Especially in the case of employee dismissal, the law strictly requires adherence to the notice requirements and imposes indemnity for employer’s violation.

In the case of King of Kings Transport, Inc. vs. Mamac, the Supreme Court (SC) laid down the procedural due process required in employee termination. First, there should be notice to explain or NTE. Then a hearing/conference. Finally, a notice of dismissal.

As can be observed, there are several notices in a single act of dismissal. These are know as the two-notice rule. While the holding of hearing / conference is still contentious, it is best to err on the side of caution by holding the same anyway.

In the case of Perez vs. PT&T, G.R. No. 152048, April 7, 2009,  the SC held that a formal or trial type hearing is not at all times and in all instances essential to due process, the requirements of which are satisfied where the parties are afforded fair and reasonable opportunity to explain their side of the controversy. It is deemed sufficient for the employer to follow the natural sequence of notice,

hearing and judgment.

After receiving the first notice apprising him of the charges against him, the employee may submit a written explanation (which may be in the form of a letter, memorandum, affidavit or position paper) and offer evidence in support thereof, like relevant company records (such as his 201 file and daily time records) and the sworn statements of his witnesses.

For this purpose, he may prepare his explanation personally or with the assistance of a representative or counsel. He may also ask the employer to provide him copy of records material to his defense. His written explanation may also include a request that a formal hearing or conference be held.

In such a case, the conduct of a formal hearing or conference becomes mandatory, just as it is where there exist substantial evidentiary disputes or where company rules or practice requires an actual hearing as part of employment pretermination procedure. To this extent, the SC refined the decisions we have rendered so far on this point of law.

In sum, the following are the guiding principles in connection with the hearing requirement in dismissal cases:

(a) “ample opportunity to be heard” means any meaningful opportunity (verbal or written) given to the employee to answer the charges against him and submit evidence in support of his defense, whether in a hearing, conference or some other fair, just and reasonable way.

(b) a formal hearing or conference becomes mandatory only when requested by the employee in writing or substantial evidentiary disputes exist or a company rule or practice requires it, or when similar circumstances justify it.

(c) the “ample opportunity to be heard” standard in the Labor Code prevails over the “hearing or conference” requirement in the implementing rules and regulations.

The 2019 Amendments to the Rules of Court duly recognize the computer printouts as original documents. Thus, computer printouts of text, chat, or any form of electronic medium that is readable may be used as proof of compliance with the procedural due process nowadays. This is just my personal view.

It has to be seen whether the courts also see it this way.

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

Read more on procedural due process discussion by Atty. Elvin:

Read more on procedural due process by Atty. Villanueva:

Twin Requirements of Notice and Hearing

Procedural Due Process for Other Types of Employment

Notice to Explain: Contents and Requirements