Employment Dispute: Wrongful Accusation of Abandonment of Work in the Philippines

In Philippine labor law, “abandonment of work” is often invoked as a just cause for termination under Article 297 (formerly Article 282) of the Labor Code. It refers to the employee’s deliberate and unjustified refusal or failure to resume employment duties. However, merely alleging abandonment is not enough; the employer must meet stringent legal and evidentiary standards to prove it. Wrongful accusations of abandonment can thus give rise to employment disputes, which are frequently resolved at the level of the Labor Arbiter, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), or even the appellate courts. This article examines the concept of abandonment in the context of Philippine labor law, outlines the legal requisites and defenses, and discusses the remedies available to wrongfully accused employees.

1. Legal Framework

1.1. Constitutional Right to Security of Tenure

The 1987 Philippine Constitution enshrines the right of employees to security of tenure. This means that an employee cannot be dismissed from service except for just or authorized causes recognized by the Labor Code and only after compliance with due process.

1.2. Labor Code Provisions

Under the Labor Code of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended), particularly Article 297 (formerly Article 282), an employer may terminate an employee for just causes, which include:

Serious misconduct or willful disobedience of the lawful orders of the employer;
Gross and habitual neglect of duties;
Fraud or willful breach of trust;
Commission of a crime or offense against the employer or the employer’s immediate family; and
Other causes analogous to the foregoing.

Abandonment of work generally falls under “other causes analogous to the foregoing” or may be considered as a form of gross and habitual neglect of duty depending on the circumstances. However, the Supreme Court has clarified through numerous decisions that abandonment is not a catch-all ground; there are specific requirements to establish it.

2. Definition and Elements of Abandonment of Work

2.1. Two Essential Elements

Philippine jurisprudence (e.g., Twestate Logistics Inc. v. Escote, Jr., G.R. No. 228539, January 13, 2021; Nueva Ecija Electric Cooperative II (NEECO II) v. NLRC, G.R. No. 121520, May 5, 1997, among others) has consistently held that abandonment of work requires the concurrence of two elements:

Failure to report for work or absence without valid or justifiable reason; and
Clear intention of the employee to sever the employer-employee relationship (animus deserendi).

The second element is typically the most crucial to prove. Mere absence or failure to report to work—even for an extended period—does not automatically constitute abandonment. There must be a showing of a deliberate and unjustified refusal to return to work.

2.2. Indicators of Animus Deserendi

Several factors may be considered in determining whether the employee had the intent to abandon:

Failure to respond to an employer’s return-to-work notice (if properly served);
Failure to provide any communication or explanation for prolonged absence;
Acts or statements by the employee evidencing a desire to end the employment relationship.

However, courts and labor tribunals also look at the employee’s overall behavior. For instance, if an employee files a complaint for illegal dismissal or otherwise makes efforts to resume work (e.g., asking to be reinstated, promptly providing medical certificates for absences), these actions contradict any alleged intent to abandon.

3. Wrongful Accusation of Abandonment

3.1. Common Scenarios

Employers may wrongfully accuse employees of abandonment under various scenarios:

Extended Sick Leave or Unauthorized Leave
The employee may have been unable to report to work due to medical or personal reasons but failed to properly notify or obtain approval. In such cases, while the absence might warrant disciplinary action for violation of company policy, it does not automatically equate to abandonment.
Employee Under Preventive Suspension
Sometimes, employers place an employee under preventive suspension pending investigation of an alleged offense. If the suspension drags on or is not clearly documented, the employer might later claim abandonment when the employee does not return—despite no clear instruction to do so.
Dispute or Protest Actions
Where employees stage a work stoppage or protest against unfair labor practices, an employer might misconstrue or deliberately brand the collective action as abandonment.
Constructive Dismissal Situations
If the employer reduces the employee’s responsibilities or harasses the employee into leaving, the employer might defend itself by claiming the employee abandoned the job. However, in constructive dismissal cases, the employee typically is forced to leave against his or her will and often files a complaint for illegal dismissal.

3.2. Burden of Proof on the Employer

Under Philippine labor law, the employer has the burden of proving just cause for dismissal, including abandonment. This principle arises from the general rule that an employee is presumed not to have resigned or abandoned unless proven otherwise. The strict rule aims to protect the Constitutionally guaranteed right to security of tenure.

4. Due Process Requirements

4.1. Substantive and Procedural Due Process

To lawfully terminate an employee for abandonment, employers must satisfy both substantive and procedural due process:

Substantive Due Process
There must be a valid or just cause—i.e., abandonment as defined by jurisprudence.
Procedural Due Process
Employers must observe the two-notice rule:
- First Notice (Show-Cause Notice): A written notice to the employee specifying the grounds for termination and requiring the employee to explain.
- Second Notice (Termination Notice): After due investigation, if the employer decides to dismiss, it must issue a final notice indicating the decision to terminate and stating the reasons.

4.2. Proper Investigation

Even in alleged abandonment cases, the employer must conduct an investigation and give the employee an opportunity to refute the accusation. If the employee fails to respond to notices or participate in the process, the employer can document these efforts to show compliance with due process.

5. Remedies for Wrongful Accusation

5.1. Filing an Illegal Dismissal Complaint

An employee who believes they have been wrongfully terminated on the ground of abandonment may file an illegal dismissal complaint with the Labor Arbiter of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). The complaint must generally be filed within four (4) years from the date of dismissal.

5.2. Reinstatement and Backwages

If the Labor Arbiter or the NLRC rules that the dismissal was illegal:

Reinstatement
The employee is entitled to be reinstated to their former position without loss of seniority rights and other privileges.
Full Backwages
Under Article 294 (formerly Article 279) of the Labor Code, illegally dismissed employees are entitled to full backwages from the time of dismissal until actual reinstatement.

5.3. Separation Pay in Lieu of Reinstatement

In cases where reinstatement is not viable (e.g., strained relations, closure of business, or other exceptional circumstances), the labor tribunal may award separation pay instead of reinstatement. Separation pay is typically computed based on the employee’s length of service (usually one month’s salary for every year of service, although this can vary depending on jurisprudence and agreements).

5.4. Damages and Attorney’s Fees

If the employer is found to have acted in bad faith or in a manner that caused undue harm, the labor tribunal may award moral and/or exemplary damages. Attorney’s fees may also be granted if the employee was compelled to litigate to protect their rights.

6. Defenses and Best Practices for Employees

Document Legitimate Absences
Employees should promptly and properly notify their employers regarding absences due to sickness or other valid reasons. Official documentation such as medical certificates, approved leave forms, or written communications can protect an employee from later claims of unauthorized absence.
Respond to Notices
Employees who receive notices to report back to work or show-cause notices must respond immediately and in writing. Silence or inaction can be misconstrued as admission or an indication of abandonment.
File Grievances or Complaints Promptly
An employee who is barred from returning or believes they are being unjustly tagged as AWOL (absent without official leave) should file the appropriate grievance or complaint (e.g., for illegal suspension, constructive dismissal, or illegal dismissal).
Gather Evidence of Continued Interest in Employment
Emails, text messages, or documents showing that the employee attempted to return to work or sought reinstatement are strong evidence against an allegation of abandonment.

7. Employer’s Perspective: Avoiding Wrongful Claims

Follow Due Process
Employers must issue the required notices, conduct a fair investigation, and give the employee the chance to explain their side. Proper documentation is crucial.
Serve Return-to-Work Notices
If an employee disappears without explanation, sending a return-to-work notice via registered mail, courier, or personal service, and requiring a response can help clarify the employee’s intentions. Proof of receipt or attempt of service is important.
Maintain Proper Records
Keep detailed records of an employee’s attendance, leave requests, approvals, and any communication regarding absences. In the event of a dispute, such records help establish or negate the claim of abandonment.
Check for Alternatives
If the employee’s conduct is more consistent with a lesser infraction (e.g., unauthorized leave), it may be more appropriate to impose suspension or other disciplinary measures instead of dismissing on the more serious ground of abandonment.

8. Key Jurisprudence

Samson v. NLRC (G.R. No. 121035)
Reiterated the two elements of abandonment: absence plus clear intent to sever employment.
Nueva Ecija Electric Cooperative II v. NLRC (G.R. No. 121520)
Emphasized that an employee’s filing of a complaint for illegal dismissal contradicts any claim of abandonment.
Twestate Logistics Inc. v. Escote, Jr. (G.R. No. 228539)
Highlighted that the mere absence from work cannot be equated with abandonment; deliberate intent must be proven.
Philippine Wireless Inc. (Smart Communications) v. Garrido (G.R. No. 178201)
Discussed the requirement of due process in termination, stressing that failure to follow due process can lead to liability for damages even if the dismissal is for a just cause.

9. Conclusion

In the Philippines, wrongful accusations of abandonment of work can have far-reaching consequences for employees’ livelihoods and employers’ operations. Because of the constitutionally protected right to security of tenure, the burden to prove abandonment of work rests firmly with the employer. Employers must establish both the fact of unjustified absence and the employee’s intention to end the employment relationship.

Employees, for their part, should be proactive in documenting and explaining their absences and demonstrating continued interest in their positions. When confronted with a wrongful accusation of abandonment, employees have legal avenues for redress, including filing an illegal dismissal complaint, seeking reinstatement or separation pay, and claiming backwages.

Ultimately, strict compliance with the two-notice rule and thorough documentation from both parties serve as the best safeguards against baseless or wrongful claims of abandonment. As with all legal disputes, it is prudent to seek professional legal advice or representation to ensure the protection of one’s rights and interests.

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific concerns, consult a licensed attorney or labor law practitioner in the Philippines.