Willful breach of trust
Credit to Author: PERSIDA ACOSTA| Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 17:22:47 +0000
Dear PAO,
I was hired as a sales clerk in May 2017. My tasks were attending to the needs of our customers, coordinating orders from our clients, cashiering, preparing inventory reports and reporting to our accounting manager every month. On July 24, 2019, I received a memorandum asking me to explain in writing why I should not be terminated for tampering with the company’s Point-of-Sale System by using an unauthorized password and by sharing the password to my closest officemate.
I admitted to using the password I learned from my co-employee, whom I saw browsing through our company’s sales inquiry out of curiosity and without any intention of defrauding our company. My manager recently talked to me and advised me that the management is thinking of terminating my employment on the ground of loss of trust and confidence. Can the company terminate me based on this ground?
Joanne
Dear Joanne,
To answer your question, we shall refer to Article 297 of the Labor Code of the Philippines, to wit:
“ARTICLE 297. 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;
“(b) Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties;
“(c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized representative;
“(d) Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the person of his employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly authorized representatives; and
“(e) Other causes analogous to the foregoing.” (Emphasis supplied)
In the case of Bluer Than Blue Joint Ventures Company/Mary Ann Dela Verga vs Glyza Esteban (GR 192582, April 17, 2014), the Supreme Court through Associate Justice Bienvenido Reyes discussed:
“Loss of trust and confidence is premised on the fact that the employee concerned holds a position of responsibility, trust and confidence. The employee must be invested with confidence on delicate matters, such as the custody, handling, care and protection of the employer’s property and funds. With respect to rank-and-file personnel, loss of trust and confidence as ground for valid dismissal requires proof of involvement in the alleged events in question, and that mere uncorroborated assertions and accusations by the employer will not be sufficient. xxx Among the fiduciary rank-and-file employees are cashiers, auditors, property custodians, or those who, in the normal exercise of their functions, regularly handle significant amounts of money or property. These employees, though rank-and-file, are routinely charged with the care and custody of the employer’s money or property, and are thus classified as occupying positions of trust and confidence. xxx As consistently ruled by the Court, it is not the job title but the actual work that the employee performs that determines whether he or she occupies a position of trust and confidence. xxx Loss of trust and confidence to be a valid cause for dismissal must be work related such as would show the employee concerned to be unfit to continue working for the employer and it must be based on a willful breach of trust and founded on clearly established facts. Such breach is willful if it is done intentionally, knowingly, and purposely, without justifiable excuse as distinguished from an act done carelessly, thoughtlessly, heedlessly or inadvertently. The loss of trust and confidence must spring from the voluntary or willful act of the employee, or by reason of some blameworthy act or omission on the part of the employee. xxx” (Emphases Supplied)
Applying the above-mentioned law and the jurisprudence in your situation, your company may only terminate your employment if it will be proven that your actions were based on willful breach of trust and confidence and were made intentionally, purposely and without any justifiable cause. Your company must adduce evidence that your actions of opening your Point-of-Sale System through unauthorized password and relaying such password to your officemate were not made carelessly, thoughtlessly or inadvertently, but were made to intentionally prejudice the company.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. The opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net