SC Affirms Xerox Business’ Solidary Liability as Employer in Sexual Harassment Case
February 2, 2024
The Supreme Court has upheld the solidary liability of an employer for unpaid salary and payment of damages resulting from sexual harassment, for its failure to prevent the commission of acts of sexual harassment as well as for its failure to provide procedures for the resolution or prosecution of the acts complained of.
In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the Court’s Second Division affirmed the May 31, 2019 Decision and the November 23, 2020 Resolution of the Court of Appeals (CA) finding that Xerox Business Services Philippines, Inc. (Xerox Services) constructively dismissed an employee (complainant) in relation to a sexual harassment case.
Complainant was hired by Xerox Business as Customer Care Senior Specialist in 2014. In March 2015, while at the office, complainant informed Nilo Dela Peña (Dela Peña), the assigned team leader, of a system error in the use of her temporary headset and asked the latter for assistance. Dela Peña told complainant that the error might be due to the headset itself and told her to get a replacement in the storage room.
While complainant was in the storage room, Dela Peña suddenly appeared and told her: “Baby tigas na tigas na ako, kelan mo ba talaga ako pagibigyan [sic]?” Complainant, trying to make light of the situation, replied, “TL ano kaba? Para kang tanga diyan.” She grabbed the nearest headset and ran out of the room back to her station.
When the headset that complainant grabbed turned out to be similarly defective, she went back to the storage room, thinking that Dela Peña had already left. To her surprise, Dela Peña approached her, grabbed her waist, and tried to kiss her when she hurriedly moved away. Complainant struggled to push Dela Peña away, but the latter was able to hug her and grope her breasts. Mustering all her strength, complainant was able to break free from Dela Peña’s hold and race out of the room.
However, Dela Peña still approached her at her workstation and told her to reboot her tools and get a replacement headset so she could start making calls instead of slacking off. Distressed, complainant complied and went back to the storage room to get a replacement headset, but Dela Peña followed her, closed the door, and blocked the exit.
Dela Peña again made advances on complainant, saying, “Sige na Baby, pagkahawak mo at itatago ko din agad,” and forcing himself on her. When complainant found an opportunity, she ran out of the room.
Complainant claimed that from then on, she detested going to work and she became anxious and paranoid. She would find herself uncontrollably crying whenever she saw Dela Peña, but, as she was a single parent, she could not afford to quit and had no choice but to continue working. Complainant further claimed that she reported the incident and filed a formal complaint with the company’s Human Resources Department, but her case was never heard and the management did not give her any protective measure. Dela Peña, who continued to work in the same area and same shift with her, even insinuated that it was complainant who wanted what happened between them to transpire. Worse, complainant said that Xerox Business withheld three days of her salary in May 2015.
This prompted her to file a complaint before the Labor Arbiter against Xerox Business, its human resources manager, and Dela Peña for sexual harassment, with prayer for payment of unpaid salary and damages.
The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of complainant, finding Xerox Business liable for constructive dismissal for its failure to create a Committee on Decorum and Investigation and investigate the incident. It ordered Xerox Business to pay complainant moral damages of PHP 100,000.00, exemplary damages of PHP 50,000.00, and three-day salary of PHP 2,630.58.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s finding of constructive dismissal, but modifed the award by increasing the amount of moral and exemplary damages to PHP 500,000.00.
The CA modified the NLRC’s ruling by reducing the award of moral damages to PHP 100,000.00 and exemplary damages to PHP 50,000.00, ratiocinating that these awards are not meant to enrich the employee but are intended to serve as reasonable compensation for the suffering caused to the injured party and as correction for the public good. Complainant thus filed a petition for review before the Supreme Court.
In denying the petition, the Court took note that the Labor Arbiter, the NLRC, and the CA all ruled that while complainant did not cease to be employed, she was still constructively dismissed due to the hostile, offensive, and intimidating work environment perpetrated by Xerox Business.
The Court reiterated that in cases involving sexual harassment, an employee is deemed constructively dismissed if he or she was sexually harassed by his or her superior, and said superior failed to act on the employee’s complaint with promptness and sensitivity.
However, the Court did not sustain the complainant’s claim that she was entitled to separation pay and backwages on the basis of the finding of constructive dismissal. It took note of the fact that complainant did not resign from her work despite the hostile, offensive, and intimidating work environment. The Court also found that the records of the case contained no allegation of demotion in rank or diminution of pay and benefits. It stressed that there was no economic loss to speak of that would warrant payment of separation benefits and backwages.
The Court did affirm the factual findings of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC that Xerox Business was remiss in its duty to prevent or deter commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide procedures for resolution, settlement, or prosecution of said acts, as mandated by Section 4 of Republic Act No. (RA) 7877, or the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995. It thus upheld the ruling that Xerox Business was solidary liable with Dela Peña for payment of damages arising from the acts of sexual harassment, pursuant to Section 5 of RA 7877.
On the proper amount of damages, the Court first highlighted that the essence of sexual harassment is not the violation of the sexuality of the offended party, but the offender’s abuse of power. This abuse of power, the Court said, comes from the fact that the superior can remove the subordinate from the workplace should the latter refuse the superior’s advances.
Sustaining the CA on the modification of the awards of damages, the Court ruled that reducing the amount of moral damages to PHP 100,000.00 and exemplary damages to PHP 50,000.00 was supported not only by the records of the case, but also by prevailing jurisprudence.
The said award of damages was consistent with complainant’s prayer for relief in her Position Paper, wherein she asked that Xerox Business and Dela Peña be held jointly and severally liable to pay her claims for PHP 100,000.00 in moral damages and PHP 50,0000.00 in exemplary damages. The ruling was also in line with 2020 case of Toliongco v. CA, where the Court awarded the same amounts as moral and exemplary damages upon a finding of sexual harassment.
The Court concluded by stressing that it will not hesitate in granting affirmative relief that is due the complainant under the law, saying that under RA 7877, she is not precluded from filing a separate action for any affirmative relief arising from the acts of sexual harassment.
The Supreme Court Public Information Office will upload a copy of the Decision in G.R. No. 268399 once it receives the same from the Second Division Clerk of Court.
FULL TEXT of G.R. No. 268399., Francheska Aleen Balaba Buban Vs. Nilo Dela Peña (January 24, 2024), at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/268399-francheska-aleen-balaba-buban-vs-nilo-dela-pena/