The question of whether Noli’s resignation was voluntary or forced hinges on the issue of whether he filed his resignation letter on March 1, 2000 as claimed by OCM or on March 15, 2000 as claimed by Noli, in other words, before or after the appointment of Danny as the new concurrent HRD manager to replace him. This question arises because his resignation letter is undated.
It is more consistent with human experience that Noli indeed learned of the appointment of Danny on March 13, 2000 and reacted to this development through his resignation letter submitted on March 15, 2000 after realizing that he would only face hostility and frustration in his working environment. Three very basic labor law principles support this conclusion and militate against OCM’s case.
The first is that the employer bears the burden of proving that the employee’s dismissal was for a just and valid cause. That Noli filed a letter of resignation does not help the company’s case as other than the fact of resignation, the company must still prove that he voluntarily resigned. There can be no valid resignation where it was made under compulsion or under circumstances approximating compulsion as when the employee’s act of handing his resignation was in reaction to circumstances leaving him no alternative but to resign. In this case the evidence does not support the voluntariness of Noli’s resignation.
Another basic principle is that doubts about the evidence presented by the employer and the employee must be resolved in favor of the employee. Thus in this case given the hostile and discriminatory working environment in which Noli found himself particularly the escalating acts of unfairness against him that culminated in the appointment of another HRD manager, he must have been indeed constructively dismissed. Where no less than the chief corporate officer was against him he had no alternative but to resign.
Last but not least, the employee’s reaction to the termination of his employment is also significant. In this case, Noli sought almost immediate official recourse to contest his separation from the service through a complaint for illegal dismissal. This is not the act of one who voluntarily resigned; his immediate complaint shows that he deeply felt he had been wronged.
When it comes to employee termination cases, the employer bears the burden of proving that the dismissal is for a just and valid cause; and in case of doubts in the evidence presented by the employer and the employee, the doubts are resolved in favor of the employee. The immediate subsequent action of the employee after he stopped working also determines whether he abandoned the post, voluntarily resigned or was dismissed.
No comments:
Post a Comment