When is disease a ground for dismissal?

Can an employee's disease be a ground for the termination of his employment?

Yes. An employee’s disease can be a ground for the termination of his employment (Art. 284, Labor Code). However, not just any kind of disease can justify such termination. It is required that the disease must be: 

1. of such nature that his continued employment is considered prohibited by law; or
2. prejudicial to himself or to the other employees; and that 
3. it cannot be cured within a period of six months even with proper medical attention. (Sec. 8, Rule II, Book Vi, Implementing Rules of the Labor Code).

What are the requisites that must be complied with before termination of employment due to disease may be justified?

1. Substantive requisites 
2. Procedural requisites 

What are the three substantive requisites?

The following are the three (3) substantive requisites: 

1. An employee has been found to be suffering from any disease; 
2. His continued employment is prohibited by law or prejudicial to his health, as well as to the health of his co-employees; and 
3. A competent public health authority issues a medical certificate that the disease is of such nature or at such a stage that it cannot be cured within a period of six (6) months even with proper medical treatment. (Deoferio vs. Intel Technology Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 202996, June 18, 2014)

What are the procedural requisites?

The employer must furnish the employee two (2) written notices in terminations due to disease, namely:

1. The notice to apprise the employee of the ground for which his dismissal is sought; and  
2. The notice informing the employee of his dismissal, to be issued after the employee has been given reasonable opportunity to answer and to be heard on his defense. (Deoferio vs. Intel Technology Philippines, Inc.)

Salient Points:

● If the disease or ailment can be cured within the period of six (6) months with proper medical treatment, the employer should not terminate the employee but merely ask him to take a leave of absence. The employer should reinstate him to his former position immediately upon the restoration of his normal health.  (Sec. 8, Rule I, Book VI, of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code)

● In case the employee unreasonably refuses to submit to medical examination or treatment upon being requested to do so, the employer may terminate his services on the ground of insubordination or willful disobedience of lawful order. 

● A medical certificate issued by a company’s own physician is not an acceptable certificate for purposes of terminating an employment based on Article 284, it having been issued not by a “competent public health authority,” the person referred to in the law. 

● A “competent public health authority” refers to a government doctor whose medical specialization pertains to the disease being suffered by the employee. For instance, if the employee suffers from tuberculosis, the medical certificate should be issued by a government-employed pulmonologist who is competent to make an opinion thereon.  If the employee has cardiac symptoms, the competent physician in this case would be a cardiologist.

● The medical certificate should be procured by the employer and not by the employee. (Tan vs. NLRC, G. R. No. 116807, April 14, 1997, 271 SCRA 216)

● The requirement for a medical certificate under Article 284 of the Labor Code cannot be dispensed with; otherwise, it would sanction the unilateral and arbitrary determination by the employer of the gravity or extent of the employee’s illness and thus defeat the public policy in the protection of labor. (Sy vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142293 February 27, 2003)

● The separation pay of an employee terminated on the ground of disease is equivalent to at least one (1) month salary or to one-half (½) month salary for every year of service, whichever is greater, a fraction of at least six (6) months being considered as one (1) whole year. (Article 284, Labor Code; Baby Bus, Inc. vs. Minister of Labor, G. R. No. 54223, Feb. 26, 1988).

● Disability should not be confused with disease. Disability itself, even if permanent, is not a ground for termination. The Magna Carta for Disabled Persons prohibits the termination of a disabled employee based on disability alone. This constitutes act of discrimination, a criminal offense for which fine and/or imprisonment may be imposed. (Magna Carta for Disabled Persons)