Can an Employee Be Terminated for Time-In Issues and Absence During Work Hours? (Philippine Labor Law)

Updated for the post-Labor Code amendments era; focused on private-sector employment.

1) The starting point: constitutional security of tenure

In the Philippines, employees have security of tenure. A private-sector employee may be dismissed only for:

a just cause (fault-based, e.g., serious misconduct, willful disobedience, gross and habitual neglect of duties, fraud/breach of trust, commission of a crime against the employer or their family), or
an authorized cause (business-driven, e.g., retrenchment, redundancy, closure, disease not curable within six months).

Attendance-related violations—tardiness, undertime, “no time-in,” unauthorized absence, leaving one’s post—fall, if at all, under just causes, principally:

Gross and habitual neglect of duties,
Serious misconduct (for willful, grave acts like falsifying time records), and
In specific circumstances, abandonment (a special form of neglect that requires intent to sever employment).

Even when a valid cause exists, the employer must still observe procedural due process (the “twin-notice and hearing” rule). Failure to follow procedure can make the dismissal defective and expose the employer to damages—even if the reason for dismissal is otherwise valid.

2) What attendance behavior can legally justify dismissal?

A. Habitual tardiness and absenteeism

Not every late or single absence is dismissible. To rise to “gross and habitual neglect,” there must be repeated violations showing disregard of duty despite prior warnings.
“Habitual” isn’t fixed by statute (no universal “three-strikes” rule). Instead, the company code of conduct usually defines thresholds (e.g., X lates in Y months). Those rules must be reasonable, clearly communicated, and consistently enforced.
Context matters: the nature of the job (e.g., time-critical roles), prior infractions, written warnings or suspensions, length of service, and mitigating circumstances (illness, calamity, family emergency) are weighed under the totality of infractions doctrine.

B. Absence without official leave (AWOL) and leaving the post

Repeated AWOL, unauthorized undertime, or leaving the workstation without permission can support dismissal for gross and habitual neglect—especially after progressive discipline (written warnings, suspension) has failed.
Single-incident AWOL ordinarily warrants discipline, not immediate dismissal—unless it’s egregious (e.g., abandonment of a safety-critical post causing serious risk or loss).

C. Abandonment vs. AWOL

Abandonment requires: (1) failure to report for work without valid reason, and (2) a clear intention to sever the employment (animus deserendi).
Mere absence—no matter how long—does not equal abandonment without proof of intent (e.g., ignoring a return-to-work directive plus acts inconsistent with continued employment).
Employers typically send two notices to the last known address: a directive to report/explain, then a termination notice if unheeded.

D. Time theft and falsified time records

Falsifying timesheets, “buddy punching,” tampering with biometrics/logs, or instructing others to clock in/out is serious misconduct and fraud. These are usually dismissible even for a first offense, due to willful breach of trust.

3) Lawful absences and protections you cannot penalize

An employee cannot be dismissed (or otherwise penalized) for exercising legal leave rights or for lawful, documented absences:

Maternity leave (105 days + 15 for solo mothers), paternity leave (7 days), solo parent leave (7 working days subject to qualifications), violence-against-women leave (10 days), special leave for women for gynecological surgery (qualified), service incentive leave (minimum 5 days after one year of service), sick/annual leave as per company policy/CBA, and holiday/rest day rules.
Injury/illness supported by reasonable proof (medical certificate, hospital record) is a classic valid excuse.
Force majeure (floods, transport shutdowns, earthquakes) and lawful orders (e.g., government lockdowns) justify absence when reasonably documented.

Important: “No work, no pay” applies to unpaid absences and tardiness, but monetary penalties (fines/deductions) require legal basis, employee written consent, or CBA; otherwise, they are illegal deductions. Always distinguish pay consequences from disciplinary consequences.

4) The must-follow procedure (twin-notice + hearing)

Even with a solid attendance-based cause, an employer must strictly comply with due process:

First written notice (Notice to Explain)
- Clearly state the specific acts (dates, times, time-in/out data, policies violated).
- Provide at least five (5) calendar days to submit a written explanation and evidence.
Opportunity to be heard
- Hold a hearing or conference if requested or if factual issues warrant it; allow the employee to appear with a representative, present evidence, and rebut the allegations.
Second written notice (Decision)
- Issued after considering the explanation and evidence; state the facts, rule violated, and penalty.

For alleged abandonment: send (a) a directive to report/explain to the last known address, then (b) a termination notice if the employee does not report or justify.

If the employer skips procedure: a dismissal that had a valid cause can still result in nominal damages (jurisprudence has awarded fixed amounts), and if there was no valid cause, the dismissal is illegal—entitling the employee to reinstatement (or separation pay in lieu) plus full backwages, and possibly moral/exemplary damages and attorney’s fees.

5) Evidence and documentation: how cases are won or lost

Daily time records (DTRs)/biometric logs, access logs, CCTV (if lawfully deployed), supervisor reports, client schedules, and acknowledged company policies are critical.
Employers bear the burden of proof to show just cause by substantial evidence.
Inconsistent enforcement (e.g., overlooking similar violations by others) can be construed as discriminatory or as condonation/waiver, undermining the case.

6) Progressive discipline, proportionality, and fairness

While not strictly mandated by statute for every offense, progressive discipline reflects fairness and helps withstand legal scrutiny:

1st stage: counseling or written warning
2nd stage: final warning or short suspension
3rd stage: dismissal for repetition, or immediate dismissal for grave, willful acts (e.g., time-record falsification)

Penalties must be proportionate. Factors include:

Length of service and performance record
Frequency/recentness of violations
Job nature (e.g., safety-critical, client-facing)
Actual harm/risk caused
Mitigating/Aggravating circumstances (illness, emergency vs. deceit)

7) Special contexts

A. Probationary employees

May be terminated for just cause (same rules) or for failure to meet reasonable standards communicated at hiring (e.g., attendance reliability).
Even for failure to qualify, provide notice of termination stating the grounds; for just cause, follow the twin-notice procedure.

B. Flexible, remote, and field work

Clarify in writing the core hours, timekeeping method (biometrics, apps, VPN logs, GPS), and what counts as “work hours.”
Leaving the virtual “post” (e.g., logging out during core hours without approval) can be treated similarly to on-site undertime—if the policy is clear and the employee was trained and warned.

C. Unionized workplaces / CBAs

Collective bargaining agreements often set attendance matrices and penalty ladders. These bind both sides if they do not contravene law. Employers should align internal codes with the CBA.

8) Practical do’s and don’ts

For employers

Codify attendance rules (tardiness thresholds, grace periods, undertime definitions, proof requirements).
Communicate policies at onboarding; obtain written acknowledgment; refresh through trainings.
Record every infraction and response (NTEs, explanations, hearing minutes).
Be consistent; treat like cases alike.
Avoid automatic fines or unlawful deductions; rely on “no work, no pay” and lawful discipline instead.
For potential abandonment, promptly issue written directives to report to work and explain; send to the last known address.

For employees

Keep proof of valid excuses (medical certificates, incident reports, photos, transport advisories).
Notify supervisors early; follow the call-in/approval protocol.
Respond to NTEs comprehensively within the deadline; request a hearing if needed.
Use and document statutory leaves properly; know your benefits and eligibility.
If dismissed, secure copies of time logs, notices, and your submissions; consider filing a labor complaint if you suspect illegal dismissal.

9) Quick answers to common questions

Q1: Can one day of absence lead to dismissal? Generally no, unless it’s an egregious, willful act (e.g., falsifying time records, deserting a safety-critical post causing serious loss). Usually, it triggers discipline, not immediate termination.

Q2: How many tardies equal “habitual”? There’s no statutory number. The company policy typically defines it; it must be reasonable and enforced consistently.

Q3: Is “AWOL” the same as abandonment? No. Abandonment needs proof of intent to quit; prolonged AWOL without such proof is not abandonment (though it can be punishable neglect).

Q4: What if the employer had a valid reason but skipped due process? Dismissal may stand substantively, but the employer can be liable for nominal damages for violating procedural due process.

Q5: Can an employer deduct “fines” for tardiness from wages? Not without a lawful basis (law, CBA, or valid written authorization consistent with law). Otherwise, rely on no work, no pay and proper discipline.

10) Checklist for lawful dismissal based on attendance

Policy basis exists (clear rule on time-in/absence; employee acknowledged).
Factual basis (logs, reports, corroboration).
Proportionality (habituality or gravity shown; prior discipline considered).
Due process (two notices + hearing/opportunity to be heard; proper addresses).
Decision explains the facts, rule violated, rationale, and penalty.
Consistent enforcement (no selective discipline).
Records preserved (for potential DOLE/NLRC review).

11) Bottom line

Yes—termination is legally possible for habitual or willful attendance violations (e.g., repeated AWOL/tardiness despite warnings, or time-record fraud). But it is not automatic. The employer must prove the facts, fit them into a just cause, observe strict due process, and impose a proportionate penalty. Conversely, employees are protected against dismissal for lawful or excused absences, for exercising statutory leaves, and where employers skip procedure or over-penalize.

This article provides general information on Philippine labor law. For specific situations, consult counsel, as small factual differences (e.g., what the handbook says, the paper trail, or the nature of the job) can change the legal outcome.