Tag - dismissal

Standards to Observe in Alleging Offenses in the Notice to Explain

Issuance of the Notice to Explain (NTE) is one of the steps required in employee dismissal. At least, insofar as avoiding payment of indemnity is concerned for violation of procedural due process. Not observing the proper NTE may also impress upon the tribunal the haphazard nature of the employer in issuing such legal requirement. The last thing that an employer, as respondent in a case, wants is to have a wrong impression in the eyes of the labor tribunal. So, [...]

Resigned Employees are not Entitled to Separation Pay

Resignation is provided under Art. 300 of the Labor Code. There is nothing in such article that mandates the payment of separation pay to resigned employee. In a case of Italkarat 18, Inc. vs. Gerasmio, (G.R. No. 221411, September 28, 2020), the Supreme Court held that as a general rule, the law does not require employers to pay employees that have resigned any separation pay, unless there is a contract that provides otherwise or there exists a company practice [...]

Effect of Long Employment Tenure Against the Charge of Loss of Trust and Confidence

There is a thought that an employee who has rendered several years of service is accorded leniency in disciplinary situations. However, this is not always the case since under certain circumstances, long years of service may aggravate the offense involving loss of trust. In a case where the two employees had spent twenty-two (22) and nineteen (19) years of service with the company respectively and although they committed their only first offense, the Supreme Court upheld their dismissal nonetheless. [...]

Loss of Trust and Confidence Applies to Confidential Employees

There are rank-and-file employees who hold highly confidential positions due to their fiduciary responsibilities and proximity to the management that makes important decisions pertaining to labor relations. In one of my clients’ organizational setup, an employee who used to be a holder of supervisory position being an assistant to the SVP for Marketing was demoted to rank-and-file status. But he was classified as a confidential employee. This kind of confidential employee is not a holder of a trusted position [...]

Doctrine of Command Responsibility for Managerial Employees and Breach of Trust by Rank and File Employees

In the case of a Chief Purser of a passenger ship, the established facts show that although he did not participate in the commission of anomalies, he was still liable due to his failure to detect those irregularities. (See Vicente C. Etcuban, Jr. vs. Sulpicio Lines, Inc., G.R. No. 148410, January 17, 2005.) Interestingly, jurisprudence has made a connection between neglect of duty and loss of trust and confidence involving a managerial employee or a rank-and-file holding a fiduciary [...]

Loss of Trust and Confidence Based on Employee Position

Loss of trust and confidence is premised on the fact that the employee holds a position whose functions may only be performed by someone who has the confidence of management. Such employee may be managerial or rank-and-file, but the nature of his position determines the requirements for a valid dismissal. With respect to a managerial employee, the mere existence of a basis for believing that such employee has breached the trust of his employer would suffice for his dismissal. Proof [...]

Classes of Positions of Trust

In a case involving breach of trust and confidence, it is required that the employee being investigated holds a position of trust. There are two classes of positions of trust. The first class consists of managerial employees and the second. class consists of cashiers, auditors, property custodians, etc. (Abelardo P. Abel vs. Philex Mining Corporation, G.R. No. 178976, July 31, 2009 citing Mabeza vs. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 118506, April 18, 1997, 271 SCRA 670, 682.) Managerial employees [...]

Loss of Trust and Confidence as Ground for Termination Must have Reasonable Grounds

For loss of trust and confidence to constitute a sufficient ground for termination, the employer must have a reasonable ground to believe, if not to entertain the moral conviction, that the employee was responsible for the misconduct, and that the nature of his participation therein rendered him absolutely unworthy of the trust and confidence demanded by his position. As can be deduced from Article 297 of the Labor Code, as amended, the breach of trust and confidence must be [...]

Fraud and Loss of Trust and Confidence

A managerial employee is conferred with full trust and confidence by his employer. While as a manager he could exercise some discretion, such does not cover acts of betrayal of trust and confidence of his employer. He cannot reimburse his family’s personal travel expenses out of company funds. His act amounted to fraud or deceit which led to the loss of trust and confidence of his employer. An employee, the Officer-in-Charge of the company in its boutique misappropriated the [...]

Abandonment Requires Notice

Abandonment is a ground for dismissal of employees under Article 297 of the Labor Code, as amended. Being considered as within the context of gross and habitual neglect of duty. However, while abandoning employee is usually not physically available, he should still be served the notices for the dismissal. There is no such thing automatic termination for abandonment. An employee whom the employer deems to have abandoned his work cannot be automatically terminated. Due process is required in order for [...]

error: Content is protected !!