Unjust Dismissal After Workplace Assault in the Philippines (A practitioner-oriented overview — updated to 2025)

1. Why this topic matters

Physical violence at work is one of the few incidents that implicate both labor law and criminal law. Employers usually react swiftly, but a hasty termination is easily struck down as illegal dismissal if it violates either (a) the substantive rules on “just cause” or (b) the procedural rules on due process under the Labor Code and Constitution. An erroneous decision exposes the company to reinstatement orders, back-wages, nominal or moral damages, and even administrative fines from the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE).

2. Governing legal framework

Source	Key provision
Labor Code, Art. 297 [old 282]	“Serious misconduct” and “gross neglect” are just causes for dismissal. An assault may qualify, but only if it is (1) related to work, (2) grave, and (3) committed with wrongful intent.
Labor Code, Arts. 300-302	Two-notice rule and opportunity to be heard.
Rules on Labor Relations (2011 NLRC Rules), Rule XI	Outlines the NLRC’s jurisdiction, remedies, and execution of reinstatement.
Occupational Safety and Health Standards (R.A. 11058 & D.O. 198-18)	Obligates employers to maintain a safe workplace, investigate violence, and prevent retaliation.
Civil Code, Art. 1701	Bars employers from dismissing workers by reason of union activities—in a violent strike, context matters.
Revised Penal Code	Assault may give rise to serious or slight physical injuries or alarm & scandal, but criminal guilt is not a prerequisite for a labor dismissal.

3. Elements of a just dismissal for assault

Serious misconduct
- Misconduct = a transgression of established rules.
- Serious if the act is grave, reflects moral depravity, and relates to the employee’s duties.
- Cases: St. Luke’s Medical Center v. Notario (G.R. 195521, 23 Oct 2013) — nurse who stabbed co-worker in the OR; SC sustained dismissal.
Loss of trust and confidence
- Available only to managerial or fiduciary employees and must be founded on clearly established facts.
- Assault itself rarely shows “breach of trust” unless it involves extortion, sabotage, or breach of safety-critical roles.
Company policy / code of conduct
- Policies must be written, posted, and enforced uniformly. Arbitrary invocation leads to illegality (see PLDT v. Teves, G.R. 143511, Sept 13 2005).
Causation & Work-relation
- Off-duty bar fights seldom suffice. The act must occur in company premises or arise out of work.

4. Procedural due process (Two-notice rule)

Step	Common mistakes	Cure
Notice to explain (NTE)	Vague “physical assault” without specifics; < 5-day reply period	Specify date, time, victim, injuries; give 5 calendar days
Administrative conference	Purely written exchange; no hearing	Offer actual hearing or allow written position paper
Notice of decision	Signed by HR only, no discussion of defenses	Must recite facts, rules violated, and reasons

Failure in either notice → dismissal becomes illegal → employer owes nominal damages (often ₱30 000) even if just cause exists (Jaka Food Processing v. Pacot, G.R. 151378, Mar 10 2005).

5. Preventive suspension ≠ dismissal

Allowed if employee’s presence poses a “serious and imminent” threat (30-day cap, Art. 299).
Must be with pay after 30 days if investigation drags on.
SC voided dismissal when employer kept worker on “indefinite preventive suspension” (University of Santo Tomas v. Samahang Manggagawa, G.R. 206678, July 2020).

6. Typical fact patterns & Supreme Court guidance

Scenario	Case law highlight	Outcome
Assault during heated labor dispute	Asian Terminals, Inc. v. Villanueva, G.R. 143219, 21 Nov 2008	Dismissal affirmed (violence not protected activity)
Fight triggered by teasing, no serious injury	Gold City Integrated Port v. NLRC, G.R. 110324, Feb 6 1997	Dismissal reversed (lack of proportionality)
Spontaneous punching of supervisor	MGG Marine Services v. NLRC, G.R. 174286, Jan 25 2012	Dismissal affirmed; act undermined discipline
Employee acted in self-defense	G.R. 200007, JR Hauling Corp. v. Calleja, June 2017	Dismissal illegal; employer failed to weigh self-defense claim

Key take-away: The Court scrutinizes not only the assault but the surrounding context, including provocation, comparative fault, and whether progressive discipline was feasible.

7. Defenses available to the employee

Self-defense/Mutual affray – burden on employee to show unlawful aggression by the other party.
No wrongful intent – accidental contact during horseplay isn’t “misconduct.”
Unequal treatment – if only one combatant is dismissed, the employer may be guilty of discrimination.
Procedural lapses – even an employee who admits the punch can win on due-process grounds.

8. Consequences of illegal dismissal

Relief	Rule
Reinstatement (immediately executory)	Without loss of seniority
Full back-wages	From dismissal until actual reinstatement or payroll reinstatement
Separation pay in lieu	One month per year of service if reinstatement is no longer viable
Damages	Nominal (₱30 000-₱50 000), moral, exemplary if bad faith
Attorney’s fees	10 % commonly awarded

9. Best-practice checklist for employers

Codify a zero-tolerance violence policy.
Train supervisors on de-escalation and documentation.
Secure CCTV and witness statements before issuing NTE.
Observe the 30-day limit for preventive suspension.
Evaluate proportionality; consider demotion or suspension where justified.
Document the hearing—minutes, attendance sheet, written rulings.
Coordinate with security and, if needed, the police, separate from the labor process.

10. Best-practice checklist for employees

Respond in writing to the NTE; raise self-defense or provocation.
Attend the hearing—even by counsel or union rep.
Request copies of CCTV or incident reports.
File a complaint with the NLRC within four (4) years (Art. 305).
Mitigate by seeking new employment; it does not waive your claim.

11. Interaction with criminal cases

The labor arbiter may rule ahead of the criminal court; standards differ (“substantial evidence” vs. “proof beyond reasonable doubt”).
An acquittal does not automatically void the dismissal, but a conviction may bolster it.
Employers should avoid citing pending criminal liability as sole ground; always rely on Labor Code causes.

12. Frequently-asked questions

Q	A
Can an employer dismiss both aggressor and victim?	Yes, if investigation shows they both participated voluntarily.
Is self-defense always accepted?	Only when unlawful aggression from the other party is proven and response is reasonable.
Does an unsigned NTE cure due-process defects?	No; signature (or proof of service) is essential.
Can the company deduct hospital bills from wages?	Only with written consent (§ 113, Labor Code).

13. Conclusion

Dismissal for workplace assault is never automatic. The Supreme Court repeatedly invalidates terminations where employers shortcut the investigation or ignore nuance. Conversely, employees who initiate unprovoked violence, especially against superiors or in safety-critical areas, rarely win reinstatement. The golden rule remains: substantive just cause + full procedural due process = valid dismissal. Anything less is unjust under Philippine labor law.

This article is informational and not a substitute for individualized legal advice. For specific cases, consult a Philippine labor-law practitioner.