On 9 June 2006, the respondent group hired the employee as a legal officer. On 23 February 2007, it promoted her to corporate affairs manager and assigned her to head the human resources and legal departments of said respondent.
The employee narrated that a supervisor gave her a new and additional assignment as a customer service representative (CSR). She was told to answer phone calls and jot notes on her communications with clients. Since the CSR task was far from a managerial job, she approached said supervisor to suggest a different procedure. However, the latter negatively reacted and called the employee stupid and incompetent. On 6 and 9 December 2011, the president of the respondent group of companies verbally advised her to resign and remarked that even if the employee stays for 10 years, the respondent group would not spend Php1 million to pay her salary. The employee stated that the various heads of the respondent group then treated her indifferently. She also received emails implying that she was remiss in her duties to make her appear incompetent.
On 29 March 2012, she filed a complaint for constructive dismissal against the respondent group.
The respondent group stated that one of its companies requested the employee to handle complaints from its customers. However, the employee did not address the complaints and instead delegated the task to other personnel. The respondent group thus created a CSR project and designated the employee to man the same. Despite this, the employee still failed to perform her tasks. When asked for her justification, the employee explained that health concerns and stress caused her poor performance. The respondent group then suggested her resignation from employment, where she would receive financial assistance should she resign. However, the employee accused the respondent group not only of forcing her to resign, but also of bribing her with financial assistance. Because of this, the respondent group withheld their offer of financial assistance and just advised the employee to stay in her job, which she did. The respondent group, however, remarked that the employee became difficult to supervise.
Was the employee constructively dismissed from employment?
Jurisprudence1Rodriguez v. Park N Ride, Inc., G.R. No. 222980, March 20, 2017, 807 PHIL 747-764 dictates:
There is constructive dismissal when an employer’s act of clear discrimination, insensibility or disdain becomes so unbearable on the part of the employee so as to foreclose any choice on his part except to resign from such employment. It exists where there is involuntary resignation because of the harsh, hostile and unfavorable conditions set by the employer. The standard for constructive dismissal is “whether a reasonable person in the employee’s position would have felt compelled to give up his employment under the circumstances.”
The unreasonably harsh conditions that compel resignation on the part of an employee must be way beyond the occasional discomforts brought about by the misunderstandings between the employer and employee. Strong words may sometimes be exchanged as the employer describes her expectations or as the employee narrates the conditions of her work environment and the obstacles she encounters as she accomplishes her assigned tasks. As in every human relationship, there are bound to be disagreements.
However, when these strong words from the employer happen without palpable reason or are expressed only for the purpose of degrading the dignity of the employee, then a hostile work environment will be created. In a sense, the doctrine of constructive dismissal has been a consistent vehicle by this Court to assert the dignity of labor.
In the present case, the Court declared the employee to be constructively dismissed from employment. It found instances of disdainful and hostile acts committed against the employee that degraded her dignity as a person and eventually led her to file her constructive dismissal complaint:
- The employee, who already held the position of corporate affairs manager, was made to work as a CSR, a function fit for a rank-and-file employee. The Court viewed this not only as a demotion, but also as an act of disdain and disrespect because she was treated as if she was unworthy of her managerial position.
- When the employee suggested a different procedure for the CSR Project, her supervisor reacted negatively and told her she was stupid and incompetent — “No you don’t know anything stupid, stupid, I don’t care about what you say, if you do not accept this project by doing the procedure of answering phone calls from clients and jot down your communication with them and fill in the forms provided then resign, we do not need you here, all you have to do is put in writing that you are not accepting this project and that you are incompetent.” For the Court, these words clearly worsened her already hostile working environment and were plainly demeaning, degrading, and disrespectful to her dignity.
- The employee was asked to resign on more than one occasion and was offered financial assistance. According to the Court, this shows that her employer was eager to remove her from its employ.
- Although management told the employee to keep her job, it treated her indifferently thereafter.
According to the Court, the employee’s overall experience was mentally, emotionally and psychologically burdensome and made her tenure unbearable. Such experience prompted her to involuntarily give up her employment.
The Court noted that although the respondent group argued that the employee failed to meet the standard performance expected of her, said instance of poor performance was unsubstantiated. Furthermore, the fact that it assigned her to lead the CSR Project was an odd move considering her alleged poor performance. The Court stated that common sense would dictate that the project should have been headed by a competent and efficient employee if the employee’s performance was not satisfactory as the respondent group would claim.
Also, the Court said that the respondent group did not want to retain the employee, for otherwise, it could have asked her to take a medical leave or have her treated and diagnosed by a government physician.
The employee was accordingly awarded separation pay, backwages, and damages.
Takeaway:
Acts of disdain and hostile behavior such as demotion, uttering insulting words, asking for resignation, and apathetic conduct towards an employee constitute constructive illegal dismissal.
Further reading:
- Bayview Management Consultants, Inc. v. Pre, G.R. No. 220170, August 19, 2020.
Lawyer | Law Professor | Author
