Buban v. Dela Peña (2024)

Buban v. Dela Peña, G.R. No. 268399, January 24, 2024, J.:

• This case stemmed from an Amended Complaint filed by Francheska Aleen Balaba Buban (Buban) against Xerox Business, Human Resources Manager Rojan Gonzales (Gonzales), and Dela Peña for sexual harassment, non-payment of salary, payment of moral and exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees, before the Labor Arbiter. To support her claim, Buban executed an Affidavit narrating the incidents of sexual harassment.

• On November 11, 2014, Buban was hired as Customer Care Senior Specialist in Xerox Business. On March 22, 2015, between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m., Buban arrived at the office and went directly to the workstation of Team Leader Kiko10 to get her headset. However, the latter was on leave and left his pedestal locked. As a result, Buban was constrained to get a temporary headset in the storage room. She tried them on three computers, but was unsuccessful due to a system error. Buban promptly informed Dela Peña, the assigned team leader at the time, and asked for assistance in reporting the system issue to the Information Technology Department. Dela Peña told Buban that the error might be due to the headset and directed her to get a replacement headset from the storage room.

• While inside the storage room, Dela Peña suddenly appeared and told Buban, “Baby tigas na tigas na ako, kelan mo ba talaga ako pagibigyan [sic]?” Startled and feeling uneasy, Buban tried to make light of the situation by answering, “TL ano kaba? Para kang tanga dyan.” Then, she grabbed the nearest headset and ran out of the room back to her station.

• Unfortunately, the headset that Buban took was similarly defective. Buban had to get another headset without an “enabler.” Thinking that Dela Peña already left the storage area, Buban went back inside. To her surprise, Dela Peña approached her. Trying to avoid further contact, Buban hurriedly moved away, but Dela Peña grabbed her by the waist and tried to kiss her. She struggled to push him away, but Dela Peña was stronger. Dela Peña was able to hug her and he started groping her breasts. Mustering all her strength, Buban was able to break free from Dela Pena’s hold and race out of the room.

• Buban’s ordeal did not end here. While she was at her workstation, Dela Peña approached her and told her to reboot her tools and get a replacement headset, so she can start making calls instead of using system error as an excuse to slack off. Distressed at being put on the spot, Buban complied and went back to the storage room to get another headset. To her horror, Dela Peña followed her inside, closed the door, and blocked the exit. Again, Dela Peña made sexual advances on Buban, telling her, “Sige na Baby, pagkahawak mo at itatago ko din agad.” Despite her vehement protestations and warnings that he would be caught by the closed-circuit television camera, Dela Peña still forced himself upon Buban. When she found an opportunity, she ran out of the room. Shocked at what she had just experienced, she was only able to tell her teammates about the incident during their break.

• From then on, she detested going to work for fear of running into Dela Peña. As a result, her health deteriorated. At work, she became anxious and paranoid, and would find herself uncontrollably crying whenever she saw Dela Peña. However, as a single parent, she could not afford to quit. Thus, she was left with no choice but to continue working.

• She reported the incident and filed a formal complaint with the Human Resources Department. However, her case was never heard, and no protective measure was afforded to her by the management. Dela Peña continued to work in the same area and same shift with her, magnifying her distress. To her consternation, Dela Peña acted condescendingly and even insinuated that it was Buban who wanted or asked for what happened between them. To make matters worse, Xerox Business withheld three days of Buban’s salary earned in May 2015.

• On September 15, 2015, Buban filed a Complaint before the Labor Arbiter against Xerox Business, Rojan, and Dela Peña for sexual harassment, with prayer for payment of unpaid salary, moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees.

• In response, Xerox Business filed its Position Paper18 admitting that Buban was its employee with the position of Customer Care Senior Specialist. However, Xerox Business denied Buban’s allegations that the incident report was never investigated. It claimed that the security incident report was promptly referred to Megaforce Security Services, the security group handling the overall security concerns of the company. In addition, Xerox Business conducted an administrative investigation where a Show Cause Notice was issued against Dela Peña, directing him to explain in writing the charges against him within five days. The administrative investigation, however, did not find convincing evidence to warrant the imposition of the penalty of termination against Dela Peña. Xerox Business further claimed that it was only upon such conclusion that Buban filed her Complaint before the Labor Arbiter.

[SC RESOLUTION]

• [W]e find no cogent reason to depart from the uniform factual findings of the Labor Arbiter, the NLRC and the CA that Xerox Business was remiss in its duty under Section 4 of Republic Act No. 7877 to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment. Specifically, it failed to create a committee on decorum and investigation to promptly act upon the allegation of sexual harassment filed by Buban. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 5 of the law, Xerox Business was adjudged solidarily liable with Dela Peña for payment of damages arising from the acts of sexual harassment committed in the employment.

• Having ascertained the solidary liability of Xerox Business and Dela Peña, we now proceed to determine the proper amount thereof.

• Buban contends that the CA erred in reducing the award of moral damages to PHP 100,000.00 and exemplary damages to PHP 50,000.00. Further, she claims that aside from the damages awarded to her by the NLRC, she is likewise entitled to the damages provided under Section 5 of Republic Act No. 7877 arising from the acts of sexual harassment committed in the work environment.69

• At this juncture, it is worth noting that while the Labor Arbiter, the NLRC, and the CA are in agreement that Xerox Business and Dela Peña are solidarity liable for the payment of damages resulting from the act of sexual harassment, they are at odds with the amount thereof. The Labor Arbiter, as upheld by the CA, ruled that Buban is entitled to PHP 100,000.00 as moral damages and PHP 50,000.00 as exemplary damages. Meanwhile, the NLRC ruled that Buban is entitled to moral and exemplary damages in the amount of PHP 500,000.00.

• To put things in proper perspective, Section 3(a) of Republic Act No. 7877 provides that workplace sexual harassment occurs when the employer, agent of the employer, or any other person who has authority over another in a work environment, imposes sexual favors on another, which creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the latter. The essence of sexual harassment is the abuse of power by the offender, not the violation of the offended party’s sexuality. Such abuse of power emanates from the fact that the superior can remove the subordinate from the workplace should the latter refuse the superior’s amorous advances.70 What the law intends to correct “is the undue exercise of power and authority manifested through sexually charged conduct or one filled with sexual undertones.”

• In Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Yañez, this Court re-emphasized that the “demand, request, or requirement of a sexual favor” requirement in Section 3 is not essential before an act can be qualified as sexual harassment in an administrative charge. It suffices that the offender’s actions created an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the employee.

• Corollary thereto, the liability of the erring managerial officer and the employer are distinct. In fact, such liabilities are covered by separate provisions under Republic Act No. 7877. For the erring manager, unlawful acts are defined under Section 3(a), whereas the liability of the employer is subsumed under Section 4, in relation to Section 5, of the law.

• Upon a careful scrutiny of the records of the case, we sustain the CA’s modification on the awards of moral and exemplary damages.

• The award of damages is consistent with Buban’s prayer for relief in her Position Paper. To recall, Buban asked that Xerox Business and Dela Peña be declared “jointly and solidarily liable to pay [Buban] all of her monetary claims, moral and exemplary damages amounting to PHP 100,000.00 and PHP 50,000.00, respectively, and ten percent attorney’s fees from the total monetary award.”

• Applied to the present sexual harassment case, Buban is entitled to recover damages. The failure of Xerox Business to investigate the allegations of sexual harassment demonstrated its insensibility, indifference, and utter disregard not only to the employee’s security and welfare, but also to its duty under Republic Act No. 7877.

• On this matter, the CA acted accordingly in reducing the award of moral damages to PHP 100,000.00 and exemplary damages to PHP 50,000.00. The same is not only supported by the records of the case, but also consistent with prevailing jurisprudence. In Toliongco v. Court of Appeals, this Court awarded moral damages amounting to PHP 100,000.00 and exemplary damages amounting to PHP 50,000.00 upon a finding of sexual harassment.