Photo from Unsplash | Igor Omilaev
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:
Any employee may be required by the employer to perform overtime work when there is urgent work to be performed on machines, installations, or equipment, in order to avoid serious loss or damage to the employer or some other cause of similar nature. (Article 89 (c), Labor Code of the Philippines)
To be validly dismissed on the ground of willful disobedience requires the concurrence of at least two requisites: (1) the employee’s assailed conduct must have been willful or intentional, the willfulness being characterized by a wrongful and perverse attitude; and, (2) the order violated must have been reasonable, lawful, made known to the employee and must pertain to the duties which he had been engaged to discharge.
A refusal to provide overtime work despite the employee’s knowledge that there is a production deadline that needs to be met, and that without him, the offset machine operator, no further printing can be had, shows his wrongful and perverse mental attitude, thus, there is willfulness.
Such an order is legal under Article 89 (c) of the Labor Code and the employee’s unexplained refusal to obey is insubordination that merits dismissal from service. (Billy Realda vs. New Age Graphics, Inc., G.R. No. 192190, April 25, 2012)
In the workplace, sometimes employees are asked to work extra hours to meet deadlines or handle urgent tasks. But what happens if an employee refuses to do overtime work? Is it considered disobedience? Let’s take the case of Billy Realda vs. New Age Graphics, Inc.
In this case, Billy Realda, an employee, was asked to work overtime to meet urgent printing deadlines. However, he refused to do so, citing various reasons, including feeling unwell. This refusal caused delays in work and incurred losses for the company.
According to the Labor Code of the Philippines, employers can require employees to work overtime to prevent serious loss or damage. However, for a dismissal based on willful disobedience to be valid, two conditions must be met: the refusal must be intentional, and the order violated must be reasonable and lawful.
The Court of Appeals ruled that Realda’s refusal to work overtime, along with other infractions like tardiness and absenteeism, justified his termination. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, stating that Realda’s refusal demonstrated a wrongful and stubborn attitude, especially considering the urgent production needs of the company.
The Supreme Court Ruling:
In the present case, New Age Graphic’s business is a printing press whose production schedule is sometimes flexible and varying. It is only reasonable that workers are sometimes asked to render overtime work in order to meet production deadlines.
With regard Realda’s refusal or failure to render overtime work, in Lakpue Drug Inc. v. Ma. Lourdes Belga (G.R. No. 166379, October 20, 2005), willfulness was described as “characterized by a wrongful and perverse mental attitude rendering the employee’s act inconsistent with proper subordination.” The fact that Realda refused to provide overtime work despite his knowledge that there is a production deadline that needs to be met, and that without him, the offset machine operator, no further printing can be had, shows his wrongful and perverse mental attitude; thus, there is willfulness.
Realda’s excuse that he was not feeling well that day is unbelievable and obviously an afterthought. He failed to present any evidence other than his own assertion that he was sick. Also, if it was true that he was then not feeling well, he would have taken the day off, or had gone home earlier, on the contrary, he stayed and continued to work all day, and even tried to go to work the next day, thus belying his excuse, which is, at most, a self-serving statement.
Further, to be validly dismissed on the ground of willful disobedience requires the concurrence of at least two requisites:
- The employee’s assailed conduct must have been willful or intentional, the willfulness being characterized by a wrongful and perverse attitude; and,
- The order violated must have been reasonable, lawful, made known to the employee and must pertain to the duties which he had been engaged to discharge.
In the present case, there is no question that New Age Graphics’ order for Realda to render overtime service to meet a production deadline complies with the second requisite. Art. 89 of the Labor Code empowers the employer to legally compel his employees to perform overtime work against their will to prevent serious loss or damage.
After a re-examination of the facts, we rule that Realda unjustifiably refused to render overtime work despite a valid order to do so. This Court cannot likewise agree to the Realda’s attempt to brush aside his refusal to render overtime work as inconsequential when Graphics, Inc.’s order for him to do so is justified by Graphics, Inc.’s contractual commitments to its clients. Such an order is legal under Article 89 of the Labor Code and the petitioner’s unexplained refusal to obey is insubordination that merits dismissal from service.
In conclusion, the case of Billy Realda vs. New Age Graphics, Inc. explains the importance of understanding and complying with workplace expectations, particularly regarding overtime work. While employees have rights, such as protection from unreasonable demands, they also bear responsibilities to fulfill their job duties and contribute to the overall success of the organization. Employers, on the other hand, must ensure that their instructions are reasonable and lawful, balancing the needs of the business with the rights of their workforce.
Read also:
https://www.alburolaw.com/can-employees-be-compelled-to-render-overtime-work/
https://www.alburolaw.com/can-an-employee-contractually-waive-his-right-to-overtime-pay/
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.