G.R. No. 114129 – 331 Phil. 838 – 263 SCRA 53 – Political Law – Constitutional Law – Bill of Rights – Due Process; Due Process in the Dismissal of Employees – No right to cross-examine; Hearing not mandatory – Opportunity to be heard
Jeremias Cortez, Jr. was hired as a lineman by the Manila Electric Company (MERALCO) in 1975. In 1990, an investigation was conducted by MERALCO as to Cortez’ behavior and work ethics as he incurred numerous unauthorized absences and other infractions such as coming to work drunk. Cortez was summoned and was made to explain in writing why he should not be disciplined. After the investigation, he was given a notice of termination. Cortez sued MERALCO for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter dismissed his complaint. The National Labor Relations Commission reversed the decision of the Labor Arbiter.
ISSUE: Whether or not Cortez’ dismissal is illegal.
HELD: No. Due to the divergent finding of facts between the LA and the NLRC, the Supreme Court reviewed the facts of the case and it determined that the LA’s findings of facts was based on evidence on record – that indeed Cortez incurred numerous unauthorized absences. In fact, based on the very same admissions of Cortez, his infractions were apparent.
The SC also emphasized that disciplinary proceedings by employers against their employees are not full adversarial in nature. The essence of due process is simply an opportunity to be heard. As applied to administrative proceedings, an opportunity to explain one’s side – which was given to Cortez and he did explain his side in writing – unfortunately for Cortez, his explanations were not satisfactory.
The SC emphasized: Actual adversarial proceedings becomes necessary only for clarification. This is a procedural right which the employee must, however, ask for it is not an inherent right, and summary proceedings may be conducted. Hearings in administrative proceedings and before quasi-judicial agencies are neither oratorical contest nor debating skirmishes where cross examination skills are displayed. Non-verbal devices such as written explanations, affidavits, positions papers or other pleadings can establish just as clearly and concisely aggrieved parties’ predicament or defense. What is essential, is ample opportunity to be heard, meaning, every kind of assistance that management must accord the employee to prepare adequately for his defense.
