AN EMPLOYEE WHO TENDERED RESIGNATION LETTER CANNOT CLAIM TO BE ILLEGALLY DISMISSED

The act of resignation is a voluntary act of relinquishment of one’s employment. Resignation is the voluntary act of an employee who is in a situation where one believes that personal reasons cannot be sacrificed in favor of the exigency of service, and one has no other choice but to dissociate oneself from employment. It is a formal pronouncement or relinquishment of an office.

In a case decided by the Supreme Court, a flight attendant tendered her resignation but later on filed an illegal dismissal case contending that she was forced to resign. In dismissing the complaint, the court considered that:

1.  The resignation letter was handwritten
2. The complainant was of sufficient age and discretion, could read, write, and understand English
3. There is no proof of any material or physical force applied on her person or family
4.  Voluntary executed a quit claim
5. Received generous financial benefits without protest
6. It took one year to file illegal dismissal

Further, the court ruled that the resignation letter and undertaking that evidenced her receipt of separation pay, when taken together with her educational attainment and the circumstances surrounding the filing of the complaint for illegal dismissal, comprise substantial proof of voluntary resignation.

The words used in the resignation letter showing appreciation and gratitude towards the employer, negates the notion of being forced and coerced to resign. The complainant is no ordinary employee who may not be able to completely comprehend and realize the consequences of her acts. She is an educated individual. It is highly improbable that with her long years in the profession and her educational attainment, she could be tricked and forced into doing something she does not intend to do.

It must be remembered that for intimidation to vitiate consent, the following requisites must be present: (1) that the intimidation caused the consent to be given (2) that the threatened act be unjust or unlawful (3) that the threat be real or serious, there being evident disproportion between the evil and the resistance which all men can offer, leading to the choice of doing the act which is forced on the person to do as the lesser evil (4) and that it produces a well grounded fear from the fact that the person from whom it comes has necessary means or ability to inflict the threatened injury to his person or property. In this cas, there is no proof to the existence of any of the essential elements. Bare and self-serving allegations of coercion or intimidation, unsubstantiated by evidence, do not constitute proof to sufficiently support a finding of forced resignation.

Moreover, not all waivers and quitclaims are invalid as against public policy. There are legitimate waivers and quitclaims that represent a voluntary and reasonable settlement of workers which must be respected by the courts as the law between parties.

G.R. No. 183915, December 2011