Dear Atty. Kathy,

I met my live-in partner in my current company, where he is also an employee of a different department. Management had no issues with our relationship when it started three years ago as the both of us have never been married, are discreet and we were consistently outstanding in our performances. However, after I had a baby with my partner where I was constrained to exhaust my sick leave credits because of a delicate pregnancy and delivery, the new HR manager suddenly issued to us notices to explain, asking us to explain why we should not be dismissed for immorality since we have a child outside of marriage. Is having a child out of wedlock valid ground to dismiss us?

Skyler

***

Dear Skyler,

The Supreme Court has ruled that the determination of whether a particular conduct is immoral involves: (1) a consideration of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the conduct; and (2) an assessment of these circumstances in the light of the prevailing norms of conduct, for example, what the society generally considers moral and respectable, and of the applicable laws.

Further, in cases for termination of employment, the sufficiency of a conduct claimed to be immoral must be judged based on secular, not religious standards. This distinction is important because the jurisdiction of the Court extends only to public and secular morality.

Based solely on your narration, you and your partner are both single, therefore, you had no impediments to marry each other. You also mentioned that you were discreet and have outstanding performances. In accordance with the ruling of the Supreme Court, mere private sexual relations between two unmarried and consenting adults, even if the relations result in pregnancy out of wedlock, are not enough to warrant liability for illicit behavior. The voluntary intimacy between two unmarried adults, where both are not under any impediment to marry, where no deceit exists, and which was done in complete privacy, is neither criminal nor so unprincipled as to warrant disciplinary action. Thus, dismissing you solely on the ground of having a child out of wedlock is not valid.

(ZAIDA R. INOCENTE vs ST. VINCENT FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN AND AGING, INC./VERONICA MENGUITO, G.R. No. 202621, 22 June 2016)

Atty. Kathy Larios