Failure to disclose previous employment not ground for dismissal — SC

The Supreme Court has said the failure to disclose previous employment should not be a ground for dismissal as it ruled in favor of a bank employee who was terminated from work.

In an 18-page decision promulgated on June 15, the High Court ruled that Nancy Celis shall earn legal interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of finality of the decision, until full satisfaction.

It said that it deemed it best to award Celis a separation pay in lieu of reinstatement due to the “strained relations” between her and the bank.

“The labor tribunals aptly held that this is merely a case of an omission to disclose former employment in a job application, a fault which does not justify petitioner’s suspension and eventual termination from employment,” the SC said.

“The penalty must be commensurate to the offense involved and to the degree of the infraction. To dismiss petitioner on account of her omission to disclose former employment is just too harsh a penalty,” it added.

Further, the Court said that since Celis has been working with the bank before her previous employment was raised, it was already “water under the bridge.”

“Likewise, the fact that respondent suddenly created an issue about undisclosed past employment lends credence to her allegation that the charge against her was only precipitated by her discovery of the corrupt practices involving her division head and her department head,” it said.

In July 2013, the bank hired Celis as an account officer. However, towards the end of 2017, the bank received a report that she was previously employed in another bank and was allegedly involved in a case concerning embezzlement of funds.

Celis denied this in a written explanation to the bank after she was placed under preventive suspension, saying she had been too excited in filling in her job application.

The bank, however, decided to terminate her employment in January 2018.

Due to this, she filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, monetary claims, and damages against the bank.

She argued that her failure to disclose her previous employment was done in good faith and that the bank failed to prove her involvement in the case.

The Labor Arbiter ruled in her favor in May 2018. The ruling was later affirmed by the National Labor Relations Commission.

This was, however, set aside by the Court of Appeals which held that the bank was valid in dismissing Celis.

The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals.

“Wherefore, the petition is granted. The decision dated June 7, 2019 and the Resolution dated December 6, 2019 of the Court of Appeals… are reversed and set aside,” the Court said.

The case was remanded to the Labor Arbiter for proper computation of the monetary awards.—AOL, GMA News