Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila

Sixteenth Congress
First Regular Session

0, 4628

HOUSE BILL }

Introduced by Honorable Joaquin M. Chipeco, Jr.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

A young worker once said that if he would have his way he would
not work with the priva ctor, He explained that he cringes all the time
he sees those notices of termination of employment in the classified ads
section of newspapers. The ads usually go by informing the public that
so-and-so is no longer connected with the particular company and that
any transaction entered with him will not be honored by the corporation.
With the employee’s face splashed across the newspaper and with the
notice itself in fine print, the notice uncannily resembles a wanted poster
of fugitives from justice. To top it all, wanted posters or something akin
to them, are also sometimes published in the same newspaper space. They
run by stating that criminal case number so-and-so have been filed
against a particular person and that any information leading to his arrest
may be conveyed to the authorities.

Without a doubt, companies and other juridical persons have the
right to warn the public against present and future dealings with former
employees. It may be that previous employees either have the potential or
the inclination to harm the interests of the corporation, and it is in the
legitimate interest of the company to protect itself from possible lawsuits
from the public by forewarning the latter against continued dealings with
unscrupulous ex-employees.

However, while it cannot be denied that juridical entities have that
right to protect itself from dishonest former employees, it is clear that the
exercise of that right is open to abuse. An employee who resigns from her
work due to strained relations, misunderstanding, sexual harassment,
exposure of irregularities in high company echelons or under similar
unpleasant circumstances, but without fault on her part, may find herself
on the receiving end of a vindictive act on the part of his former boss by


having a notice of severance of employment relations published in the
newspapers. If that worker happens to be applying for another job at the
moment and her future employer becomes aware of these newspaper ads
concerning the worker, this could prejudice the employment opportunities
of the subject employee. While the prospective employee may be asked to
explain the circumstances surrounding the publication, a doubt
nevertheless has already been created by the publication and the
employer, given that there many other applicants for the position, would
most probably prefer workers unsullied by such publications.

There is therefore a need to define the legal parameters of
permissible and non-permissible notices of termination of employment.
Perhaps, the practice of publishing the same should be limited to
situations where the former employees were accountable officers, such as
cashiers, treasurers, collection officers, sales representatives, and others
who handle cash, property, stocks, etc. of the company. In addition, the
company must have reasonable grounds to believe, either due to bad
performance record, previous acts of dishonesty, etc., that the ex-
employees have the propensity to compromise the interests of the
company.

Applying the “balancing-of-interests” rule in constitutional law,
there is a need to balance the right of companies to be protected against
any corporate harm that might be inflicted to it by disgruntled employees
and the right of workers to preserve their integrity and reputation against
any undue aspersion that might be cast against them. When corporate
interests are prejudiced, the company still has a lot of resources to
compensate against the loss. However, the lowly workers have, in most
cases, only their character, industry and reputation to cope with
adversities. That is why, in the uneven contest between capital and labor
(with everything else being equal), our laws and jurisprudence have
always sided with labor to level the field, so to speak.

In view of all the foregoing considerations, the early approval of
this bill is earnestly requested

cond District of Laguna


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila

Sixteenth Congress
First Regular Session
628
HOUSE BILL NO.

Introduced by Honorable Joaquin M. Chipeco, Jr.

AN ACT
RATIONALIZING THE POST-EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE OF
EMPLOYERS IN POSTING OF NOTICES OF TERMINATION
OF EMPLOYMENT IN NEWSPAPERS AND OTHER SIMILAR
PUBLICATION

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the
Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Declaration of Policy. ~ Every employer must, in the
exercise of his right to publish notices of termination of employment, act
with fairness, respect the dignity, privacy and peace of mind of the former

employer and observe good faith.

SEC. 2. Limitations on the Prerogative of Employers to Publish
Notices of Termination of Employment in Newspapers and Other Similar
Publication. ~ No employer in the private sector shall publish notices of
termination of employment in newspapers and other similar publication

unless upon the concurrence of the following factors:


(a) The subject employee was an accountable officer or staff, such
as but not limited to:

[1] cashiers

[2] treasurers

[3] collection officers

[4] sales agents or representatives

[5] other officers or employees who handle cash, property, stocks

and other assets of the employer; and

(b) The employer has reasonable grounds to believe that said

former employee shall cause loss or damage or otherwise compromise the

interests of the employer. The commission of the following acts, based on
employee records, shall constitute sufficient grounds for the employer to

issue disclaimer notices, in addition to the foregoing paragraph:

[1] serious dishonesty;

[2] grave misconduct;

[3] falsification of documents;

[4] conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; and

[5] analogous acts


SEC. 3. Damages. — Violation of the provision of Section 2 of this
Act shall entitle the aggrieved former employee with the payment of
damages in the amount of not less than Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00)
but not more than Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00), upon the discretion.

of the court.

SEC. 4, Liability When Committed By Entities Other Than Natural
Person, — If the violation is committed by a corporation, trust, firm,
partnership, association or other similar entity, the damages shall be

imposed against the guilty officer or officers of such entity.

SEC. 5. Repealing clause. - All laws, decrees, executive orders,
rules and regulations and other issuances or parts thereof inconsistent
with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, modified or amended

accordingly.
SEC. 6. Effectivity clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen
(15) days after its publication either in the Official Gazette or in two (2)

newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,