Competence without character (Part 1)

The problem with Filipino workers, including OFWs working abroad, is not so much lack of competence but, sad to say, a seeming behavioral pattern of a little lack of character, in a good number of times. Filipino workers are generally highly skilled and knowledgeable, very articulate and in today's demands for technology and information skills, very computer savvy indeed. But it is in the values and attitudes department that they falter and fail, and at times found wanting. Most of the labor problems that reach the labor tribunals and courts involve questions related to propriety of personnel demeanor, respect for authority and respect for superiors, honesty and issues involving trustworthiness and loyalty. There are also many questions concerning quality of work, diligence and concern for the clients and customers.

 If we examine the pages of our labor jurisprudence these days, we would be dismayed at the manner by which Filipino workers behave in the working place. Of course, we hasten to add, this is not representative of all the Filipino manpower. The vast majority are competent, honest, loyal, hard-working and trusworthy, customer-focus and very good in human and customer relations. But an increasing number of incidence are causing serious concern, if not alarm among human resources managers. On September 11 this year, the High Court affirmed the dismissal of two private school teachers (husband and wife) for gross incompetence and negligence (GR 169905, SPCQC, vs Ancheta). In another case, the Supreme Court, on 14 September this year, affirmed the decision of Nissan Motors in dismissing a long-time personnel for serious misconduct, insubordination and gross negligence ( Nissan vs Angelo, GR 164181).

 In still another case, the KFC management won a case before the highest court when it terminated the employment of an area manager for fraud and gross and habitual neglect of duties (PFPJ vs Hi-Flyer Food, 07 Sept 2011). On August 8, 2011, a company driver was dismissed by his employer for figuring in a fistfight with his co-employee who was also his nephew. The case was remanded to the Labor Arbiter for further proceeding after six (6) long years of expensive and tedious litigation. He is most likely to lose this case too. In Bello vs BSSI (GR 188086, 03 Aug 2011), a security guard refused to be transferred from one location to another. The Agency dismissed him for insubordination. His case for illegal dismissal was dismissed by the Court, ruling that the guard was indeed guilty of insubordination. In NIppon Housing vs Leynes (GR 177816, 03 Aug 2011), a manager lost her case when she was deemed a redundant personnel after quarrelling with both her fellow employees and her superiors.

 A driver was dismissed by Philippine Rabbit Bus Co for failing to collect fare from the wife of his friend who is also a fellow employee. His dismissal was affirmed by the Highest Court (GR 172506. 27 July 2011). In another case, Litton Mills dismissed a female clerk who was accused of demanding money from a contractor. She was acquitted from the criminal charge, but was found guilty of dishonesty in the administrative case against her. The Company won in an illegal dismissal case that she brought all the way to the Supreme Court (LS vs Litton Mills, GR 170646, 22 June 2011). Hyatt Hotel dismissed a waiter for his arrogant and confrontational behavior. He charged the hotel for illegal dismissal, which was dismissed by the Court. Management acted correctly in terminating the services of a highly recalcitrant and disobedient personnel (SAMASAH-NUHWRAIN vs Magsalin, GR 164939, 06 June 2011).

(To be concluded)