Nonetheless, when the floating status lasts for more than six (6) months, the employee may be considered to have been constructively dismissed.

The managerial prerogative to transfer personnel must be exercised without grave abuse of discretion, bearing in mind the basic elements of justice and fair play. Having the right should not be confused with the manner in which that right is exercised. Thus, it cannot be used as a subterfuge by the employer to rid himself of an undesirable worker.

Read more on constructive dismissal here: Constructive Dismissal Definition and Concept

In particular, the employer must be able to show that the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient or prejudicial to the employee; nor does it involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, privileges and other benefits. Should the employer fail to overcome this burden of proof, the employee’s transfer shall be tantamount to constructive dismissal, which has been defined as a quitting because

continued employment is rendered impossible, unreasonable or unlikely; as an offer involving a demotion in rank and diminution in pay.

Likewise, constructive dismissal exists when an act of clear discrimination, insensibility or disdain by an employer has become so unbearable to the employee leaving him with no option but to forego with his continued employment.

Being piece-rate workers assigned to individual sew- ing machines, employees’ earnings depended on the quality and quantity of finished products. That their work output might have been affected by the change in their specific work assignments does not necessarily imply that any resulting reduction in pay is tantamount to constructive dismissal. Workers under piece-rate employment have no fixed salaries and their compensation is computed on the basis of accomplished tasks.

In the case of Suldao vs. Cimech System Construction, Inc., while the employee’s transfer was valid, the manner by which the employer unjustifiably prevented him from returning to work on several occasions runs counter to the claim of good faith on the part of the corporation.

By reporting for work, the employee manifested his willing- ness to comply with the regulations of the corporation and his desire to continue working for the latter. However, he was barred from entering the premises without any explanation.

This is a clear manifestation of disdain and insensibility on the part of an employer towards a particular employee and a veritable hallmark of constructive dismissal.

Thus, the Court held that while the decision to transfer employees to other areas of its operations forms part of the well-recognized prerogatives of management, it must be stressed, however, that the managerial prerogative to transfer personnel must not be exercised with grave abuse of discretion, bearing in mind the basic elements of justice and fair play. Having the right should not be confused with the manner in which that right is exercised. Thus it cannot be used as a subterfuge by the employer to rid himself of an undesirable worker.

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