Reasonable doubts about honorable men

In the eyes of the law, it is not enough that a business executive, a corporate manager, supervisor, confidential employee or any employee for that matter, is honest. He must look honest, smell honest and appear unimpeachable in all his actuations and interactions. Under the Labor Code an employee may lose his employment based on just cause, specifically fraud or breach of trust and loss of confidence. If found guilty, after due process, an erring employee may forfeit his security of tenure. He may thereby lose all his retirement benefits notwithstanding the fact that he might have been connected with the company for many years. Only one serious misconduct may justify his dismissal.

There are company executives and managers who are otherwise honorable men and women. For a single act involving a blot in their character, they lose their job, they were put to shame and their careers were ruined. It should always be stressed that the relationship between employer and employee is fiduciary in character. It involves a high degree of trust and confidence. The higher one’s position is, the greater is the responsibility and accountability. Indeed, as the Good Book postulates: To whom much is given, much is expected. We have come across a number of Supreme Court decisions against dishonest, scheming, and misbehaving honorable men and women.

There was this bank credit investigator who was allegedly involved in many questionable loans that led to a major sandal in a southern city and caused millions of damages to the bank (GR 1180849, 16 Nov 2011). A senior finance manager of a soft drinks firm was dismissed for supposedly altering official receipts submitted for reimbursements (GR 149433, 22 June 2011). A bank branch manager was also dismissed because she ordered an unauthorized withdrawal from a depositors’ account, without the account owner’s knowledge (GR 179801, 18 June 2010). A cashier in a Mactan restaurant was validly dismissed for altering receipts and pocketing some sales (GR180660, 20 Jan 2010).

A superintendent of an oil company was legally dismissed for selling his employer’s property without authority from higher management (GR 162017, 23 April 2010). Tampering of electric meters of a power company, which was his employer, was deemed a just cause to dismiss a branch supervisor (GR19036, 16 Jan 2012). A fishing company worker was dismissed for stealing fish (GR 181974, 01 Feb 2012). A company driver in Bohol was validly dismissed for attempting to bring out 60 kilos of scrap iron (GR 191008, 11 April 2011). An assistant manager of a ladies’ wear manufacturer was dismissed for altering company documents (GR 164423, 16 June 2009).

A bank branch manager based in Davao was about to retire after working for more than 30 years. He would get millions in retirement benefits. The bank however asked him to stay for one more year, and he agreed. Then he was dismissed and lost all his millions. He was found guilty of allowing his friend to engage in “kiting activities” (G R 160618, 02 Nov 2006). A bill collector of an electric cooperative was dismissed for alleged misappropriation of his collections (G R 183186, 19 Aug 2009).

A restaurant cashier was also validly dismissed for tampering her daily time cards (GR 179507, 02 Oct 2009). A softdrinks company’s route salesman was dismissed legally for irregularities connected with his sales (GR 148205, 28 Feb 2008). For loss of confidence on a bank officer, the bank dismissed him due to serious irregularities (GR 148544, 12 July 2006). A telephone company dismissed a field officer for loss of confidence resulting from irregularities in major bank accounts (GR 143688, 21 Aug 2007).

All these involved responsible men and women who were evaluated and were found wanting. They tainted their character with very serious offenses. It was only just and proper that they were dismissed.