In the Philippine corporate landscape, the Human Resources (HR) department is traditionally viewed as the primary arbiter of workplace disputes. However, when HR exhibits bias—whether through inaction, victim-blaming, or protecting high-value perpetrators—the employee is not without legal remedy. Under Philippine law, workplace harassment and employer negligence are governed by a robust framework of statutes and administrative regulations.

1. The Legal Framework

The primary laws governing workplace harassment and the obligations of employers (and by extension, HR) include:

Republic Act No. 11313 (The Safe Spaces Act / Bawal Bastos Law): Expands the definition of sexual harassment to include gender-based infractions in the workplace and mandates specific duties for employers to resolve these issues promptly.
Republic Act No. 7877 (Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995): Requires employers to create a Committee on Decorum and Investigation (CODI) to handle sexual harassment complaints.
The Labor Code of the Philippines: Provides the foundation for "constructive dismissal" claims when the work environment becomes unbearable due to employer hostility or negligence.

2. When HR Becomes the Problem: Common Signs of Bias

Bias in HR often manifests as a failure to maintain the "duty of care." Legal actionable signs include:

Conflict of Interest: HR personnel having close personal or professional ties with the respondent.
Procedural Lapses: Failing to convene the CODI or ignoring the timelines set by the company’s internal policy and the Safe Spaces Act.
Retaliation: HR facilitating memo-redding, demotion, or isolation of the complainant after a report is filed.
Non-Confidentiality: Leaking sensitive details of the complaint to unauthorized personnel.

3. Remedies and Forums for Filing Complaints

When internal HR mechanisms fail or prove biased, the employee should look toward external regulatory bodies.

A. The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)

DOLE is the primary administrative body for labor disputes.

Request for Assistance (RFA): Filed through the Single Entry Approach (SEnA). This is a mandatory 30-day conciliation-mediation process. If HR has been biased, this is the stage where an external mediator evaluates the company's handling of the case.
Labor Inspection: You may request a specialized inspection if the company fails to comply with the mandatory requirements of the Safe Spaces Act (e.g., no anti-harassment policy, no CODI).

B. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)

If SEnA fails, a formal position paper can be filed with the NLRC.

Constructive Dismissal: If HR’s bias or the harassment makes continued employment impossible, an employee may resign and sue for constructive dismissal, seeking backwages and separation pay.
Damages: Complainants can pray for moral and exemplary damages if the employer (through HR) acted in bad faith or failed to provide a safe working environment.

C. Civil and Criminal Courts

Criminal Charges: If the harassment falls under RA 7877 or RA 11313, criminal cases are filed with the Prosecutor’s Office, independent of HR’s internal findings.
Civil Suit for Damages: Under the Civil Code (Art. 19, 20, and 21), a separate civil action for damages can be filed against the company and the HR officers personally if they willfully caused injury to the employee in a manner contrary to morals or public policy.

4. Evidentiary Requirements

To prove HR bias in a legal proceeding, documentation is paramount. An "internal paper trail" should include:

Written Complaints: Copies of all formal reports submitted to HR, preferably with a "received" stamp.
Correspondence: Emails, chat logs, or recordings (noting the Anti-Wiretapping Law restrictions) showing HR’s dismissive or biased responses.
The Employee Handbook: Using the company’s own written policies to demonstrate where HR deviated from standard procedure.
Witness Affidavits: Statements from colleagues who observed the harassment or HR’s subsequent mishandling.

5. Employer Liability for HR’s Inaction

Under the Safe Spaces Act, employers are held solidarily liable for damages if:

They were informed of the harassment and took no action.
They did not take "immediate and appropriate corrective action."

If HR—as the representative of the employer—fails to act or acts with bias, the company itself becomes legally vulnerable. The law treats HR’s failure as the company’s failure, often resulting in higher awards for moral damages due to the breach of the fiduciary relationship between employer and employee.