Title
Imasen Philippine Manufacturing Corp. vs. Alcon
Case
G.R. No. 194884
Decision Date
Oct 22, 2014
Employees dismissed for engaging in sexual intercourse on company premises during work hours; Supreme Court upheld termination, ruling it as serious misconduct under labor laws.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 175045-46)

Factual Background

On October 5, 2002, during the second shift (8:00 pm–5:00 am), Guard Altiche discovered respondents engaging in sexual intercourse on the factory floor’s Tool and Die section, using a piece of carton as a mattress. He reported the incident in writing to management, and Guard Ogana corroborated the account during a subsequent inspection. Respondents denied the charge, claiming they were merely sleeping and that others were present in the area.

Administrative Proceedings

Imasen issued inter-office memoranda (October 14 and 22, 2002) requiring respondents’ explanations and appearance at a formal hearing held on October 30, 2002. After hearing testimony, the company found respondents guilty of gross misconduct and terminated their services on December 4, 2002.

Labor Arbiter and NLRC Rulings

Respondents filed illegal dismissal complaints. On December 10, 2004, the Labor Arbiter dismissed their complaints, upholding dismissal for serious misconduct with due process. The National Labor Relations Commission affirmed on December 24, 2008, finding that petitioner established just cause under Article 282 (now Article 296) of the Labor Code and complied with procedural requirements.

Court of Appeals Ruling

On June 9, 2010, the Court of Appeals nullified the NLRC’s decision, agreeing that respondents committed the infraction and that due process was observed, but holding that the penalty of dismissal was disproportionate. It reduced the sanction to a three-month suspension, ordered reinstatement without loss of seniority, and granted backwages from December 4, 2002, less the suspension period.

Issue

Whether respondents’ conduct—engaging in sexual intercourse inside company premises during work hours—constitutes serious misconduct under Article 282 (now Article 296) of the Labor Code, justifying their dismissal.

Applicable Law

• 1987 Constitution: guarantees security of tenure (Art. 18, Sec. 3).
• Labor Code, Article 293 (formerly 279): prohibits termination except for just or authorized causes and requires due process.
• Labor Code, Article 296 (formerly 282): defines just causes for dismissal, including serious misconduct—an aggravated, willful transgression of established rules, related to employment duties, and committed with wrongful intent.

Court’s Analysis

The Court balanced workers’ tenurial security against the employer’s prerogative to maintain workplace standards. Serious misconduct requires (1) grave and aggravated character, (2) relation to employment duties, and (3) wrongful intent. Sexual intercourse between consenting adults is generally priva

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.