Due Process in Labor Cases

Due process under the Labor Code involves two aspects. These are the substantive and the procedural.

Substantive due process refers to the ground for dis- missal. It is the justification, the reason or the “why” aspect. For example, under Article 297 of the Labor Code, as amended, an employee may be dismissed for theft, fraud or gross and habitual neglect of duty.

While in Article 298, an employee may be terminated due to closure of establishment, redundancy or retrenchment.

The just cause and authorized cause constitute the substantive due process aspect. The procedure pertains to the manner of executing the discipline. The law requires observance of procedural due process aspect as well. This is the “how” aspect where the notice requirement mentioned earlier belongs.

Why is there a need for due process?

Under Section 1, Article III of the 1987 Constitution, “no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

These essential requirements of due process were laid down in the landmark case of Ang Tibay vs. Court of Industrial Relations, et al. In this case, The SC held that the fact, however, there are cardinal primary rights which must be respected even in proceedings of this character. Thus, to paraphrase the essence of its findings:

(1) The first of these rights is the right to a hearing, which includes the right of the party interested or affected to present his own case and submit evidence in support thereof. The liberty and property of the citizen shall be protected by the rudimentary requirements of fair play.’

(2) Not only must the party be given an opportunity to present his case and to adduce evidence tending to establish the rights which he asserts but the tribunal must consider the evidence presented. The right to adduce evidence, without the corresponding duty on the part of the board to consider it, is vain. Such right is conspicuously futile if the person or persons to whom the evidence is presented can thrust it aside without notice or consideration.

Learn how to Validly Terminate Employee in the Philippines with this Tutorial Video of Atty. Elvin

(3) While the duty to deliberate does not impose the obligation to decide right, it does imply a necessity which cannot be disregarded, namely, that of having something to support its decision. A decision with absolutely nothing to support it is a nullity, a place when directly attached.

(4) Not only must there be some evidence to support a finding or conclusion, but the evidence must be ‘substantial. Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. But this assurance of a desirable flexibility in administrative procedure does not go so far as to justify orders without a basis in evidence having rational probative force. Mere uncorroborated hearsay or rumor does not constitute substantial evidence.

(5) The decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected. Only by confining the administrative tribunal to the

evidence disclosed to the parties, can the latter be protected in their right to know and meet the case against them.

(6) The tribunal therefore, must act on its or his own independent consideration of the law and facts of the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision.