M. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT Articles 282 — 286, Labor Code; IRR, Book VI, R1 $1-14, Dept. Order No. 9, Rule XXIII, Secs. 1-9 1. GENERALLY: 1.1 No termination without just cause and due process; rationale behind principle (Dept. Order No. 9, R23, S1) Employee not required to prove innocence of the charges leveled against him. - Phil. Transmarine vs. Carilla, 525 SCRA 586 [2007] 1.2 Management prerogative; Company rules and regulations San Miguel Brewery Sales Force Union vs. Ople, 170 SCRA 25 [1989] 2. SOME GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION, Art. 282-285, LC JUST CAUSES FOR TERMINATION Toyota Motor Phils. Workers Assn vs. NLRC, 537 SCRA 171 [2007] BUT EMPLOVEE MUST PROVE FACT OF DISMISSAL FIRST: Lilia Labadan vs. Forest Hills Academy et. al., G.R. No. 172295, 23 Dec 2008 Bitoy Javier (Danilo P. Javier) vs. Fly Ace Corporation/Flordelyn Castillo, G.R. No. 25 192558, 15 Feb 2012. 2.1_ Serious misconduct Torreda vs. Toshiba Information Equip., 523 SCRA 133 [2007] Fighting within company premises: ‘Supreme Steel Pipe Corp vs. Berdaje, 522 SCRA 185 [2007] ‘Alex Gurango vs. Best Chemicals and Plastics Inc. and Moon Pyo Hong, G.R. No. G.R. No. 174593, 25 August 2010 Northwest Airlines vs. Concepcion Del Rosario, GR. 157633, 10 Sept 2014. Cesar Naguit vs. San Miguel Corporation, G.R. No. 188839, 22 June 2015 Attitude problem e.g., negative attitude: Cathedral School of Technology vs. NLRC, 251 SCRA 554 [1992] Citibank NA vs. NLRC, 544 SCRA [2008]Serious misconduct by manager Sim vs. NLRC, 534 SCRA 515 [2007] Tirazona vs. Phil. Eds Techno-Service (PET INC.), G.R. No. 169712, 20 January 2009 Moonlighting: Capitol Wireless, Inc. vs. Balagot, 513 SCRA 672 [2007]. Theft by employee: Caltex (Phils.), Inc vs. Agad, G.R. No. 162017, 23 April 2010; Villamor Golf Club vs. Pehid, G.R. No. 166152, 04 October 2005. Cosmos Bottling Vs. Wilson Fermin, G.R. 193676 and Wilson Fermin Vs. Cosmos Bottling, GR 194303, 20 June 2012 Drug abuse as serious misconduct: See also: REQUIREMTS FOR VALID DRUG TEST under RA9156. AER vs. Progresibong Union sa AER, 15 July 2011 citing Nacague vs. ‘Suplicio Case, Aug 2010 Bughaw Jr. Vs. Treasure Island, 550 SCRA 307 [2008] Plantation Bay Resort and Spa vs. Dubrico, 04 Dec 2009 Mirant Philippines vs. Joselito A. Caro, G.R. No. 181490, 23 April 2014. Conspiracy in commission of theft: White Diamond Trading Corporation vs» NBLRC, G.R. No. 186019, 29 March 2010 Sargasso Construction and Development Corporation vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 164118, 09 February 2010 Committing offenses penalized with three suspensions within a twelve-month period: Samahan Ng Manggagawa Sa Hyatt-NUHWRAIN Vs. Magsalin, GR No. 164939, 06 June 2011 Contra: When not serious misconduct RCPI vs. NERC, G.R. No. 114777, 05 July 1996 — stapler case VH Manufacturing vs. NLRC, 322 SCRA 417 [2000] — sleeping on the job; dismissal too harsh a penalty Collegio de San Juan de Letran — Calamba vs. Villas, 399 SCRA 550 [26 March 2003] Uttering of invectives: Samson vs. NLRC, 330 SCRA 460 [2000] Punzal vs. ESTI Technologies, 518 SCRA 66 [2007] Roque B. Benitez, et al., vs. Santa Fe Moving and Relocation Services, et al., G.R. No. 208163, 20 April 2015. Libel: Visayan Electric Company Employees Union-ALU-TUCP, et al. vs. Visayan Electric Company, Inc., (VECO), G.R. No. 205575, 22 July 2015. 22 Gross insubordination nO2. wo 24 2010. 25 The Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf Philippines, Inc. vs. Rolly P. Arenas, G.R. No. 208908, March 11, 2015. Employee’s refusal to comply with rules and regulations by simple expedient of challenging reasonableness, not allowable: GTE Directories vs. Sanchez, 197 SCRA 452 [1991] What if the act were within discretionary powers of manager? ePacific Global Contact Center vs. Cabansay, 538 SCRA 498 [2007] Prudential Bank vs. Antonio Mauricio et al., GR 183350, 18 Jan 2012. Contra: Refusal to comply due to valid reason Lores Realty Enterprises, Inc., Lorenzo Y. Sumulong Ill v. Virginia E. Pacia, G.R. No. 171189, 09 March 2011 Contra: Violation of company rules and regulations, tolerance thereof. Permex, Inc. vs. NLRC, 323 SCRA 121 [24 Jan 2000); citing Tide Water Association Oil Co. vs. Victory Employees and Laborer’s Association, 85 Phil. 166. Gross negligence/habitual neglect of duty Dr. Phylis C. Rio, et al, vs. Colegio De Sta. Rosa — Makati et. al, G.R. No. 189629, 06 Aug 2014. Habitual absencesj/tardiness as form of neglect San Juan De Dios Educational Foundation Employees Union v San Juan De Dios and NLRC, 28 May 2005 May gross and habitual neglect likewise be considered as serious misconduct? Arsenio Quiambao vs:,Manila Electric Company, GR No. 171023, 18 December 2009. Single Isolated act of negligence insufficient ground for termination St. Luke's Medical Center, Inc. and Robert Kuan vs. Estrelito Nazario, G.R. No. 152166, 20 October 2010 Totality of Infractions ruling: Mansion Printing Center and Clement Cheng vs Diosdado Bitara, Jr. , G.R. No. 168120, 15 January 2012. Abandonment Hilton Heavy Equipment vs. Ananias Dy, G.R. No. 164860, 02 February Essencia Q. Manarpiis vs. Texan Philippines, Inc., et al. G.R. No. 197011, 28 January 2015 Fraud Felix vs. Enertech Systems, 355 SCRA 680 [2001] Pfizer vs. Lleander vs. Galan, G.R. No. 158460, 24 Aug. 2007 Unilever vs. Ma. Ruby Rivera, G.R. No. 201701, 03 June 2013 N.B.: Concealment of pregnancy; dismissal too harsh Lakpue Drug vs. Balga, G.R. 166379, 20 Oct 2005]26 27 28 Loss of Confidence/Breach of Trust Philippine Plaza Holdings vs. Episcope, G.R. No. 192826, 27 Feb 2013. Hormillosa vs. Coca Cola, G.R. No. 198699, 09 September 2013 peered plecicel Center Vs. Ma. Theresa Sanchez, G.R. No. 212054, 11 Managerial employee Prudential Bank vs.Antonio Mauricio, GR 183350, 18 Jan 2012 Cecilia Manese vs. Jollibee Foods, G.R. No. 17-454, 11 October 2012 De Leon Cruz vs. BPI, G.R. No. 173357, 13 February 2013 Two kinds of positions of trust identified: Abelardo Abel vs. Philex Mining, GR 178976, 31 July 2009 Carlos Valenzuela vs. Caltex, GR 169965-66, 15 Dec 2010 Bus conductor is a confidential employee: Mapili vs. Phil. Rabbit Bus Line, G.R. No. 172506, 27 July 2011. Rank_and_file NOT entrusted with custody of property, cannot be terminated for loss of trust and confidence Century Iron Works vs. Banas, G.R- 184116, 19 June 2013 Phil. Transmarine Carriers vs..Carilla, 535 SCRA 893 [2007] Tirazona vs. CA, 548 SCRA 560 (2008) Tampering of com) nt for | Eats Cetera Food Services vs. teran, GR 179507, 02 Oct 2009 in rmin: ven if he did _n from fraud committed? Eric Dela Cruz V. Coca-Cola Bottlers, G.R. 180465, 31 July 2009 Incompetence EDI Staffbuilders Intl. vs. NLRC, 537 SCRA 409 [2007] Contra: Inefficiency of employee; condonation by employer — Bebina G. Salvaloza vs. National Labor Relations Commission, Gulf Pacific Security Agency, Inc., and Angel Quizon, G.R. No. 182086, 24 November 2010 Commission of a crime Torreda vs. Toshiba Info Equip., 515 SCRA 133 [2007] AUTHORIZED CAUSES OF TERMINATION2.9 Redundancy Sebuguero vs. NLRC, 248 SCRA 532 [1995] Nelson Culili vs. Eastern Telecom, GR 165381, 09 Feb 2011 Alleged redundancy contradictory to “voluntary” retirement. = General Milling Corporation vs. Violeta L. Viajar. G.R. No. 181738, 30 January 2013. 2.10 Retrenchment or business reverses Businessday vs. NLRC, 221 SCRA9 San Miguel Jeepney vs. NLRC, 265 SCRA 35 [1996] Navotas Shipyard Corporation and Jesus Villaflor vs. Innocencio Montallana et. al., G.R. No. 190053, 24 March 2014 Contra: separation pay not necessary in case of bankruptcy North Davao Mining vs. NLRC, 254 SCRA 721 [1996] Audited financial statements as proof of serious business losses Virgilio Anabe vs. AsiaKonstruct, GR 183233, 23 Dec 2009 Notice to DOLE/employee plus payment.of separation pay to all affected employees Sebuguero vs. NLRC, 248 SCRA 533 [1995]: 2.11 Closure Capitol Medical Center vs. Meris, 470 SCRA 125 [2005] Benson Industries Employees Union-ALU-TUCP et. al. vs. Benson Industries, Inc. G.R. No. 200746, 06 August 2014. When done in bad faith: Penafrancia Tours and Travel Transport vs. Sarmiento, GR 178397, 20 Oct 2010. 2.12 Disease - continued employment must be prejudicial to. own health and co-workers Sevillana vs. International Corp., 356 SCRA 451 [16 April 2001] Romeo Villaruel vs. Yeo Han Guan, doing business under the name and style Yuhans Enterprises, G.R. No. 169191, 01 June 2011. Wuerth Philippines, Inc. vs. Rodante Ynson,G.R. No. 175932, 15 February 2012. Eleazar S. Padillo vs. Rural Bank of Nabunturan, Inc., et al. G.R. No. 199338, 21 January 2013. 2.13 Merger or consolidation with another company First Gen. Marketing vs. NLRC, 223 SCRA 337 [1993] Manlimos vs. NLRC, 242 SCRA 145 [1995] |. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES: 3.1 Preventive suspension YRS Business vs. NLRC, 246 SCRA 445 [1995] Cadiz vs. Court of Appeals, 474 SCRA 232 [2005] 3.2 Suspension — where allowed for more than one monthDeles vs. NLRC, supra. Gross negligence, 327 SCRA 541 [2000] 3.3 Constructive dismissal - MeMer Corporation, Inc., et al. vs. NLRC, et al. G.R. No. 193421; June 04, 2014 3.4 Floating status not to exceed 6 months - Bebiana Salvaloza vs. NLRC Gulf Pacific Agency et al, GR 182086, 24 Nov 2010 Nippon Housing Phil. Inc., et. al., vs. Maia Angela Reyes, G.R. No. 177816, 03 August 2011. = Suspension of operations on account of business losses Nasipit Lumber Company, et al. vs. National Organization of Workingmen (NOWM), et al., G.R. No. 146225, 11/25/2004. G.J.T. Rebuilders Machine Shop et al. vs. Ricardo Ambos. et. al., G.R. No. 174184, 28 January 2015. 3.5 Last-in First-Out (LIFO) rule - Maya Farms Employees Org. vs. NLRC, 239 SCRA 508 3.6 Totality of infractions rule Mendoza vs. NLRC, 195 SCRA 606 [1997] Villeno vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 108153 [26 Dec. 1995] Meralco vs. NLRC, ibid. Contra: Acebedo Optical vs. NERC, 527 SCRA 655 [2007] 3.7 Length of service Citibank NA vs. Gatchalian, 240 SCRA 212 [1995] Reynaldo Moya vs. First Solid Rubber, G.R. No. 184011, 18 September 2013 3.8 Demotion Leonardo vs.;NLRC, 333 SCRA 589 [2000] 3.9 Employee's abrasive character and fallure to get along with other co- employees Cathedral School of Technology vs. NLRC, 251 SCRA 554 [1992] Heavylift Manila, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 473 SCRA 541 [2005] Citibank NA vs. NLRC, 544 SCRA (2008). 3.10 Resignation instead of termination Mendoza vs. HMS Credit Corp., et. al., G.R. No. 187232, 17 April 2013; citing San Miguel Properties vs. Gucaban, 654 SCRA 18 [2011] General Milling Corporation vs. Viajar, G.R. No. 181783, 30 January 2013; nee vs. Benguet Electric Cooperative, Inc., 599 SCRA 438 [2009] N.B.: Signing of Release Waivers and Quitclaims Becton Dickinson Phils. vs. NLRC, 475 SCRA 125 [2005] Goodrich Manfuacturing vs. Ativo et al., GR 188002, 01 Feb 2010 Telex is not equivalent to tender of resignation.31 3.12 3.13 Skippers United Pacific, Inc. and Skippers Maritime Services, Inc. Ltd. vs. Nathaniel Doza, et al., G-R. No. 175558. 08 February 2012 Immorality/Sexual Harassment Republic Act No. 7877 Chua-Qua vs. Clave, 189 SCRA 117 [1990] Dr. Rico Jacutin vs. PP, G.R. No. 140604, 06 March 2002. Lourdes Domingo vs. Rogelio Rayala, G.R. No. 155831, 18 February 2008. Santos Leus vs. St. Scholastica’s College Westgrave, et al., G.R. No. 187226, January 28, 2015 Cadiz vs. Brent Hospital and Colleges, G.R. No. 187417, 15 March 2016 Contra; when not sexual harassment Atty. Susan Aquino vs. Hon. Emesto Acosta, Presiding Judge of the Court of Tax Appeals, A.M. No. CTA -01-1, 02 April 2002. Contra: when not immorality, re: live-in relationships Toledo vs. Toledo 544 SCRA 27 Termination instigated by Union on account of Union Security Clause Malayang Samahan sa M Greenfield, supra.,326 SCRA 428 [2000] Alabang Country Vs. NLRC, 545 SCRA 351 [2008]. Inguillio vs. First Phil. Scales, GR No. 165407, 05 June 2009 Effect when employer choses to extend suspension period Pido vs. NLRC, 516 SCRA 68 [2007] 4. PROCEDURE TO TERMINATE EMPLOYMENT Art. 282, Le;-B5 R14 S1-11, IRR; Dept. Order No. 9, Rule 23, Sec. 2-9) 41 General Rule: Twin requirements of notice and hearing must be complied with for valid termination Reasonable period to answer, interpreted as FIVE days: King of Kings Transport vs. Mamac, 526 SCRA 116 [2007] Requirements of Charge Sheet/Notice of Appraisal: Magro Placement vs. Hernandez, 526 SCRA 408 [2007] Genuino vs. NLRC, 539 SCRA 342 [2007] Unilever vs. Ma. Ruby Rivera, G-R. 201701, 03 June 2013 Is the employer required to inform the employee in the appraisal/charge sheet that he may be terminated for the infraction? Dolores T. Esguerra vs. Valle Verde Country Club et. al., G.R. No. 173012, 13 June 20124.2 Exception: WENPHIL doctrine, as affirmed by the AGABON vs NLRC case [17 Nov. 2004]; SERRANO ruling overturned Wenphil vs. NLRC, 170 SCRA 69 [1989] Serrano vs. NLRC, 323 SCRA 445 [2000] Agabon vs. NLRC, 442 SCRA 573 [17 Nov. 2004] See: Section 5.2 on Hegality of the Manner of Dismissal 4.3 Administrative Hearing/investigation not required: Perez vs. Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Company, 584 SCRA 110 [2009], En Banc When employee has voluntarily admitted guilt Bernardo vs. NLRC, 255 SCRA 108 [1996] 4.4 Right to counsel on the part of the employee — Is this mandatory and indispensable as part of due process? Lopez vs. Alturas Group, 11 April 2011, 5. Burden of proof rests upon employer to show Just cause and due process Segismundo vs. NLRC, 239 SCRA 167 [1994] Domasig vs. NLRC, 261 SCRA 779 [1996] Medenilla vs. Phil. Veterans Bank, 328 SCRA 1 [2000] De Guzman vs. NLRC, 540 SCRA 21 [2007] Testimonies, how treated: Philippine Airlines vs. NLRC, 328 SCRA 273 [2000]