Below is an extensive discussion on the concept of a “written explanation demand” (often called a “show cause memo” or “notice to explain”) in disciplinary procedures under Philippine law. This explanation focuses on the private-sector context under the Labor Code and Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) regulations, but also touches on the practice in the civil service context.

1. Overview of Disciplinary Due Process in the Philippines

Under Philippine labor law, an employer must observe due process before imposing any disciplinary penalty on an employee, particularly termination of employment. The concept of due process for employees is generally referred to as the “twin-notice rule”:

First Notice (or “Notice to Explain” / “Show Cause Memo”): The employer must issue a written notice stating the specific act or omission constituting the ground(s) for disciplinary action or dismissal. The employee must be given a chance to explain or refute the allegations in writing and, if needed, in a hearing.
Second Notice (Final Decision): After giving the employee a reasonable opportunity to be heard and to present evidence, the employer issues a second notice communicating the employer’s final decision, including the penalty (if any).

The “written explanation demand” pertains to the first notice: this is the formal, written directive for an employee to submit an explanation of the alleged wrongdoing or infraction.

2. Legal Basis

2.1. Labor Code of the Philippines

While the Labor Code itself outlines grounds for disciplinary action (particularly for just causes of dismissal under Article 297 [formerly Article 282]), it does not spell out in precise detail the procedural aspects of disciplinary due process. Those procedures have been fleshed out via regulations and jurisprudence.

2.2. Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code

The Omnibus Rules to Implement the Labor Code supplement the statutory provisions. Rule XXIII provides guidelines on termination of employment for just causes, emphasizing the requirement of a written notice to the employee specifying the reasons for dismissal and giving the employee an opportunity to respond.

2.3. DOLE Department Order No. 147-15

Department Order (DO) No. 147-15, issued in 2015, clarified the requirements for due process in termination cases. It reiterates the need for:

A first written notice (i.e., the notice to explain or show cause memo) stating the specific acts or omissions and providing the employee at least five (5) calendar days to submit a written explanation.
A hearing or conference if necessary or requested, where the employee can defend themselves or present contrary evidence.
A second written notice (notice of decision) informing the employee of the employer’s disciplinary action or decision.

2.4. Civil Service Rules (For Government Employees)

For employees in the civil service, the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RRACCS) or the earlier Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (URACCS) apply. While the “twin-notice rule” is similarly recognized, government employees face a more elaborate procedure, and the show cause order or formal charge is given in writing to allow an adequate opportunity to respond.

3. Key Elements of the Written Explanation Demand (Show Cause Memo)

A properly issued demand for a written explanation or show cause memo generally includes:

Statement of the Alleged Violations or Offenses
- Clear identification of the specific acts or omissions that constitute the ground(s) for disciplinary action.
- Reference to company policies, code of conduct, or relevant legal provisions allegedly violated.
Factual Basis
- Sufficient detail (names, dates, places, approximate times, relevant background) to allow the employee to understand the allegations and prepare an appropriate response.
Directive to Respond in Writing
- An explicit instruction for the employee to submit a written explanation within a specified timeframe. Under DOLE’s rules, employees are generally given at least five (5) calendar days to respond, although a shorter or longer period may be justified by the circumstances (e.g., if the alleged offense is serious and time-sensitive, or if the employee requests more time).
Notice of Consequences
- Although not always included, many employers will clarify that disciplinary action (including termination if warranted) may be imposed depending on the outcome of the investigation.
Opportunity to Request a Hearing
- In some cases, the show cause memo explicitly offers or mentions the option for the employee to ask for a clarificatory hearing, conference, or meeting to further explain or present evidence in person.

4. Purpose and Importance

Compliance with Procedural Due Process
- The demand for a written explanation is a cornerstone of the “first notice” required under the twin-notice rule. Failing to issue a proper notice to explain can result in a finding of illegal dismissal even if there is a valid cause for termination.
Fairness and Transparency
- By detailing alleged infractions and giving employees a chance to respond, the employer ensures the disciplinary process is transparent, and the employee is not unfairly or abruptly penalized.
Protection Against Legal Liability
- An employer who fails to adhere to lawful disciplinary procedures may be held liable for damages, full back wages, or reinstatement if the dismissal is challenged before labor arbiters or the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).

5. How the Employee Should Respond

Upon receiving a written explanation demand, an employee is expected to:

Acknowledge Receipt
- The employee should document that they have received the notice (e.g., signing a copy or sending an acknowledgment email), to avoid claims they never received a chance to respond.
Review and Understand the Allegations
- The employee should carefully read the notice, noting the details of the accusations and any company policies invoked.
Submit a Written Explanation
- The response should be factual, organized, and sufficiently detailed to address each allegation. The employee should cite relevant documentation, witnesses, or evidence whenever possible.
Request Additional Documents or Evidence if Needed
- If the employee needs further information to rebut the accusation (e.g., logbooks, CCTV footage), they can respectfully request it from the employer, consistent with any company policies and rules.
Request for a Hearing (If Beneficial)
- If a face-to-face conference or hearing would help clarify complex facts, the employee should formally request it in writing.

6. Common Issues and Pitfalls

Insufficient Details in the Notice
- A vague, overly general, or “template” show cause memo that does not specify the alleged misconduct can be deemed invalid. Employers must ensure that notices provide enough information for the employee to understand and respond effectively.
Insufficient Time to Explain
- Giving the employee too short a period to submit a written explanation (e.g., requiring a response the next day without urgent reasons) may violate due process unless justified by the nature of the offense or other urgent factors.
Failure to Conduct a Hearing or Conference (When Needed)
- While written explanation is often enough in straightforward cases, more complex cases may necessitate a hearing or conference to satisfy due process requirements. Automatically imposing disciplinary action without considering the merits of the written explanation can invalidate the discipline imposed.
Predetermined Outcomes
- If the employer issues a show cause memo but has clearly already decided on termination or other penalties before reading the employee’s response, this may be viewed as a sham proceeding. The employer’s good faith consideration of the employee’s explanation is part of the due process requirement.
Not Following Through with a Second Notice
- Even if the first notice is properly given and an adequate opportunity to respond is provided, an employer must still issue a final notice of decision. Failure to provide that second notice can likewise result in a procedural due process violation.

7. Jurisprudence

Various Supreme Court cases highlight the necessity and legal impact of the written explanation demand:

King of Kings Transport, Inc. v. Mamac (G.R. No. 166208, June 29, 2007)
The Court reiterated the twin-notice rule, underscoring that employers must provide a written notice specifying the ground for dismissal and give employees ample opportunity to explain.
Perez v. Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Company (G.R. No. 152048, April 7, 2009)
The Supreme Court emphasized that due process in dismissal cases is comprised of two aspects: substantive (existence of just cause) and procedural (twin-notice rule). Failure to observe proper procedure may result in liability for nominal damages even if a valid cause for dismissal exists.
Agabon v. National Labor Relations Commission (G.R. No. 158693, November 17, 2004)
The Court established that an employer who has a valid cause for termination but fails to observe due process in imposing dismissal is liable for nominal damages.

These and other rulings affirm that a properly issued “show cause memo” (or demand for written explanation) is non-negotiable to comply with the fundamental requirements of procedural due process.

8. Written Explanation Demand in the Civil Service

For government employees, the principle of due process is similarly observed but with additional procedural safeguards under the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RRACCS) or URACCS. The written explanation demand is typically in the form of a “Show Cause Order” or “Formal Charge.” The civil service rules require:

Specific Allegations with relevant details of the administrative offense.
Directive for the employee to submit an explanation and evidence in defense.
Option to request a formal investigation or clarificatory hearing, especially in serious cases.

Failure to comply with these steps may result in the administrative disciplinary action being invalidated and reversed on appeal to the Civil Service Commission or the courts.

9. Practical Tips for Employers

Draft Clear and Specific Show Cause Memos
- Specify the policy or provision violated, include factual details, and invite the employee to provide a written explanation.
Set a Reasonable Deadline
- Provide at least five (5) calendar days (as per DO 147-15), or more if justified by circumstances.
Consider All Evidence
- Review the employee’s explanation objectively before deciding on any penalty.
Observe Confidentiality
- Keep disciplinary proceedings private to protect both the employee and the company.
Document Everything
- Ensure that all notices, responses, and proceedings are properly recorded, as these will be critical if a labor complaint arises.

10. Consequences of Non-Compliance

Illegal Dismissal (if termination is involved):
The employer may be ordered to reinstate the employee with full back wages and additional benefits if the dismissal is found procedurally or substantively flawed.
Nominal Damages:
Even if a just cause for dismissal is proven, but procedural due process is lacking (e.g., no valid show cause memo), the employer can still be held liable for nominal damages.
Reputational Harm and Employee Morale Issues:
Perceptions of unfair disciplinary practices can negatively affect overall employee relations and result in reputational harm for the employer.

11. Conclusion

In Philippine labor practice, the “written explanation demand” (commonly referred to as a show cause memo or notice to explain) is crucial in fulfilling the first step of procedural due process for disciplinary actions. It ensures fairness and transparency, provides the employee with an opportunity to defend themselves, and protects employers from liabilities by showing good-faith compliance with labor regulations. Both private and government sectors require this form of notice, although specific procedures vary slightly under DOLE regulations for private employees and CSC rules for government employees.

By understanding the legal basis, key elements, and best practices for issuing (and responding to) a written explanation demand, employers and employees alike help maintain a fair and lawful disciplinary process—ultimately upholding the principle of due process guaranteed under Philippine labor laws.