/ regulation is violative of the constituional rights
company policy. towards marriage and the family of employees and of Article
(e) On July 29, 1994, Estrella was hired by the company. She 136 of the Labor Code: and
met Luisito Zuniga, also a co-worker, whom petitioners claimed (2) Whether or not the respondents’ resignations were far from
to be a married man who got Estrella impregnated. The voluntary.
company allegedly could have terminated her services due to Held:
immorality but she opted to resign on December 21, 1999. (1) No. The CA did not err in holding that the subject 1995
(f) Estrella alleged that she had a relationship with co-worker policy/ regulation is violative of the constitutional rights
Zuniga who misrepresented himself as a married but a towards marriage and the family of employees and or Article
separated man. After he got her pregnant, she discovered that 136 of the Labor Code:
he was not separated. Thus, she severed her relationship with (ARTICLE 136. Stipulation against marriage. – It shall be
him to avoid dismissal due to company policy. unlawful for an employer to require as a condition of
(g) On November 30, 1999, Estrella met an accident and had to employment or continuation of employment that a woman
recuperate for twenty-one (21) days as advised by the doctor of employee shall not get married, or to stipulate expressly or
the Orthopaedic Hospital. On December 21, 1999 but she tacitly that upon getting married, a woman employee shall be
found out that her name was on hold at the gate. She was deemed resigned or separated, or to actually dismiss,
discharge, discriminate or otherwise prejudice a woman "Article 155. Health Assessment. - At their request, workers shall
employee merely by reason of her marriage. have the right to undergo a health assessment without charge and to
receive advice on how to reduce or avoid health problems associated
with their work:
"(a) Before taking up an assignment as a night worker;
WORKERS, THEREBY REPEALING ARTICLES 130 AND "(b) At regular intervals during such an assignment; and
HUNDRED FORTY-TWO, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE "(c) If they experience health problems during such, an
KNOWN AS THE LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES assignment which are not caused by factors other than the
performance of night work.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
Philippines in Congress assembled: "With the exception of a finding of unfitness for night work, the
findings of such assessments shall not be transmitted to others
Section 1. Article 130 of the Labor Code is hereby repealed. without the workers' consent and shall not be used to their
Section 2. Article 131 of the Labor Code is hereby repealed.
"Article 156. Mandatory Facilities. - Suitable first·aid facilities shall
be made available for workers performing night work, including
Section 3. The subsequent articles in Book Three, Title III, Chapter I arrangements where such workers, where necessary, can be taken
to Chapter IV of Presidential Decree No. 442 are hereby renumbered immediately to a place for appropriate treatment. The employers are
accordingly. likewise required to provide safe and healthful working conditions
and adequate or reasonable facilities such as sleeping or resting
Section 4. A new chapter is hereby inserted after Book Three, Title III quarters in the establishment and transportation from the work
of Presidential Decree No. 442, to read as follows: premises to the nearest point of their residence subject to exceptions
and guidelines to be provided by the DOLE."
"Chapter V
"Employment of Night Workers "Article 157. Transfer. - Night workers who are certified as unfit for
night work, due to health reasons, shall be transferred, whenever
"Article 154. Coverage. - This chapter' shall apply to all persons, practicable, to a similar job for which they are fit to work.
who shall be employed or permitted or suffered to work at night,
except those employed in agriculture, stock raising, fishing, maritime "If such transfer to a similar job is not practicable, these workers
transport and inland navigation, during a period of not less than shall be granted the same benefits as other workers who are unable
seven (7) consecutive hours, including the interval from midnight to to work, or to secure employment during such period.
five o'clock in the morning, to be determined by the Secretary of
Labor and Employment, after consulting the workers' "A night worker certified as temporarily unfit for night work shall be
representatives/labor organizations and employers. given the same protection against dismissal or notice of dismissal as
other workers who are prevented from working for reasons of health."
"'Night worker' means any employed person whose work requires
performance of a substantial number of hours of night work which "Article 158. Women Night Workers. - Measures shall be taken to
exceeds a specified limit. This limit shall be fixed by the Secretary of ensure that an alternative to night work is available to women
Labor after consulting the workers' representatives/labor workers who would otherwise be called upon to perform such work:
organizations and employers."
"(a) Before and after childbirth, for a period of at least sixteen benefits connected with maternity leave under
(16) weeks, which shall be divided between the time before existing laws."
and after childbirth;
"Article 159. Compensation. The compensation for night workers in
"(b) For additional periods, in respect of winch a medical the form of working time, pay or similar benefits shall recognize the
certificate IS produced stating that said additional periods are exceptional nature of night work."
necessary for the health of the mother or child:
"Article 160. Social Services. - Appropriate social services shall be
"(1) During pregnancy; provided for night workers and, where necessary, for workers
performing night work."
"(2) During a specified time beyond the period, after
childbirth is fixed pursuant to subparagraph (a) above, "Article 161. Night Work Schedules. - Before introducing work
the length of which shall be determined by the DOLE schedules requiring the services of night workers, the employer shall
after consulting the labor organizations and consult the workers' representatives/labor organizations concerned
employers. on the details of such schedules and the forms of organization of
night work that are best adapted to the establishment and its
"During the periods referred to in this article: personnel, as well as on the occupational health measures and social
services which are required. In establishments employing night
"(i) A woman worker shall not be dismissed or workers, consultation shall take place regularly."
given notice of dismissal, except for just or
authorized causes provided for in this Code Section 5. The subsequent articles starting from Book Four, Title I,
that are not connected with pregnancy, Chapter I of Presidential Decree No. 442 are hereby renumbered
childbirth and childcare responsibilities. accordingly.

"(ii) A woman worker shall not lose the benefits Section 6. Application. - The measures referred to in this chapter
regarding her status, seniority, and access to shall be applied not later than six (6) months from the effectivity of
promotion which may attach to her regular this Act.
night work position.
Section 7. Guidelines. - The DOLE shall promulgate appropriate
"Pregnant women and nursing mothers may be regulations in addition to existing ones to ensure protection, safety
allowed to work .at night only if a competent and welfare of night workers.
physician, other than the company physician,
shall certify their fitness to render night work, Section 8. Penalties. - Any violation of this Act, and the rules and
and specify, in the case of pregnant employees, regulations issued pursuant hereof shall be punished with a fine of
the period of the pregnancy that they can safely not less than Thirty thousand pesos (P30,000.00) nor more than Fifty
work. thousand pesos (P50,000.00) or imprisonment of not less than six (6)
months, or both, at the discretion of the court. If the offense is
"The measures referred to in this article may committed by a corporation, trust, firm, partnership at association,
include transfer to day work where this is or other entity, the penalty shall be imposed upon the guilty officer or
possible, the provision of social security officers of such corporation, trust, firm, partnership or association, or
benefits or an extension of maternity leave. entity.

"The provisions of this article shall not leave

the effect of reducing the protection and
Section 9. Separability Clause. - If any portion of this Act is declared
unconstitutional, the same shall not affect the validity and effectivity
of the other provisions not affected thereby.

Section 10. Repealing Clause. - All laws, acts, decrees, executive

orders, rules and regulations or other issuances or parts thereof,
which are inconsistent with this Act, are hereby modified and

Section 11. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect after fifteen
(15) days following its publication in two (2) national newspapers of
general circulation.