Tag - Just Cause

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 the [...]

Filing of Illegal Dismissal as Against Denial of Termination in Abandonment Cases

Substantial evidence proffered by the employer that it had not terminated the employee should not be ignored on the pretext that the employee would not have filed the complaint for illegal dismissal if he had not really been dismissed. The Court held that such non sequitur reasoning cannot take the place of the evidence of both The lapse of time between the dismissal of an employee for abandonment and the filing of a complaint for illegal dismissal is not a [...]

Evidence Required in Abandonment Cases

Abandonment of work is a ground for dismissal under Article 297 of the Labor Code, as amended. However, is mere claim of abandonment already substantial evidence to support the dismissal? The issue of whether the employee has abandoned his work is factual. The law does not enumerate what specific overt acts can be considered as strong evidence of the intention to sever the employer-employee relationship. Failure of the employer to present attendance record even when this was readily available to it could [...]

Separation Pay Cannot be Awarded to Employee Dismissed for Gross and Habitual Neglect of Duty; Other issues on this ground

Gross and habitual neglect of duty is one of the grounds for dismissal under Article 297 of the Labor Code, as amended. In certain termination, employee is entitled to payment of separation pay. This applies to grounds found under Article 298 of the Labor Code such as installation of labor saving devices, redundancy, retrenchment, and closure. But this does not apply to dismissal due to the fault of the employee like those grounds in Article 297. In one case, in view of [...]

Habituality in Gross and Habitual Neglect is Disregarded if Loss is Substantial

That for negligence to be a valid ground, it must be “gross and habitual” is only a general rule. Where damage or loss is substantial, the element of habituality may be disregarded. Thus, in a case where the bank suffered actual loss in the amount of P50,000.00 which is part of the P200,000.00 left by a bank teller fully exposed in her counter on a payday in the presence of depositors milling around, the dismissal of the bank teller for [...]

Insubordination and Compliance with Lawful Orders of Employer

It may dawn upon an employee who does not want to comply with an order to file a case questioning its validity thinking that his filing will give him an excuse not to follow such command. The Supreme Court ruled that it would be dangerous doctrine indeed to allow employees to refuse to comply with rules and regulations, policies and procedures laid down by their employer by the simple expedient of formally challenging their reasonableness or the motives which inspired [...]

Sexual Harassment in a Nutshell

Republic Act 7877 or the “Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995” governs the cases of sexual harassment. In section 3 of the law, it provides that: “Section 3. Work, Education or Training- Related, Sexual Harassment Defined.—Work, education or training-related sexual harassment is commit ted by an employer, employee, 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, [...]

Specific Instances Constituting Serious Misconduct

A series of irregularities may constitute serious misconduct. Thus, in Gustilo vs. Wyeth Phils. where the employee committed the following acts: Falsified his employment application form by not stating therein that he is the nephew of the company’s manager; Falsified gasoline receipt; Submitted false report of his trade outlet calls; and Unauthorized availment of sick, vacation and emergency leaves The Court held that with those listed offenses, the dismissal from service is in order. Citing Piedad vs. Lanao del Norte Electric Cooperative, Inc. [G.R. [...]

Breach of Trust is a Factual Issue

Breach trust must be proven as a fact. There must be some evidence to substantiate the claim and form a legal basis for loss of confidence. The employer cannot exercise arbitrarily and without just cause the right to dismiss an employee for loss of trust and confidence. While it is true that loss of trust and confidence is a just cause for termination, it must not be simulated or concocted but must be supported by substantial evidence. The evidence must be substantial [...]

Burden of Proof in Constructive Dismissal

Burden of proof is the standard required in proving a case. In cases of constructive dismissal, the burden of proof is on the employer to show that the employee was dismissed for a valid and a just cause. (Suldao vs. Cimech System Construction, Inc., G.R. No. 171392, October 30, 2006.) This means that if the employee claims he was constructively dismissed from service and sues the employer, it is the employer who must prove that the employee was not dismissed from [...]

error: Content is protected !!