ALBURO ALBURO AND ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES ALBURO ALBURO AND ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES

contact

MON-SAT 8:30AM-5:30PM

What are the two classes of corporate positions of trust?

(P.J. Lhuillier, Inc. vs. Velayo, G.R. No. 198620, November 12, 2014)

Photo from Unsplash | Joshua Hoehne

The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.

Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.

 


AT A GLANCE:

There are two classes of corporate positions of trust:

(1) The managerial employees whose primary duty consists of the management of the establishment in which they are employed or of a department or a subdivision thereof, and other officers or members of the managerial staff; and,

(2) The fiduciary rank-and-file employees, such as 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. (P.J. Lhuillier, Inc. vs. Velayo, G.R. No. 198620, November 12, 2014)


 

Managerial Employees

They are defined as those vested with the powers or prerogatives to lay down management policies and to hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline employees or effectively recommend such managerial actions. (Josephine Caso vs. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 200571, February 19, 2018.)

 

Fiduciary Rank-and-File Employees

The second class consists of cashiers, auditors, property custodians, etc. They are defined as those who in the normal and routine exercise of their functions, regularly handle significant amounts of money or property. (Ibid.)

 

Importance of Distinction of Managerial Employees vs. Fiduciary Rank-and-File Employees in Termination based on Loss of Trust and Confidence

As firmly entrenched in our jurisprudence, loss of trust and confidence, as a just cause for termination of employment, is premised on the fact that an employee concerned holds a position where greater trust is placed by management and from whom greater fidelity to duty is correspondingly expected. This includes managerial personnel entrusted with confidence on delicate matters, such as the custody, handling, or care and protection of the employer’s property. The betrayal of this trust is the essence of the offense for which an employee is penalized.

It must be noted, however, that in a plethora of cases, this Court has distinguished the treatment of managerial employees from that of rank-and-file personnel, insofar as the application of the doctrine of loss of trust and confidence is concerned. Thus, 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. But as regards a managerial employee, the mere existence of a basis for believing that such employee has breached the trust of his employer would suffice for his dismissal. Hence, in the case of managerial employees, proof beyond reasonable doubt is not required, it being sufficient that there is some basis for such loss of confidence, such as when the employer has reasonable ground to believe that the employee concerned is responsible for the purported misconduct, and the nature of his participation therein renders him unworthy of the trust and confidence demanded of his position. (Lima Land, Inc. vs. Marlyn Cuevas, G.R. No. 169523, June 16, 2010)

 

Read also:

Termination of employment due to loss of trust and confidence

THE SUPREME COURT SAYS: A cashier’s inability to safeguard and account for missing cash is a sufficient cause for dismissal

 

Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding taxation and taxpayer’s remedies, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.

All rights reserved.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share