A.M. No. MTJ-99-1213 - Carino vs. Biteng

A memorandum dated 10 January 2018 by Atty. Eden T. Candelaria, Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief Administrative Officer of the Office of Administrative Services (OAS), recommended imposing administrative penalties on several Court employees.
The disallowed conduct includes habitual tardiness in reporting for work and incurring undertime during the first semester of 2017, in violation of applicable CSC Memorandum Circulars (MC No. 4, MC No. 17, and MC No. 16).

The Leave Division of the OAS compiled and transmitted a list on 8 August 2017 detailing habitual tardiness of three employees:

Ms. Jhunine Ann T. Gamolo – Recorded tardiness between 10 to 12 instances across January to June 2017.
Ms. Genevieve Victoria Maria B. ZuAiga – Recorded tardiness between 10 to 14 instances over various months.
Ms. Nicole Angela Regina C. Benbinuto – Listed as having incurred tardiness but later resigned on 27 June 2017 due to health issues.

On 9 August 2017, the Leave Division submitted a report on undertime incurred by Ms. Ivy B. Silva, with frequencies ranging from 3 to 10 instances across the first semester of 2017.

Difficulties in securing reliable childcare.
Health issues including abdominal cramps, migraine, pelvic pain, and a diagnosis of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome.
Assurance to adjust her schedule to avoid further lateness.

She was awaiting the 2016 Bar Examination results, which affected her mental well-being.
Emotional stress from family problems, including separation difficulties and abusive remarks by her husband.
Her efforts to manage work and family responsibilities amid these challenges.

Violating the Policy on Undertime by leaving early on several occasions.
Personal difficulties, including health concerns and the need to attend to her son’s occupational therapy sessions.
Acknowledgement of her oversight and an apology, stressing that this was her first offense after 13 years of service.

Ms. Benbinuto had resigned prior to the report; hence, her record was to be closed with a note of her default incident attached for future reference.

Ms. Gamolo, having a previous offense, was recommended a suspension of five days without pay and a stern warning for another occurrence.
Ms. ZuAiga was recommended for a reprimand with a similar warning about repeat offenses.
Ms. Benbinuto’s record was to be noted and attached for future reference in lieu of disciplinary action due to her resignation.
Ms. Silva was recommended to be held liable for simple misconduct for violating the Policy on Undertime, with a suspension of five days without pay after allowing for mitigating circumstances.

Whether the Court employees committed offenses by incurring habitual tardiness and undertime inconsistent with the established CSC policies.
Whether the frequency and context of the tardiness and undertime qualify as habitual, meriting administrative penalties.

Whether personal circumstances such as childcare difficulties, health issues, and family distress are sufficient to excuse repeated tardiness.
Whether such justifications can mitigate the strict duty of adhering to the prescribed office hours as mandated for public officials.

Whether the recommended penalties (suspension for repeat offenses and reprimand for first offenses) are consistent with the provisions of the 2017 Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RACCS) and the doctrine of public trust.
How the disciplinary measures balance the gravity of the offenses with the mitigating circumstances presented, such as long service or personal hardships.