Supreme Court of the Philippines — INQUIRER file photo
MANILA, Philippines — Verbal abuse, indifferent behavior and demotion towards employees that force them to resign is considered constructive illegal dismissal, the Supreme Court (SC) ruled.
Constructive dismissal occurs when an employer creates unbearable working conditions that the employee feels forced to resign.
The SC Second Division, through Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, found Jonathan Dy Chua Bartolome constructively dismissed by a car dealer in Quezon City.
READ: Hiring Gen Zs? They shun ‘toxic’ workplaces – survey
Bartolome became a regular car dealer employee in 2010, where he was tasked with selling cars, products and services.
He got suspended for seven days in 2015 for frequent absences.
“During a meeting with the management, Bartolome’s sibling, acting as his legal counsel, accompanied him. The President of the (car dealer) then publicly humiliated Bartolome for bringing his sibling to the meeting,” the SC statement read.
He was then transferred to another team, and many of his accounts were taken away without an explanation.
The SC said the general sales manager blocked Bartolome’s attempt to process a sale, and his new boss explicitly asked if he planned on resigning.
“Due to these events and the hostile work environment, Bartolome resigned in 2016. When he tried to get his clearance, he was treated like a stranger-criminal and harassed for no reason,” the SC said.
Bartolome subsequently filed a complaint with the Labor Arbiter (LA) against the car dealer and its officials for constructive dismissal.
The LA ruled in his favor, and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the decision.
However, the Court of Appeals later overturned the LA’s decision, saying that Bartolome had voluntarily resigned and failed to prove he was coerced or intimidated into doing so.
But the SC ruled in favor of Bartolome and emphasized that “actions demonstrating extreme dislike and hostile behavior, such as demotion, uttering insulting words, and apathetic behavior toward an employee, constitute constructive illegal dismissal when such actions cause the employment conditions to be so unbearable that there is no other choice but to resign.”
“The Court held that the standard for constructive dismissal is whether or not a reasonable person in the employee’s position would have felt forced to give up their employment under the circumstances,” it also said.
READ: Quiet quitting and civil disobedience to ‘hustle culture’: winners and losers
While disagreements in the workplace are inevitable, the High Court noted that such disputes should never degrade an employee’s dignity.
It further noted that Bartolome would not have intended to resign without the car dealer’s officials’ hostile actions.
“The car dealer, together with its officials, was ordered by the Court to pay Bartolome full back wages, separation pay, earned commissions, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees,” concluded the SC.