Key Takeaway: Employers Can Dismiss Employees for Serious Misconduct, Even During Union Activities

Gaudioso Iso, Jr. and Joel Tolentino v. Salcon Power Corporation (now SPC Power Corporation) and Dennis Villareal, G.R. No. 219059, February 12, 2020

Imagine being dismissed from your job for speaking out during a heated union negotiation. This scenario became a reality for Gaudioso Iso, Jr. and Joel Tolentino, two union officers at SPC Power Corporation. Their case reached the Supreme Court of the Philippines, highlighting the delicate balance between employee rights and employer prerogatives. The central question was whether their dismissal for alleged libelous statements was justified, even amidst union activities. This case underscores the complexities of labor law and the importance of understanding the boundaries of free speech in the workplace.

In this case, Iso and Tolentino, leaders of the Salcon Power Independent Union (SPIU), were dismissed after making statements during a press conference that were deemed libelous by their employer, SPC Power Corporation. The statements alleged financial misconduct by the company. The Supreme Court upheld their dismissal, ruling that their actions constituted serious misconduct, a valid ground for termination under the Labor Code.

Legal Context: Understanding Serious Misconduct and Employee Rights

Serious misconduct, as defined under Article 297 of the Philippine Labor Code, is a valid reason for an employer to terminate an employee’s contract. The article specifies that an employer may terminate employment for serious misconduct or willful disobedience of lawful orders related to work, among other reasons. Serious misconduct is characterized by an improper or wrong conduct, a transgression of established rules, and a willful act with wrongful intent.

This case touches on the tension between an employee’s right to free speech and an employer’s right to protect its reputation and business interests. The Philippine Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, but this right is not absolute, especially in the workplace where it must be balanced against the company’s interests.

The concept of management prerogative also comes into play. Employers have the right to regulate their business, including the power to dismiss employees for acts that are detrimental to the company. However, this power must be exercised fairly and in accordance with due process requirements, which include providing the employee with notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Here is the relevant provision from the Labor Code:

Art. 297. [282] Termination by Employer. — An employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes: (a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work; (c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized representative;

Case Breakdown: The Journey from Union Negotiation to Supreme Court

The conflict began when Iso and Tolentino, as union leaders, engaged in collective bargaining with SPC Power Corporation. The company had refused to recognize their union, leading to a certification election in which SPIU won. Despite this, the company continued to resist bargaining, prompting the union to file a notice of strike.

In May 2009, Iso and Tolentino held a press conference to address what they believed were unfair labor practices by SPC Power Corporation. They claimed the company had profited excessively at the expense of consumers, a statement that was later published in a newspaper. SPC Power Corporation responded by filing a criminal complaint for libel against them.

Subsequently, the company issued show-cause notices to Iso and Tolentino, charging them with serious misconduct, dishonesty, breach of trust, and disobedience. After hearings, the company found them guilty and dismissed them from service. The employees then filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, which was denied by the Labor Arbiter and later affirmed by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).

The case reached the Court of Appeals (CA), which also upheld the dismissal. The Supreme Court, in its decision, emphasized the following:

“Accusatory and inflammatory language used by an employee towards his employer or superior can be a ground for dismissal or termination,” more so in this case where petitioners’ utterance of accusatory statements came out in the news item dated May 29, 2009 authored by Baquero of Sun Star Cebu.

“The longer the employees stay in the service of the company, the greater is their responsibility for knowledge and compliance with the norms of conduct and the code of discipline in the company.”

The Supreme Court found that Iso and Tolentino, as supervisory employees, were in positions of trust and confidence. Their statements, deemed libelous, were seen as a betrayal of this trust, justifying their dismissal.

Practical Implications: Navigating Workplace Speech and Dismissal

This ruling reaffirms the employer’s right to dismiss employees for serious misconduct, even if the misconduct occurs during union activities. It serves as a reminder to employees that while they have the right to engage in union activities, they must be cautious about making statements that could harm their employer’s reputation.

For businesses, this case underscores the importance of having clear policies on employee conduct and communication, especially during labor disputes. Employers should ensure they follow due process when dismissing employees, including providing written notices and opportunities for the employee to respond.

Key Lessons:

• Employees should be aware that freedom of expression in the workplace has limits, particularly when it involves statements that could be considered libelous.
• Employers must balance their management prerogatives with respect for employee rights, ensuring that any dismissal is justified and follows due process.
• Both parties should seek to resolve disputes through dialogue and negotiation before resorting to public statements that could escalate tensions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What constitutes serious misconduct in the workplace?
Serious misconduct involves improper or wrongful conduct that is willful and shows a disregard for established rules or duties. It must be related to the employee’s work and performed with wrongful intent.

Can an employee be dismissed for statements made during union activities?
Yes, if the statements constitute serious misconduct, such as libelous statements that harm the employer’s reputation, an employee can be dismissed, provided the employer follows due process.

What is the role of due process in employee dismissal?
Due process requires the employer to provide the employee with written notices of the charges and the decision to dismiss, as well as an opportunity to be heard. This ensures fairness in the termination process.

How can employees protect their rights during labor disputes?
Employees should engage in constructive dialogue with their employer, seek legal advice, and ensure they understand their rights under labor laws. Documenting interactions and following established grievance procedures can also be beneficial.

What steps should employers take before dismissing an employee?
Employers should issue a show-cause notice detailing the allegations, conduct a fair investigation, provide the employee an opportunity to respond, and issue a notice of dismissal if the charges are substantiated.

ASG Law specializes in labor and employment law. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.