Dear PAO,
I am writing to ask for your legal advice about a situation that I discovered in my company. For context, when I took my preemployment medical exam, the referral only showed the five major tests plus a drug test. When I started working, I found out (because I was in HR) that the company secretly requires pregnancy tests for all female new hires which they do not reveal to them. The company sends the referral directly to their partner clinic. The results go straight to the company; not to the employee. The women never see their own results. If a woman is pregnant, she will not be allowed to start working. The company does not tell her that pregnancy is the reason. I was shocked. This is the first time I have encountered this kind of policy. Is this legal?
Tilda Uerldend
Dear Ms. Uerlend,
In the recent case of Paulino vs. Sutherland Global Services Inc. (GR 262564, Aug. 6, 2025, penned by Justice Henry Jean Paul Inting), the Supreme Court held that when an employer discriminates against a woman on account of her pregnancy and results in her resignation, said act or series of acts constitutes not only constructive dismissal but also violation of the provisions of the Constitution and the Magna Carta of Women (Republic Act 9710):
“Third, the Supreme Court, as the prime duty bearer and as the last bulwark of justice and democracy, is constitutionally mandated to protect working women against all forms of discrimination and to ensure that they enjoy decent work environments, with due regard to their maternal functions.
“Article XXX, Section 14 of the 1987 Constitution states:
“SECTION 14. The State shall protect working women by providing safe and healthful working conditions, taking into account their maternal functions, and such facilities and opportunities that will enhance their welfare and enable them to realize their full potential in the service of the nation.
“Additionally, Section 5 (b) in relation to Section 22 of the Magna Carta of Women reads:
“SECTION 5. The State as the Primary Duty-Bearer. – The State, as the primary duty-bearer, shall: “...
“(b) Protect women against discrimination and from violation of their rights by private corporations, entities and individuals; and
“The State shall fulfil these duties through law, policy, regulatory instruments, administrative guidelines and other appropriate measures, including temporary special measures[.]
“SECTION 22. Right to Decent Work. – The State shall progressively realize and ensure decent work standards for women that involve the creation of jobs of acceptable quality in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity.” Xxx xxx In this case, respondent et al. never denied, and in effect admitted the following: (I) the harsh conditions petitioner allegedly suffered while in the Production Area of the Clark Office during her pregnancy; (2) her unjustifiable inclusion in the Absconding List and the fact that she was unable to receive her salary for the periods before and after she gave birth, despite respondent et al.’s representations that it would be credited to her account; (3) the fact that respondent et al. never informed petitioner about the “relocation bond,” which prohibited her reassignment to the Shaw Office for one year; and (4) that it was Moussa, who suggested and triggered petitioner’s resignation. xxx
To the Court’s mind, the circumstances, taken collectively, demonstrate respondent et al.’s discrimination against petitioner on account of her pregnancy. Such discrimination constitutes not only constructive dismissal but also a violation of the Magna Carta of Women.”
In your case, your company taking clandestine pregnancy tests of female new hires appears to be a measure against hiring a woman on account of her pregnancy. Sections 5 and 22 of the Magna Carta of Women assure that women shall be protected against discrimination and violation of their rights, and shall be afforded the right to decent work. This mantle of protection not only protects women against illegal termination, but rather extends from the time a woman applies and is evaluated for work application, and up to her eventual exit from the company. Based on your narration, a case may possibly be filed before the National Labor Relations Commission by any of those whose rights may have been violated, with a right to claim damages.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Thank you for your continued trust and support.
Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net.
