Theft of Employer’s Property, Most Reprehensible Betrayal

There is no mercy for scoundrels and rascals. Perhaps those who allegedly steal from PhilHealth, if proven guilty, after due process, must be sufficiently forewarned. The highest court of our land condemned rather harshly an employee’s act of stealing his employer’s property and declared that such a despicable act is the highest form of ingratitude.

The Supreme Court declared that his dismissal was legal and refused to grant him anything despite his long years of service. Employees should learn from this stern warning from the court. This was in the case of Herma Shipping and Transport Corp. vs. CJC (hidden to protect his dignity), GR244210, decided by the Supreme Court on January 27, 2020 through the pen of Madam Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe, the most senior associate justice of the Supreme Court. This involved a Filipino seaman who was accused of stealing oil and petroleum products aboard the vessel. After due process, he was dismissed in 2016. He filed a case of illegal dismissal.

The labor arbiter correctly dismissed the case and ruled in favor of management in November 2016.This is one exceptional case where justice has been very speedy, expeditious, and without any delay. In February 2017, the NLRC affirmed the ruling. In April 2018, the Court of Appeals modified the ruling. It said that the dismissal was right, but the worker should be given separation pay for his 24 years of service. The court was applying the principles of social justice and compassion to the complainant. But such a misplaced mercy was rebuffed by the highest court of the land. The controlling doctrine is that there is no mercy for thieves.

The Supreme Court removed the separation pay and quoted the famous decision of Justice Isagani Cruz in the PLDT case (562 Phil759, 2007) that: “The policy of social justice is not intended to countenance wrongdoing simply because it is committed by the underprivileged. Compassion for the poor is an imperative of every humane society but only when the recipient is not a rascal claiming an undeserved privilege. Social justice can not be permitted to be the refuge of scoundrels any more than can equity be an impediment to the punishment of the guilty. Those who invoke social justice may do so only if their hands are clean and their motives blameless, and not simply because they happen to be poor.” Such a harsh condemnation indeed.

The Supreme Court, in PLDT, and cited here in the Herma Shipping case went on very sternly: “If an employee who steals from the company is granted separation pay even as he is validly dismissed, it is not unlikely that he will commit a similar offense in his next employment because he thinks that he can expect a similar leniency. This kind of misplaced compassion is not going to do labor any good as it will encourage the infiltration of its ranks by those who do not deserve the protection and concern of the Constitution.” If we may add, the Bible has a word on this: Don’t throw your pearls to the swine

Employers should feel happy about this decision, and employees should learn a lesson or two. I just have a minor misgiving in general. This case involved the lowest-ranked worker aboard the vessel. Where are the big fishes? He could not have stolen alone as an able-bodied seaman. I am not saying he is clean. I am saying that bigger officials might have been more guilty. This guy might have been the scapegoat or the sacrificial lamb. But then again, he deserved his fate.