Kailan masasabing serious misconduct ang away sa trabaho?

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta - @Magtanong Kay Attorney | November 15, 2022

Dear Chief Acosta,

Ang aking asawa ay naglilingkod sa factory bilang packer. Siya ay nagkaroon ng munting pakikipagtalo sa kanyang kapwa empleyado na nagresulta sa kaunting tulakan. Matapos ang imbestigasyon at pagdinig ng kumpanya, nag-desisyon itong tanggalin ang aking asawa bilang empleyado dahil umano sa Serious Misconduct. Tama ba ito? - Lora

Dear Lora,

Ang sagot sa iyong katanungan ay sinagot ng Korte Suprema sa kasong G&S Transport Corporation v. Reynaldo A. Medina, G.R. No. 243768, September 5, 2022, na isinulat ni Kagalang-galang na Mahistrado Ramon Paul L. Hernando, kung saan sinabi ng Korte Suprema na ang pagtutulakan at kaunting pagtatalo ay hindi katumbas ng Serious Misconduct. Ayon sa Korte Suprema:

“Here, none of the requisites for serious misconduct is present. To reiterate, the CA found that only a petty quarrel involving shoving or slight pushing transpired between Medina and Pogoy. The same was “nipped in the bud'” by the intervention of the security guards on duty and Viggayan. It did not cause work stoppage nor posed a threat to the safety of the other employees. [G&S] did not show how [Medina’s] misconduct has adversely affected its business, or how [Medina] has become unfit to continue working for the company.” Thus, there was no just cause for the termination of Medina’s employment with G&S. xxx

While misconduct in the eyes of the employer may have been committed, the same was not serious enough to result in termination of employment. It is a hornbook principle that "infractions committed by an employee should merit only the corresponding penalty demanded by the circumstance. The penalty must be commensurate with the act, conduct or omission imputed to the employee and must be imposed in connection with the disciplinary authority of the employer." The disciplinary authority of G & S is recognized but should be tempered with compassion and understanding.

Here, We agree with the appellate court that “the penalty of dismissal is too harsh and is not commensurate with the act committed,” considering that Medina had been employed for seven years and only recently became involved in any form of misconduct. Absent any evidence showing the seriousness and aggravated character of the misconduct, the extreme penalty of dismissal should not have been imposed. As the appellate court stated,” [a] lighter penalty, such as suspension, would have been more just. (Emphasis Ours)

Tulad ng iyong nabanggit, ang pagtatalo ng iyong asawa at ng kanyang katrabaho na nagresulta sa kaunting panghahamon at tulakan ay isa lamang “petty quarrel”, na hindi maaaring ikonsiderang Serious Misconduct. Dahil dito, ang parusang pagkakatanggal sa trabaho ay ikinonsidera na masyadong marahas na parusa na hindi katumbas ng naging pagkakamali ng nasabing empleyado. Kaya naman, ilegal ang ginawang pagtanggal sa iyong asawa dahil walang just cause upang patalsikin siya. Kaugnay nito, maaari siyang maghain ng reklamong illegal dismissal laban sa kanyang employer.

Sana ay nabigyang namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa impormasyon na iyong inilahad at sa pagkakaintindi namin dito. Maaaring magbago ang aming opinyon kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.