Constructive Dismissal and Pregnancy Discrimination Claims

1) Why this topic matters

In Philippine workplaces, pregnancy can intersect with employment decisions in ways that raise serious legal risk—especially when an employer pressures a pregnant employee (particularly one with a high-risk pregnancy) to resign, take unpaid leave, “rest at home,” or accept a diminished role “for her own good.” When resignation is not truly voluntary, the law may treat it as an illegal termination through constructive dismissal. When the pressure is linked to pregnancy, it may also support pregnancy discrimination and sex-based discrimination claims, along with related statutory and constitutional violations.

This article discusses the governing principles, common fact patterns, legal elements, evidence strategy, defenses, remedies, and practical compliance guidance in the Philippine context.

2) Core legal framework (Philippines)

A. Constitutional and policy foundations

Philippine law strongly protects labor and women. Several constitutional policies reinforce:

Security of tenure (employees cannot be dismissed except for just/authorized cause and with due process)
Protection to labor and women, including working mothers
Equal protection / non-discrimination principles

These broad policies inform how labor tribunals and courts evaluate “forced resignation” and pregnancy-related workplace actions.

B. Labor Code principles: security of tenure and illegal dismissal

Even if a separation document is labeled “resignation,” it can be treated as an illegal dismissal if the resignation was coerced or if working conditions were made intolerable so the employee had no real choice.

Key concepts:

Illegal dismissal occurs when termination is without valid cause and/or without due process.
Constructive dismissal is termination in disguise: the employee “resigns” because continued employment is rendered impossible, unreasonable, or unlikely.

C. Special laws protecting women and working mothers

Magna Carta of Women (RA 9710) Prohibits discrimination against women, including in employment. Acts that penalize pregnancy or treat pregnancy as a basis to restrict opportunities can be discriminatory.
Expanded Maternity Leave Law (RA 11210) Expands maternity leave benefits and protects the enjoyment of maternity leave. Employer actions that undermine maternity leave rights (e.g., pushing a resignation to avoid leave/benefits) can be evidence of bad faith or discrimination.
Anti-Sexual Harassment Act (RA 7877) / Safe Spaces Act (RA 11313) Not pregnancy-specific, but relevant when harassment overlaps with pregnancy (ridicule, humiliating remarks, hostile environment, retaliation).
Violence Against Women and Their Children (RA 9262) Sometimes invoked when harassment/abuse is committed by a spouse or intimate partner; typically not the first line in employment disputes, but can be relevant in extreme scenarios involving psychological violence intersecting with employment.

D. DOLE rules and workplace standards

DOLE regulations and general OSH and welfare standards (including workplace accommodation practices and anti-discrimination expectations) can be relevant contextually, especially when the employer claims it acted “for safety,” but actually excluded the employee rather than accommodating her.

3) Understanding “high-risk pregnancy” in workplace disputes

A “high-risk pregnancy” commonly refers to a medically identified condition where the mother and/or fetus faces increased health risks (e.g., hypertension, placenta issues, threatened miscarriage, complications requiring bed rest, frequent checkups, restricted lifting, reduced stress). In disputes, the legal significance is usually not the label itself, but the medical restrictions and how the employer responds.

A lawful employer response typically involves:

Respecting medically recommended restrictions
Exploring reasonable adjustments, alternative assignments, schedule modifications, or temporary work modifications (when feasible)
Avoiding exclusionary treatment (e.g., “You can’t work here anymore because you’re pregnant”)

An unlawful response often features:

Treating pregnancy/medical restrictions as a “problem employee” issue
Pressuring resignation, demotion, forced leave, or termination
Withholding benefits, threatening non-renewal or non-regularization because of pregnancy

4) Constructive dismissal: what it is and how it’s proven

A. Definition (practical)

Constructive dismissal happens when an employer’s acts make continued employment so difficult or humiliating that a reasonable person would feel forced to quit. The resignation is not voluntary; it is a coerced exit.

Common indicators:

Threats of termination or criminal/civil cases unless the employee resigns
Sudden, unjustified demotion or pay reduction
Forced transfer to a far location or inferior role without valid business reason
Hostile treatment, ridicule, isolation, or severe workload changes aimed at pushing the employee out
“Floating status” abuse or indefinite off-detailing without legitimate basis
Forced unpaid leave or “stop reporting to work” instructions
Withholding salary, benefits, or access to work tools
Conditioning release of last pay/COE on signing resignation/quitclaim

B. Pregnancy-related constructive dismissal patterns

In pregnancy/high-risk pregnancy contexts, constructive dismissal may be alleged when the employer:

Says the employee is “a liability,” “too risky,” or “bad for operations”
Pressures her to resign to avoid maternity leave costs or staffing disruptions
Refuses medically necessary accommodations and instead pushes resignation
Removes her from meaningful work, then claims “she has nothing to do”
Threatens non-regularization or dismissal due to absences tied to prenatal care/bed rest
Labels pregnancy-related medical absences as “AWOL” without good-faith process
Tells her not to return until after birth, without pay, while treating her as separated

C. Legal test and burden dynamics

In practice, once the employee raises credible facts suggesting coercion or intolerable conditions, the employer typically needs to show that:

The resignation was voluntary, and
The employee had a clear intention to resign, and
The intention was supported by overt acts (e.g., a freely written resignation letter without pressure), and
The employer did not commit acts designed to force resignation.

Resignation letters are not conclusive if evidence shows they were demanded, dictated, or signed under pressure.

D. “Resignation vs. termination” red flags

These facts often weigh toward constructive dismissal:

Resignation letter prepared by HR/management or with identical templates used for other employees
Immediate acceptance and quick processing, especially while the employee is distressed, hospitalized, or medically restricted
Resignation “effective immediately” despite employee having no new job or plan
Threats like “sign this or we’ll terminate you and blacklist you”
Employer preventing the employee from returning to work while calling it “resignation”
No exit clearance process consistent with the company’s usual practice (suggesting a rushed, coerced separation)

5) Pregnancy discrimination and sex-based discrimination

A. Discrimination can be direct or indirect

Direct discrimination: explicitly adverse action because of pregnancy (e.g., “We can’t keep you because you’re pregnant/high-risk”).

Indirect discrimination: facially neutral policies that disproportionately harm pregnant employees and are not justified by legitimate business necessity (e.g., “no absences tolerated,” applied harshly to prenatal checkups; or requiring fitness certifications beyond what is reasonably necessary).

B. Typical discriminatory acts in the workplace

Termination, forced resignation, demotion, non-renewal, or non-regularization due to pregnancy
Denial of promotion/training because “you’ll be on leave anyway”
Harassment or hostile environment tied to pregnancy symptoms or medical restrictions
Imposing unlawful conditions (e.g., requiring the employee to waive maternity leave benefits)
Penalizing pregnancy-related absences without considering legal leave and medical needs
Treating high-risk pregnancy as misconduct, poor performance, or “unreliability” without objective basis

C. “Protective” paternalism can still be discriminatory

Employers sometimes defend actions as “concern for the mother and baby.” If the effect is exclusionary—pushing the employee out rather than accommodating or allowing her to decide with her doctor—this can still support a discrimination finding.

D. Retaliation and reprisal

Retaliation claims may arise when adverse action follows:

The employee’s request for accommodations or medical restrictions
Filing complaints or raising concerns
Asserting maternity leave rights
Seeking help from HR, DOLE, NLRC, or the company grievance committee

6) Overlapping claims: how cases are usually framed

A forced resignation during high-risk pregnancy is rarely just one cause of action. It often involves a cluster of claims, typically including:

Illegal dismissal via constructive dismissal The core claim: separation was employer-driven, not voluntary.
Pregnancy discrimination / sex discrimination Pregnancy is a sex-linked condition; adverse treatment tied to pregnancy can be framed as discrimination under the Magna Carta of Women and related principles.
Money claims Unpaid wages, unpaid benefits, withheld maternity benefits (where employer has obligations), unpaid 13th month, service incentive leave conversions, etc.
Damages and attorney’s fees When dismissal is in bad faith, oppressive, or discriminatory, moral and exemplary damages may be sought, plus attorney’s fees in proper cases.
Unfair labor practice (less common, context-dependent) If the forced resignation is linked to union activity or collective rights, additional angles may arise.

7) Evidence: what wins (and what hurts)

A. High-value evidence for the employee

Contemporaneous messages (email, chat, text) showing pressure to resign, threats, or pregnancy-based remarks
Medical records: OB recommendations (bed rest, reduced lifting, stress restrictions), checkup schedules, high-risk diagnoses
Timeline showing proximity between pregnancy disclosure / high-risk diagnosis and adverse actions
Witness statements from coworkers who heard comments or saw coercive meetings
Company policies on leave, transfers, discipline, performance, and how they were inconsistently applied
Resignation letter circumstances: who drafted it, when signed, whether the employee requested time to think, whether she was emotional, sick, or in a vulnerable condition
Proof of being prevented from working: revoked access, gate passes, system logins, schedule removal

B. High-value evidence for the employer (defensive)

Clear documentation of legitimate operational reasons unrelated to pregnancy
Proof of accommodation efforts and interactive problem-solving
Due process records if discipline was involved (notices, hearings, consistent application)
Voluntary resignation proof: employee-initiated resignation letter, exit interview notes indicating free choice, absence of threats, consistent behavior suggesting intent to resign

C. The “quitclaim” problem

Quitclaims can be challenged if:

The employee did not fully understand the waiver
Consideration is unconscionably low
The signing was not voluntary (pressure, threat, vulnerability)
There is evidence of fraud, mistake, intimidation, or undue influence

In pregnancy-related coercion cases, vulnerability can be a meaningful factor in assessing voluntariness.

8) Employer defenses—and how they are evaluated

A. “Operational necessity”

Employers may claim:

The role is inherently hazardous
Staffing needs required restructuring
Performance issues existed before pregnancy
Attendance problems are unacceptable

Evaluation hinges on:

Consistency (were similarly situated non-pregnant employees treated the same?)
Documentation quality
Timing and motive indicators
Whether alternatives/accommodations were considered
Whether the employer jumped to exclusion rather than adjustment

B. “She resigned voluntarily”

This defense often fails when:

There is evidence of threats or coercion
The resignation is immediate and inconsistent with normal resignation practice
The resignation letter was dictated or prepared by management
The employee attempted to return to work shortly after, or protested soon after signing

C. “We were just protecting her health”

This can backfire if the employer:

Unilaterally removed the employee without pay
Denied her choice and doctor-guided accommodations
Used “safety” as a pretext to end employment

D. “High-risk pregnancy means she cannot do the job”

Medical limitation does not automatically justify termination. The key is whether the employer:

Explored feasible adjustments
Considered temporary reassignment (if available)
Followed lawful leave policies
Avoided discriminatory assumptions

9) Remedies and monetary consequences (typical)

A. If constructive dismissal/illegal dismissal is established

Common remedies include:

Reinstatement (to the same position without loss of seniority rights), when feasible; or
Separation pay in lieu of reinstatement (when reinstatement is no longer viable due to strained relations or business realities), plus
Full backwages from dismissal to reinstatement or finality of decision (depending on the procedural posture and remedies granted), and
Restoration/payment of benefits that would have been earned.

B. If discrimination/bad faith is established

Possible additional awards:

Moral damages (for mental anguish, humiliation, anxiety—often relevant in pregnancy coercion)
Exemplary damages (to deter oppressive or discriminatory conduct)
Attorney’s fees (in proper cases, such as unlawful withholding or when forced to litigate)

C. Other money claims

Unpaid wages and benefits
13th month pay differentials
Leave conversions where applicable
SSS-related maternity benefit coordination issues (depending on the situation and compliance)

Note: Actual computation depends on salary history, status (regular/probationary/fixed-term), benefits structure, and the timing of separation.

10) Procedure: where these disputes are filed and how they proceed

A. Administrative/labor dispute route

Most forced resignation / constructive dismissal disputes are brought as labor cases involving illegal dismissal and money claims. The typical trajectory includes:

Filing a complaint
Mandatory conciliation/mediation (where applicable)
Submission of position papers and evidence
Decision, appeal, and enforcement stages

B. Parallel remedies

Certain discrimination aspects may be pursued through:

Internal company grievance mechanisms
DOLE-related compliance contexts
Other legal avenues depending on the facts (e.g., harassment)

Strategically, parties usually focus on the labor case as the main vehicle for reinstatement/backwages and monetary relief.

11) Special situations and nuanced scenarios

A. Probationary employees and non-regularization

A frequent pattern is non-regularization shortly after pregnancy disclosure. While probationary employment allows dismissal for failure to meet standards, the employer must show:

Standards were made known at engagement
Non-regularization is based on legitimate performance/standards, not pregnancy
Due process and documentation exist
Timing and remarks do not indicate discriminatory motive

Pregnancy cannot lawfully be used as the real reason for non-regularization.

B. Fixed-term contracts and “non-renewal”

Non-renewal can still be attacked when:

The contract-renewal practice effectively created expectation/continuity
Non-renewal is a pretext for pregnancy discrimination
Timing and communications show pregnancy-based motive

C. Transfers, demotions, and pay cuts “because of high-risk pregnancy”

A temporary accommodation may be permissible if it is:

With the employee’s informed participation
Non-punitive and not used to derail her career
Properly documented and time-bound
Not involving unlawful wage diminution unless lawful and agreed with safeguards

A demotion or pay cut imposed to push the employee out supports constructive dismissal.

D. Absences for prenatal care, emergencies, and bed rest

Pregnancy-related absences may be legitimate and medically necessary. Employers must be careful not to:

Treat them as misconduct without proper inquiry
Summarily tag them as AWOL
Use “attendance policy” mechanically without considering legal protections and medical documentation

E. Hostile environment and “performance management” during pregnancy

It is not illegal to manage performance, but it becomes suspicious when:

The performance plan appears only after pregnancy disclosure
Metrics shift abruptly or become unattainable
The employee is singled out while others are treated differently
The process is accompanied by pregnancy-related remarks or threats

12) Practical guidance

A. For employees (rights-protective steps)

Document everything: dates, meetings, messages, and who said what
Request instructions in writing, especially if told to stop reporting or resign
Secure medical certificates detailing restrictions and recommended accommodations
If pressured to resign, explicitly state (in writing) that you do not wish to resign and that you want to continue working subject to medical advice
Preserve evidence: screenshots, email headers, HR memos, payslips, access removal proof
Be mindful of signing quitclaims/resignations under pressure; seek independent review where possible

B. For employers (risk-reducing compliance)

Never suggest resignation as a solution to pregnancy-related operational issues
Use an accommodation-oriented approach: explore adjustments, temporary reassignment, schedule modifications, remote work (if feasible), and safe duty modifications
Train supervisors: avoid pregnancy-based remarks (“liability,” “too risky,” “not fit,” “choose family or work”)
Apply policies consistently and document legitimate business reasons carefully
Ensure due process if discipline is involved; do not fast-track separation during pregnancy
Respect maternity leave rights; do not structure staffing solutions by pushing separation
Keep separation documents voluntary, unpressured, and consistent with standard exit processes

13) Case theory templates (how claims are typically argued)

A. Employee’s narrative (typical)

Pregnancy disclosed → 2) high-risk diagnosis/medical restrictions → 3) employer hostility or exclusion → 4) pressure to resign or forced leave without pay → 5) resignation signed under threat or distress → 6) immediate “acceptance” and removal from systems → 7) pregnancy-based remarks and timing show discriminatory motive → 8) therefore constructive dismissal + discrimination + damages and money claims.

B. Employer’s narrative (typical)

Legitimate operational reasons existed → 2) accommodations were offered → 3) employee could not meet essential job requirements even with adjustments → 4) employee resigned voluntarily for personal reasons → 5) no discriminatory remarks; consistent documentation supports good faith.

Tribunals decide largely on credibility, documentation, consistency, and timing.

14) Key takeaways

In the Philippines, a “resignation” obtained through pressure, threats, or intolerable conditions can be treated as constructive dismissal, i.e., illegal dismissal in disguise.
When the pressure is linked to pregnancy—especially a high-risk pregnancy—facts may also support pregnancy discrimination/sex discrimination claims.
Strong cases are built on timelines, written communications, medical documentation, and proof of coercion or exclusionary treatment rather than genuine accommodation.
Employers reduce risk by focusing on accommodation and non-discrimination, avoiding paternalistic exclusion, and respecting maternity protections and due process.