When private employees run for public office

It is the right of every Filipino to vote and be voted upon in any Philippine election. The problem arises however, when he is an employee of a private firm. Is he considered resigned upon filing his certificate of candidacy? Can he be legally dismissed from his employment on that basis? If he wins in the election, can he serve in both the private firm and the government? If he loses, can he insist to come back and reclaim his position?  The problem is that many companies do not even know what to do with these employees. They do not have any company policy covering such situations.

I happen to have the answers to all these questions. And my answers are all based on decisions by no less than the Supreme Court. There are two decisions, in fact: first the case of Ernesto Ymbong vs. ABS-CBN (GR 184885) decided on March 7, 2012 and the earlier case of Manila Broadasting Company vs. NLRC (GR 121975, 294 SCRA 486), decided on Aug. 20,1998. The two decisions do not have the same answer. But it is our view that the latest pronouncement of the highest court shall prevail. I am afraid however, that my answers may not find favor among those who are running. On the other hand, the employers will definitely like them.

In the 1998 case of Manila Broadcasting, there was a radio station production supervisor in Laoag who took a leave of absence when he ran for Board Member in Ilocos Norte. When he lost the election, he came back to resume his work at the radio station. He was told that he could no longer come back because he was considered resigned when he filed his candidacy. He filed a case of illegal dismissal. Both the Labor Arbiter, the NLRC and the Supreme Court declared the dismissal illegal and ordered his reinstatement. The Court did not elaborate on the fact that management had an explicit policy, which considered as resigned any employee who would run for public office.

The ruling was the complete opposite in the 2012 case of our own kababayan, Ymbong and Boy Patalinghug who both worked for ABS-CBN Cebu since 1983. Ymbong was a co-anchor of Hoy Gising and TV Patrol, and also in DYAB, starting 1995. Patalinghug was a drama talent who was paid talent fees. Ymbong ran for councilor in Lapu-lapu City in the 1998 elections, without telling management. Patalinghug informed management that he was running for councilor in Naga, Cebu. Both of them unfortunately lost in that election. They went back to ABS. They were told that they were already deemed resigned. Of course, they did not take it sitting down.

Both of them filed a case of illegal dismissal. Again, both the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC decided in their favor. However, only Ymbong could be reinstated because the drama where Patalinghug was a talent already ended. ABS raised the matter to the Court of Appeals, which reversed the NLRC. Both the appellate Court and the Supreme Court ruled that Ymbong and Patalinghog were deemed resigned the very moment they filed their respective candidacy. The High Court stressed that they could not serve two masters at the same time. The two jobs would put them in a conflict of interest position.

It should be disclosed here that in the Supreme Court case, mention was made of a company policy, formulated by the ABS management that specifically declared that employees who seek public office are considered resigned. Ymbong attacked the legality of such policy for it supposedly violated his constitutional freedom of suffrage. The High Court did not think so. The employer did not prohibit Ymbong from running but since he did run, he should be bound by the policy that precisely considers such act as constructive resignation. It should be disclosed that ABS first told the Court that Ymbong was not an employee, and that he was an independent talent. The Court did not agree with ABS. The fact that ABS applied a policy on Ymbong was a proof that Ymbong was an employee.

Therefore, as an unsolicited advice to all employers: Be prepared with a written policy similar to that of ABS-CBN. Give all your employees proper and adequate information, Be proactive and avoid any surprise. Even if these people won’t run, if they would actively campaign for or against a candidate or a party, their behavior should be regulated by a written policy. They should avoid putting the name of the company in bad light or be seen as partial to any side of the political battles. Business should not be mixed with politics. They are like oil and water. Take my word for it.