Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Wenphil 1
Labor law practitioners and labor relation experts have, time and
again, raised in several fora, the unfairness of declaring illegal or
ineffectual dismissal made for just or authorized causes for failing to
comply with the requirements on statutory DUE PROCESS. They
asseverate that declaring such dismissals either as illegal or ineffectual
would have far-reaching consequences.
The new rule under the AGABON RULING is virtually reverting back
to WENPHIL, which states that where the dismissal is for just or
authorized cause, the lack of observance of the statutory due process
would not nullify the dismissal nor render it ineffectual. The dismissal
is sustained as VALID but the employer has to indemnify the
employee for the violation of his statutory right. Under the Agabon
3
EDITOR’S NOTE: In Agabon vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 158693, November 17, 2004,
when the dismissal is for just or authorized cause but due process was not
observed, the dismissal should be upheld. However, the employer should be held
liable for non-compliance with the procedural requirements of due process. In that
case, the amount of damages was fixed by the Supreme Court at 30,000 pesos.
The ruling in Agabon has however been modified by JAKA Food Processing v.
Pacot , G.R. No. 151378, March 28, 2005.
If the dismissal is based on a just cause under Article 282 but the employer failed
to comply with the notice requirement, the sanction to be imposed upon him
should be tempered because the dismissal process was in effect initiated by an
act imputable to the employee.
If the dismissal is based on an authorized cause under Article 283 but the
employer failed to comply with the notice requirement, the sanction to be imposed
should be stiffer because the dismissal process was initiated by the employer’s
exercise of his management prerogative. The amount of indemnity in that case
was 50,000 pesos.
BONIFACIO LAW JOURNAL | From Wenphil to Serrano, then Back to 31
Wenphil