Photo from Unsplash | Icons8 Team
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:
Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties is a just cause for termination of employment. (Article 297, Labor Code)
Habitual tardiness is a serious offense that may very well constitute gross or habitual neglect of duty. (Systems and Plan Integrator and Development Corporation, v. Michelle Elvi C. Ballesteros, G.R. No. 217119, April 25, 2022)
The Labor Code provides that gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties is just cause for termination of employment. (Article 297, Labor Code)
Under DOLE Department Order No. 147, series of 2015 (DOLE DO 147-15), for gross and habitual neglect of duties to be a valid ground for termination, the following must be present:
- There must be neglect of duty; and
- The negligence must be both gross and habitual in character. (Section 5.2, par. c,
Habitual neglect of duty refers to the repeated failure to perform one’s duties over a period of time, depending upon the circumstances. (Section 4, par. k, DOLE DO 147-15)
Habitual tardiness is a form of neglect of duty. Lack of initiative, diligence, and discipline to come to work on time everyday exhibit the employee’s deportment towards work. Habitual and excessive tardiness is inimical to the general productivity and business of the employer. This is especially true when the tardiness and/or absenteeism occurred frequently and repeatedly within an extensive period of time. (R.B. Michael Press and Annalene Reyes Escobia v. Nicasio Galit, G.R. No. 153510, February 13, 2008)
It has been held that punctuality is a reasonable standard imposed on every employee whether in government or private sector. Habitual tardiness is a serious offense that may very well constitute gross or habitual neglect of duty, a just cause to dismiss a regular employee. (Systems and Plan Integrator and Development Corporation, v. Michelle Elvi C. Ballesteros, G.R. No. 217119, April 25, 2022)
Further, habitual tardiness manifests lack of initiative, diligence and discipline that are inimical to the employer’s general productivity and business interest. (Systems and Plan Integrator and Development Corporation, v. Michelle Elvi C. Ballesteros, Id.)
It must be remembered that neglect of duty, to be a ground for dismissal under the Labor Code, must be both gross and habitual. (Michelle Tay v. Apex 8 Studios, July 06, 2021)
Related Articles:
Habitual Tardiness as a Ground for Dismissal
SC decides: habitual tardiness and absenteeism constitute neglect of duty
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.