Employer Non-Remittance of Benefits and Workplace Defamation

Below is a comprehensive discussion covering the twin topics of (1) employer non-remittance of mandated employee benefits and (2) workplace defamation under Philippine law. While this article provides a broad overview, it should not be construed as legal advice. Individuals seeking specific guidance should consult a qualified legal professional.

I. INTRODUCTION

In the Philippines, protecting workers’ welfare is a fundamental policy enshrined in the Constitution and reflected in labor statutes. Two issues frequently encountered by employees are:

  1. Employer Non-Remittance of Statutory Benefits – This pertains to the failure or refusal of employers to remit mandatory contributions (e.g., SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG) on behalf of their employees.
  2. Workplace Defamation – This concerns statements made within the employment context that harm an individual’s reputation. In the Philippines, defamation can give rise to both civil and criminal liability (libel or slander), depending on the circumstances.

Understanding how these issues arise, their legal bases, and possible remedies is crucial for both employers and employees to protect their respective rights and interests.

II. EMPLOYER NON-REMITTANCE OF MANDATORY BENEFITS

A. Overview of Mandatory Contributions in the Philippines

  1. Social Security System (SSS)

    • Legal Basis: Republic Act No. 8282 (Social Security Law) and its subsequent amendments.
    • Coverage: Private sector employees (and, in some cases, self-employed and voluntary members).
    • Obligation: Employers must deduct from employees’ salaries the required SSS contribution and must remit both the employer’s and the employee’s share to the SSS on or before the due date.

  2. PhilHealth

    • Legal Basis: Republic Act No. 7875 (National Health Insurance Act), as amended by R.A. 10606 and R.A. 11223 (Universal Health Care Act).
    • Coverage: All employees in the public and private sector.
    • Obligation: Employers must ensure the timely deduction and remittance of both employer and employee shares of PhilHealth contributions.

  3. Home Development Mutual Fund (HDMF or Pag-IBIG)

    • Legal Basis: Republic Act No. 9679 (Home Development Mutual Fund Law of 2009).
    • Coverage: Mandatory for all employees who are earning a minimum monthly salary (set by law/HDMF guidelines).
    • Obligation: Similar to SSS and PhilHealth, employers must deduct employee contributions and add their corresponding share, remitting these to Pag-IBIG on time.

B. Employer Obligations

  1. Registration – Employers must register themselves and their employees with SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG.
  2. Timely Deductions – Employers are required to deduct the correct amount from their employees’ salaries as provided by law and regulations.
  3. Remittance – Employers must remit both the employer’s share and the employee’s share to the respective agencies on or before the deadlines set by law or regulation.

C. Legal Consequences for Non-Remittance

  1. Criminal Liability

    • Under the SSS Law, for instance, non-remittance of SSS contributions is considered an offense. Officers of the company (including the president, manager, treasurer, or other officers responsible for the violation) may be held criminally liable.
    • Penalties can include fines and/or imprisonment, depending on the amount and duration of non-remittance.
    • Similar provisions exist under PhilHealth and HDMF laws, which provide penalties for employers who fail to register employees or fail to timely remit contributions.

  2. Administrative Penalties and Interests

    • Unremitted or delayed contributions incur penalties and interest charges. For example, the SSS imposes a three percent (3%) per month penalty for late payments.
    • These agencies have administrative powers to enforce collection, including issuing warrants of distraint, levy, or garnishment of bank accounts to collect unpaid contributions.

  3. Civil Liabilities

    • Employees can initiate complaints before the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) or file cases with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) for the recovery of unremitted contributions.
    • Employers may also be liable for damages if employees suffered harm or were deprived of benefits (e.g., hospitalization coverage under PhilHealth) due to non-remittance.

D. Remedies for Employees

  1. Filing a Complaint with SSS/PhilHealth/Pag-IBIG

    • Employees can approach these agencies directly to report employer violations, prompting administrative and/or legal action.

  2. Filing a Labor Complaint with the NLRC

    • If the non-remittance is tied to wage-related issues or results in constructive dismissal, employees can file a complaint before the NLRC.

  3. Availing of Administrative Enforcement

    • SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG each have their own enforcement mechanisms. Employees can coordinate with these agencies to ensure collection and remittance.

  4. Criminal Action

    • In cases of egregious or repeated non-remittance, employees can coordinate with the relevant agencies or the Department of Justice (DOJ) for criminal prosecution of responsible corporate officers.

III. WORKPLACE DEFAMATION

A. Definition of Defamation under Philippine Law

Under Philippine law, defamation is an umbrella term that covers:

  • Libel – Defamatory statements made in writing or similar permanent forms (e.g., published material, social media posts).
  • Slander – Oral or spoken defamation (non-permanent form).

B. Legal Framework

  1. Revised Penal Code

    • Articles 353 to 362 define libel and slander, the elements thereof, and penalties.
    • Article 353 states that libel is a public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice, or defect, real or imaginary, which tends to dishonor or discredit a person, or blacken the memory of one who is dead.

  2. Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 (RA 10175)

    • Covers online libel, which is libel committed through a computer system or other similar means.
    • Penalties under this law are generally more severe than those under the Revised Penal Code for libel.

  3. Civil Code of the Philippines

    • A person defamed may also file a civil action for damages under Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Civil Code.
    • Even if a criminal complaint for libel/slander fails, a civil suit for damages may still prosper if the defamatory conduct is proven under civil standards.

C. Elements of Defamation

Whether for libel or slander, the following elements generally apply:

  1. Imputation of a Discreditable Act or Condition – It must convey an accusation or implication of wrongdoing, vice, or defect.
  2. Publication or Communication – The statement must be made known to at least one other person aside from the subject. In written defamation (libel), the material must be published or posted publicly or shared with a third party.
  3. Identification of the Person Defamed – The victim must be identifiable.
  4. Malice – There is a presumption of malice in defamatory statements unless the defendant can prove good intentions or justifiable motives (e.g., privileged communication in official proceedings).

D. Workplace Context: Common Scenarios

  1. Performance-Related Criticism – Constructive feedback by an employer does not automatically amount to defamation if done in good faith, with no malicious intent, and for a legitimate business purpose.
  2. Office Gossip and Rumors – Spreading harmful rumors or false information about a colleague or subordinate can give rise to a libel/slander claim.
  3. Employer’s Statements – Publicly accusing an employee of theft, fraud, or other wrongdoing without basis or in a manner that injures reputation can be the subject of libel or slander complaints.
  4. Online Platforms – Workplace social media groups or messaging apps used to malign a co-worker could fall under cyber-libel if the statements are seen or accessible by other people.

E. Privileged Communications and Defenses

  1. Absolute Privileged Communication – Statements made in the discharge of a public function or in official proceedings (e.g., legislative session, judicial proceeding) are generally protected. This is less likely to apply in a private employment context.
  2. Qualified Privileged Communication – Limited scenarios, such as performance evaluations or statements made to protect a legitimate interest, provided no malice is present.
  3. Truth – Proof of the truth of the allegation is generally a defense in defamation cases, so long as the matter is communicated with good motives and for justifiable ends.

F. Remedies for Workplace Defamation Victims

  1. Criminal Complaint for Libel or Slander

    • File a complaint with the Office of the City Prosecutor or Provincial Prosecutor, submitting evidence (e.g., witness accounts, screenshots, recordings).
    • If probable cause is found, the prosecutor may file charges in court.

  2. Civil Action for Damages

    • A separate or independent civil suit may be pursued under the Civil Code.
    • The victim may claim moral damages, nominal damages, and other forms of compensation.

  3. Administrative or Internal Remedies

    • Employees can seek resolution under company policies (e.g., by filing a harassment or misconduct complaint against the co-worker or employer).
    • The DOLE may get involved if the conduct amounts to constructive dismissal or a violation of labor standards.

IV. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NON-REMITTANCE AND DEFAMATION

While non-remittance of benefits and defamation are distinct violations, they can sometimes overlap in a workplace dispute:

  • Employee Complaints of Non-Remittance: If an employer reacts by accusing the complaining employee of wrongdoing in front of others (to discredit the employee’s complaints), such conduct may give rise to a defamation claim.
  • Retaliatory Acts: An employer who is subject to a labor complaint might make public statements impugning the employee’s character, potentially triggering libel or slander liability.

V. BEST PRACTICES AND PREVENTIVE MEASURES

A. For Employers

  1. Ensure Compliance with Statutory Contributions

    • Maintain accurate records and systems for timely deduction and remittance.
    • Conduct periodic audits to detect errors or delays.

  2. Establish Clear Policies on Communication

    • Develop guidelines on how to provide feedback and evaluations to avoid malicious or baseless accusations.
    • Train management and supervisors on libel/slander laws, emphasizing respect in the workplace.

  3. Implement Grievance Mechanisms

    • Provide avenues for employees to raise concerns (e.g., non-remittance of benefits) without fear of harassment or defamation.

B. For Employees

  1. Monitor Pay Slips and Agency Records

    • Regularly check with SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG to ensure contributions are credited.
    • Keep personal documentation (payslips, receipts) to show deductions were made.

  2. Address Issues Internally First

    • If safe to do so, raise concerns through HR or management about non-remittance to seek immediate rectification.

  3. Document Incidents of Defamation

    • Save screenshots, messages, or emails that contain defamatory statements.
    • Note the time, date, and witnesses of oral defamation.

  4. Consult a Lawyer for Legal Remedies

    • Where malicious or grave violations are committed, a formal legal complaint may be necessary.

VI. CONCLUSION

Employer non-remittance of SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG contributions and workplace defamation are significant legal issues in the Philippines that can subject offenders to civil, criminal, and administrative liabilities. The law provides various remedies—ranging from complaints before government agencies (SSS, PhilHealth, Pag-IBIG) to criminal prosecution under the Revised Penal Code and special laws (Cybercrime Prevention Act). Employers should prioritize strict compliance with statutory obligations and enforce clear communication protocols to prevent defamatory conduct. Employees, in turn, should remain vigilant, document potential violations, and seek timely legal advice when necessary. By understanding their rights and responsibilities, both parties can foster a fair and respectful work environment.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login