Dear PAO,
I am assigned as a sales clerk in a convenience store. I intend to resign due to the sexual harassment committed against me by our supervisor. I already reported the incident to our company through the Human Resources Department. One month after I reported the matter, they told me they are still investigating it. Do I have a cause of action against my employer for not taking immediate action on my complaint?
Mae
Dear Mae,
You may have a cause of action against your employer. Constructive dismissal has been defined as the involuntary resignation due to the harsh, hostile, and unfavorable conditions set by the employer. It arises when a clear discrimination, insensibility, or disdain by an employer exists and has become unbearable to the employee. The gauge for constructive dismissal is whether a reasonable person in the employee’s position would feel compelled to give up his or her employment under the prevailing circumstances. (Peñaflor v. Outdoor Clothing Manufacturing Corporation, GR 177114, Jan. 21, 2010; Ponente: Associate Justice Arturo Brion) In your case, you wanted to resign because of the sexual harassment committed against you by your supervisor and your perceived inaction by the company you are working for.
In LBC Express-Vis, Inc. v. Palco (GR 217101; Feb. 12, 2020; Ponente: Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen), the Supreme Court ruled that an employee is considered constructively dismissed if she was sexually harassed by her superior and her employer failed to act on her complaint with prompt and sensitivity:
“Given these circumstances, the delay in acting on respondent’s case showed petitioner’s insensibility, indifference, and disregard for its employees’ security and welfare. In failing to act on respondent’s complaint with prompt and in choosing to let the resolution of the complaint hang in the air for a long period of time, it had shown that it did not accord her claims the necessary degree of importance, and at best considered it a minor infraction that could wait. Petitioner, it appears, belittled her allegations.
“Furthermore, during the investigation, Batucan resumed his duties as usual. In the meantime, respondent consumed her vacation leaves just trying to avoid him while waiting for her transfer to another branch. Petitioner’s acts showed that it was respondent who had to change and adjust, and even transfer from her place of work, instead of Batucan. Petitioner thus cannot claim that it did not create a hostile, unfavorable, unreasonable work atmosphere for respondent.”
Thus, an employer may only be held liable for an officer’s misconduct if it is first informed of such acts. If the employer is made aware but fails to dispute or act on them, it is deemed to have authorized or condoned the misconduct. This is explicit in the Supreme Court’s ruling:
“In this case, Batucan cannot be considered to have been acting on petitioner’s behalf when he sexually harassed respondent. Thus, respondent cannot base her illegal dismissal complaint against petitioner solely on Batucan’s acts. However, even if petitioner had no participation in the sexual harassment, it had been informed of the incident. Despite this, it failed to take immediate action on respondent’s complaint. Its lack of prompt action reinforced the hostile work environment created by Batucan.” (LBC Express-Vis, Inc. v. Palco; supra)
Indifference to sexual harassment complaints is no longer condoned. The State reinforced its policy against sexual harassment with the enactment of Republic Act (RA) 11313, or the Safe Spaces Act. The law broadened the scope of gender-based sexual harassment in the workplace and imposed additional obligations on employers regarding its prevention, deterrence and sanction. It mandates that complaints be investigated and resolved within 10 days of reporting. Thus, you may have a cause of action against your employer for not taking immediate action on your complaint.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely 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.
