PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS IN TERMINATION

In the case of United Tourist Promotions (UTP) v. Harland Kemplin, February 5, 2014, G.R. No. 205453, the Court quoted the Unilever case in explaining the requirements for procedural due process, to wit:

In Unilever Philippines, Inc. v. Maria Ruby M. Rivera, the Court laid down in detail the steps on how to comply with procedural due process in terminating an employee, viz:

(1) The first written notice to be served on the employees should contain the specific causes or grounds for termination against them, and a directive that the employees are given the opportunity to submit their written explanation within a reasonable period. "Reasonable opportunity" under the Omnibus Rules means every kind of assistance that management must accord to the employees to enable them to prepare adequately for their defense. This should be construed as a period of at least five (5) calendar days from receipt of the notice to give the employees an opportunity to study the accusation against them, consult a union official or lawyer, gather data and evidence, and decide on the defenses they will raise against the complaint. Moreover, in order to enable the employees to intelligently prepare their explanation and defenses, the notice should contain a detailed narration of the facts and circumstances that will serve as basis for the charge against the employees. A general description of the charge will not suffice. Lastly, the notice should specifically mention which company rules, if any, are violated and/or which among the grounds under Art. 282 is being charged against the employees.

(2) After serving the first notice, the employers should schedule and conduct a hearing or conference wherein the employees will be given the opportunity to: (1) explain and clarify their defenses to the charge against them; (2) present evidence in support of their defenses; and (3) rebut the evidence presented against them by the management. During the hearing or conference, the employees are given the chance to defend themselves personally, with the assistance of a representative or counsel of their choice. Moreover, this conference or hearing could be used by the parties as an opportunity to come to an amicable settlement.

(3) After determining that termination of employment is justified, the employers shall serve the employees a written notice of termination indicating that: (1) all circumstances involving the charge against the employees have been considered; and (2) grounds have been established to justify the severance of their employment.

CGRLAW & Associates

3F Builders Center, 170  Salcedo Street, 

Legaspi Village, Makati City
Tel. No. (+63 2) 985 4322
email: claude.requino@cgrlaw.ph

            info@cgrlaw.ph

website: http://www.cgrlaw.ph

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. You are hereby notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

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