Dear Atty. Kathy,
Employee E was among the first employees hired by our company in the year 2000. We issued E a notice to explain his willful disobedience because he prematurely gave the go-signal to start the operations of a company project. During the administrative investigation process, E explained that he received a call from the IT department to go “live,” and that he was simply carrying out orders.
However, E could not recall the identity of the caller from the IT Department as it allegedly happened several months ago. Management wants to dismiss E as it appears that he is concealing facts and giving untruthful statements. This is the first offense charged against E, and I feel dismissal would be too harsh, but management wants to dismiss E. Can we validly dismiss E for willful disobedience?
Malachi
***
Dear Malachi,
To warrant termination of employment under Article 297(a) of the Labor Code, particularly for willful disobedience, it is required that: (a) the conduct of the employee must be willful or intentional; and (b) the order the employee violated must have been reasonable, lawful, made known to the employee, and must pertain to the duties that he had been engaged to discharge. Willfulness must be attended by a wrongful and perverse mental attitude rendering the employee’s act inconsistent with proper subordination. It is implied that in every act of willful disobedience, the erring employee obtains an undue advantage detrimental to the business interest of the employer.
Based on the above, the failure of E to identify the person from the IT Department who allegedly gave the go-live order cannot be considered as willful disobedience, as it does not satisfy the requirements above, and there is no showing that E benefited from it, nor was there any mention that the business interest of your company was prejudiced.
Also, during E’s around 23 years of service since 2000, you mentioned that this is his first offense charged, which shows E’s lack of propensity to disobey superiors and the company’s rules. In other words, there does not appear to be any wrong or perversity on E’s part that warrants the termination of E’s employment on the ground of willful disobedience.
While it does appear that E committed a violation by prematurely giving the go signal to a company project based on a call from the IT Department, which caller he failed to identify, the termination of E’s employment is not commensurate to the offense. As ruled by the Supreme Court, in determining the penalty to be imposed on an erring employee, due consideration must be given to the employee’s length of service and the number of violations he committed during his employment.
Based solely on your narration, since E has been an employee for around 23 years, and nowhere in the records does it appear that E committed any previous infractions of company rules and regulations, the company cannot validly dismiss E as this would be too severe a penalty.
(Jimmy Paez, et al. versus Marinduque Electric Cooperative Inc., et al., 9 December 2020).
Atty. Kathy Larios