G.R. No. 118978 May 23, 1997
PHILIPPINE TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE COMPANY, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and GRACE DE GUZMAN, respondents.

FACTS

Grace de Guzman was initially hired by PT&T as a reliever under fixed-term contracts. Subsequently, she was re-hired as a probationary employee. In her application form and prior agreements, she indicated she was single, despite having been married months earlier. Upon learning of her marriage, PT&T required her to explain, citing a company policy against employing married women. De Guzman replied she was unaware of the policy and did not deliberately conceal her status. PT&T dismissed her effective January 29, 1992, on grounds of concealment of civil status and alleged defalcation of company funds, the latter arising from her admitted failure to remit certain collections for which she executed a promissory note during the preliminary conference of the illegal dismissal case she filed.
The Labor Arbiter found De Guzman to have attained regular status and declared her dismissal illegal, ordering reinstatement with back wages. The NLRC affirmed the illegal dismissal finding, agreeing she was discriminated against due to her marriage. However, it modified the decision by imposing a three-month suspension for her dishonesty regarding her civil status. PT&T’s motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this petition for certiorari.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether PT&T validly dismissed Grace de Guzman.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the dismissal was illegal. The legal logic centers on the prohibition against discrimination based on marriage under Article 136 of the Labor Code, which declares it unlawful for an employer to require as a condition of employment or continuation that a woman employee shall not get married. PT&T’s policy against hiring married women constitutes direct discrimination, rendering any termination based thereon invalid. The Court emphasized that such a policy violates the constitutional mandate of protecting labor and promoting equality.
Regarding the grounds invoked by PT&T, the concealment of civil status was deemed not a valid cause for dismissal. The misrepresentation was directly induced by the illegal company policy; De Guzman was compelled to hide her marriage to secure employment. A dismissal based on an act necessitated by an unlawful policy cannot be sustained. Furthermore, the alleged defalcation was not a substantive ground for termination as it was not the reason for her dismissal as stated in the termination notice. It arose and was being addressed separately during the litigation proceedings. Consequently, De Guzman, having achieved regular employee status, was entitled to security of tenure. The NLRC’s imposition of a three-month suspension for dishonesty was also deleted, as the misrepresentation was a consequence of the discriminatory policy. The Court affirmed the orders for reinstatement and payment of full back wages.